Job Satisfaction Among Radiation Therapy Educators

................................................................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PEER REVIEW

Job Satisfaction Among Radiation Therapy Educators LARRY G. SWAFFORD, Ph.D., R.T.(R)(T) JEFFREY S. LEGG, Ph.D., R.T.(R)(CT)(QM) Context Job satisfaction is one of the most consistent variables related to employee retention and is especially relevant considering the shortage of radiation therapists and radiation therapy educators in the United States. Objective To investigate job satisfaction levels among radiation therapy educators certified by the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists and employed in programs accredited by the Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology. Methods The long form of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) was mailed to 158 radiation therapy educators to measure job satisfaction. Overall job satisfaction and subscales were calculated based on MSQ methodology. Results A total of 90 usable surveys were returned for a 56.9% response rate. With a “general satisfaction” score of 69.64, radiation therapy educators ranked in the lowest 25th percentile of the nondisabled norm scale for job satisfaction. Respondents reported higher degrees of job satisfaction on the moral values, social service and achievement subscales. Lower job satisfaction levels were associated with the company policies and practices, advancement and compensation subscales. Conclusion Radiation therapy educators report low job satisfaction. Educational institutions must tailor recruitment and retention efforts to better reflect the positive aspects of being a radiation therapy educator. Furthermore, improving retention and recruitment efforts might help offset the current shortages of radiation therapy educators and, ultimately, clinical radiation therapists.

verall employment in the United States fell dramatically in the late 1990s until late 2003, and only recently has the employment outlook improved. Despite a decline in overall employment rates in the United States during the past decade, the number of jobs within the health care industry has risen. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimated that the health care sector added another 255 000 jobs during 2003, thus continuing its stature as one of the strongest sectors in the U.S. economy.1 Currently, health professions with the greatest need for employees include nursing, pharmacy and radiation sciences.1 An American Society of Radiologic Technologists (ASRT) report estimated that the radiation sciences will need to recruit approximately 90 000 more workers by 2010, including 7000 more radiation therapists, 8000 more nuclear medicine technologists and 75 000 more radiographers.2 Similarly, the BLS reported an increase of 31.6% in the number of radiation therapists needed by 2012.1 Hilton reported in 2003 that a shortage of radiologic technology educators, including radiation therapy educators, existed in the United States.3 Common reasons cited

for the shortage included the overall shortage of personnel in radiologic technology, low faculty salaries and difficulty finding faculty with appropriate academic preparation and degrees. These reasons, coupled with programmatic and institutional demands associated with faculty positions, contribute to the present shortage. Hilton projected the shortage to grow in the next several years as a large number of educators in the profession prepare for retirement. Considering the demands associated with radiation therapy educator positions and the availability of other options for educators, the question arises as to why radiation therapy faculty members remain in education. Job satisfaction is one of the most consistent variables related to employee retention. Hapaz suggested that low morale and job dissatisfaction are correlated closely with increased turnover rates.4 According to Kreisler, turnover in any organization is expensive; the average cost to replace an employee is roughly 30% of the employee’s salary. 5 This total includes costs incurred while the position is vacant, costs associated with finding and selecting a replacement and costs related to training the new employee.6 Research on job satisfaction and dissatisfaction of radiation therapy faculty might reveal factors and

RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGY July/August 2007, Vol. 78/No. 6

459

O

............................................................................................................. JOB SATISFACTION AMONG EDUCATORS

relationships that influence faculty to stay in higher education positions and could offer insights into the recruitment practices needed to increase the number of educators in the profession. Given the current environment of greater job mobility, increasing pay, more opportunities and fewer employees, it is critical for health care institutions as well as educational programs to find and retain qualified personnel, including faculty. Similarly, it is imperative for educational programs to recruit and retain qualified faculty to meet the demand for competent radiologic technologists. Job satisfaction is central to these issues. Given the shortage of radiation therapists today and government projections for greater shortages in the future, it is imperative to understand the determinants of radiation therapy faculty job satisfaction and identify the factors that influence job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. The future supply of clinical radiation therapists will be determined by the availability of qualified radiation therapy faculty to teach and administer these programs. To meet future educational and societal needs, it will be necessary to recruit additional faculty and students into the radiation therapy profession.

