فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی در آموزش عالی
استخراج معیارهای ارتقای مرتبه اعضای هیئت علمی از طریق کاربست مطالعه تطبیقی دانشگاه های منتخب
نویسندگان
1 پژوهشگر پژوهشکده سیاست‌پژوهی و مطالعات راهبردی حکمت و دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت آموزش عالی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
2 دانشجوی دکتری رشته برنامه ریزی توسعه آموزش عالی، دانشگاه مازندران
3 دانشجوی دکتری برنامه ریزی توسعه آموزش عالی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
چکیده
نظام ارتقای مرتبه اعضای هیئت علمی به دلیل ماهیت ویژه آن، به عنوان یکی از ابزارهای برجسته سیاستگذاری در حوزه آموزش عالی شناخته می شود. معیارها و اصول در نظر گرفته شده برای ارتقای مرتبه نشان دهنده رسالت ها، سیاست ها و برنامه های نظام های دانشگاهی است و از این رو، متولیان آن تمام تلاش خود را به منظور تنظیم هر چه بهتر آن انجام می دهند. به دلیل همین ویژگی ها آیین نامه ارتقای مرتبه علمی کشور در سال های اخیر مد نظر سیاستگذاران این حوزه قرار گرفته است. در این خصوص، مطالعات تطبیقی می تواند به عنوان یکی از راه های دستیابی به دانش موجود در این زمینه موجب ارتقای دیدگاه سیاستگذاران علمی و دانشگاهی کشورمان شود. در مطالعه حاضر بررسی تطبیقی درخصوص معیارهای ارتقا در برخی از دانشگاه های منتخب دنیا و منطقه انجام شده است. به همین منظور، 9 دانشگاه برتر دنیا (از کشورهای آمریکا، انگلستان، کانادا و آلمان) و 6 دانشگاه برتر منطقه (از کشورهای عربستان، لبنان، ترکیه و مالزی) که اسناد کامل تری در این زمینه داشتند، بررسی و معیارهای مرتبط با آموزش، پژوهش و خدمات استخراج شدند و سپس، به صورت تطبیقی با معیارهای مشابه آیین نامه ارتقای کشورمان تطبیق داده و درباره آن بحث شده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Extracting the criteria for faculty members rank promotion through the application of comparative study of selected universities
نویسندگان [English]
- Hadi Yousefi 1
- Mohammad Asadbegi 2
- Saleh Rashid Haji Khaje Loo 3
1 Master of Management and Planning in Higher Education Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Doctoral student in Higher Education Development Planning, Mazandaran University, Babolsar, Iran.
3 Doctoral student in Higher Education Development Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]
The faculty promotion system, due to its special nature, is recognized as one of the prominent policy tools in the field of higher education. The criteria and principles for rank promotion represent the missions, policies and programs of the academic system. Therefore, authorities try to better organize the promotion system. Due to these characteristics, academic and scientific policymakers have considered the bylaws for the scientific rank promotion level in recent years. In this regard, the comparative studies, as one of the ways to achieve existing knowledge, can improve the perspective of scientific and academic policymakers. The present study comparatively examined the promotion criteria in some selected universities in the world and the region. For this purpose, the top 9 universities in the world (from the United States, Britain, Canada and Germany) and the top 6 universities in the region (from Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Turkey, and Malaysia) were reviewed and criteria related to teaching, research and services were extracted. Then, in a comparative way, the criteria were matched with Iran's promotion bylaws' criteria and important findings were discussed.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Promotion system
- Promotion criteria
- Higher Education
- Policymaking
- Iran
2. American University of Beirut (2018). Policy and procedures for tenure and promotion evaluation of tenure eligible faculty members. Retrieved December 27, 2018, from https://aub.policytech.eu/dotNet/ documents/?docid=1548&public=true
3. Beasley, B.W., & Wright, S.M. (2003). Looking forward to promotion. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 18(9), 705-710.
4. Beasley, B.W., Wright, S.M., Cofrancesco, J., Babbott, S.F., Thomas, P.A., & Bass, E.B. (1997). Promotion criteria for clinician-educators in the United States and Canada: A survey of promotion committee chairpersons. Jama, 278(9), 723-728.
5. Carnegie Mellon University (2018). Faculty appointment and tenure handbook. Retrieved August 9, 2018, from https://www.cmu.edu/cfa/ faculty-and-staff/assets/cfa-faculty-appointment-and-tenure-handbook-2016-v1.pdf
6. Comprehensive scientific map of the country (2011). (in Persian).
7. Fang, D., Moy, E., Colburn, L., & Hurley, J. (2000). Racial and ethnic disparities in faculty promotion in academic medicine. Jama, 284(9), 1085-1092.
8. Fath Abadi, J. (2015). Faculty members of Tehran Universities attitude to cultural activities of professors based on article 1 of the promotion regulation. Journal of Iranian Cultural Research, 2 (7) 97-116 (in Persian).
9. Fumasoli, T., Goastellec, G., & Kehm, B. M. (Eds.). (2015). Academic work and careers in Europe: Trends, challenges, perspectives (Vol. 12). Switzerland: Springer.
