Search results

This study explored teachers' perceptions of a specific, collaborative peer observation structure, collegial visits, and collegial visits' connection to collective teacher efficacy (CTE). The research question was: how do teachers perceive collegial visits, particularly with respect to their influence on CTE?

Within this qualitative descriptive study, 13 K-12 educators from three northeastern USA schools (one urban high school and a suburban middle and elementary school) were interviewed individually and/or in a focus group.

Utilizing social cognitive theory as a framework for analysis, the authors found a theme of a shift from uninformed to informed perceptions of the collective. Results demonstrated that collegial visits foster positive CTE beliefs.

Since collegial visits were found to increase participants' CTE, a construct others have associated with increased student achievement, school leaders should consider implementing collegial visits as a professional learning structure in their schools after considering their specific context.

Though there has been recent scholarship connecting peer observations and CTE, there has been no research, to date, to examine the effect of the specific structure of collegial visits on CTE.

The purpose of this study is to uncover how peer ostracism (POS) elicits knowledge hiding directed towards ostracizing peers through the intervening role of peer contact quality (PCQ). Moreover, the authors aim to highlight the role of the need to belong (NTB) as a first-order boundary condition in direct and indirect hypothesized paths.

The research opted for a three-wave time-lagged survey design. The data were obtained from the 234 teaching and non-teaching employees working in Higher Educational Sector in Pakistan through random sampling. Mediation and moderated mediation analysis was done by using PROCESS Models 4 and 7.

The results embraced the mediation, moderation and moderated mediation hypotheses. It was noted that POS creates negative exchange relationships. As a result, the ostracized employees withhold knowledge from the predating peer. NTB served as a buffering agent between POS and PCQ, as well as, in the indirect POS, PCQ and peer-directed knowledge hiding relationship.

This research serves as a guideline for management and faculty of Higher Educational Institutions for minimization of POS to promote effective collegial contact quality and curb knowledge hiding.

Although the research in workplace ostracism and knowledge hiding is not new, yet how this association emerges from the viewpoint of peers is not known. This study has added to the literature by answering who is more likely to reciprocate ostracism from peers by having poor quality contact and directing knowledge hiding towards the predator. By this, the authors have added to the limited stream of moderated mediation mechanisms underlying ostracism and knowledge hiding behaviour. In addition, the authors have drawn attention to the importance of peer relationships in higher educational settings.

Over the past few decades, university reforms in line with management and enterprise ideals have been well documented. Changes in the ideals underlying the missions of universities have led to changes in their modes of governing and organizing, which in turn drive further transformation of their missions. One set of reforms in Swedish higher education has been the dissolution of collegial bodies and procedures. At the same time, in recent years, we have witnessed an increased interest in collegiality and a reintroduction of collegial bodies and procedures. New translations of collegiality appear not only in how universities are organized, but also in other core aspects of research and higher education. We review examples of peer reviewing, research assessment, and direct recruitment of professors and ask: Can these new translations of collegiality be understood as a revitalization of collegiality, or is it – to draw a parallel with greenwashing – rather a matter of collegiality-washing?

Recent changes in university systems, debates on academic freedom, and changing roles of knowledge in society all point to questions regarding how higher education and research should be governed and the role of scientists and faculty in this. Rationalizations of systems of higher education and research have been accompanied by the questioning and erosion of faculty authority and challenges to academic collegiality. In light of these developments, we see a need for a more conceptually precise discussion about what academic collegiality is, how it is practiced, how collegial forms of governance may be supported or challenged by other forms of governance, and finally, why collegial governance of higher education and research is important.

We see collegiality as an institution of self-governance that includes formal rules and structures for decision-making, normative and cognitive underpinnings of identities and purposes, and specific practices. Studies of collegiality then, need to capture structures and rules as well as identities, norms, purposes and practices. Distinguishing between vertical and horizontal collegiality, we show how they balance and support each other.

Universities are subject to mixed modes of governance related to the many tasks and missions that higher education and research is expected to fulfill. Mixed modes of governance also stem from reforms based on widely held ideals of governance and organization. We examine university reforms and challenges to collegiality through the lenses of three ideal types of governance – collegiality, bureaucracy and enterprise – and combinations thereof.

Collegiality is the modus operandi of universities. Collegiality is central to academic freedom and scientific quality. In this way, collegiality also contributes to the good functioning of universities’ contribution to society and democracy. In this concluding paper of the special issue on collegiality, we summarize the main findings and takeaways from our collective studies. We summarize the main challenges and contestations to collegiality and to universities, but also document lines of resistance, activation, and maintenance. We depict varieties of collegiality and conclude by emphasizing that future research needs to be based on an appreciation of this variation. We argue that it is essential to incorporate such a variation-sensitive perspective into discussions on academic freedom and scientific quality and highlight themes surfaced by the different studies that remain under-explored in extant literature: institutional trust, field-level studies of collegiality, and collegiality and communication. Finally, we offer some remarks on methodological and theoretical implications of this research and conclude by summarizing our research agenda in a list of themes.

