PEER REVIEW Research and Scholarship Among R»T Educators TERRI L. FAUBER, ED.D., R.T.(R)(M) JEFFREY S. LEGG, PH.D., R.T.(R)(CT) Full-time registered radiolog- ie technologist educators were surveyed to determine their professional profile and research/scholarship produc- tivity. Overall, research and scholarship productivity was low. More than 85 % of respondents had not authored an article in a peer or nonpeer-reviewed journal, although more than half of the sample reported other scholarly activities, such as reviewing books, developing continuing education mater- ial and presenting at profes- sional meetings. As a group, full-time educators employed in 4-year institu- tions and holding a higher academic degree were more productive in research and scholarship. This research was supported, by a grant from the American Society of Radiologie Technologists Education and Research Eoundation. adiologic science education has changed rapidly in recent years. The number of educational programs housed in hospitals has declined, while programs in community colleges and universities have increased. For example, certificate programs have decreased since 1985 by more than 50%, while the number of associate degree programs has risen 28%.-''^ Baccalau- reate degree programs have increased more than 44% since 1985.^-^ Educational programs housed in com- munity colleges and universities bring new challenges to radiologie technology educators. According to Nollnske, "Faced with challenges of the 21st centu- ry, faculty members are expected to adapt to an increasingly diverse student population, apply new teaching methods, integrate complex technology into their curricula, conduct research and pursue scholarly endeavors, engage in service activities and develop curricula that respond to multifaceted professional issues and academic reform."^ Issues particularly challenging for radiologie technology educators are the need to participate in academic service, research and scholarship in order to expand the professional body of knowl- edge and achieve promotion and tenure. Radiologie technology educators need to understand the promotion and tenure process and the criteria used to evaluate them.'* Although some maintain that radiologie technologists should not be held to the same high standard as other disciplines,^ others argue that the newer allied health professions need a well- established knowledge base to identify them as a distinct profession and improve tbeir image in academe.® Additionally, the expectations and resources for community and profession- al service along with research and schol- arship may vary gready from one institu- tion to another. As members of the allied health com- munity, radiologie technology educators play a significant role in preparing future technologists but also in contributing to the continued development of the pro- fession. Research and scholarship pro- ductivity are considered important activi- ties to increase the professional knowl- edge base. "As an allied health profes- sion, radiologie technology must increase its research and scholarship productivity in order to develop its full potential as a separate and distinct profession."^ Review of the Literature Due to manpower needs, allied health professions traditionally have emphasized teaching and service over research and scholarship.^'^ In Covey and Burke's commentary on schools of allied health, the authors state that "academic allied health has been focused almost entirely on graduating practitioners."^ This pri- mary focus on meeting the demand for competent practitioners has been at a cost to the allied health professions that must validate dieir roles and practice.^ 376 VOLUME 74/NUMBER 5