Level of Academic Performance Among Faculty Members in the Context of Nepali Higher Educational Institution
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32674/jcihe.v13i2.2450Keywords:
academic performance, faculty member, intellectual capital, level, universityAbstract
Academic performance is taken as the process of carrying out academic activities and discourses by faculty members to enhance their academic activities and discourses. The purpose of this research was to identify the faculty member's level of academic performance in higher educational institutions. To conduct this research, a quantitative methodology was employed. The tools to measure the academic performance of faculty members were developed using Delphi method. The data were collected with 445 sampled respondents from four universities. The factor analysis was used to explore the dimensions of academic performance. The factor analysis identified four factors of academic performance i.e., research and publication, innovation, interactive learning, and capacity building. To analyze the level of academic performance, mean and the standard deviation was used. It was found that individual differences and the organizational environment, culture, and technological infrastructure were crucial to influence the pace and level academic performance in academia.
References
Al Saifi, S., Dillon, S., & McQueen, R. (2016). The relationship between management support and knowledge sharing: An exploratory study of manufacturing firms. Knowledge and Process Management, 23(2), 124–135.
Asif, R., Merceron, A., Ali, S. A., & Haider, N. G. (2017). Analyzing undergraduate students’ performance using educational data mining. Computers and Education, 113, 177–194. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.05.007
Babbie, E. R. (2001). The practice of social research (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
Bedggood, R. E., & Donovan, J. D. (2012). University performance evaluations: what are we really measuring? Studies in Higher Education, 37(7), 825-842.
Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2006). Research in education (10th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Cadez, S., Dimovski, V., & Zaman Groff, M. (2017). Research, teaching and performance evaluation in academia: the salience of quality. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1455-1473.
Chawla, D., & Joshi, H. (2010). Knowledge management practices in Indian industries a comparative study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(5),708–725.
Chen, C. J., & Hung, S. W. (2010). To give or to receive? Factors influencing members’ knowledge sharing and community promotion in professional virtual communities. Information & Management, 47(4), 226–236.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
Cohn, E., Rhine, S., & Santos, M. (1989). Institutions of higher education as multiproduct firms: Economies of scale and scope. Rev. Educ. Stat. 71: 284–290.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Croasmun, J., & Ostrom, L. (2011). Using Likert-type scales in the social sciences. Journal of Adult Education, 40(1), 19-22.
Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organisations Manage what they Know. HBS Press, Boston, MA.
Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and reliability in social science research. Education Research and Perspectives, 38(1), 105-124.
Ebersberger, B., & Altman, A. (2013). Universities in change: Managing higher education institutions in the age of globalization. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Fairweather, J. (2002). The Mythologies of faculty productivity: Implications for institutional policy and decision making. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 26-48. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1558446
Fives, M., & Looney, L. (2009). College instructors’ sense of teaching and collective efficacy. International Journal of Teaching in Higher Education, 20(2):182-191.
Goddard, R. D. (2001). Collective efficacy: A neglected construct in the study of schools and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93 (3), 467-476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-663.93.3.467.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Balkin, D. B. (1992). Determinants of faculty pay: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management journal, 35(5), 921-955.
Harvey, C., Kelly, A., Morris, H., & Rowlinson, M. (2010). The Association of Business Schools. Academic Journal Quality Guide, 4.
Hazelkorn, E. (2015). Rankings and the reshaping of higher education: The battle for world-class excellence. London: Springer.
Henningsen, B. (2006). A joyful good-bye to Wilhelm von Humboldt: The German University and the Humboldtian Ideals of “Einsamkeit and Freiheit”. In The European Research University (pp. 91-107). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Hilman, H., & Abubakar, A. (2017). Strategic talent management and university performance: A theoretical perspective. European Journal of Business and Management, 9(4), 35-40.
Huck, S. W. (2012). Reading statistics and research (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson
Ipe, M. (2003), Knowledge sharing in organizations: a conceptual framework. Human Resource Development Review, 2(4), 337–359.
Laloux, F. (2014). Reinventing organizations: A guide to creating organizations inspired by the next stage in human consciousness. Brussels: Nelson Parker.
Lee, P., Gillespie, N., Mann, L., & Wearing, A. (2010). Leadership and Trust: Their Effect on Knowledge Sharing and Team Performance, Management Learning, 41(4), 473–491.
Levin, B., Cooper, A., & MacMillan, R. (2011). The Ontario Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research. Paper presented to the Canadian Society for the Study of Education, Fredericton, May.
Liebowitz, J. (1999). Key ingredients to the success of an organization’s knowledge management strategy. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(1), 37–40.
Lin, C. P. (2007). To Share or not to Share: Modelling Tacit Knowledge Sharing, its Mediators and Antecedents. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(4), 411–28.
Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (Eds.). (2002). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
Liu, O. L. (2012). Student evaluation of instruction: In the new paradigm of distance education. Research in Higher Education, 53(4), 471-486.
Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic, or independent constructs? The Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603-641.
McDermott, R., & O‘Dell, C. (2001). Overcoming culture barriers to sharing knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(1), 76–85.
Ministry of Education, Science and Techology. (2019). National educational policy. Kathmandu: Author.
Moerdyk, A. (2009). The principles and practice of psychological assessment. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Mohajan, H. K. (2017). Two criteria for good measurements in research: Validity and reliability. Annals of Spiru Haret University. Economic Series, 17(4), 59-82. doi:10.26458/1746
Newman, M. (2008). Leeds rewards publication in top journals with bonus research time. Times Higher Education.
Noble, K. A. (1989). Publish or perish: what twenty-three journal editors have to say. Studies in Higher Education, 14, 97–102.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parker, L. D. (2012). Beyond the ticket and the brand: imagining an accounting research future. Accounting & Finance, 52(4), 1153-1182.
Paudel, K. P. (2019). Constructing scale on knowledge management: Appreciating standard or self-constructed tools? International Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Crossing the Border, 7(2), 32-43.
Pinilla, B., & Munoz, S. (2005). Educational opportunities and academic performance: A case study of university student mothers in Venezuela. Higher Education, 50, 299-322.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Politis, J. D. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership predictors of the stimulant determinants to creativity in organisational work environments. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 2, 23–34.
Rejc, B. A., & Zaman, G. M. (2012). Contemporary Performance Measurement Systems in Central and Eastern Europe. Journal for East European Management Studies, 17(1), 69–103.
Rummel, R. J. (1967). Understanding factor analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 11(4), 444-480. doi:10.1177/002200276701100405
Samoila, C., Ursutiu, D., & Jinga, V. (2014). International conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL): The position of the remote experiment in the experiential learning and SECI
Sangster, A. (2011). The ABS journal quality guide: A personal view. Accounting Education, 20(6), 575-580.
Santos, J. R. A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool of assessing the reliability scales. Journal of Extension, 37(2), 1-5. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/1999april/tt3.html
Schimank, U., & Winnes, M. (2000). Beyond Humboldt? The relationship between teaching and research in European university systems. Science and Public Policy, 27, 397–408.
Schutt, R. K. (2014). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research. Sage Publications.
Shabbir, M., Wei, S., Nabi, G., Zaheer, A. N., & Khan, H. (2014). Job satisfaction status of public primary school teachers: A case of Pakistan administrative Kashmir. European Journal of Education Sciences, 1(4), 56-71. Retrieved from http://ejes.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/1-4-6.pdf
Shenoy, G. V., & Madan, P. (1994). Statistical methods in business and social sciences. New Delhi: Inter-India.
Steinberger, E. D. (1993). Improving student achievement. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
Suciu, M., Schebesch, K. B., Grigore, C., Busoi, M., Spiridon, R., & Serbu, V. (2013). Universities as knowledge creation and sharing institutions: Research perspectives from Romania. Retrieved from https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/20321/1/MPRA_paper_20321.pdf
Syed Mustapha, S. M. F. D., Sayed, B. T., & Mohamad, R. (2017). Measuring process Innovation on double-flanked conceptual model for knowledge sharing on online learning environments. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 95(7), 499–1509.
Ter Bogt, H. J., & Scapens, R. W. (2012). Performance management in universities: Effects of the transition to more quantitative measurement systems. European Accounting Review, 21(3), 451-497.
University Grants Commission, India. (2010). Regulations on minimum qualifications for appointment of teachers and other academic staff in universities and colleges and measures for the maintenance of standards in higher education.
University Grants Commission, Nepal. (2015). Higher Education Policy. Kathmandu: Author.
University Grants Commission, Nepal. (2016). Proposed higher education policy of Nepal. Kathmandu: Author.
Van den Hooff, B., & Huysman, M. (2009). Managing knowledge sharing: Emergent and engineering approaches. Information & Management, 46, 1–9.
Zheng, H., & Stewart, A. (2002). Assessing the performance of public research universities using NSF/NCES data and data envelopment analysis technique. AIR Prof. File 83: 1–21.
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 2021-05-07 (2)
- 2021-05-05 (1)
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The findings, interpretations, conclusions, and views expressed in Journal of Comparative and International Higher Education (JCIHE) are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to CIES, HESIG, or the sponsoring universities of the Editorial Staff. These works are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License. Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute articles that appear in JCIHE as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and JCIHE, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or JCIHE. By submitting a manuscript, authors agree to transfer without charge the following rights to JCIHE upon acceptance of the manuscript: first worldwide serial publication rights and the right for JCIHE to grant permissions as its editors judge appropriate for the redistribution of the article, its abstract, and metadata associated with the article in professional indexing and reference services.
