Search results

To determine the factors influencing the perception of undergraduate students toward research–teaching nexus and also to examine its impact on the attitude of the students.

The study used a quantitative design to examine the perceptions of students in higher education institutions in India. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe the data and test the hypothesis. The data was collected using a structured questionnaire for a sample of 188 students from higher education institutions (HEIs). Further, in line with the purpose of the study and to test the hypotheses, the study used descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis and multivariate regression analysis.

The study demonstrates that the factors influencing the perception of undergraduate students toward research teaching nexus were identified using principal component analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation, conducted on 27 measurement items. In addition, the results of the multivariate regression analysis indicated that research-based, research-tutored and research motivation dimensions, significantly impact the graduate students' perception of research–teaching nexus.

The outcomes of this research may become valid input to HEI regulators, researchers and teachers while framing the policies and implementation of the same about the pertinent issues discussed in the paper. Further, it contributes to the existing theory that teaching–research quality and level of motivation are also the predominant factors influencing the teaching–research nexus among students. In addition, the outcome of this paper also supports HEIs to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs) at large.

This study contributes to the ongoing debate and scarce literature on research–teaching nexus at the higher education level. The factors derived in this paper propose a framework for aligning teaching and research in academic programs to create high-quality human resource in the nation.

Places of Inquiry identifies basic conditions and trends in modern systems of higher education that link or dissociate research, teaching, and student learning (“study”). The book is structured in two major parts. Part I, “Distinctive National Configurations of Advanced Education and Research Organization”, in five chapters organized by country, contrasts the national arrangements of the basic elements in the five major nations of Germany, Britain, France, United States, and Japan. These chapters give play to historical determination of national peculiarities and unique arrangements. Chapter 1 particularly highlights the preeminent role played in the construction of the modern research university by nineteenthcentury developments in the German system. Emerging disciplinarians learned by trial and error to use the laboratory and the seminar in a framework of university institutes. In “the institute university”, the academic research group was born, with Humboldtian thought serving as a useful covering ideology.Chapter 2 portrays English universities, in contrast, to be focused historically on elite preparation of undergraduates—a “thin stream of excellence”—in the small worlds of Oxford and Cambridge colleges. Here, in this model, against the grain of the structure, research-centered academics learned to use the apprenticeship model for a very limited number of “research students” who were supported for advanced study toward a late-developing Ph.D. “The collegiate university” has been very different from the German configuration.Chapter 3 presents the highly unusual historical arrangements in the French setting where the universities became in effect the party of the third part, caught between the elite nature of the grandes ecoles and the domination in research of a nonuniversity research establishment. An outside set of research institutes has provided the main research base, and university research-oriented activities had to be brought into alignment with it. The genetic imprints of the system, in contrast to both the German and the British, have been one of subordination of the university, with much broad structural separation of research activity from university teaching and the university education of students. A picture of historic subordination is also found in the case of Japan (Chapter 5), where much displacement to industry has taken place. Students graduating from first-degree study have been snapped up by industry and offered better opportunity, including in research, than what the university could offer. Advanced education at universities became severely constrained. In Japanese terms, Japanese graduate schools, although formally modeled after the American structure, became “empty show windows.”The chapter on the United States traces the development of a highly competitive system of higher education in which a graduate level, separately organized within universities from undergraduate programs, provided a broad foundation for small-group laboratories and seminars in which research activity could be a means of teaching and a mode of study. Peculiar American conditions of weak secondary schooling and generous admission to higher education left much general or liberal education to be accomplished in the undergraduate years, preempting specialization. Emerging disciplinarians tried repeatedly in the mid- and late-nineteenth century to build their new research interests into the undergraduate realm. It did not work. The emergent solution was a vertical one, to add a formal graduate school on top, with its arms in the graduate programs of the departments making it “the home of science.”This major internal differentiation, in comparison to the other four major international models, made the American university a “graduate department university,” with extensive provision developing in the last half of the twentieth century for research-based teaching and learning. What the German system had been able to do on a small scale in the nineteenth century, in the context of elite higher education, the American system developed systematically the capacity to do on a much larger scale, in the context of mass higher education on the road to universal higher education.Part II of the volume, entitled “The Research-Teaching-Study Nexus,” offers a conceptual framework for understanding how modern systems of higher education do or do not effectively bring research into alignment with advanced university