Recently there has been considerable enthusiasm towards incorporating scientific teaching into our ecology classrooms and conducting research on those activities. Subsequently, as more faculty in science departments engage in research and other professional activities about teaching and learning science, the profiles and responsibilites of faculty are changing. Science departments of the California State University (CSU) system, the largest university 
in the country serving more than 400,000 students on 23 campuses, have 
been making an effort to hire faculty members with training as a
 scientist and as a specialist in science education. In addition, other faculty originally hired for their disciplinary science research have incorporated science education into their scholarly activities. However, departments have encountered challenges in structuring the positions, finding candidates that match advertised qualifications, and 
retaining such faculty. Recently, the National Academy of Sciences held
 a workshop for Discipline-based Science Education Research, and the 
CSU held a system-wide Colloquium on Science Education, both of which 
raised issues regarding such faculty positions, across scientific 
disciplines. A collaborative team of tenure-track CSU faculty holding 
such science education positions has investigated factors leading to
 more or less successful positions by surveying faculty in the system.
 This team aimed to answer the following general questions: What do
 Science Faculty with Education Specialties (SFES) look like? How are
 these positions similar to and different from other tenure-track
 faculty positions in science departments? with respect to research?
 teaching? service? Why create these positions within science 
departments? Survey questions were developed specifically to evaluate 
seven commonly held myths about what SFES do and why departments
 should hire such faculty.

Results/Conclusions

Approximately 100 faculty anonymously
 completed surveys characterizing expectations and realities of 
teaching, research, and service, and how their job expectations compared to other
 faculty in their science departments. Initial results indicated some
 differences and some similarities in responses from two typical 
profiles: faculty hired, often recently, as SFES, and faculty hired
 to conduct basic science (not education) research, who converted to SFES at some
 point in their career. Both groups refuted some commonly held ideas about resource needs and activities of SFES. These data will stimulate
 productive discussions in university science departments about 
hiring, retaining, and supporting the SFES who can link research and education and help us improve ecology education for all.