Literature Review Although there is a multitude of research on job satisfaction among a variety of disciplines and occupations, studies of radiation therapists are limited. A Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature database search revealed only 1 study relating to radiation therapy and job satisfaction. However, other studies on the broader field of radiography and job satisfaction are discussed. Research findings on job satisfaction among educators in other health professions also are presented. Radiologic Technologists Johnson and colleagues sought to determine if job satisfaction was influenced by personality characteristics among a sample of radiation therapists residing in southern Florida.7 The authors used 4 instruments (ie, Minnesota Satisfaction Questionaire, Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey, Professional Satisfaction Questionnaire and Personality Research Form) in a correlation research design to determine the influence of demographic variables on radiation therapists’ job satisfaction. Respondents expressed high levels of job satisfaction, and the majority found their jobs important and gratifying. Many enjoyed the technical aspects of the job and cited helping people as the primary reason for choosing the profession.

460

Personality characteristics as well as management, family and institutional factors all appeared to influence professional and job satisfaction. However, the limited nature of the sample restricts the generalizability of the research results. Radiologic technologists working at a southwestern regional medical center were surveyed to evaluate their perceived organizational climate and, in particular, attitudes toward job satisfaction.8 A portion of the questionnaire was based on the Job Descriptive Index. The authors reported that the radiology department ranked significantly below average compared with other hospital departments. The authors concluded that understaffing and a poor salary structure played a pivotal role in employee turnover and job dissatisfaction in the radiology department. Again, the generalizability of the results is limited due to the narrow sample. Wernick conducted a nationwide survey of radiologic technologists to determine their level of job satisfaction.9 The survey instrument was published in a well-known and widely distributed professional journal and recipients were asked to detach, complete and return the survey to the principal investigator. Survey respondents (n = 386) commonly cited a sense of satisfaction derived from interactions with patients and families. Other recognizable factors associated with job satisfaction included workload variety, flexibility of hours, relationships with coworkers and working with state-of-the-art equipment. Factors associated with dissatisfaction included stress due to administrative tasks, lack of consistent leadership, low salaries and working on outdated equipment. Results of this study must be interpreted carefully because of the potential for response bias and the nonrandom sample. Akroyd and Shewchuk conducted a job satisfaction study of 161 full-time radiographers working in the hospital setting.10 Results indicated that the work itself, pay and supervision all played a significant role in job satisfaction. The authors found that overall job satisfaction for radiographers correlated highly with intrinsic rewards such as increased autonomy and workload variety. Pay structure also was shown to be a significant factor in overall job satisfaction for radiographers. Satisfaction with current earnings or potential earnings figured highly into whether radiographers would remain in their current position or seek another. Employees with more autonomy and a work environment that promoted respect, fairness and recognition of skills indicated a higher degree of job satisfaction.

July/August 2007, Vol. 78/No. 6 RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGY

............................................................................................................. SWAFFORD, LEGG

Health Professions Educators Embry used the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) to explore job satisfaction among nurse anesthesia faculty.11 Nurse anesthesia educators (n = 304) expressed a moderate degree of job satisfaction. MSQ subscales that correlated highest with job satisfaction included social service, moral values, achievement, ability utilization, activity and variety. The 5 subscales associated with the least amount of job satisfaction included company policies and practices, recognition, advancement, supervision-human relations and compensation. Cosgrove investigated occupational therapy faculty’s perceptions of program director leadership and the impact of program directors’ behavior on the job satisfaction of occupational therapy faculty.12 Data were collected via 4 survey instruments: the Job Descriptive Index and the Job in General Scale, the Leadership Practices Inventory–Observer and the Demographic Data Questionnaire. Occupational therapy faculty (n = 122) generally were satisfied with their jobs. Furthermore, employee perceptions of the program director’s leadership behaviors significantly and positively influenced their job satisfaction. Other factors influencing job satisfaction included present pay and coworkers. Job satisfaction among nursing faculty has been investigated because of its impact on the production of nursing graduates. Kuennen evaluated job satisfaction among nurse educators in private colleges and universities in a Midwestern state.13 Study results indicated that nursing faculty (n = 85) were satisfied with their jobs in general. Although the work, workload and collegiality were associated with job satisfaction, collegiality was the most significant predictor of job satisfaction. Based on this review of job satisfaction among radiologic technologists and health professions faculty, certain findings are consistent. Job satisfaction often is associated with positive feelings toward the job itself, good relations with coworkers, adequate salary and autonomy. Factors that cause dissatisfaction with one’s job include low salary, inadequate staffing and lack of leadership from superiors.

