Search results

The purpose of the article is to examine the motivation of the academics in a developing country, Cambodia, which is an under-researched country in order to look into the satisfaction level of the academics in various aspects of academic profession. This study helps inform policy makers and other stakeholders in higher education in Cambodia about the current status quo of academic profession in Cambodia, which acts to impede the quality of higher education in this country.

This study employed a survey design to examine the motivation of academics in a periphery country, Cambodia. The result from an online survey via Microsoft Form of 278 academics currently working at three public universities and four private universities across the country revealed that academics in higher education institutions in Cambodia were satisfied with their job (Mean = 4.1, SD = 0.74) and the organizational culture and value (Mean = 3.9, SD = 0.77), but dissatisfied with their salary (Mean = 3.1, SD = 0.90). The mean score of other variables also skewed toward happiness, yet this mean score remained low (between 3.2 and 3.8). Furthermore, the result from t-test and one-way ANOVA showed no significant difference in job satisfaction between public and private academics and among academics from different employment statuses. Job satisfaction of academics in this study did not come from salary or work environment, but may have come from the flexibility and status quo of academic career in Cambodia, in which the majority of academics have additional job while many others (38% of the participants) treat teaching as their secondary job and at the same time maintain the title as academic or even professor, which is relatively well-respected in Cambodia society, despite poor salary. The complexity of academic career in this context may present major setbacks to the quality of higher education in this periphery country.

This study revealed that although academics in higher education in Cambodia were satisfied with their job and organizational culture and value, they were not satisfied with their work environment and salary. The result from this study indicated that the reason why salary did not determine the satisfaction level of academics was that most of the academics in Cambodia higher education have additional job or business in addition to teaching. Moreover, they have other full-time jobs outside higher education and they can still teach part-time to earn extra income.

Since this study generated only 278 responses from academics, these data remain small compared to the whole population. Thus, this may affect the generalization of the finding to the larger population.

This study helps fill the existing gaps in literature on higher education in Cambodia and the findings from this study can be used to make informed decision regarding quality of higher education in Cambodia.

Higher education is a social institution that helps maintain professionalization of all professions and improve students competitiveness. Improving quality of higher education means that academics themselves need to be professional and ethical toward teaching. This research pointed out the unethical practices of academic procession, which in turn, de-professionalize academics and downgrade the quality of higher education in Cambodia.

This study provides a fresh insights into the motivation of academics in Cambodia higher education. This study also provides the framework for academic motivation in a developing country.

As the chapters in this book have identified, the academy and academics have experienced significant radical transformations across the past three decades. In many ways, academics have been eyewitnesses to these changes, and while there is much to mourn about what has been ‘lost’, this is not the time for academic ambivalence towards the effects of these reforms that have significantly altered the landscape of higher education. In this final chapter, I draw together the constellation of ideas presented across this book to propose five institutional typologies of universities in the 21st century. This chapter and book concludes by calling for a re-emergence of the public university and a reaffirmation of the role of public intellectuals.

The purpose of this paper is to uncover the basic motivations of the administrators (referred to also as “managers”) to hire foreign-born employees in the academic system, which is relatively ethnically homogenous and where the proficiency in Polish is still a strong asset. By doing this, the authors make an attempt to theorise the value of internationalisation of higher education in the academic peripheries.

This study reports the finding of 20 qualitative interviews with the deans and other senior academic officials serving managerial functions at Polish public and private universities.

The four basic motivations expressed directly by the mangers were (1) the crave for cultural diversity, (2) willingness to “Westernize” the academe, (3) a need for academic achievement and (4) staff shortages. In the discussion, the authors show, however, that the discursive order of these institutional motivations to hire international faculty is incompatible with motivations of international faculty to seek employment in Poland and statistical data regarding their concentration in different academic centres.

The paper tackles crucial issues regarding staffing (including recruitment and retention) and diversity hiring in a country with an “emigration culture”, similar to other East European states, namely a place from which highly skilled workers emigrate. A relocation to Poland is a rather unusual reverse migration, or “stepping down”, to a periphery to use it as a possible stepping stone for career progression.

This paper aims to problematize the lack of different worldviews on international management (IM), and the virtual silence in Latin America regarding this field within the context of the ongoing crisis of neoliberal policies and discourse.

This paper embraces a decolonial Latin American perspective based on developments in international relations (IR). A major reason for this dialogue is that critical debates within IR have been overlooked by both mainstream and critical literature on management, despite the intrinsic relation between decolonial arguments and IR and the increasing importance of management, and IM, within the realm of international relations to both “centers” and “peripheries”.

The interdisciplinary dialogue put forward in this paper goes beyond those borders established by the “center” and imposed on subalterns. Accordingly then, this might be taken as a particular way of putting into practice a decolonial Latin American perspective. It aims to go beyond some “universal” standpoint as the IR literature shows that the universal standpoint in relation to the “peripheries” tends to be mobilized by the “centers”. It is understood that the construction of a critical Latin American perspective is a way of creating better conditions for “cross‐cultural encounters” not only in global terms, but also within Latin America.

Rethinking IM through a critical perspective inspired by IR has implications for teaching, research and other types of practice in both IM and IR in Latin America.

The paper aims to foster a Latin American perspective rather than a general perspective. Instead of merely disengaging the “center”, the paper embraces, from a critical position inspired by IR, the current argument in US literature that the core of IM comprises a strong commitment to cross‐cultural issues, diversity, and eclecticism.

This study examines students’ views of the institutional learning environments, which add to their academic and social success, in a multicultural college. The relationships between the students’ background characteristics and their academic skills, self-efficacy and interactions with the academic and administrative staff are analysed utilising quantitative and qualitative methods. The findings indicate that the students encounter difficulties in their academic studies because of low attainment in academic literacy. However, students with higher self-efficacy actively seek assistance to advance their academic skills, whilst students with lower self-efficacy circumvent academic-assistance resources available on campus. Nonetheless, most students are motivated to succeed in their academic studies and continue them further.

The study concludes with recommendations for future measures to enhance students’ self-efficacy and the specific needs of students of diverse ethnic and national origin.

Depending on the research approach one uses, the development of particular bodies of knowledge over time is the result of a combination of agency, chance, opportunity, patronage, power, or structure. This particular account of the development of geographies of tourism stresses its place as understood within the context of different approaches, different research behaviors and foci, and its location within the wider research community and society. The chapter charts the development of different epistemological, methodological, and theoretical traditions over time, their rise and fall, and, in some cases, rediscovery. The chapter concludes that the marketization of academic production will have an increasingly important influence on the nature and direction of tourism geographies.

This book was written across a period of intense turmoil and change in higher education in Australia and England. We are deeply unsettled by these changes and wish to open up the discussion about what it means to be an academic and engage in academic work in the 21st century. Accordingly, each of the authors has nominated a theme or lens through which to examine the changes, tensions and uncertainties that have erupted in higher education. Thus, we offer this book as a constellation of ideas that traverse a number of aspects of our work and identities as academics. The overlap between these ideas is deliberate so that the multiple and complex challenges that underpin the higher education landscape can be examined.

As the chapters in this book thus far have outlined, profound changes have occurred to the higher education landscape that have impacted significantly on what academics do and how they position themselves and their intellectual work. As this chapter will illustrate, these changes are acutely visible in the intensified scrutiny of research outputs, performance and publishing, the rating of universities through ranking exercises, and the flows of knowledge through a mobile academic labour market. These are the rapid and relentless calculative technologies (Douglas, 1987; Shore & Wright, 2000) that frame the research environment. Significantly, ways in which individuals and universities have responded to these demands and the pursuit of status have ritualised academic work and the academy.