REASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF A GERONTOLOGY CERTIFICATE PROGRAM: A SECOND FOLLOW‐UP SURVEY OF GRADUATES

This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]On: 21 November 2014, At: 21:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational GerontologyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uedg20

REASSESSMENT OFTHE QUALITY OF AGERONTOLOGY CERTIFICATEPROGRAM: A SECONDFOLLOW‐UP SURVEY OFGRADUATESGerald L. Euster a & Elizabeth Woods Reaves ba College of Social Work , University of SouthCarolina , Columbia, South Carolina, USAb Hospice of Charleston , Charleston, SouthCarolina, USAPublished online: 03 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: Gerald L. Euster & Elizabeth Woods Reaves (1995)REASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF A GERONTOLOGY CERTIFICATE PROGRAM:A SECOND FOLLOW‐UP SURVEY OF GRADUATES, Educational Gerontology, 21:3,191-207, DOI: 10.1080/0360127950210301

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0360127950210301

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uedg20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0360127950210301

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0360127950210301

should be independently verified with primary sources of information.Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

REASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF A GERONTOLOGYCERTIFICATE PROGRAM: A SECOND FOLLOW-UPSURVEY OF GRADUATES

Gerald L. EusterCollege of Social Work, University of South Carolina, Columbia,

South Carolina, USA

Elizabeth Woods ReavesHospice of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina, USA

The gerontology certificate remains the most widely awarded credential resultingfrom the continuing growth of gerontology education structures in American col-leges and universities. The proliferation of multidisciplinary education in geron-tology raises concerns about curriculum quality, vitality, and development; em-ployment and career advancements in aging agencies; and the centrality ofgerontology education to institutional missions in a climate of diminishing finan-cial resources and refocusing of academic priorities. In a reassessment study, weobtained data from graduates (N = 92) of the Certificate of Graduate Study inGerontology Program at the University of South Carolina 6 years after a follow-upsurvey of graduates (N = 40) in 1987. The Standardized Survey Instrument forGraduates of Gerontology Programs, developed by the Association for Gerontologyin Higher Education (AGHE; 1989), was used to elicit demographic information;educational histories; information on gerontology employment activities, sources ofassistance in gaining employment, and salary levels; and views regarding theadequacy of gerontology education as preparation for work in aging agencies.Analysis of the survey data supports the goals and interdisciplinary focus of theeducational program, reveals a rich diversity of graduates' educational and careerattainments, and provides a strong indication that AGHE graduate certificatecurriculum standards have helped strengthen the program's quality. Additionaldata indicate several areas requiring curriculum development to support the careeradvancement of graduates in management and planning positions in aging andhealth care organizations.

Social and behavioral scientists, health care professionals, educators,public officials, and others who influence public policy are becomingincreasingly aware that both the number and proportion of older peo-ple continue to rise at a staggering rate in the United States. Data fromthe U.S. Bureau of the Census (1991) that indicate that our nation's

Address correspondence to Gerald L. Euster, College of Social Work, University ofSouth Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208.

Educational Gerontology, 21:191-207, 1995 191Copyright © 1995 Taylor & Francis

0360-1277/95 $10.00 + .00

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

192 G. L EUSTER AND E. W. REAVES

older population will continue to increase rapidly into the next centuryare constantly pressed into our national awareness. Even more as-tounding are the projections, based on increased life expectancies, thatlarge percentage increases will occur in the older old (over age 70) andoldest old (over age 85) populations.

As we approach the next century, our nation appears to be gaininga clearer understanding of the complex implications of the greying ofAmerica. Gerontologists and farsighted social planners and policymak-ers continue to project an increased demand for a widening array oftraditional and creative human services that may enhance the abilityof elderly persons to age in place. At the same time, there is increasedawareness that most Americans age 65 or older are healthy and desireto live active, productive lives. The multitude of persons engaged instrategic planning for the delivery of health care and social serviceprograms must confront our nation's expectations for cost-effectiveprograms and services that respond to the needs of older citizens whoare experiencing physical and psychological decline as well as those ofthe well elderly.

In a document prepared for the Southern Regional Education Board,Denton (1990) cogently addressed the role of higher education in thenation's attempt to prepare for an aging society. He recommended thatprograms awarding degrees and other credentials in gerontology andgeriatrics be encouraged at all levels of higher education. This call hasbeen echoed by various gerontology educators, who have articulatedthe emergent need for not only services and information designed forthe elderly, but also a clear response to labor force projections indicat-ing that additional personnel in aging will be needed in the yearsahead (Folts, Martin, & Friedsam, 1991; Kropf, Schneider, & Stahl-man, 1993; Mullins, 1992). In addition, many persons in the field be-lieve it is crucial that support and incentives be generated for facultymembers and practicing professionals in the health and human servicedisciplines to obtain continuing education in aging.

