بررسی انتقادی مدیریت دانشگاه‌ها در دستیابی به رتبه برتر در رتبه بندی های جهانی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه کردستان، کردستان، ایران.

2 استاد دانشکده علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه کردستان، کردستان، ایران.

3 دانشیار دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران.

10.22111/jmr.2020.32898.4948

چکیده

    هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی انتقادی مدیریت دانشگاه­ها در دستیابی به رتبه برتر در رتبه­بندی های جهانی است که از رویکرد تحقیق کیفی از نوع تحلیل انتقادی بهره­گرفته است. شرکت­کنندگان در تحقیق، افراد صاحب­نظر در  موسسه پژوهش و برنامه­ریزی آموزش عالی، وزارت علوم، تحقیقات و فناوری، دانشگاه تهران، موسسه آموزش عالی بیمه اکو، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی و دانشگاه فنی و حرفه­ایی بود. شرکت­کنندگان 16 نفر از افراد آگاه به حوزه مورد مطالعه بودند که با روش نمونه­گیری گلوله­برفی مورد مصاحبه قرار گرفتند. برای این منظور از مصاحبه نیمه­ساختارمند استفاده شد. پژوهش حاضر از دو روش بازبینی مشارکت­کنندگان و مرور خبرگان غیر شرکت­کننده در پژوهش به منظور اعتبار­سنجی استفاده شد. به منظور تجزیه و تحلیل داده­ها از دو نوع تحلیل موضوعی و تحلیل متون گفتاری که از روش­های تحلیل CDA هستند،  استفاده شده است.  نتایج نشان داد مشکلات مدیریت دانشگاه­های کشور با دو عامل مرتبط است که عبارتند از : - عوامل درون­فردی (سیاست­زدگی افراطی مدیران دانشگاه­ها، عدم توجه به تفویض اختیار و تلاش برای حفظ وضع موجود، یکی پنداشتن مدیریت دانشگاهی با مدیریت سایر سازمان­ها، تصمیم­گیری و برنامه­ریزی نامناسب)، -عوامل برون­فردی (سیستم نظارت و ارزیابی معیوب، سازماندهی و هماهنگی نامناسب). در این راستا، راهبردهایی به منظور بهبود رتبه دانشگاه­های ایران در رتبه­بندی­های جهانی ارائه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Critically Examine University Management in Achieving top Global Rankings

نویسندگان [English]

  • Atefeh Rigi 1
  • Nematollah Azizi 2
  • Abdulwahab Pourghaz 3
1 Ph.D Student, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Kurdistan, Iran.
2 Professor, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Kurdistan, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Abstract
This study aimed to critically examine university management in achieving top global rankings, using a qualitative-research approach with Ruth Wodak’s method of critical discourse analysis. Participants included 16 experts and senior officials from the Institute for Higher Education Research and Planning, University of Tehran, Eco Insurance Higher Education Institute, Alameh Tabatabae University and Technical and Vocational University whom were selected via snowball sampling method. Semi-structured interviews were applied to collect data based on theoretical saturation which were lasting between 30 and 60 minutes. For data validation both participants review (member check) and review by external experts (external check) were applied.Thematic analysis and spoken texts analysis methods were used to analyze data. The results showed that university management problems in Iran are associated with two factors: Intrapersonal Factors (extreme politicization of university managers, disregard for delegating authority and trying to maintain the status quo, assuming academic management the same as managing other organizations, inappropriate decision making and planning); and Interpersonal Factors (defective monitoring and evaluation system, inappropriate organizing and coordination). In this regard, some strategies are presented to improve the global ranking of Iranian universities.
 
 
Introduction
Considering the importance of university managers’ role in improving the quality of higher education centers as well as the low ranking of Iranian universities in most international standard evaluation systems, it is necessary to study and critically examine university managers in the process of university management and leadership, and to find the reasons for Iranian universities being dropped behind other universities in the world in the above-mentioned rankings. The results of this study can help higher education managers and policy makers in decision making and strategic planning to enhance the quality of Iranian universities and compete with other universities worldwide while joining the global village to employ international knowledge and gain higher international rankings.
Case Study
Participants included 16 experts and senior officials from the Institute for Higher Education Research and Planning, University of Tehran, Eco Insurance Higher Education Institute, Alameh Tabatabae University and Technical and Vocational University whom were selected via snowball sampling method.
Materials and Methods
This study used a qualitative approach and a critical interpretive paradigm. According to this paradigm, hidden structures that cause inequality and provide solutions to change can be identified through research (Mohammadpour, 2013).
According to the discourse analysis approach, the practical method of collecting data in this study involved reviewing notes taken from related lectures and analyzing interviews. Analysis methods in the CDA included thematic analysis, written text analysis, and spoken text analysis, all three types of which were used in the present study.
Results
The results showed that university management problems in Iran are associated with two factors: Intrapersonal Factors (extreme politicization of university managers, disregard for delegating authority and trying to maintain the status quo, assuming academic management the same as managing other organizations, inappropriate decision making and planning); and Interpersonal Factors (defective monitoring and evaluation system, inappropriate organizing and coordination). In this regard, some strategies are presented to improve the global ranking of Iranian universities.
Discussion and conclusion
Inappropriate academic management in various areas of decision making, evaluation, and leadership is one of the factors that have been implicated in numerous research studies in lowering university rankings. Jaroka (2015) believes that university rankings help manage these centers and are important in building and securing credit. In addition, as a platform in the field of strategic management, it assists the university in policy and strategy regulation. The effectiveness of a particular management policy can also be assessed using rankings. However, given the fact that the set of activities and their respective performances are represented by rankings, they are direct reflections of the quality of academic centers. Obviously, in addition to harm reduction, eliminating the problems and challenges of university management, and opening new windows to enhance Iran's higher education status, the strategies of this article can be used as a reliable platform to hopefully eventually improve Iranian universities international rankings.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Higher Education
  • university rankings
  • global rankings
  • University Management
1- Alma, B. Coşkun, E & Övendireli, E. (2016). University ranking systems and proposal of a theoretical framework for ranking of Turkish Universities: A case of management departments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. (235), 128 – 138.

