Search results

The authors examine how performance measurement systems (PMSs) and academic agency influence the meaning of research quality in practice. The worries are that the notion of research quality is becoming too simplistically and narrowly determined by research quality's measurable proxies and that academics, especially manager-academics, do not sufficiently realise this risk. Whilst prior literature has covered the effects of performance measurement in the university sector broadly and how PMSs are mobilised locally, there is only little understanding of whether and how PMSs affect the meaning of research quality in practice.

The study is designed as a comparative case study of two university faculties in Finland. The role of conceptual analysis plays a notable role in the study, too.

The authors find that manager-academics of the two examined faculties have rather similar conceptual understandings of research quality. However, there were differences in the degree of slippage between the “espoused-meaning” of research quality and “meaning-in-practice” of research quality. The authors traced these differences to how the local PMS and manager-academics’ agency relate to one another within the context of increasing global and national performance pressures. The authors developed a tentative framework for the various “styles of agency”. This suggests how the relationship between the local PMS and manager-academics’ exerted agency shapes the “degrees of freedom” of the meaning of research quality in practice.

Given that research quality lies at the heart of academic work, the authors' paper indicates that exploring the three matters – performance measurement, the agency of manager-academics and the meaning of research quality in practice – in combination is crucial for the sustainability of the academe. The authors contribute to the literature by detailing the way in which local PMS and manager-academics' agency have material impacts on what research quality means in practice. The authors conclude by highlighting the pressing need for manager-academics to exercise the agency in efforts to safeguard a broad and pluralistic understanding of research quality in practice.

In this paper we (a pracademic, a practitioner, and an academic) aim to explore the academic/practitioner gap in social marketing and offer recommendations to close it, while amplifying existing examples of best practice from within the field. We also propose a research agenda to spur dialog and guide further investigations in this area. Insights from prior research, coupled with the co-authors’ experience and observations, indicate that a disconnect does exist between academia and practice within social marketing, though it is admittedly and unsurprisingly not uniform across contexts and disciplinary areas. Given social marketing’s identity as a practice-oriented field, there are many existing examples of academic/practitioner collaboration and the successful linkage of theory and practice that deserve to be amplified. However, the challenges associated with the very different systems and structures affecting both worlds mean the disconnect is problematic enough to warrant systematic change to ensure the two worlds are more aligned.

This paper (a pracademic, a practitioner and an academic) explores the academic/practitioner gap in social marketing and offer recommendations to close it, while amplifying existing examples of best practice from within the field. The authors also propose a research agenda to spur dialog and guide further investigations in this area.

The authors suggest five key reasons that focus should be placed upon closing the academic/practitioner gap in social marketing: demonstrating societal value by contributing to practice; embedding and developing theories in practice; adding to the social marketing literature; contributing to social marketing teaching; and communicating the value and effectiveness of social marketing. To close the gap, the authors propose specific recommendations within four broad areas: marketing the academia and practitioner collaboration offer; building ongoing relationships; creating collaborative partnerships; and changing the publishing model ensuring communications are accessible to all. They also suggest ways for social marketing associations and peak bodies to play a role.

The concept of a disconnect between academia and practice is by no means new; it has been a pervasive issue across disciplines for decades. However, this issue has not been the subject of much discussion within the social marketing literature. Recommendations outlined in this paper serve as a starting point for discussion. The authors also acknowledge that due to long standing “bright spots” in the field, numerous examples currently exist. They place an emphasis upon highlighting these examples while illuminating a path forward.

This study aims to shape the future of academic air travel practices by identifying the challenges between existing air travel-related policies and practicing responsible air travel.

With increasing concern over global warming, many institutions have implemented sustainability programmes to tackle carbon emissions and create sustainable practices. COVID-19 has resulted in many universities seizing the opportunity to maintain reduced levels of academic air travel emissions. However, the outdated travel-related policies have caused much scope for tension arising from the policy gap between pre-COVID university travel policies and academics' intentions to reduce their air travel emissions. This study interviewed academics at the University of Otago (New Zealand) to elicit detailed narratives of their perceptions of the university’s air travel-related policies, generating co-created and mutually informative insights.