Methods Survey Instrument The 1967 long form of the MSQ was used to measure satisfaction with several different aspects of the work environment. The MSQ is a paper-and-pencil inventory that can be administered to individuals or groups. The survey consists of 100 questions and takes approximately


15 to 20 minutes to complete. It measures general job satisfaction using 20 subscales. Each subscale represents a facet of job satisfaction and is measured by 5 questions. For each question, the respondent chooses the best response from 5 Likert-type alternatives: not satisfied, slightly satisfied, satisfied, very satisfied and extremely satisfied. Table 1 provides a list and short description of the 20 MSQ subscales. The MSQ is based on the theory of work adjustment, which hypothesizes that work adjustment can be predicted by matching personality and environment in the work setting.14 Because individuals express work satisfaction in different ways, the MSQ makes it possible to obtain an individualized picture of job satisfaction by identifying the degree to which values and needs are satisfied on a job. The MSQ provides an overall job satisfaction score for each respondent. The reliability and validity of the MSQ are sound and well documented.14 Weiss and colleagues provided internal consistency data for each of the 20 MSQ subscales.14 Reliability coefficients range between 0.62 and 0.97 across a variety of groups. These data suggest that the MSQ scales have adequate internal consistency. However, the reliability of some scales varies across study groups. Validity of the MSQ as a measure of job satisfaction was derived from other construct validation studies based, again, on the theory of work adjustment. Using general job satisfaction as the dependent variable and the Minnesota Importance Questionnaire scale scores as independent variables in a multivariate prediction problem, findings supported the conclusion that the MSQ measures satisfaction in accordance with the constructs from the theory of work adjustment.14 The concurrent validity of the MSQ was presented by Weiss and colleagues in the MSQ manual.14 Data were accumulated for more than 30 years on an array of occupations. This large body of research indicates that occupational differences exist in job satisfaction in both level and variability. Using 1-way analysis of variance, data were analyzed for 25 occupational groups to determine if differences in the level of expressed satisfaction existed.14 To test for group variability, the researchers employed Bartlett’s test of homogeneity of variance. Their findings indicated that group differences were statistically significant for both means and variances on all 20 MSQ subscales, as well as the overall job satisfaction scale, demonstrating that MSQ can differentiate among various occupational groups.