The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, to explore the importance of specific work environment facets for the overall job satisfaction (JS) of primary full-time permanent teachers (PTs) and substitute/temporary teachers (STs). Second, to highlight the similarity or difference in JS patterns among PTs and STs. Third, to provide guidelines for effective evidence-based human resource management (HRM) interventions targeting to boost PTs and STs JS levels by considering: (1) the perceived importance of individual work facets for them and (2) the school's performance in providing a satisfactory work environment.

Data on overall and important JS facets (i.e. satisfaction with opportunities for self-fulfillment, work intensity/load, salary/income, leadership and collegial relations) were collected from a sample of 438 PTs and STs in Greece. Moreover, MUSA, a method that combines Multi-Criteria Decision (MCDA) and Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA), was applied to uncover the critical work environment facets of PTs and STs overall JS that call for interventions.

The findings suggest that PTs seem to value, more than STs, the transactional and economic aspects of the school environment. More precisely, on the part of PTs, self-fulfillment and salary/income are the main contributors to their JS, whilst leadership is the least important facet of JS. For STs self-fulfillment and collegial relationships are the aspects of work that contribute the most to their overall JS, whilst salary/income is the least important contributor. The study results further indicate that self-fulfillment is the strong attribute of Greek schools' work environment in boosting TJS regardless teachers' status, whilst salary/income and workload are potential threats.

It is one of the few studies that provide insights into the differing JS patterns of STs and PTs through the application of a MCDA/IPA method. Therefore, it offers evidence-based guidelines that take into consideration both the school's performance (overall and facet JS) and importance of core aspects of the work experience for STs and PTs.

In the present discourse of university politics, collegiality has come to be viewed as a slow force – seemingly inefficient and conservative compared to popular management models. Concerns have thus been raised regarding the future prospects of such a form of governance in a society marked by haste and acceleration. One way to bring perspectives on this contentious issue is to perceive it in the light of the long history of the university. In this article, I derive insights about the shifting state of collegial governance through a survey of an intense period of reforms in Sweden c. 1850–1920 when higher education was allegedly engaged in a process of modernization and professionalization. Drawing on recent work in historical theory and science and technology studies (STS), I revisit contests and debates on collegiality in connection to a number of governmental commissions. Focusing on the co-existence – and collisions – of multiple temporalities reveals that overcoming potential problems associated with heterogeneous rhythms required an active work of synchronization by universities in order to make them appear timely, as higher education expanded along with the mounting ambitions of national politics, focused on centralization, efficiency, and rationalization. The analysis is structured around three focal issues for which collegial ideals and practices, including their temporal characteristics, were particularly questioned: (a) the composition of the university board, (b) the employment status of professors, and (c) hiring or promotion practices. Pointing at more structural challenges, this study highlights how collegiality requires a constant maintenance paired with an awareness of its longer and complex history.

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.

Higher education institutions have undergone a transformation over the past few decades, from loosely coupled systems to more centrally managed organizations. Central to this ongoing development is the increasing competition for resources and reputation, driving higher education institutions to rationalize their structures and practices. In our study, we focused on changes in job advertisements for professorships in Germany from 1990 to 2010. Findings showed that the requirements stipulated by universities for professorial positions have become increasingly differentiated (and measurable) over time. In this context, competitive aspects, such as third-party funding, international orientation, or publications, have particularly come to the fore and grown significantly in importance. We discuss these findings in light of an increasing managerialization of higher education institutions, which has a direct effect on collegiality. We argue that the differentiation of professorial job profiles leads to even more formalized appointment processes and may push collegial governance into the background.

Collegiality is often discussed and analyzed as a challenged form of governance, a form of working that used to function well in universities prior to the emergence of contemporary and modern forms of governance. This seems to suggest that collegiality used to dominate, while other forms of governance are now taking over. The papers in volume 86 of this special issue support the notion of challenged collegiality, but also show that for the most part, nostalgic notions of “the good old days” are neither true nor helpful if we are to revitalize academic collegiality. After examining whether a golden age of collegiality ever existed, we discuss why collegiality matters. Exploring what are often described as limitations or “dark sides” of collegiality, we address four such “dark sides” related to slow decision-making, conflicts, parochialism, and diversity. This is followed by a discussion of how these limitations may be handled and what measures must be taken to maintain and develop collegiality. With a brief summary of the remaining papers under two headings, “Maintaining collegiality” and “Revitalizing collegiality,” we preview the rest of this volume.