The present programme of in-depth interviews with academic staff revealed that while most staff accept the need to reduce air travel emissions, they face challenges concerning career advancement, equity and equality issues. Universities will need to evolve their travel-related policies to address these challenges, enabling academics to adopt new practices that do not unreasonably disadvantage themselves, their disciplines or their institutions.

The findings contribute to the literature by highlighting the institutional policy challenges to responsible academic air travel and the need for the current policy gap to be resolved. The authors propose directions for a responsible academic air travel future that will require both top-down and bottom-up approaches involving academics and institutions.

This paper explores who among the AACSB categorization of academics conducts the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) research within business schools and how AACSB-accredited business schools capture SoTL research as part of their portfolio of intellectual contributions.

This study adopts a qualitative-method research design by collecting primary data through surveys, semi-structured interviews and secondary data in policy documents focused on AACSB-accredited business schools in Canada and the United States.

The findings establish that scholarly and practice academics who possess rigorously acquired research skills due to their terminal degrees are most likely to conduct SoTL research. The results also reveal an even split among respondents regarding whether their AACSB-accredited business school captures SoTL with their journal ranking frameworks.

Based on the findings, two recommendations are offered to foster more SoTL research at AACSB-accredited schools. First, higher education leaders (e.g. business school deans) can further inculcate a culture of SoTL research at the department and institutional levels by creating communities of practice (CoPs). Second, AACSB-accredited business schools could adopt more inclusive journal ranking frameworks to capture better and incentivize SoTL research.

This is the first known study to explore how AACSB Standards 3 and 8 are implemented and operationalized regarding SoTL research. Understanding how these standards are adopted and implemented could help institutional leaders, standard setters and administrators better facilitate SoTL research.

This study aims to explore the instructional leadership practices implemented by academic professionals and leaders to enhance the curriculum of Islamic economics and finance (IEF) in two public universities in Saudi Arabia.

This study used a qualitative approach, using a case study methodology that focused on two meticulously chosen universities in Saudi Arabia. A total of 21 academics from two public universities in Saudi Arabia who worked in IEF schools were selected for semi-structured interviews.

The findings showed that two universities in Saudi Arabia that offer degrees in IEF exhibited limited instructional leadership. The findings indicate four apparent barriers that may explain the lack of involvement in instructional leadership and fair practices in the IEF curriculum at Saudi Arabian universities. According to this study, a positive collegial climate in Saudi universities’ IEF promotes shared instructional leadership.

The use of a limited qualitative method and small sample of respondents in this study may not provide enough evidence to generalise the findings to all universities and higher education schools in Saudi Arabia. Although a case study was used to describe IEF curriculum management and implementation at the two universities, caution should be exercised when applying these findings to other institutions.

IEF schools in Saudi universities need to leverage their positive, collaborative and relationship-building environments to develop activities that promote shared instructional leadership.

The research findings can offer valuable insights and examples for school leaders to develop instructional activities and promote the concept of “shared instructional leadership”. This approach involves delegating responsibilities and actions to others to enhance the IEF curriculum’s quality. Policymakers and university officials can use these findings to enhance strategic policies.

For sustainable strategies to be developed in business schools, it is essential to understand which sustainability drivers and barriers are identified by academic managers and coordinators in the implementation of sustainable practices. In this scenario, the study aims to understand the barriers and possible drivers for the implementation of sustainability practices in Brazilian business schools. The subjects are managers and coordinators of business schools that are part of the Principles for Responsible Executive Education Network – Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) Chapter Brazil/UN.

Descriptive research with a qualitative approach was conducted to achieve this objective. The study included academic managers, responsible for the general management of academic and administrative activities and coordinators, responsible for supervising and coordinating academic activities in a specific area, of schools that are part of PRME Chapter Brazil (interviews). For data analysis, the content analysis technique was used.

Taking into account the three pillars of sustainability (economic, environmental and social) as categories of analysis, as well as management, curriculum and teaching as subcategories, the study identified 10 barriers and 12 drivers.

The results reveal that both the barriers and the drivers are supported by the social pillar, which focuses on the academic community and society as a whole. The “Management” subcategory was also the most mentioned, indicating guidelines for the strategic academic management of these organizations.