2-Altbach, P. G. (2012). The globalization of college and university rankings. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 44(1): 26-31.

3-Alvani, S. M. (2003). Public Management, Ney Publishing, Fifteenth Edition, Tehran. (In Persian).

4-Amin Mozafar, F. Amiri Miandoab, Sh. Abbaszadeh, M & Alizadeh Adham, M. B. (2015). Studying the Politics of Higher Education System Managers with a Qualitative Approach. Contemporary Sociology Research Quarterly, 4 (7), 158- 129. (In Persian).

5-Arkali Olcay, G &  Bulu, M. (2017). Is measuring the knowledge creation of universities possible? A review of university rankings. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. 153–160.

6-Bahari, A & Moody, B. (2017). The Role of Perception and Specialization in Organizational Behavior and its Impact on Organizational Development, 17th International Conference on Accounting and Management with Modern Research Approach, Tehran. (In Persian).

7- Benito, M & Romera, R. (2011). Improving quality assessment of composite indicators in university rankings: a case study of French and German universities of excellence. Scientometrics, 89, 153–176.

8-Billaut, J. C. Bouyssou, D &  Vincke, P. (2009). Shouldyoubelieveinthe Shanghairanking? AnMCDMview.

9-Docampo, D. (2011). On using the Shanghai ranking to assess the research performance of university systems.  Scientometrics, 86, 77–92.

10 -Fairclough N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis, International Advances in Engineering and Technology (IAET) ISSN: 7305-2725 Vol.2 July. International Scientific Researchers, pp 452-487.

11-Farasatkhah, M. (2008). Assessment of the Current and Desirable Status of Scientific System Evaluation in Iran with Emphasis on Higher Education Sector. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 1 (32), 58-43. (In Persian).

12-Gholami, H & Yarmohammadzadeh, P. (2016). Route Analysis of Relationships between Job Anchors and Managers' Performance. New Approaches to Educational Management, 7 (1), 155- 175. (Persian).

13-Ghourchian, N. Gh & Shahrakipour, H. (2008). Investigation of Higher Education Assessment Systems in the World in order to Provide Appropriate Model for Higher Education in the Country. Journal of Management Research, 21(2), 1-19. (In Persian).

14-Hassanian, M. (2019). Leadership Style of the Heads of the Departments in Hamadan  Medical University. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 4(12): 117-121. (In Persian).

15-Hatami,  J.  Mohammadi, R &  Ishaqi, F.  (2011). The Challenge of Structuring for Quality Supervision and Evaluation in Iranian Higher Education. 5th Conference on Quality Assessment in University System, Tehran. (In Persian).

16-Hazelkorn, E. (2009). Impact of Global Rankings on Higher Education Research and the Production of Knowledge. UNESCO Forum on Higher Education. Research and Knowledge, 15, 1-14.

17-Hazelkorn, E. (2011). How rankings are reshaping higher education. In V. Climent, F. Michavila & M. Ripolle´s, (Eds.), Los rankings universitarios, Mitos y Realidades.Tecnos. http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article= 1023&context=cserbk.

18-Hoy, K. W. & Miskel, G. C. (2008). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice (8th Ed.). New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.

19-Huang, M. H. (2012). Exploring the h-index at the institutional level: A practical application in world university rankings. Online Information Review, 36(4), 534-547.

20-Jeremic, V. Bulajic, M. Martic, M. & Radojicic, Z. (2011). A fresh approach to evaluating the academic ranking of world universities. Scientometrics, 84, 587-596.

21-Karimian, Z. Kojouri, J. Lotfi, F & Amini, M. (2011). Higher Education Administration and Accountability; the Necessity of Autonomy and Academic Freedom from Faculties’ Viewpoint. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 11(8), 855-863. (In Persian).

22-Kashef, H; Taghvaee Yazdi, M and Nyaz Azari, K. (2019). Designing an Organizational Transparency Model to Empower Islamic Azad University Managers, Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 12 (2), 158-145. (In Persian).