These recommendations reinforce the earlier position statement ofthe National Institute on Aging (NIA) and National Institutes ofHealth (NIH), in which these agencies specified that the capacities ofeducational and training organizations must be significantly expandedin response to the projected demands for quality services on behalf ofthe elderly living in their homes, in community-based settings, or innursing facilities. Both the NIA and the NIH urged that providers andacademic institutions maintain collaborative arrangements to betteruse scarce educational resources and enrich necessary multidisci-plinary practice approaches (U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices, 1987).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

QUALITY OF A GERONTOLOGY CERTIFICATE PROGRAM 193

Formal gerontology and geriatrics education in the United Stateswas essentially unknown until the mid-1960s (Denton, 1990). Throughpassage of the Older Americans Act and formation of the Administra-tion on Aging in 1965, grants supporting the establishment of geron-tology education programs became available to colleges and universi-ties. By 1984, the Administration on Aging had provided funding to185 institutions and 28 consortia. In 1974, gerontology educatorsthroughout the United States joined together to form the Associationfor Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), an organization thatcurrently lists 311 institutional members. In the past two decades, theAGHE has conducted annual conferences on instructional methodol-ogy and issues, offered technical assistance to new and developingeducational programs, and conducted personnel and instructional re-search studies. The AGHE also has developed a monumental set ofcurriculum and policy recommendations to strengthen gerontologyprogram development and revision of associate, bachelor's, master's,and graduate certificate levels of instruction in colleges and universi-ties (Rich, Connelly, & Douglass, 1990).

In the past several years, AGHE surveys have traced the dramaticgrowth of gerontology education in the United States. Rich, Atchley,and Douglass (1990) reported that more than 1,155 campuses offeredat least one gerontology course and more than 100 degree programs inthe field and projected further expansion of gerontology education intoseveral hundred additional colleges and universities in the 1990s. Ithas been suggested that the infusion of survey gerontology courses andrecommended course sequences in the humanities, social and behav-ioral sciences, and health sciences curricula may further recruitmentefforts in the field (Peterson & Wendt, 1993). A recent collaborativesurvey by the University of Southern California, the Andrus Gerontol-ogy Center, and the AGHE (Peterson, Wendt, & Douglas, 1991) iden-tified more than 800 organized programs of instruction in gerontology.The National Directory of Educational Programs in Gerontology andGeriatrics (AGHE, 1994) provides the most comprehensive documen-tation of the growth of gerontology educational structures during thepast several years.

Despite the projected growth of the elderly population, the demo-graphic pressures on health and human services use and the need forincreased human resources to deal with the problems of aging, geron-tology and geriatrics educators in institutions of higher education mustanticipate future challenges to their efforts to create and maintainappropriate educational structures. Our public policy directed towardcaring for an aging society has evolved at a time when both private andpublic colleges and universities are struggling to refocus their aca-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


demic and administrative priorities. These systems are facing the taskof allocating diminishing financial resources to academic programsconsidered to be the most central to their missions and to have thegreatest potential for growth. Cost control and strategic allocation ofinstitutional resources have emerged as issues of central importance inhigher education in the past decade (Noble, Cryns, & Laury, 1992), andsome university officials have responded to fiscal constraint by concen-trating resources on the academic programs they expect to be the mostprofitable for their institutions (Slaughter, 1993).

ASSESSMENT OF GERONTOLOGY EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Perhaps the most critical task for gerontology educators and directorsin future years will be ongoing assessment that strengthens the cred-ibility of their respective gerontology education programs. With thedramatic increases in the number of gerontology education programsbeing offered and the number of jobs requiring specialized training ingerontology, assessment of curriculum content, program standards,and employment of graduates must be undertaken (Euster, 1989a). Ger-ontology educators in state colleges and universities must join otheracademic disciplines in demonstrating that their programs are attunedto the needs of the larger state community. Assessment must be con-ducted to determine the program's ability to provide competent, em-ployable professionals who are able to improve the lives of older citi-zens as direct service providers, planners, and administrators inrapidly changing, diverse aging network settings. Assessment shouldserve to identify student outcomes, including employment and profes-sional achievements (Filenson, 1993). Administrators also need to un-derstand that they have an ethical responsibility to evaluate and mod-ify education and training on a regular basis Euster, 1989a, 1989b;(Johnson et al., 1980). This enables faculty to reconceptualize coursecontent, providing a basis for reshaping and strengthening the curric-ulum and ultimately providing students educational experiences of thehighest quality.