461


to acquire information on accredited radiation therapy programs in Subscale Description the United States. All 71 program directors 1. Ability utilization Use of one’s abilities on the job listed on the JRCERT 2. Achievement Feeling of accomplishment one gets from the job Web site were e-mailed 3. Activity Employee’s ability to keep busy at work to obtain faculty names and confirm their 4. Advancement Availability of advancement opportunities mailing address. Sixty 5. Authority Supervision and management of others program directors 6. Company policies How policies are implemented and practiced responded, resulting in the submission of 7. Compensation Pay and amount of work required 100 names. Eleven pro8. Coworkers Rapport with coworkers gram directors did not 9. Creativity Using own thoughts and methods on the job respond to the e-mail or 10. Independence Preferences toward working alone a subsequent follow-up phone call. 11. Moral values Being guided by conscience The ARRT data 12. Recognition Praise one receives for doing a good job and the list of names 13. Responsibility Using own judgment acquired from program directors were 14. Security Job provides steady employment and job security then cross-matched 15. Social service Doing things for others to remove duplicate 16. Social status Status in community names. The final mailing list contained 158 17. Supervision-human relations Relationship between boss and employees subjects. Because it was 18. Supervision-technical Competence of supervisor in the decision-making process not possible to identify 19. Variety Variation of job duties educators from accred20. Working conditions Conditions of the job environment ited vs nonaccredited programs based on the list obtained from Research Design the ARRT, a question A nonexperimental cross-sectional descriptive study regarding their program’s accreditation status was was conducted using data obtained from mailed quesadded to the survey and results from educators in nontionnaires. The long form of the MSQ was used to meaJRCERT-accredited programs were eliminated from the sure each respondent’s job satisfaction. The study was study. This restriction was implemented to solicit inforapproved by the university’s institutional review board. mation from radiation therapy faculty in programs that share a degree of consistency in program curricula and Study Population outcomes. To identify study participants, addresses were obtained from the American Registry of Radiologic Survey Procedures Technologists (ARRT) for registered technologists who Because of the limited size of the study population, identified themselves as certified in radiation therapy the investigators attempted to obtain a universal sample. and who were currently employed full time as program After the study population was identified, a packet was faculty or program directors in an educational setting. mailed to each subject containing a letter of introducThe results revealed 127 possible participants. tion, the MSQ, a supplemental demographic/profesIn an attempt to reach additional radiation therapy sional data form and a self-addressed stamped return educators, the Joint Review Committee on Education envelope. Nonrespondents were mailed a reminder postin Radiologic Technology (JRCERT) Web site was used card approximately 3 weeks after the initial deadline. All

Table 1 Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire Subscales and Descriptions14

462


............................................................................................................. SWAFFORD, LEGG

subjects who did not respond to the first mailing were sent 2 additional mailings. Plan of Analysis According to the MSQ manual, in the event that an individual occupation has no norm group developed (as is the case with radiation therapy educators), MSQ raw scores can be converted to percentile scores using the MSQ norms established for the “employed disabled” or “employed nondisabled,” depending on an individual’s disability status.14 For this study the normative data for “employed nondisabled” workers provided in the MSQ manual were used. These norm data were produced from information collected on occupations researched since the inception of the MSQ14 and provide a mechanism for comparing radiation therapy educator job satisfaction to other professions. Additionally, MSQ scores can be ranked to indicate areas of greater or lesser satisfaction. Generally, participants scoring in the lowest 25th percentile would be classified as low in job satisfaction, and those scoring in the upper 75th percentile would have higher job satisfaction.14 Based on the MSQ manual, participants scoring in the lowest 25th percentile of the general satisfaction score (≤ 71 general satisfaction score) were placed in the low job satisfaction group. Respondents placed in the job-satisfied group represented the middle 50th percentile (general satisfaction scores of 72 to 83) on the general satisfaction scale. Participants scoring at and above the 75th percentile (≥ 84 general satisfaction score) were placed into the high job satisfaction group.14 The MSQ general satisfaction score was calculated to identify the satisfaction level of radiation therapy educators as a whole. The subscale mean scores were used to indicate areas of increased or decreased satisfaction for the study population. Data were entered in SPSS (Release 10.0.05, SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL) for statistical analysis. Subscale means were calculated by averaging the 5 Likert-scale scored questions for each of the 20 subscales. Therefore, subscale means could range from 5 to 25. A higher subscale mean denotes a higher level of satisfaction. Subscale percentiles were calculated by comparing the mean subscale scores against MSQ norms developed for employed nondisabled groups. Overall job satisfaction for radiation therapy educators was calculated using the instructions provided in the MSQ manual. The overall or general satisfaction score was obtained by adding the score of a preselected item from each of the 20 subscales.14


Table 2 Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents (N = 90) Characteristic Age (years)

No. (%)

a

20-30

5 (5.6)

31-40

16 (18.0)

41-50

45 (50.6)

51-60

21 (23.6)

> 61

2 (2.2) Race/ethnicity

Black

5 (5.6)

Asian/Pacific Islander

1 (1.1)

Hispanic

1 (1.1)

White

83 (92.2) Gender

Male

12 (13.3)

Female

78 (86.7)

Education level Certificate

1 (1.1)

Associate

4 (4.4)

Baccalaureate

39 (43.3)

Master’s

43 (47.8)

Doctorate

3 (3.3)

a

Only 89 respondents indicated their age group.