23-Kaucher, E. (2010). Ethical decision making and effective leadership: Alliant International University.

24-Kazemi, M. (2003). Globalization and the Challenges of Higher Education in the Third Millennium. Proceedings of the Conference on Policies and Management of Growth and Development Plans in Iran: Political Development Policies. Institute of Higher Education and Research Management and Planning. (In Persian).

25-Khayef Elahi A. A. Norouzi, M. T & Danaei Fard, H. (2009). Explaining the Model of Effectiveness of Iranian Governmental Organizations Based on Servant Leadership Role. Quarterly Journal of Humanities, 13 (2), 91-65. (In Persian).

26-Khorsandi Taskouh, A & Panahi, M. (2016). Critical Analysis of International University Ranking Systems, Policy Recommendations for Iranian Higher Education. Iranian Journal of Higher Education, 8 (2). (In Persian).

27-Lee, J. (2013). Creating world-class universities: implications for developing countries, Prospects, 43, 233-249.

28-Mansoorian, M. R. Hosseiny, M & Khosravan, Sh. (2015). Nurse Managers’ Performance from Nurses’ Perspective. Iran Journal of Nursing, 27(92), 81-73. (In Persian).

29-Mogashoa, Tebogo (2014) Understanding Critical Discourse Analysis in Qualitative Research, International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, Volume 2, Issue 2

30-Mohammadi, A; Mojtahedzadeh, R & Karimi, A. (2006). Ranking of Iranian Medical Sciences Degrees and Universities and Introducing the Top Iranian Patterns in 2005. Medicine & Cultivation; V 15, 65-73. (In Persian).

31-Mohammadpour, A. (2013). Qualitative Research Method Against Method 1 Logic and Design in Qualitative Methodology. Sociological Publications. (In Persian).

32-Nafisi, A. H. (2002). Analysis of higher education system. Integration Report No. 6, Institute for Higher Education Research and Planning.  (In Persian).

33-Nguyen, S. (2017). Effect of pore shape on the effective behavior of viscoelastic porous media. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 125, 161-171.

34-Pakzad, M; Qaem Panah, A & Jahan, M. (2012). Investigating the Position of Iranian Mother Universities in International Ranking Systems of Universities and Higher Education Centers. Rahyaft, (53), 45-33. (In Persian).

35-Pavel, A. P. (2015). Global university rankings - a comparative analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance 26, 54 – 63.

36-Peters, B & Pierre, J. (2004). A Adaptive Approach to Office System Politics: An Attempt to Control. Translated by: Saffar, Mohammad, Publisher: Country Management and Planning Organization, Deputy of Administration, Finance and Human Resources, Center for Scientific Evidence, Museum and Publication. Year 2005. (In Persian).

37-Rabiei, A & Nazarian, Z. (2011). Factors Affecting Higher Education Policy Making with Principle 44. Strategy. (61). (In Persian).

38-Rahman Sersht, H. (2011). Organizational and management theories from modernism to postmodernism, period publication. (In Persian).

39-Rizzo, F. M. (2010). University rankings: a critical view. Revista de la educacion superior, 40(1), 77-97.

40-Sadlak, J., Merisotis, J., & Liu, N. C. (2008). University rankings: Seeking prestige. Raising visibility and embedding quality—the Editors’ views. Higher Education in Europe, 33, 195–199

41-Salmi, J. (2009). The Challenge of Establishing World-Class Universities. 36- 40.

42-Sharafi, M. (2009). World Academic Rankings. (206). (In Persian).

43-Shehatta, I., & Mahmood, k. (2016).  Correlation among top 100 universities in the major six global rankings: policy implications. Scientometrics, 109, 1231–1254.

44-Shin, J.C & Toutkoushian, R.K. (2013). The past, present, and future of University Rankings. In: Shin, J.C., Toutkoushian, R.K., Teichler, U. (Eds.), University Rankings, The Changing Academy: The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective (3). Springer Science, Dordrecht

45-Siadat, S., Shams, B., homaie, R & Gharibi, L. (2019). Satisfaction of Students and Faculty Members of Graduate Studies From Educational Services Management at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 5(2): 93-99. (In Persian).

46-Sobhanejad, M; Omidi, M & Najafi, H. (2014). Implementation Strategies for Participatory Management in Universities Based on Islamic Reference. Cultural Engineering, 9 (84), 106-127. (In Persian).

47-Khorsandi Taskouh, A; Panahi, M. (2016). Critical Analysis of International University Ranking Systems, Policy Recommendations for Iranian Higher Education. Iranian Journal of Higher Education, 8 (2). (In Persian).

48-Waters M (2001). Globalization. Routledge, London.

49-Wodak, R. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis: Concepts, History, Theory, VOLUME I, Lancaster University, https://www.researchgate.net /publication.

50-Wodak R. (2014). Critical Discourse Analysis, Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp, p 302-316.

51-Xiaoyang, W & Bukhari, N. H.S (2013) Critical Discourse Analysis and Educational Research, Journal of Research & Method in Education, Volume 3, Issue 1.