Although it would be illogical to attribute all graduates' accomplish-ments to enrollment in a single educational program, it is imperativethat gerontology educators systematically articulate the centrality oftheir respective educational programs to their institution's missions.This should be done in a manner that demonstrates the accomplish-ments of successful graduates, the impact of credentials conferred, andother outcomes for graduates of multidisciplinary educational struc-tures.

The present study was conducted at the University of South Caro-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


lina to reassess the impact and quality of the Certificate of GraduateStudy in Gerontology Program. It was considered necessary to deter-mine the extent to which the program continues to achieve its originalgoals and at the same time gain additional data to facilitate futureprogram and curriculum development. The purpose of the programreassessment, therefore, was to acquire data on program graduates'educational histories, professional gerontological activities, and em-ployment-seeking activities in gerontology, as well as their evaluationsof the usefulness of the program and their recommendations for cur-riculum revisions. The initial assessment of the gerontology certificateprogram was conducted in 1987 (Euster, 1989a).

DEVELOPMENT OF THE GERONTOLOGY CERTIFICATEPROGRAM AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA

The Certificate of Graduate Study in Gerontology Program at the Uni-versity of South Carolina was approved in 1979 as an 18-semester-hour program to meet the educational needs of mature learners whowere either employed or seeking career employment in the planning,administration, or provision of direct services for older citizens. Thefirst certificates were awarded by the university in 1980. Since itsbeginning, the program has proven to be particularly beneficial tothose students concurrently enrolled in master's or doctorate degreeprograms in various disciplines. The program has enabled students toobtain specialized preparation to advance their positions in aging net-work agencies or to prepare for new career opportunities in the ex-panding fields of gerontology and geriatrics. A large number of mas-ter's degree social work students and graduates have used the programto prepare for advanced roles in micro- or macrolevel practice. In thelast 2 years, an increasing number of students in the School of PublicHealth, preparing for careers in health care administration, havebroadened their employment prospects through concurrent enrollmentin the gerontology certificate program. At the present time, with ap-proval of the particular academic unit, and subject to Graduate Schoolregulations, students may apply some courses taken for the gerontol-ogy certificate toward another graduate degree.

The program is administered by the Graduate School of the Univer-sity of South Carolina, with planning, evaluation, and oversight pro-vided by the university's multidisciplinary Academic Committee onGerontology. The committee is composed of faculty who teach requiredcourses and others representing academic units that contribute ap-proved elective courses. With a continuing commitment to excellence,the gerontology certificate program has evolved in relation to stan-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

196 G. L. EUSTER AND E. W. REAVES

dards and guidelines established by the AGHE. The graduate directorcurrently is a member of the College of Social Work faculty, and theprogram is located in space provided by that academic unit.

The gerontology certificate program was designed as a means oforganizing existing courses and resources at the University of SouthCarolina to serve graduate students whose educational needs in ger-ontology could not be met within the framework of traditional aca-demic programs. Certificate studies are interdisciplinary in nature,and the credential is granted after completion of a structured programof 21 semester hours of required courses and approved electives. In1992, the School of Medicine's geriatrics faculty were enlisted to pro-vide an additional required course, Health Aspects of Aging, in re-sponse to a curriculum gap acknowledged by both faculty members onthe Academic Committee on Gerontology and graduates of the pro-gram. Currently, each student's program of study must include fourrequired courses (12 credit hours) and three elective courses (9 credithours); these courses are listed in Table 1. In accordance with stan-dards and guidelines recommended by the AGHE, all students must

TABLE 1 Courses Offered to Students in the Certificate of Graduate Studyin Gerontology Program at the University of South Carolina

Required courses (4)Psychosocial Approaches to Gerontology (team taught by social work,

psychology, and sociology faculty)Health Aspects of Aging (taught by medical and health professions

faculty)Programs and Services for the Elderly (taught by social work faculty)Fieldwork, internship, or supervised research practicum (developed for

students in their respective academic units)Electives (3)Students choose three courses from a list of approved gerontology electives.

