palette
شناسایی عوامل مؤثر در سنجش بهره‌وری پژوهشی اعضای هیئت علمی در حوزه‌ی علوم انسانی و اجتماعی (مطالعه موردی: دانشگاه تهران)

چکیده

هدف: پژوهش حاضر با هدف شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر سنجش بهره­وری پژوهشی اعضای هیئت­ علمی در حوزه­های علوم انسانی و اجتماعی دانشگاه تهران با رویکرد کیفی به شیوه نظریه برخاسته از داده­ها (روش نوخاسته) صورت گرفت.

مواد و روش­ها:  به منظور گردآوری داده­های پژوهش، ابزار مصاحبه نیمه ­ساختاریافته بکار برده شد. مصاحبه­هایی با 18 نفر از اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاه­ها به صورت هدفمند با راهبرد نمونه­گیری ملاک­محور انجام گرفت. داده­ها طی دو مرحله کدگذاری باز و محوری مورد تحلیل و بررسی قرار گرفتند. روایی یافته­های پژوهش با استفاده از روش­های بررسی توسط اعضا، بررسی کنندگان بیرونی و چندسویه نگری منابع داده­ها تضمین گردید.

بحث و نتیجه­گیری: نتایج تحلیل کیفی پژوهش نشان داد که عوامل اصلی در سنجش بهره­وری پژوهشی اعضای هیئت علمی در سه بعد، عامل کیفیت بروندادهای پژوهش (کیفیت مقاله، کتاب، پایان­نامه، نوآوری و اخلاق در پژوهش)، اثر دستاوردهای پژوهش (استنادات، تعاملات پژوهشی، اشاعه و کاربست نتایج، ترویج علم، فناوری، درآمدزایی و اعتبار پژوهشی) و محیط پژوهش (منابع مالی و کالبدی، منابع انسانی و مکانیزم تشویقی) قرار می­گیرند.

واژگان کلیدی
آموزش عالي، ارزشیابی پژوهش، اثر پژوهش، بهره‌وری پژوهش، کیفیت پژوهش

منابع و مآخذ مقاله

Abbaszadeh, M. (2012). Validity and reliability in qualitative researches. Journal of Applied Sociology. 23(1). 19-34.

Abramo. G., Cicero. T. & D’Angelo. A.A. (2013). Individual research performance: A proposal for comparing apples to oranges. Journal of Informetrics. 7. 528– 539.

Abramo. Giovanni. & D’Angelo. C.A. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity?. Scientometrics. 101:1129–1144.

Alibeygi. A. H. (2007). An Analysis of the Research Productivity of Faculty Members: The Case of Razi University. Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education. 13(4). 125-154.

Anfossi, A., Ciolfi, A., Costa, F., Parisi,G. and Benedetto, s.(2016). Large-scale assessment of research outputs through a weighted combination of bibliometric indicators.15th Conference on Sciento- metrics & Informetrics. Scientometrics: 107:671–683.

Azizi, N. (2013). A Study of Ways to Improve Research Performance of Humanities Faculty Members. Journal Management system. 6(21). 7-33.

Bacon,D.R., Paul,P., Stewart,K.A. & Mukhopadhyay,K. (2012). A New Tool for Identifying Research Standards and Evaluating Research Performance. Journal of marketing education. 34(12):194-208.

Bazargan., Abbas. (2010). An Introduction to Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research.Tehran: Didar.

Bland, C. J. & Ruffin, M. T. (1992). Characteristics of a productive research environment: Literature review. Academic Medicine. 67(6), 385-397.

Chen, Y., Gupta, A., & Hoshower, L. (2006). Factors that motivate business faculty to conduct research an expectancy theory analysis. Journal of Education for Business, 81(4). 179-189.

Dev, C.S., Parsa, H.G., Parsa, A.A., and Bujisic, M.(2015). Assessing Faculty Productivity by Research Impact: Introducing Dp2 Index. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism. 15:93–124. DOI: 10.1080/15313220.2015.1026471.

ERA(2015). Research Assessment Exercise .The State of Australian University Research( 2015–2016).Volume 1 ERA. Natinal Report. http://www.arc.gov.au/era-2015

Eshaghi, F., Mohammadi, R., & Parand, K. (2008). proper performance evaluation system of faculty (criteria and procedures). Journal of Higher Education Letter. 2(1). 93-111.

Farasatkhah, M. (2018). Qualitative research method in social sciences: GTM theory. Tehran: Agah.

Faraji Armaki, A., Arasteh, H. R., & Farasatkhah, M. (2012). Developing a Model for Increasing Research Productivity of University Faculty Member: a Case Study of Shahid Beheshti University. Journal of Management and Planning in Educational Systems. 5(8). 95-117.

Ghorchian, N., Arasteh, H. R., & Jafari, P. (2004). Encyclopedia of Higher Education. Vol.2. Tehran: Ministry of Science, Research & Technology.