teaching and advanced student training. The concept of a research-teaching-study nexus serves as leitmotiv. In Chapter 6, devoted to “forces of fragmentation,” adverse conditions for this nexus are largely subsumed under the twin concepts of research drift and teaching drift, with certain interests of government and industry strengthening inherent tendencies, already stimulated by mass enrollments and great growth in knowledge, for research on the one side and teaching and learning on the other to drift apart.But the nexus survives, often with great resilience and strength, and, in Chapter 7, the central part of the conceptual analysis takes the form of an explanation of how a modern integration is most strongly effected. Supporting conditions and processes are identified at three levels: whole national system, where differentiation, decentralization, and competition serve as broad enabling elements; the individual university, where diversified funding and deliberate organization of advanced education play an increasingly large determining role; and the basic unit (departmental) level within universities, where the activities of research, teaching, and study are located. At the base, operational conditions are captured in the twin concepts of research group and teaching group, each dependent on the other and closely intertwined in a veritable double helix of linkage and interaction. These twin settings for professors and students permit the linked transmission of tacit and tangible knowledge.As both the tacit and the tangible components of specialized knowledge bulk ever larger, they cannot be suitably conveyed by undergraduate or first-degree teaching programs alone, or by historic mentor-apprentice relationships alone. The research-teaching-study nexus is increasingly enacted by operational units of universities that bring together an advanced teaching program and the learning-by-doing of research activity. In this organizational nexus we find the heart of the graduate school phenomenon.The concluding chapter (Chapter 8) goes beyond analysis of the research-teaching-study nexus by offering three broad conclusions for the understanding of modern higher education: first, that inquiry remains the central activity, the dynamic element, in the university complex; second, that complexity and contradiction in university activities are inevitable and will continue to grow, ruling out simple solutions to long-term problems and placing a premium on how individual universities go about organizing themselves; and third, that research and teaching have an “essential compatibility.” Research activity itself is a compelling and rich basis for teaching and learning, primarily in graduate education in the arts and sciences but also secondarily in both advanced professional education and undergraduate or pre-advanced education. The much-voiced view that research and teaching are incompatible is short-sighted and regressive. The incompatibility thesis should give way to a more fundamental understanding in which research activity is seen both as a compelling form of teaching and as a necessary method of learning.For all modern and modernizing systems of higher education, the book emphasizes the great importance of organizing master's and especially doctoral work so that the activities of specialized research groups interact with structured teaching programs.In sum: Places of Inquiry concentrates on graduate (advanced) education, a level of higher education that has been rarely studied. It depicts distinctive configurations of academic research and advanced training in the five major national systems of higher education of the late twentieth century. It highlights research activity as a basic for teaching and learning. And it identifies generic conditions that pull research, teaching, and study apart from each other, and conversely and most important, focuses attention on the structures and processes that work to keep these central university activities closely linked.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide are required to acquire accreditation for the sake of their academic reputation at the institutional as well as programs levels. Meeting the requirements of standards established by accrediting bodies can be daunting for HEIs undergoing accreditation for the first time. Drastic organizational change is required to overhaul and implement systems to meet the requirements of quality standards. HEIs in the Sultanate of Oman are determined to acquire and maintain institutional accreditation from the Oman Academic Accreditation Authority (OAAA). The purpose of this paper is to describe how a HEI has undergone organizational change to meet the requirement of the research–teaching nexus standard using Lewin’s and McKinsey 7-S change management models.

This is a qualitative research which made use of primary and secondary data. The primary data were collected through focus group discussions and workshops, and documents analysis while internet resources were used for secondary data. The dimensions of the research–teaching nexus were determined through review of the literature which became the basis for evaluating the HEI’s practices in the area. Lewin’s and McKinsey 7-S change management models were combined to provide the conceptual framework for describing the process of change the HEI undertook.

Lewin’s and McKinsey 7-S change management models allowed for a systemic and systematic perspective of the change required for the HEI to meet the research–teaching nexus standards and acquire institutional accreditation. The HEI documented its practices, conducted an evaluation and instituted the changes in the dimensions of the research–teaching nexus and the supporting 7-S elements. As final result, the HEI was granted institutional accreditation.

This is a case study of the experience of an HEI in the Sultanate of Oman in its effort to acquire institutional accreditation from the OAAA. However, this case study can provide insights to a larger audience of institutions in Oman and within the Gulf region (or even outside the region) that are in the process of going through a similar experience. For those who have already undergone a similar exercise, this case study can provide a valuable comparison.

The practical experience of the HEI in the Sultanate of Oman can provide valuable lessons/insights to those in the praxis of educational management and quality assurance in education.