Results Of the 158 surveys mailed to radiation therapy educators in the United States, 102 were returned. However, 12 respondents who indicated they were employed by a non-JRCERT-accredited program were eliminated from the study and subsequent data analysis. With 90 usable surveys, the response rate was 56.9%. The demographics of the respondents are presented in Table 2. The vast majority of respondents were women (86.7%). One half of the respondents were ages 41 to 50 years, with 76.4% indicating they were 41 years and older. White was the most common racial/ethnic group selected (92.2%), and only approximately 6% of faculty indicated they were black. Large percentages of radiation therapy educators reported holding a baccalaureate (43.3%) or master’s degree (47.8%).

463


Table 3 Ranked Job Satisfaction MSQ Subscales by Mean Scores and Percentiles Mean (SD)

Percentilea

1. Moral values

20.50 (4.06)

50

2. Social service

20.32 (4.03)

65

3. Achievement

20.07 (4.25)

60

4. Creativity

19.67 (4.21)

55

Subscale

only approximately 17% reported high levels of job satisfaction. Nearly 30% of respondents reported job satisfaction in the middle percentile range.

Discussion

With a general satisfaction mean score of 6. Responsibility 19.24 (3.73) 50 69.64, radiation therapy 7. Ability utilization 19.03 (4.56) 30 educators scored in the lowest 25th percentile of 8. Independence 18.92 (4.17) 40 the “employed-nondis9. Variety 18.69 (4.06) 30 abled” normative scale, 10. Coworkers 17.73 (4.36) 15 indicating a low level of job satisfaction. The 7 11. Security 16.69 (4.95) 15 job satisfaction subscales 12. Supervision-human relations 16.52 (5.56) 30 ranked highest by radia13. Social status 16.41 (4.30) 40 tion therapy educators on the MSQ (in descending 14. Recognition 16.28 (4.78) 25 order) were moral values, 15. Authority 16.18 (4.03) 30 social service, achieve16. Working conditions 16.14 (5.11) 20 ment, creativity, activity, responsibility and ability 17. Supervision-technical 16.08 (5.35) 25 utilization. The subscales 18. Company policies and practices 14.19 (4.68) 25 ranking in the lower 19. Advancement 13.52 (4.59) 15 third of job satisfaction 20. Compensation 12.46 (5.60) 10 (from lowest to highest) were compensation, General satisfaction score 69.64 (13.86) 20 advancement, company 14 a Rounded to nearest fifth percentile. Based on “employed-nondisabled” norms from the MSQ. policies and procedures, supervision-technical, working conditions, authority and recognition. Table 3 presents radiation therapy educator mean The moral values dimension of the MSQ was the subscores and corresponding percentile ranks for each scale with which study respondents were most satisfied. of the 20 MSQ subscales. MSQ mean scores indicate The MSQ manual defines moral values as the ability to higher degrees of job satisfaction for the moral values, “do things that do not go against one’s conscience.”14 All social service and achievement subscales. Lower job radiation therapy educators have at one time practiced satisfaction levels were associated with the company in the clinical setting, and providing comprehensive, conpolicies and practices, advancement and compensation cerned and compassionate patient care is of utmost imporsubscales. The overall satisfaction score for radiation tance to most radiation therapists. This is supported by therapy educators was 69.64, placing them in the 20th Johnson and colleagues’ study on job satisfaction of clinipercentile of the employed-nondisabled group. cal radiation therapists, in which respondents indicated The general satisfaction score for each respondent 2 primary reasons for becoming radiation therapists: the was used to determine placement in 1 of the 3 job satopportunity to work with technically advanced equipment isfaction areas (ie, low job satisfaction, satisfied or high and caring for and helping people.7 job satisfaction). (See Table 4.) Using this method, it Scoring high in social service and achievement sugappears that more than half of radiation therapy educagests that radiation therapy educators receive satisfaction tors reported low levels of job satisfaction. Conversely, 5. Activity