Current course offerings are available in the College of Social Work,College of Education, and College of Nursing; the School of Public Health(Health Care Administration, Health Promotion and Education,Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Speech-Language Pathology, and ExerciseScience departments); and the Department of Psychology, Department ofSociology, and Department of Philosophy (Health Ethics). So that theinterdisciplinary focus of the program is maintained, students are advisedto take elective courses in various departments, schools, or colleges. Atleast one elective must be taken outside the student's academic discipline.

Independent study options are available to students who desire knowledgeor research experiences in aging that are not provided in the required orelective courses.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


engage in a gerontology-related practicum, including experiences withwell-functioning older adults or those with disabilities associated witholder age. Students preparing for research, administrative, planning,or policy positions are allowed to substitute an equivalent number ofcourse credits for supervised research or participation in a project on agerontological topic to meet the practicum requirement.

Upon acceptance into the program, all students are assigned anacademic advisor who guides the construction of an individualized pro-gram of study, including fieldwork, an internship, a research practi-cum, and independent study courses. The normal time allowed forcompletion of a certificate is 4 years. All programs of study are moni-tored by the Graduate School. Academic standards parallel those ingraduate degree programs.

METHOD

The 25-item Standardized Survey Instrument for Graduates of Geron-tology Programs, developed and pilot-tested by the AGHE (1989), wasused for the current study. Demographic information and informationregarding respondents' educational backgrounds, including major fieldof study, was requested. Seventeen items were fixed-response ques-tions, providing data pertaining to employment status, primary andsecondary employment activities, yearly salary, resources consideredvaluable in seeking gerontology employment, time spent in seekinggerontology position, and usefulness of the gerontology certificate incareer advancement. Four open-ended questions elicited informationregarding useful components of the graduates' gerontology training fora career; the most useful qualities of the gerontology program; content,knowledge, skills, or experiences that would have been useful in thegerontology program; and additional comments. The questionnairecould be completed in 15-30 min.

Ninety-two graduates who had earned the gerontology certificatebetween May 1980 and May 1993 were surveyed between Februaryand June 1993. The record systems of the Graduate School and theAlumni Association were used to obtain the mailing addresses of thegraduates. Each graduate was mailed a packet containing a cover let-ter explaining the purpose of the survey, the AGHE questionnaire, anda postage-paid return envelope. A follow-up reminder was mailed 1month later. Despite this effort, several alumni had not maintainedcontact with the university, and current addresses could not be foundfor them. Several envelopes were undeliverable and returned by thepostal service. One graduate was known to have passed away. Thusthe 1993 mailing produced a total of 62 respondents, for a 67% re-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


sponse rate. (The first survey, completed in 1987, produced a total of 31respondents, for a 74% response rate.)

Data from the fixed-response questions were analyzed with the Sta-tistical Analysis System (SAS) computer program. Content analysiswas performed on the data gathered from the open-ended questions.

FINDINGS

Characteristics of Graduates

Since 1980, there have been 93 graduates of the gerontology certificateprogram, an average of nearly six graduates per year. There have been86 female and 7 male graduates. Ninety percent (n = 54) of the grad-uates who responded to the present survey were female, and 10% (ra =6) were male. Ages ranged from 24 to 69, with an average age of 45.5years. Sixty-seven percent of the respondents were married, 17% wereseparated or divorced, and 16% were single. Eighty-six percent (n = 50)were white, and 10% (n = 6) were African-American. One graduate wasNative American, and one was Spanish/Hispanic.

Graduates' Educational Histories

Forty-four percent (n = 27) of the respondents designated undergrad-uate degrees or majors in nursing, psychology, sociology, or socialwork. The remainder of the respondents indicated a wide range ofundergraduate majors, including dramatic arts, speech, political sci-ence, philosophy, religion, criminology, biology, parks and recreation,English and foreign languages, business administration, and educa-tion. Only 2 graduates noted undergraduate majors in biological orphysical sciences.

Thirty-four percent (n = 21) of the respondents had earned theirmaster's degree in social work, and 13% (n = 8) had completed master'sdegree programs in nursing. Other gerontology graduates had earnedmaster's degrees in such fields as education (8%), public administra-tion (5%), and theology (5%). The remainder of the graduates hadmaster's degrees in such fields as social gerontology, psychology, ther-apeutic recreation, public health, rehabilitation, and business admin-istration. Thirteen percent (n = 8) graduates had earned doctoral de-grees, three in public health. One graduate each had received adoctorate in education, dentistry, nursing, psychology, and law. Sixpercent (n = 4) graduates currently were completing doctoral studies.Seventy percent of the respondents had completed the gerontology

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


certificate program while enrolled as a master's-level student. Eightpercent had been doctoral students while completing the program orwere now concurrently enrolled in a doctoral program.