Hadjinicola, G. C. & A. C. Soteriou. (2006). Factors Affecting Research Productivity of Production and Operations Management Groups: An Empirical Study. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Decision Sciences.10: 1-16.

Hedjazi, Y., & Behravan, J. (2009). The Relationship Between Individual and Institutional Factors and Research Productivity of Agricultural Faculty Members The Case of: Agricultural Faculties of Tehran Province. Iranian Agricultural Extension and Education Journal. 1(5). 47-60.

Hoseinpoor, M. (2012). The Research Pathology of Faculty Members in Human Sciences. Iranian of Journal the Knowledge Studies in the Islamic University. 16(50). 45-64.

Jacob, Brian and Lars Lefgren. (2007). The Impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. NBER Working Paper 13519: 1-67.

Kyvik, S., & AKsens, D. W. (2015). Explaining the increase in publication productivity among academic staff: a generational perspective. Studies higher education. 40(8), 1438-1453.

Li, F., Yi, Y., Guo, X. & Qi., W.(2011). Performance evaluation of research universities in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan: based on a two-dimensional approach. Scientometrics: 90:531–542 .DOI 10.1007/s11192-011-0544-1.

Nguyen, Q. H., & Klopper, C. J. (2014). The influences of research environment within a university on research productivity of academic staff – a case study in a research – oriented university in VIETNAM. International Journal of arts and sciences. 7(2), 189-197.

Noroozi Chakoli, A., & Rezaee, M. ( 2014). Scientometrics, International Special Indexes, Scientific Productivity Evaluation. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management. 30(1). 3-39.

Noroozi Chakoli, A., Ghazavi, R., & Taheri, B. (2016). Valuation of Research Evaluation Indicators in Different Scientific Fields in Iran. Journal of Science & Technology Policy. 7(4). 31-40.

RAE2020.(2017). Consultation on proposed Framework for Research Assessment Exercise2020. http://www.ugc.edu.hk/doc/eng/ugc/rae/2020/framework_consult_letter.pdf

Ramesh Babu, A & Y. P Singh. (1998). Determination of research productivity. Scientometrics 43 (3): 309-329.

REF (2014).Assessment framework and guidance on submissions. http://www.ref.ac.uk/pubs/

Royal, K. D., Akers, k. S., Lybarger, M. A., & Zakrajsek, T. D. (2014). Using Social Network Analysis to Evaluate Research Productivity and Collaborations. Journal of Faculty Development. 28(1), 49-58.

Saboury, A. A. (2012). Studying the quality of science: invalid Journals. Science Cultivation Journal. 3(1). 33-42.

Saboury, A. A. (2016). Scientific Documents of Iran in 2015. Science Cultivation Journal. 6(2). 92-102.

Saboury, A. A. (2017). Scientific Documents of Iran in 2016. Science Cultivation Journal. 7(2). 72-79.

Sanchez,T.W. (2017). Faculty Performance Evaluation Using Citation Analysis: An Update. Journal of Planning Education and Research . Vol. 37(1) :83 –94. DOI:10.1177/0739456X16633500

Seggie, S. H., & Griffith, D. A. (2009). What does it take to get promoted in marketing academia? Understanding exceptional publication productivity in the leading marketing journals. Journal of Marketing, 73, 122-132.

Shepherd, C. D., Carley, S. S., & Stuart, R. S. (2009). An exploratory investigation of the periodic performance evaluation processes for marketing faculty: A comparison of doctoral-granting and non-doctoral-granting universities. Journal of Marketing Education, 31, 143-153.

Steward, M. D., & Lewis, B. R. (2010). A comprehensive analysis of marketing journal rankings. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(1), 75-92.

Sweileh, W.M., Zyoud, S.H., Al.khalil, S., Al.Jabi, S.W., Sawalha, A.F., (2014). Assessing the Scientific Research Productivity of the Palestinian Higher Education Institutions: A Case Study at An-Najah National University, Palestine. SAGE Open, vol.4(3) : 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014544287

Webber, K. L. (2011). Factors Related to Faculty Research Productivity and Implications for Academic Planners. Planning for higher education. 39(4), 32-43.

Webber, K. L. (2011). Factors Related to Faculty Research Productivity and Implications for Academic Planners. Planning for higher education. 39(4), 32-43.

Youseliani, G. A., Behrangi, M. R., Arasteh, H. R., & Abdollahi, B. (2016). Designing and Codifying Evaluation Indexes of the Performance of Research System in Education; Case Study: Instite of Ministry of Education Studies, Using a Qualitative Approach. Journal of Educational Measurement and Evaluation studies. 6(14). 69-109.

Zare Ahmadabadi, H., Javadi, S., & Tahari Mehrjerdi, M. H. (2013). Presenting a model for evaluating the performance of research and development branch of technical and engineering department (case study: Engineering and Technology Department of University of Yazd). Iranian Journal of Engineering Education. 15(58). 85-99.


ارجاعات
  • در حال حاضر ارجاعی نیست.