10. Ghazi Nouri, S., Ghazi Nouri, S. (2015). An introduction to the policy making of science, technology and innovation. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University Press (in Persian).
11. Harvard University (2018). FAS Appointment and Promotion Handbook. Retrieved November 27, 2018, from: https://academic-appointments.fas.harvard.edu/appointment-parameters
12. Hearn, J.C., & Anderson, M.S. (2002). Conflict in academic departments: An analysis of disputes over faculty promotion and tenure. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 503-529.
13. Jingning, Z. (2013). Promotion criteria, faculty experiences and perceptions: A qualitative study at a key university in China. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(2), 185-195.
14. Johns Hopkins University (2018). Appointment and promotion procedures for tenure track faculty. Retrieved September 2, 2018, from https://academiccouncil.jhu.edu/appointments-promotions/
15. Khatiban, M., Pazargadi, M., & Ashk Torab, T. (2014). A comparative study of the performance evaluation systems of academic members of different universities based on the diagnostic model: A qualitative content analysis. Quarterly Journal of Yazd Medical Sciences Education Development Studies Center, 1 (11) 23 - 34 (in Persian).
16. King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (2018). Faculty promotion regulations and guidelines. Retrieved November 13, 2018, from http://staff.kfupm.edu.sa/RECTOR/shomaail/faculty_promotion/ images/FacProm-Handbook.pdf
17. King Saud University (2018). promotion criteria, policy and procedures. Retrieved October 10, 2018, from https://sciences.ksu.edu.sa/sites/ sciences. ksu.edu.sa/files/imce_images/promotion_polciy_1.pdf
18. Lebanese American University (2018). Faculty hand book. Retrieved October 5, 2018, from facultysenate.lau.edu.lb/documents/faculty-handbook-2015-2016.pdf
19. Middle East Technical University (2018). Promotion criteria for associate professorship and full professorship. Retrieved October 11, 2018, from http://pdb.metu.edu.tr/tr/criteria-promotion-and-appointment
20. Mohammadi Doustdar, H., & Mirhosseini, S. (2010). A comparative study of the promotion criteria of faculty members in higher education. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 3 (1) 71 - 83 (in Persian).
21. Mohammadi Doustdar, H., & Mirhosseini, S. (2014). Policies and processes for promotion of faculty members in selected universities of the world. Science and Technology Policy Letters, 4 (2) 55- 70 (in Persian).
22. New York University (2018). Appointment, reappointment, promotion, and performance assessment. Retrieved August 18, 2018, from https://www.nyu.edu/about/policies-guidelines-compliance/policies-and-guidelines/promotion-and-tenure-guidelines.html
23. Parker, J. (2008). Comparing research and teaching in university promotion criteria. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(3), 237-251.
24. Perna, L.W. (2001). Sex and race differences in faculty tenure and promotion. Research in Higher Education, 42(5), 541-567
25. Pourfard, M., Bahonar, M., Baharifard, H., & Sadeghi, M. (2012). Investigation and pathology of faculty promotion regulation. Tehran: Vice – Presidency for Science and Technology (in Persian).
26. Technical University of Munich (2018). Evaluation & promotion in the university's faculty recruitment and career system. Retrieved September 11, 2018, from: https://www.tum.de/en/about-tum/working-at-tum/faculty-recruiting/evaluation-promotion/
27. The University of Manchester (2018). Academic: Teaching and research. Retrieved September 23, 2018, from https://www.staffnet.manchester. ac.uk/human-resources/atoz/guidance/
28. University of Berkeley California (2018). Guide to faculty advancement and promotion at U.C. Berkeley. Retrieved September 25, 2018, from https://teaching.berkeley.edu/advancement-and-promotion
29. University of British Columbia (2018). Guide to reappointment, promotion and tenure procedures at UBC Retrieved September 6, 2018, from http://www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty-relations/ tenure-promotion-reappointment-confirmation/tenure-promotion-reappointment-for-faculty-members/
30. University of Malaya (2018). Promotion for academic staff. Retrieved October 3, 2018, from https://www.um.edu.my/docs/default-source/about-um_document/career/staff-benefits/local-staff/career-development_promotion.pdf
31. University of Maryland (2018). Appointment, evaluation and promotion criteria for university of Maryland Extension. Retrieved October20, 2018, from https://extension.umd.edu/sites/ extension.umd.edu/files/_ images/programs/faculty-staff/UME%20PTK%20Promotion %20 Policy %20Final%20-%206-29-18.pdf
32. Wolcott, L.L. (1997). Tenure, promotion, and distance education: Examining the culture of faculty rewards. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(2), 3-18.
33. Youn, T.I., & Price, T.M. (2009). Learning from the experience of others: The evolution of faculty tenure and promotion rules in comprehensive institutions. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(2), 204-237.
34. Zakersalehi, Gh. (2018). A comparative study of academic structure and management: A case study of board of trustees. Quarterly Journal of Iranian Higher Education, 3 (8) 79-110 (in Persian).
)