Graduates' Employment Status and Activities

Seventy-three percent of the respondents stated they were currentlyemployed full-time, and 7% said they were employed part-time. Threepercent were not employed, and nearly 10% were not seeking employ-ment. Of those persons not presently employed in an aging-relatedposition, 10% indicated a lack of job opportunities in the field of aging.Four respondents stated that they had retired from the workforce.Seventy-three percent (n = 45) of the graduates had been employed inthe aging network before they entered the certificate program, but only28% (n = 13) were still employed in that original position.

Seventy-nine percent of the respondents had been employed in anaging-related position since receiving the gerontology credential. Fifty-nine percent currently were employed in an aging-related job. Eighty-eight percent of the respondents indicated they had been able to locatean aging-related job within 3 months of completing the gerontologyprogram; 95% had found a position within 6 months of graduation.

With respect to future employment, 60% of the graduates statedthey intended to remain in the field of aging. Twenty-six percent wereuncertain about future work in aging. Only 2 graduates stated theywould not remain in the field. Among those persons not currently em-ployed in an aging-related position, 58% were planning to seek em-ployment in the field.

Some interesting patterns were noted pertaining to the resourcesused by certificate program graduates to obtain their present or mostrecent positions. Networking, that is, using friends, acquaintances,and professional contacts, was ranked as the most valuable resource ofassistance by 39% of graduates. Additional important sources of assis-tance in gaining employment were contacts established at previousjobs and as a result of internship, fieldwork, and practicum experi-ences. Networking, previous job, and internships in that order alsowere considered as the second most important sources of employmentassistance.

The organizations in which the gerontology graduates currentlywere employed were widely distributed in the public and private sec-tors. Forty-two percent of the graduates were employed in local, state,or federal government agencies; 28% of the graduates worked for pri-vate nonprofit organizations; 9% worked for private for-profit organi-zations; and 14% worked within educational institutions.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


Regarding their primary work activities, 26% of the graduates in-dicated they were involved in administration and management duties.Twelve percent were engaged in program planning and evaluationactivities, and 10% were teaching in higher education. Another 7%specified teaching or training as primary roles in other employmentsettings. Only 15% of the graduates indicated that direct provision ofservices (e.g., casework, counseling, home health care, or rehabilita-tion) was their primary work responsibility. Among secondary workactivities, program planning and evaluation were indicated by 16% ofthe graduates and administration and management by 10% of them.Again, only 11% of the graduates designated direct services as theirsecondary work activities. Eight percent indicated both teaching ortraining and research as secondary work responsibilities.

Data on yearly salary levels revealed that 81% (n = 42) of the re-spondents were earning $25,000 or more. Twenty-seven percentearned $25,000-29,999, and 25% earned $40,000 or more.

Graduates' Views of the Usefulness of the Program

Ninety-five percent (n = 57) of the respondents stated that the educa-tion provided through the gerontology certificate program was usefulor very useful as preparation for their careers.

Several graduates' comments indicated that their gerontology edu-cation had provided important knowledge and insights that were notavailable elsewhere in their graduate programs and courses. Severalgraduates stated that the education they received in the program wasparticularly helpful for their practice in health care settings for theelderly. One graduate commented that she now had an "extra edge" toget jobs. Another attributed her gerontology knowledge base to suc-cessful completion of the American Nurses' Association exam for cer-tification in gerontological nursing. A recent graduate stated she be-lieved the gerontology certificate would be very useful in attainingfuture goals as a social work educator and researcher. One graduatebelieved that the gerontology education would help in doctoral disser-tation development on an aging-related topic. Six respondents re-flected that a master's degree program in gerontology would have ben-efited them.

The graduates specified several knowledge areas as particularlyuseful in preparing them for their respective careers. These areas in-cluded

• Client physical and psychological assessment,• Caregiver concerns,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


• Intervention activities used by various disciplines,• The interdisciplinary context of the aging agency network and

service delivery,• Home-based care of the elderly,• Health aspects of aging,• Entitlement and other public programs, and• Aging and public policy.

