(Re)Introducing the Gerontology and Geriatrics Curricular Standards and Guidelines in Higher Education

The Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), the education member group of GSA, is the only national institutional membership organization devoted primarily to gerontology and geriatrics education. Its mission provides for development and sponsorship of initiatives to advance the field of aging through its focus on education in gerontology/geriatrics. AGHE first published the Gerontology and Geriatrics Curricular Standards over three decades ago – a document that has been an integral resource for implementing/revising programs in liberal arts, the sciences, and more recently, health professions. To meet the needs in the field for increased breadth and depth of content, the new 7th edition of the educational guidelines fully embraces competency-based education for gerontology, as the health professions programs have for years. Our first presenter will provide an overview of the new edition. The second presenter will focus on associate degree programs in gerontology and their unique contribution to higher education. The third will present on undergraduate programs in gerontology explaining how these programs give students an edge in today’s job market. The fourth presenter will address graduate programs in gerontology, describing master’s degree programs and doctoral degree programs in gerontology and aging studies. The fifth presenter will discuss health professions programs including geriatrics curricula for osteopathic medical education, gerontology/geriatrics curricula for health-related programs and the doctor of pharmacy degree programs. Presentations will provide expert recommendations for program development through mapping AGHE’s Gerontology Competencies for Undergraduate and Graduate Education to programs in higher education. Nina Silverstein will serve as discussant.

Does Proficiency Level Affect Learners’ Lexical Access in L1 and L2?

Proficiency level is one important factor that contributes to learners’ language performance. Learners with higher proficiency levels tend to perform lexical access better and faster than those with lower proficiency. This study aims to investigate whether proficiency level affects lexical access in L1 and L2. The research involved seven Indonesian university students of master’s and doctoral degree programs at a university in the Netherlands who possess different proficiency levels. Two scrambled texts in the participants’ L1 and L2 were employed to test the participants. Meanwhile, the paired-samples t-test and correlation analysis were used to report the experiment. The results revealed an insignificant difference and a negative correlation between proficiency level and the number of errors and reading time. However, on average, the more proficient learners outperformed the less proficient, thus indicating that they may possess more complex lexical access in L1 and L2. Further studies are needed to provide other useful insights on this topic.

A Unique and Scalable Model for Increasing Research Engagement, STEM Persistence, and Entry into Doctoral Programs

Participation in the University of California, Los Angeles Program for Excellence in Education and Research in the Sciences (PEERS) program has a positive effect on closing gaps in research participation, graduation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors, and enrollment into graduate and professional doctoral degree programs for underrepresented minority (URM) students. Hence, PEERS could serve as a model for other institutions looking for cost-effective ways to promote URM student success.

A Snapshot of Doctoral Training in Epidemiology: Positioning Us for the Future

Although epidemiology core competencies are established by the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health for masters-level trainees, no equivalent currently exists for the doctoral level. Thus, the objective of the Doctoral Education in Epidemiology Survey (2019) was to collect information on doctoral-level competencies in general epidemiology (doctoral) degree programs and other pertinent information from accredited programs in the United States and Canada. Participants (doctoral program directors or knowledgeable representatives of the program) from 57 institutions were invited to respond to a 39-item survey (18 core competencies; 9 noncore or emerging topic–related competencies; and 12 program-related items). Participants from 55 institutions (96.5%) responded to the survey, of whom over 85% rated 11 out of 18 core competencies as “very important” or “extremely important.” More than 80% of the programs currently emphasize 2 of 9 noncore competencies (i.e., competency to ( 1) develop and write grant proposals, and ( 2) assess evidence for causality on the basis of different causal inference concepts). “Big data” is the most frequently cited topic currently lacking in doctoral curricula. Information gleaned from previous efforts and this survey should prompt a dialog among relevant stakeholders to establish a cohesive set of core competencies for doctoral training in epidemiology.

