Examining a Model to Assess Clinical Scholarship

Purpose/Aims: This study attempts to explicate constructs and similarities of clinical scholarship when compared to traditional scholarship and demonstrate the application of the Glassick model when assessing clinical scholarship.

Rationale/Background: Nursing academia has clearly defined constructs of scholarship that arose from Germanic influence. These constructs place greater value on traditional knowledge generation than on other forms of scholarship. The academy and its’ reward system is based on the academic trinity of Discovery, Teaching, and Service. Traditional scholarship (academic scholarship) has focused heavily on knowledge generation and dissemination of findings; however, scant research exists that define and explicate the concepts of clinical scholarship. Disparities in defining Clinical scholarship constructs have led to limited development of rigorous processes to assess or reward non-traditional scholarship. In the academic setting non-traditional forms of scholarship are viewed as lacking the rigorous methodologies of traditional research. The advent of the clinical doctorate, specifically the Doctor of Nursing Practice degree, creates an environment ripe for explicating clinical scholarship.

Methodology: A review of the English language literature was conducted to deepen the understanding of the similarities between clinical and traditional scholarship. The following keywords were used: nursing practice, scholarship of nursing, academic scholarship, clinical scholarship, clinical doctorate scholarship. A total of 19 articles were returned and reviewed.

Results: The articles reviewed lacked definitive conceptual definitions of clinical scholarship. Most articles defined nursing scholarship as the application of theoretical and clinical knowledge through the conduction of clinically relevant research and evaluation studies. Clinical scholarship was not specifically defined but implied that clinical scholarship provide care using evidence based principles.

Implications: Development of a clear conceptualization of the multidimensional aspects of Nursing Scholarship is needed. Assessing forms of scholarship through Glassick’s model may encourage scholarly parity. Additional study is required to evaluate these conclusions.