Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the research obstacles facing Zarqa University (ZU) faculty members, and the ways of overcoming them according to their points of view.

The study attempted to investigate the research obstacles facing ZU faculty members and how to overcome them according to the points of view among the staff. This was carried out through answering four key research questions: What are the research obstacles facing ZU faculty members according to their points of view?; Are there any statistical differences between the trends among ZU faculty members regarding research obstacles attributed to the type of faculty (scientific or humanity), gender and academic rank?; What are the ways of overcoming research obstacles facing ZU faculty members, from their points of view?; and Are there any statistical differences between the points of view among ZU faculty members regarding the ways of overcoming research obstacles attributed to the type of faculty (scientific or humanity), gender and academic ranks? The principal research tool used was a questionnaire, designed and developed by the researcher and based on his personal academic experience, intuitive hints gathered from discussions with ZU faculty members, related literature, and consultation with academic referees specialising in library and information science. The questionnaire was modified where necessary. The final version included a set of questions on the research obstacles facing ZU faculty members and the ways of overcoming research obstacles according to their points of view. In order to verify the reliability of the study, the initial questionnaire was reviewed by four referees to solicit their opinions on clarity and the extent to which each phrase met the study objectives: two university professors and two university associate professors. The researcher also applied Cronbach alpha (α) to the responses using a statistical package (SPSS), and the stability coefficient of the tool was 0.631, acceptable for the educational purposes of the study.

The study revealed that the means of the respondents' trends towards the ways of overcoming research obstacles were higher than the means of the trends towards research obstacles. The means of the responses towards the ways of overcoming research obstacles ranged from 2.91 to 4.49, while the means of the responses towards research obstacles ranged from 1.79 to 4.01. It also revealed that in spite of ZU faculty members having good motivation as well as research and statistical skills, as demonstrated in their responses, the financial and moral support required were the main problems. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the trends among faculty members towards research obstacles and the ways of overcoming them attributed to dependent variables, such as type of faculty (scientific or humanity), academic ranks and gender.

The study limitation was the trends among ZU faculty members, who were in the first semester of the academic year 2008/2009.

The importance of the study comes from its results by finding out the trends among ZU faculty members towards the research obstacles at the university and ways of overcoming them. It is an important tool to inform ZU's administrators of the study results in order to try to avoid research obstacles and support the ways of overcoming them whilst encouraging faculty members to perform more research in different fields.

We examine the origins, acceptance, and spread of academic entrepreneurship in the biomedical field at Stanford, a university that championed efforts at translating basic science into commercial application. With multiple data sources from 1970 to 2000, we analyze how entrepreneurship became institutionalized, stressing the distinction between factors that promoted such activity and those that sustained it. We address individual attributes, work contexts, and research networks, discerning the multiple influences that supported the commercialization of basic research and contributed to a new academic identity. We demonstrate how entrepreneurship expands from an uncommon undertaking to a venerated practice.

This paper ranks university faculties, accounting doctoral programs, individual behavioral accounting researchers, and the most influential articles based on Google Scholar citations to publications in Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research (AABR). All articles published in AABR in its first 15 volumes are included and four citation metrics are used. The paper identifies the articles, authors, faculties, and doctoral programs that made the greatest contribution to the development of AABR. Such an analysis provides a useful basis for understanding the direction the journal has taken and how it has contributed to the literature (Meyer & Rigsby, 2001). The h-index and m-index for AABR indicates it compares favorably among its peers. Potential doctoral students with an interest in behavioral accounting research, “new” accounting faculty with an interest in behavioral accounting research, current behavioral accounting research faculty, department chairs, deans, and other administrators will find these results informative.

Scholarly communication in the U.S. has been closely examined in the past two decades by librarians because of the acceleration in costs of serial, scholarly communication. Specific disciplines of research have increased at unprecedented rates, namely the areas of scientific, technical, and medical (STM) publishing.