Graduates' Views of the Most Useful Aspectsof the Program

The graduates provided a broad range of responses about the mostuseful aspects of their programs of study. Four areas appeared mostfrequently in their comments, however. Graduates most frequentlyindicated that the interdisciplinary aspects of gerontology emphasizedin the educational program had been the most useful component oftheir learning. This aspect helped them better understand the varioushelping roles of related disciplines, exposed them to different profes-sional perspectives, and made them aware of the need for multidisci-plinary practice to enhance the functioning of older clients.

The graduates also commented that courses on the physical andpsychological aspects of aging, programs and services, and public pol-icy were important parts of their education. Comments indicated theimportance they attributed to learning about the needs of healthy olderpersons as well as the special medical needs of the elderly. Othersignificant learning occurred in courses on grief, loss and loneliness,the psychosocial aspects of aging, normal versus pathological agingprocesses, psychopathology, and communication with the elderly. Sev-eral respondents stated that the most useful components of their ger-ontology education addressed effective aging agencies and programsand planning of long-term care and other aging services.

Many graduates stated that the gerontology education programgave them excellent opportunities for affiliation with the aging agencynetwork. Newer residents of South Carolina believed the program wasa helpful mechanism for developing relationships with academic ger-ontologists and classmates working in aging agencies and getting ex-posure to the many agencies and practitioners in the field. One grad-uate stated that the program helped her learn how to "access" thesystem.

In addition, several graduates stated that their respective academicunits had provided outstanding internship or practicum experiences aswell as courses that enabled them to sharpen skills for working witholder persons and their families. One graduate was particularly

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


pleased at being able to design an individualized program of study, andanother appreciated that some courses could be taken in the SummerSchool of Gerontology sponsored by the Governor's Division on Aging.

Graduates' Recommendations for Gerontology Content,Knowledge, and Experiences

Numerous recommendations were offered by the graduates regardingcontent, knowledge, skills, and experiences that would have been use-ful if included in their gerontology programs of study. Curriculum rec-ommendations centered on four areas: (a) the medical aspects of aging,(b) the legal aspects of aging, (c) the administrative and managementresponsibilities in aging settings, and (d) interpersonal experiences withthe elderly.

Numerous graduates suggested that the program's curriculumshould more fully address the physical and psychological problems ofthe elderly. Knowledge about normal versus abnormal aging processes,age-related biological and psychological changes, medications, sub-stance abuse, and elder abuse and neglect was considered important.Several graduates, even some with nursing degrees, indicated thatthey needed more skills for geriatric assessment, interviewing, andcommunicating with confused older persons.

Several graduates stated that the curriculum should include moreinformation on legal issues such as mental competence and victimiza-tion. Others recommended the inclusion of content dealing with wills,guardianship alternatives, power of attorney, estates, and money man-agement for the elderly.

The graduates suggested a wide range of curriculum content relatedto administrative and management practice in aging agencies. Somebelieved that they needed business knowledge, including knowledge ofbudgeting, marketing of services, and personnel management. Othersrecommended specific knowledge that would have prepared them forsuch activities as volunteer management, grant proposal writing, andeven setting up a nursing home.

There were many recommendations for increasing the amount ofgerontology students' interactions and experiences with older patientsand clients. One person suggested that students be exposed to variousforms of services for the elderly. A community service project involvingstudents and the elderly, visits to nursing homes, and field visits toaging agencies were considered important learning opportunities.

Other recommended areas of knowledge and information includedregulations and standards for licensing nursing homes and the prob-lems of the rural elderly. Two graduates indicated that the program

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


should provide content on the needs of minority elderly clients andethnically sensitive practice.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This reassessment of the Certificate of Graduate Study in GerontologyProgram at the University of South Carolina, 6 years after the initialassessment in 1987, provided additional evidence that the programstructure remains a cost-effective and productive vehicle for interdis-ciplinary, graduate-level study in gerontology. The program's viabilityhas been enhanced by the university's growing commitment to andfostering of interdisciplinary initiatives. The program clearly has re-sponded to the personnel needs of the larger state community, includ-ing the Governor's Division on Aging, county and local aging networks,and private nonprofit agencies serving the state's increasing elderlypopulation.

Nearly 80% of the survey respondents stated they had been em-ployed in aging-related positions since receiving the gerontology cre-dential, and most reported successful employment within 3 months ofcompleting their studies. The greying of America and the steadygrowth of the elderly population in South Carolina suggest that theseprofessionals will continue to locate challenging and rewarding posi-tions in expanding aging services and planning networks. The presentstudy reaffirms that concurrent enrollment by gerontology certificatestudents in master's and doctoral degree programs in social work, pub-lic health, nursing, psychology, and education will further ensure theirmarketability in the aging network.