An Examination of Factors Deterring the Pursuit of Advanced Degrees Among Alumni of a Minority Research and Training Program

Minority research and training (MRT) programs utilize interventions aimed at increasing student persistence toward the completion of undergraduate degrees and continuation into doctoral degrees. Numerous studies identify these support interventions as essential components for positive outcomes among underrepresented students, including research experiences, social integration, mentorship, and financial support. Many of these previous studies utilize quantitative design involving current program participants or program alumni who continued into graduate programs. This pilot study employed a multiple case study with a narrative approach involving partici­pants of an MRT program who completed a BSc degree but did not subsequently ma­triculate into a doctoral program. The cross-case analysis identified perceived barriers deterring continuation into doctoral degree programs among former MRT participants. Results from this study add student voice to the current literature and provide recom­mendations to better serve underrepresent­ed students in the STEM disciplines. Ethn Dis. 2020;30(2):313-320; doi:10.18865/ ed.30.2.313

Athletic Training and Physical Therapy Junior Faculty Member Preparation: Perceptions of Doctoral Programs and Clinical Practice

Background: Institutions of higher education suffer from a shortage of appropriately prepared faculty members in athletic training and physical therapy programs. Both professional programs have recently undergone curricular reform and degree change. We sought gain an understanding of the preparation mechanisms experienced by athletic training and physical therapy practitioners for their junior faculty positions. Method: Twenty-six athletic trainers and physical therapists participated in this phenomenological study. Data from one-on-one phone interviews were analyzed following the inductive process of interpretive phenomenological analysis. Content experts, pilot interviews, multiple analysts and member checking ensured trustworthiness. Results: Findings indicate two primary mechanisms prepared the practitioners to become junior faculty members: doctoral degree programs and clinical practice. Doctoral degree programs did not provide experiences for all future faculty roles. Hands-on patient care practice provided participants the context for their teaching and confidence in knowledge aptitude. Conclusion: Doctoral institutions should provide a variety of hands on active learning experiences to doctoral students. Future faculty members can maximize the amount of time they provide clinical care to patients, following the attainment of their professional credential. Clinical competence and proficiency will serve as the foundational basis for their future teaching endeavors and may increase credibility and respect.

Executive Higher Education Doctoral Programs in the United States: A Demographic Market-Based Analysis

Aim/Purpose: Executive doctoral programs in higher education are under-researched. Scholars, administers, and students should be aware of all common delivery methods for higher education graduate programs. Background This paper provides a review and analysis of executive doctoral higher education programs in the United States. Methodology: Executive higher education doctoral programs analyzed utilizing a qualitative demographic market-based analysis approach. Contribution: This review of executive higher education doctoral programs provides one of the first investigations of this segment of the higher education degree market. Findings: There are twelve programs in the United States offering executive higher education degrees, though there are less aggressively marketed programs described as executive-style higher education doctoral programs that could serve students with similar needs. Recommendations for Practitioners: Successful executive higher education doctoral programs require faculty that have both theoretical knowledge and practical experience in higher education. As appropriate, these programs should include tenure-line, clinical-track, and adjunct faculty who have cabinet level experience in higher education. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should begin to investigate more closely the small but growing population of executive doctoral degree programs in higher education. Impact on Society: Institutions willing to offer executive degrees in higher education will provide training specifically for those faculty who are one step from an executive position within the higher education sector. Society will be impacted by having someone that is trained in the area who also has real world experience. Future Research: Case studies of students enrolled in executive higher education programs and research documenting university-employer goals for these programs would enhance our understanding of this branch of the higher education degree market.

Executive Higher Education Doctoral Programs in the United States: A Demographic Market-Based Analysis

[This Proceedings paper was revised and published in the journal Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology] Aim/Purpose : Executive doctoral programs in higher education are under-researched. Scholars, administers, and students should be aware of all common delivery methods for higher education graduate programs. Background: This paper provides a review and analysis of executive doctoral higher education programs in the United States. Methodology : Executive higher education doctoral programs analyzed utilizing a qualitative demographic market-based analysis approach. Contribution: This review of executive higher education doctoral programs provides one of the first investigations of this segment of the higher education degree market. Findings: There are twelve programs in the United States offering executive higher education degrees, though there are less aggressively marketed programs described as executive-style higher education doctoral programs that could serve students with similar needs. Recommendations for Practitioners: Successful executive higher education doctoral programs require faculty that have both theoretical knowledge and practical experience in higher education. As appropriate, these programs should include tenure-line, clinical-track, and adjunct faculty who have cabinet level experience in higher education. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should begin to investigate more closely the small but growing population of executive doctoral degree programs in higher education. Impact on Society: Institutions willing to offer executive degrees in higher education will provide training specifically for those faculty who are one step from an executive position within the higher education sector. Society will be impacted by having someone that is trained in the area who also has real world experience. Future Research: Case studies of students enrolled in executive higher education programs and research documenting university-employer goals for these programs would enhance our understanding of this branch of the higher education degree market.