Quality in education is a social issue. HEIs are pressured to acquire and maintain accreditation as evidence of quality. The case study provides the larger audience a perspective of how much effort HEIs place in this aspect.

This paper documented the experience of an HEI in the Sultanate of Oman. This is the first paper describing an HEI’s change process in a country which is also implementing a new academic accreditation system. In this paper, two change models – Lewin’s and McKinsey’s 7-S – were integrated to provide a more comprehensive perspective in analyzing organizational change. Review of the literature has shown that these two models have not been used together in one paper, providing novelty to otherwise “classic” models. This paper should be valuable to HEIs pursuing accreditation. It is a “universal” knowledge that acquiring accreditation is a major goal of all HEIs worldwide. The described process of organizational change should be insightful to those who are responsible for steering this process with the goal of acquiring accreditation. Educational leaders at the forefront and center of the change process should find in this paper a valuable reference material, providing a systemic and systematic view of the change they have to lead in order to acquire the much-coveted accreditation. Faculty, staff and students of HEIs can be advocates or sources of resistance. This paper should provide better understanding of the process of change and how they, as stakeholders, benefit from it. Finally, students of educational management and leadership should find this paper as a useful case study for class discussion.

This study aims to explore the perceptions and expectations of the undergraduate students toward the teaching-research-practice nexus (TRPN) and propose a framework for the integration of nexus components at each undergraduate level. It also intends to identify whether students' views differ depending on their specialization, year of study, academic performance and gender.

Quantitative analysis was employed to evaluate the views of 460 undergraduate students from faculties of education in the Southeast Anatolia region of Turkey. The data were collected through the survey with a five-point Likert scale. A t-test and one-way ANOVA were used for the analysis of data.

Significant differences in the perceptions and expectations of the undergraduate students in relation to the TRPN suggest a gap in their satisfaction with the present teaching approach. The factors influencing students' perceptions include specialization, year of study and academic performance. Student expectations of the TRPN are affected by their specialization and GPA. The influence of gender was not confirmed.

The lack of previous research on the TRPN creates a need for further development in this area of study. The sample limited to education faculty in one region precludes generalization of the findings beyond the study setting.

The present study provides preliminary information for education faculties on how to meet students' learning expectations through proportional integration of the TRPN components into the undergraduate curriculum.

The study contributes to the ongoing debate and scarce literature on the TRPN at the undergraduate level and proposes an original framework for linking teaching, research, and practice.

Accounting academics in South Africa (SA) have been criticised for their lack of focus on research, stating that their primary responsibility is the teaching of prospective professional accountants. The purpose of this paper is to empirically evaluate the relationship between research and teaching and to consider why accounting academics in SA prioritise teaching over research.

The paper uses a questionnaire developed in the UK to assess SA accounting academics’ views of the teaching-research nexus. Cluster analysis is undertaken to identify and describe the patterns of responses of respondents.

The findings identify three clusters. The largest subgroup indicates an equal awareness of both the potential benefits and pitfalls of integrating teaching and research. A second subgroup views teaching and research as symbiotic, while the third subgroup sees the two activities as working against each other and competing for scarce resources. This study finds that conflict exists between professional membership and academic research, and a focus on teaching a professionally orientated accounting curriculum remains dominant in SA.

The attitudes to teaching and research within SA are likely to be dynamic and subject to change. The findings have implications for the development of accounting academics and potentially, for addressing the gap between accounting research, practice and education.

This research contributes to a significant corpus of work considering the teaching-research nexus and a nascent body of work considering the relationship of research to teaching in accounting. The findings may be of interest to policymakers, practitioners and academics.

Integrating research into teaching at higher education institutions (HEIs) has become a current goal of Western countries due to the reliability of this approach in promoting lifelong student learning and improving the teaching quality in higher education. However, integrating research into teaching is not as easy as “pushing a button”; instead, it requires the positive perceptions of teachers and university culture under the 21^st-century higher education (HE) paradigm. With regard to HE in non-Western countries, only a small amount of literature exists.

The present study adopted a survey design to compare teachers' perceptions towards research–teaching nexus (RTN) among Pakistan and Ethiopian faculties.

The current study demonstrated that HE should furnish academics with a research environment that stimulates the integration of research into teaching to empower students with knowledge that they can use in future professional careers.

Even though this study examines two nations with several HEIs, it is limited to universities that could be contacted, so future qualitative studies are needed in the HE systems of both countries to obtain a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of students' and teachers' actual RTN practice.