464

19.50 (4.14)

40


............................................................................................................. SWAFFORD, LEGG

from doing things for Table 4 others. Perhaps responGrouping of Respondents’ Satisfaction Levels dents experienced highJob Satisfaction Level Employed-Nondisabled Percentile Sample Size er levels of satisfaction Norm Satisfaction Scores n (%) a by providing students with the knowledge Low 1-71 < 25 45 (53.6) and experience needed Satisfied 72-83 26-74 25 (29.8) to become successful High 84-99 > 75 14 (16.6) practicing professionals. a 6 respondents had missing variables, resulting in no score. There are many opportunities throughout each student’s educational experience for educators to help students complete $59 140.16 In 2004 the mean salary for a staff therapist the program. This seems to have a positive effect on was $59 055 and $70 313 for a chief therapist. From 2001 radiation therapy educators, leading to a greater sense to 2004, staff clinical radiation therapist salaries rose of achievement. Results from this study are consistent more than 30%, while chief therapist salaries increased with those discussed previously in the literature review. more than 34%. However, during that same period, Embry, who also used the MSQ, found that the categomean salaries for radiation therapy program directors ries of social service, moral values and achievement were actually decreased about 1%, or approximately $500. all contributors to higher levels of job satisfaction among This illustrates the significant difference in educational physical therapy faculty.11 vs clinical salaries and explains the decreased level of Creativity, activity, responsibility and ability utilizajob satisfaction with respect to compensation. tion also scored relatively high as indicators of radiation Company policies and procedures also ranked fairly therapy educator job satisfaction. The opportunity to low in radiation therapy educators’ job satisfaction. This use one’s own judgment (responsibility), try one’s own finding might be due to the lack of control or input methods (creativity) and use one’s skills (ability utilizaradiation therapy educators believe they have when it tion) led to a greater sense of autonomy and resulted in comes to developing and implementing organizational a higher level of job satisfaction. The study by Akroyd policies and practices. Akroyd and Shewchuk found that and Shewchuk, discussed previously, reinforces these employees want autonomy, respect, fairness and skill findings. They concluded that overall job satisfaction recognition.10 Company policies and procedures that for radiographers correlated highly with increased job negatively impinge on any of these factors seem to result autonomy, a work environment that promoted respect in greater feelings of job dissatisfaction. and work load variety.10 Other areas resulting in lower job satisfaction includCompensation was identified as the lowest area of job ed lack of confidence in the competence of their supersatisfaction for radiation therapy educators on the MSQ. visor (supervision-technical), the work environment In this study radiation therapy educators indicated that (working conditions), the ability to tell others what to the pay they receive for the job they do is insufficient. do (authority) and the acknowledgement for a job well Several factors might contribute to this dissatisfaction done (recognition). These factors center on how radiawith remuneration. One factor is the rapidly rising salation therapy educators perceive “superior” and “suborries of practicing radiation therapists. Since the shortage dinate” relationships within the work setting. Finally, of radiation therapists began almost a decade ago, salafactors such as administrative tasks, lack of leadership ries for clinical radiation therapists have risen sharply. and working on outdated equipment also contributed to Meanwhile, faculty salaries, which often rely on local job dissatisfaction. and state funding, have remained stagnant. Based on the study findings, it appears that a successful According to the ASRT’s Wage and Salary Survey recruitment and retention program for radiation therapy for Radiologic Technologists, the mean salary for a proeducators requires the organization to take into account gram director in 2001 was $59 607.15 Mean salaries for the needs of its work force. By addressing the areas of abilstaff and chief/lead therapists that year were $45 237 ity utilization, institutional support, compensation, personand $52 455, respectively. Data from the 2004 survey nel and job characteristics, as well as other topics highindicated a mean salary for program directors of lighted in this study, organizations will be more likely to