This study attempts to identify the drivers for change in Public Relations education and what assumptions are made about professional practice. The authors suggest signature pedagogy has the potential to deepen our understanding of the teaching and learning of Public Relations and what this means as the Public Relations curriculum adapts. The paper has theoretical and practical value. It forefronts the concept of signature pedagogy as a fresh way to look at Public Relations teaching and learning that can be developed.

This paper aims to explore the historical and contemporary context of teaching Public Relations within a university setting, how it has evolved and the assumptions that underpin it both nationally and internationally. Using a mixed methods approach, the paper investigates how the curriculum has changed since 2000, how it interacts with industry and how it reflects educational historical and contemporary frameworks. It also explores the assumptions on which Public Relations education was and is based and whether signature pedagogy is evidenced.

This study concludes that, from a signature pedagogy perspective, many current Public Relations curricula emphasise surface structures of learning. Deep structures, focusing on critical engagement and conceptual approaches to problem solving, are more variable, disconnected and contested. The data indicate the existence of an Anglo-American, skills-based approach to Public Relations knowledge, alongside international nuances around multi-culturalism. From a practical viewpoint, the paper contributes to how Public Relations programmes can be designed, taught and adapted in the future.

The paper evidences fully unique, primary research.

The competition in the academe has always been tough, but today, the academe seems to be more like an industry than an academic community as academics are evaluated through quantified and economic means.

This article leans on Heidegger’s thoughts on the essence of technology and his ontological view on being to show the dangers that lie in this quantification of researchers and research.

Despite the benefits that information systems (ISs) offer to people and research, it seems that technology has made it possible to objectify researchers and research. This has a negative impact on the academe and should thus be looked into especially by the IS field, which should note the problems that exist in its core. This phenomenon of quantified academics is clearly visible at academic quantification sites, where academics are evaluated using metrics that count their output. It seems that the essence of technology has disturbed the way research is valued by emphasising its quantifiable aspects. The study claims that it is important to look for other ways to evaluate researchers rather than trying to maximise research production, which has led to the flooding of articles that few have the time or interest to read.

This paper offers new insights into the current phenomenon of quantification of academics and underlines the need for critical changes if in order to achieve the academic culture that is desirable for future academics.

There has been a recently growing interest by architects in practice-based research and the impact of research. At the same time, several post-graduate architecture programmes with practice-led research agendas were founded. This shift towards architectural design research is analysed using the notions of “process-driven research”, “output-driven research” and “impact”. The study aims to investigate and unveil the link between graduate programmes and graduates with a research interest and to test the tripartite model of “process-driven research”, “output-driven research” and “impact” in the context of small architectural practices.

The study uses a qualitative and exploratory research approach that includes 11 in-depth interviews conducted in 2020, during the first nationwide COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom (UK) selected interviews were architects representing (1) members or alumni of practice-related graduate architecture programmes in London and (2) founders of London-based small architectural practices within the last decade.

While focussing on the London context, the paper offers transferable insights for the key potentials of practice-led design research in small architectural practices and the actions that might improve research practice.

This paper addresses a lack of studies on how design research differs between diverse types and sizes of architectural firms, why emerging small architectural practices increasingly engage with research and how this shapes their practice. This knowledge is important to fully understanding architectural design research and its strengths or weaknesses.

This research paper aims to evaluate the sustainability knowledge and background of students, staff and faculty regarding current university sustainability practices and individual behaviors at Central Michigan University (CMU); to compare sustainability background and knowledge based on academic discipline of enrollment or employment; and to assess sustainability awareness and interest of the campus community to guide future sustainability initiatives and resources at CMU.

An electronic cross-sectional survey was used to collect anonymous responses through Qualtrics, and then results were analyzed through SPSS. Analyses were performed based on the academic structures at CMU.

This research has found that students in STEM fields are more inclined to have pro-sustainability attitudes, knowledge and behaviors, compared to those studying the arts and business. Additionally, results indicate that there is a significant difference in knowledge between the students, and the staff and faculty respondents regarding sustainability knowledge and application, with the staff and faculty consistently demonstrating more pro-sustainability knowledge and behavior.

While research has previously been conducted on sustainability attitudes and behaviors, this research is unique because it ties sustainability knowledge to academic discipline. Additionally, it serves to gauge which sustainability programs and topics members of the campus community are most interested in, and which areas they are most willing to support.