Aiding teachers with an intensive professional development to which illuminate teachers with research, teaching and integrating skills and reform the curriculum, which empowers teachers and students.

The study is conducted in Ethiopia and Pakistan public higher institutions.

The relationship between research and teaching – sometimes referred to as the research–teaching nexus – is an important issue in education literature. However, although it is acknowledged that this question is specific to each discipline, it is rarely addressed in the management accounting (MA) literature. Outside MA, the literature focuses on the influence of research on teaching but rarely touches on the influence of teaching on research. This paper has two aims: to enhance the understanding of the research–teaching link in MA and to analyse the link from teaching into research.

The paper is based on a reflexive analysis of a case in which the content of a management control course progressively changed over a period of 15 years. The authors structure their description of the case using Dewey’s concept of inquiry.

This paper first shows that designing the content of this course was a form of research and it produced knowledge. This analysis also suggests that the influence of research on teaching can take other forms than introducing research results or methods into teaching; designing teaching content is nurtured by not only scientific considerations but also pedagogical considerations and lecturers’ values; and linking research and teaching raises different issues dependent on the stance adopted by MA scholars in their research.

The academic community should seriously consider that knowledge can be produced in a teaching context, through the design of a teaching content.

This paper contributes to an inquiry process by documenting how course content is actually designed, which has not yet been done in the MA literature.

Linkages between research, scholarship and teaching are a topic of contemporary interest in UK universities, driven by pressures such as traditional views of the nature and purpose of universities, reputation, student expectations of their teachers, educational enhancement through up‐to‐date research and scholarly input, and personal ambitions and satisfaction. The paper describes a study of these linkages at the Beijing Institute of Technology (BIT) during 2006 within the Sino‐UK Higher Education Leadership Development Programme, which allows for senior academics from China and the UK to study a particular management issue to identify good practice which they can apply in their institution. The activities included a preliminary workshop in the UK, a two‐week visit to BIT in and a workshop in Beijing. My study was conducted through a semi‐structured interview programme with a wide range of academics and administrators. It was enlightening to find that a leading Chinese university, which operates within quite different systems and cultures from the UK, nevertheless has similar issues, imperatives and problems. My overall conclusion is that there is international agreement that research and scholarly performance underpins the credibility of academic staff to teach at a university, which in turn attracts good students and research staff.

Universities globally have faced the introduction of research performance assessment systems that provide monetary and ranking rewards based on publication outputs. This study aims to seek an understanding of the implementation of performance-based research funding (PBRF) and its impact on the heads of departments (HoDs) and accounting academics in New Zealand (NZ) tertiary institutions. The study explores NZ accounting academics’ experiences and their workload; the relationship between teaching and research in the accounting discipline and any issues and concerns affecting new and emerging accounting researchers because of PBRF.

Applying an institutional theoretical lens, this paper explores accounting HoDs’ perceptions concerning the PBRF system’s impact on their academic staff. The research used semi-structured interviews to collect data from NZ’s eight universities.

The key findings posit that many institutional processes, some more coercive in nature, whereas others were normative and mimetic, have been put in place to ensure that academics are able to meet the PBRF requirements. HoDs suggest that their staff understand the importance of research, but that PBRF is a challenge to new and emerging researchers and pose threats to their recruitment. New academics must “hit the ground running” as they must demonstrate not only teaching abilities but also already have a track record of research publications; all in all, a daunting experience for new academics to overcome. There is also a teaching and research disconnect. Furthermore, many areas where improvements can be made in the design of this measurement tool remain.

The PBRF system has significantly impacted on accounting academics. Central university research systems were established that subsequently applied coercive institutional pressures onto line managers to ensure that their staff performed. This finding offers scope for future research to explore a better PBRF that measures and rewards research productivity but without the current system’s unintended negative consequences.

This paper aims to present an understanding of what it means to infuse teaching with qualitative research and to introduce the papers in the special issue.

This is an introductory essay that provides a brief overview and analysis of the ideas to be found in the issue.

The special issue contributes to the understanding of the integration of teaching and research by showing how the authors as actors, as teacher-researchers, bring not just the findings but also reflexivity into the classroom and take knowledge out into both research and teaching. The papers in this issue all consider the agency of teachers in bringing an epistemology into the classroom, and in developing that epistemology.

The papers in this issue go beyond concepts of research-led teaching and the research-teaching nexus towards reflective pieces that develop understanding of epistemology rather than more conventional reports of classroom interventions.