465


create a positive work environment that results in higher levels of job satisfaction for its employees. Limitations of this study include the possibility of response bias and inaccurate responses due to the use of self-reported data. Because this study focused solely on the job satisfaction of full-time radiation therapy faculty in JRCERT-accredited programs, it is possible that differences in job satisfaction exist among non-JRCERTaccredited programs. Therefore, the generalizability of results might be limited. Last, research findings and conclusions were based on data obtained by using the MSQ; results might vary if other instruments are used. The work environment, attitudes and perceptions of radiation therapy educators is an area ripe for further investigation. Future research on job satisfaction among radiation therapy educators might focus on determining the explicit causes for job dissatisfaction. To determine if differences in job satisfaction might be related to institutional or programmatic factors, radiation therapy educators from non-JRCERT-accredited programs should be surveyed and the results compared with the results of this study of faculty in JRCERT-accredited programs.

Conclusion This study demonstrated that radiation therapy educators in the United States are less than satisfied with their jobs. As a result, the quality of educational programs might be affected negatively. To maintain quality radiation therapy educational programs, institutions must emphasize areas that are related positively to job satisfaction, including ability utilization, institutional support, compensation and particular personnel and job characteristics.

References 1. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Career guide to industries: health services. www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs035.htm. Accessed August 20, 2006. 2. Anderson R. ASRT projects extended shortage in radiography based on enrollment survey. ASRT Scanner. 2003;35(4):43-44. 3. Hilton L. Eye on educators. ASRT Scanner. 2003;36(2):8-11. 4. Harpaz I. Job Satisfaction: Theoretical Perspectives and a Longitudinal Analysis. New York, NY: Libra Publishers; 1983. 5. Kreisler B. New needs creating new jobs. The Richmond Times-Dispatch. March 17, 2002:6. 6. American Registry of Radiologic Technologists. Annual Report to Registered Technologists. St. Paul, MN: American Registry of Radiologic Technologists; 2002. 7. Johnson DJ, Roberts C, Trotti A, Greenberg HM. Professional satisfaction among radiation therapists: a

466

regional survey. Radiation Therapist. 1998;7:76-83. 8. Mondy RW, Nelson WF. Job satisfaction among radiologic technologists. Appl Radiol. 1978;7:65-67. 9. Wernick B. Technologists survey results. Appl Radiol. 1987;6:44-47. 10. Akroyd HD, Shewchuk RM. Factors related to job satisfaction of radiographers. Radiol Technol. 1990;61:472-477. 11. Embry JP. Job Satisfaction of Nurse Anesthesia Faculty [dissertation]. Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University; 1991. 12. Cosgrove JR. Faculty Perceptions of Occupational Therapy Program Director Leader Behavior: Impact Upon Faculty Job Satisfaction [dissertation]. Bridgeport, CT: University of Bridgeport; 2003. 13. Kuennen JK. Job Satisfaction Among Nurse Educators of Private Colleges and Universities [dissertation]. Cedar Falls, IA: University of Northern Iowa; 2002. 14. Weiss D, Daves R, England G, Lofquist L. Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota; 1967. 15. American Society of Radiologic Technologists. Radiologic Technologist Wage and Salary Survey. Albuquerque, NM: American Society of Radiologic Technologists; 2001. 16. American Society of Radiologic Technologists. Radiologic Technologist Wage and Salary Survey 2004. Albuquerque, NM: American Society of Radiologic Technologists; 2004.

Larry Swafford, Ph.D., R.T.(R)(T), is professor and program chairman of radiation therapy at Ivy Tech State College in Bloomington, Indiana. Jeffrey Legg, Ph.D., R.T.(R)(CT)(QM), is associate professor and chairman of the department of radiation sciences at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond. The authors thank the 3 anonymous reviewers whose comments improved this article. Reprint requests may be sent to the American Society of Radiologic Technologists, Communications Department, 15000 Central Ave. SE, Albuquerque, NM 87123-3909. © 2007 by the American Society of Radiologic Technologists.