These graduates of the University of South Carolina's gerontologycertificate program identified numerous career paths in gerontologyand geriatrics, and the great majority stated they were committed tocontinue working in the field of aging. Indeed, most of the surveyrespondents reported that they had advanced beyond the levels of em-ployment they had been at before enrolling in the gerontology program.The survey indicates that the graduates are engaged in a wide varietyof administrative, management, planning, and direct service roles. Inboth the 1987 and 1993 surveys of graduates, approximately 25% ofrespondents indicated that they had attained administrative and man-agement positions. Many graduates were directing social service ornursing programs in health care settings; administering continuing-care and community-based programs for the elderly; or serving in high-level program and planning positions in such settings as the Gover-nor's Division on Aging, the state Health and Human Services FinanceCommission, and county councils on aging. Other graduates had ad-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


vanced as directors of adult day treatment, wellness, senior center, andhome care programs. One graduate was serving as the executive di-rector of a state chapter of the National Association of Social Workers.Eight graduates, concurrently earning doctorates at the University ofSouth Carolina, had gained university teaching and research positionsin such disciplines as nursing, education, and public health. The salarylevels reported by the certificate program graduates compare very fa-vorably with those reported by aging network professionals in a na-tional survey by Peterson et al. (1991). Twenty-five percent of therespondents reported that they earned more than $40,000 per year.

The respondents' overall assessment of the usefulness of the geron-tology certificate program was very favorable. Many graduates be-lieved that the program had contributed to their successful employ-ment in the aging network and to their career advancement.Numerous comments by graduates indicated that the program hadgiven them a clearer perspective on the problems of the elderly andhow to solve them, an extra edge in accessing the workplace, and aspecialized area for research in advanced-degree programs. Severalgraduates commented that the program enabled them to establishhelpful networks of colleagues working in aging services.

The respondents indicated that the certificate program strongly con-tributed to their appreciation of the interdisciplinary nature of geron-tology. Many believed that they gained a clearer understanding of thecontributions and perspectives of related disciplines and of the impor-tance of multidisciplinary efforts in direct practice settings. These com-ments echoed those of the respondents in the 1987 survey. The contri-butions of courses drawn from various colleges and departments wereappreciated. In fact, since the 1987 survey, several additional courseshad been added to the approved list of gerontology electives. The re-spondents considered the practicum and fieldwork experiences espe-cially significant parts of the program. Several graduates suggestedthat additional opportunities for "practical" experiences, such as fieldvisits to aging agencies, would have been helpful. In the future, theseexperiences may be available through independent study options andhands-on projects developed by faculty in existing courses.

The present study provided important insights for improving thequality of the gerontology certificate program at the University ofSouth Carolina. As in the 1987 study, the graduates stressed the needfor more information on the physical and psychological aspects of ag-ing, including such topics as age-related biological and psychologicalchanges, geriatric assessment, and medications. This curriculum gaphas been addressed by the addition of a fourth required course, HealthAspects of Aging, added to the curriculum in 1992 and team-taught by

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


the School of Medicine geriatrics faculty. Normal aging, disease pro-cesses, nutrition, special medical problems, instability and falls, poly-pharmacy, ethical issues, mental health, dementia, functional assess-ment, and preventive geriatrics are among the topics covered in thisspecially designed course.

Because a large number of gerontology students will move into ad-ministrative and management positions in aging network agencies,faculty advisors should play a role in guiding students toward appro-priate courses throughout the university. At the University of SouthCarolina, courses in health administration, public administration,long-term care administration, and management of social agencies willbe recommended for students who want this additional career prepa-ration. Finally, the need for additional course content pertaining to thelegal aspects of aging was strongly recommended by the graduates inthis survey. Law school faculty and guest lecturers will be used toassist in developing this increasingly important content area in ger-ontology education.

CONCLUSION

It has become increasingly clear that (a) preparing students to meetthe long-term care needs of our nation's growing elderly populationpresents a complex challenge for higher education, and (b) gerontologyand geriatrics will continue to be growth fields in future years. Inresponse to sociodemographic trends and projected personnel needs,public and private institutions of higher education must attend to theiremergent roles in preparing specialized personnel for employment inrapidly evolving health care and aging network systems. Futurethreats to the development of gerontology education programs mayoccur as institutions struggle to refocus academic priorities in the faceof a decline in funding. As newer members of university communities,gerontology education programs must strive to identify to their insti-tutions their strengths and their links to their institutions' academicmissions.