Research models and practices change rapidly. While evidence of such changes includes cross-campus collaborations and multi-authored scholarship, faculty development opportunities also signal what is to come. In this case study, authors representing diverse disciplines examine what faculty development programs reveal about the future of academic research. The authors offer an analysis of faculty support programs across the country as a foundation, and then provide an examination of initiatives in place at their four-year regional comprehensive institution in the United States. The authors then report on the outcomes of these programs for research productivity, with a focus on opportunities that were available to all faculty across the university. Finally, the authors offer perspective on the future of academic research based on findings from examining these programs. The authors suggest that the future of research will focus on (1) collaborative design(s) of research-related support, (2) support structures and programs that encourage and facilitate cross-campus and interdisciplinary research collaborations and sharing, (3) incentive for integrating areas of research with teaching and service, and relatedly (4) programs that encourage faculty to span academic research with industry or community partnerships and collaborations, especially ones that can generate revenue or produce future research, development, or funding streams.

With respect to university technology transfer, the purpose of this paper is to examine the literature focused on the relationship between university research faculty and technology transfer office staff. We attempt to provide greater understanding of how research faculty’s personal values and research universities’ organization values may differ and why. Faculty researchers and tech transfer office (TTO) staff are perceived to be virtuous agents. When both are meeting each other’s needs, a “love” relationship exists. However, when these needs are not met, a “hate” relationship exists that is replete with doubt and uncertainty. This doubt and uncertainty creates tension and subsequent conflicts. There are many accounts where faculty researchers have not followed university policies and expectations, often violating policy and ethical standards. Likewise, faculty report numerous examples of how TTO staff members’ negligence in servicing their attempts to be good institutional citizens have failed them. This paper explores this love/hate relationship and reveals numerous conflicts that call into question ethical concerns. It also provides a set of recommendations for reducing and potentially alleviating these concerns. Literature review. Results from a thorough review of the literature on the relationship between faculty and university TTOs reveals that perceived job insecurity is the primary reason that some research faculty members as well as some TTO staff, unethically violate their university policy to disclose invention disclosures and select to not provide full services, respectively. One way to alleviate the conflict between faculty’s personal values regarding their inventions and university’s organizational values is to enact measures that build trust and reduce insecurity among faculty members and TTO staff. In this paper, we not only examine this faculty/TTO staff ethical conflicts, but we offer a set of recommendations that we believe will reduce the likelihood of unethical behavior while encouraging greater institutional commitment and trust.

This chapter identifies the challenges that faculty with children experience as they engage in international research. We explore how these faculty members manage the competing demands of international research work and parenthood.

Data includes qualitative interviews with 42 faculty members who are parents, in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields from 23 Research 1 universities.

The globalizing nature of research poses insufficiently recognized tensions between international travel and caregiving. Faculty reported three main strategies that enable them to manage work-family conflicts when work takes them abroad. These include: (1) opting out of international research; (2) modifying international travel; and (3) merging international research with caregiving.

Work-family conflicts identified at the national level are amplified for international research.

Interview data are self-reports of what faculty members recalled and elected to share; actual behaviors may differ somewhat.

This chapter provides insights that academic institutions might use to support faculty engaged in international research.

A failure to understand and support the unique needs of parents in international research settings may compromise active parenthood for faculty, while reinscribing and reinforcing existing gendered disparities in academia. The internationalization of STEM fields, when coupled with a lack of institutional support for parents, presents a mechanism that contributes to the ongoing underrepresentation of women in science and engineering.

Although similar questions have been considered in national contexts, little research has explored work-family conflicts for parents in an international setting.

The purpose of this paper is to identify factors influencing extremely high or low research productivity for business faculty members.

Using data originating from a random sample of 236 faculty members across a wide range of accredited business schools and a web‐based survey, main effects are hypothesized and explored. The authors examine only extreme data points of high (and low) research productivity to focus on high‐performing research “stars.”

It is found that research “stars” hold higher academic rank, possess greater time management skills, individually place a high value on research, report higher time available to conduct research, enjoy higher institutional support in the form of graduate assistants and summer research support, have fewer course preparations, and work for departments with a similar priority placed on research.

The authors found that certain person‐ and situation‐level factors differentiate high and low performing faculty members’ research output.

The paper has implications for university administrators regarding recruiting, selecting, and managing faculty members’ research performance.

Research productivity and intellectual contributions continue to dominate much of higher education as a primary measure of faculty members’ success. One area that remains under‐explored in the business literature is what “makes a research star” and, to the contrary, what factors predict extremely low faculty research productivity? Shedding light on this research question provides practical benefits for universities by enabling administrators to better recruit, select, motivate, and develop productive faculty members.