English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Context Tenure-earning faculty are evaluated in 3 primary areas including teaching, research and scholarship, and service. Struggles regarding earning tenure are not unique to the academe, but within the athletic training discipline concerns do exist. Objective We examined the organizational socialization process for junior athletic training faculty members as they learned about the tenure and promotion expectations at their institutions. Design Interpretative phenomenological approach. Setting Higher education institutions with an athletic training program. Patients or Other Participants Nineteen junior faculty members (13 women, 6 men) addressed their understanding of tenure guidelines. Our participants were 32 ± 3 years of age, averaged 2 ± 2 years as a full-time faculty member, and were all at the assistant rank. Main Outcome Measure(s) All participants completed one-on-one phone interviews. We followed a stepwise approach to evaluating the data, which is described by the interpretative phenomenological approach. To ensure credibility of the interview protocol and to bracket some of our possible biases, a peer review and pilot study were conducted. Results There were 3 findings regarding the faculty members' understanding of the tenure process at their institutions: (1) vague expectations, (2) change in leadership, and (3) differing expectations in departments and college levels. The faculty believe improving understanding of promotion and tenure should include (1) formal, ongoing annual feedback, (2) informal communication with administrators, (3) informal institutional mentorship, and (4) instructional scaffolding. Conclusions Athletic training junior faculty experience challenges with understanding tenure and promotion expectations at their institutions, mainly due to changes in leadership and a dichotomy between departmental and institutional expectations. The vagueness is often overcome when the faculty member receives support and guidance from colleagues and supervisors who not only share past experiences in knowledge but also provide feedback for understanding.

Athletic Training Junior Faculty Experiences with Institutional Expectations for Tenure and Promotion