The Certificate of Graduate Study in Gerontology Program at theUniversity of South Carolina has provided a timely educational focusfor a rapidly shifting job market and changing student population. Thegerontology certificate program addresses the needs of many older stu-dents returning to employment or entering the workforce for the firsttime, professionals who wish to strengthen their knowledge and skillsfor more advanced practice, and students who want a specialization/concentration to complement master's- and doctoral-level studieswithin the traditional academic disciplines. The gerontology certificate

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


program has remained responsive to students who are unable to com-mit themselves to full-time graduate study and want the flexibility ofcontinuing education.

The findings of this assessment study suggest that the gerontologycertificate program is an effective educational structure that has en-abled graduates to fill important and diverse roles as direct servicepractitioners, administrators, program planners, and educators. Grad-uates of the program strongly indicate that the interdisciplinary focusof the program prepared them for the collaboration and networkingrequired for effective practice in the aging agency network. Surveydata also reveal several areas in which curriculum development shouldoccur to support the employment roles of future graduates.

REFERENCES

Association for Gerontology in Higher Education Research Committee. (1989).Standardized Survey Instrument for Graduates of Gerontology Programs.Washington, DC: Author.

Association for Gerontology in Higher Education. (1994). National directory ofeducational programs in gerontology and geriatrics. Washington, DC: Au-thor.

Denton, D. R. (1990). Caring for an aging society: Issues and strategies forgerontology education. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.

Euster, G. L. (1989a). Assessment of gerontology certificate program quality: Afollow-up study of graduates. Gerontology and Geriatrics Education, 9, 59-72.

Euster, G. L. (1989b). Employability and educational needs of gerontologydegree and certificate graduates. Gerontology and Geriatrics Education, 10,19-31.

Filinson, R. (1993). Assessing outcomes of a gerontology certificate program.Educational Gerontology, 19, 251-264.

Folts, W. E., Martin, C. A., & Friedsam, H. J. (1991). A descriptive study ofselected student characteristics: Twenty years of gerontological education.Educational Gerontology, 17, 257-268.

Johnson, H. R., Britton, J. H., Lang, C. A., Seltzer, M. M., Stanford, E. P.,Yancik, R., Maklan, C. W., & Middleswarth, A. B. (1980). Foundations ofgerontological education. The Gerontologist, 20, 1-61.

Kropf, N. P., Schneider, R. L., & Stahlman, S. D. (1993). The status of geron-tology in baccalaureate social work education. Educational Gerontology, 19,623-634.

Mullins, L. C. (1992). Reflections on gerontological education into the twenty-first century. In Gerontology: The next generation (pp. 9-12). Atlanta, GA:Southern Regional Education Board.

Noble, J. H., Cryns, A. G., & Laury, B. S. (1992). Faculty productivity andcosts: A multivariate analysis. Evaluation Review, 16, 288-314.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014


Peterson, D. A., & Wendt, P. F. (1993). Professional and job characteristics ofpersonnel in the aging network: Implications for gerontological programdevelopment and student recruitment. Gerontology and Geriatrics Educa-tion, 13, 81-96.

Peterson, D. A., Wendt, P. F., & Douglass, E. B. (1991). Determining the impactof gerontology preparation on personnel in the aging network: A nationalsurvey. Washington, DC: Association for Gerontology in Higher Education.

Rich, T. A., Atchley, R. C., & Douglass, E. B. (1990). Future trends in geron-tological education. In Standards and Guidelines for Gerontology Programs,Washington, DC: Association for Gerontology in Higher Education.

Rich, T. A., Connelly, J. R., & Douglass, E. B. (Eds.). (1990). Standards andguidelines for gerontology programs (2nd ed.), Washington, DC: Associationfor Gerontology in Higher Education.

SAS Institute, Inc. (1989). SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6 (4th ed.). Cary,NC: Author.

Slaughter, S. (1993). Retrenchment in the 1980s: The politics of prestige andgender. Journal of Higher Education, 64, 250-282.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1991). Growth of America's elderly in the 1980s.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and StatisticsAdministration.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1987). Personnel for healthneeds of the elderly through the year 2020 (Administrative Document). Be-thesda, MD: National Institute on Aging and National Institutes of Health.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

21:

58 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Documents

REASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF A GERONTOLOGY CERTIFICATE PROGRAM: A SECOND FOLLOW‐UP SURVEY OF GRADUATES