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 conjecture that there are five stages to academic entrepreneurship: motivation, governance, selection, competition, and performance. The process of academic entrepreneurship originates with the motivation of faculty, universities, industry, and government to commercialize knowledge that originates within the university setting. The model conceptualizes that the governance and competitiveness of the commercialized knowledge moderate the mode selection and ultimately the performance of academic entrepreneurship. The conceptual and empirical support for the model are derived from a theory-driven synthesis of articles related to academic entrepreneurship.

The theme of collegiality and more broadly of changes in the governance of universities has attracted growing interest within the sociology of higher education. As institutions, contemporary universities are inhabited by competing logics often defined in terms of market pressures and are shaped by the higher education policies of governments. Collegiality is an ideal-type form of university governance based on expertise and scientific excellence. Our study looks at manifestations of collegiality in two publicly funded universities in Canada. Collegiality is explored through the structural attributes of governance arrangements and academic culture in action as a form of self-governance. Case studies rely on two data sources: (1) policy documents and secondary data on various aspects of university development, and (2) semi-structured interviews with key players in the governance of these organisations, including unions. Two main findings with implications for the enactment of collegiality as a governance mode in universities are discussed. The first is that governance structures are slowly transitioning into more hybrid and corporate forms, where academics remain influential but share and negotiate influence with a broader set of stakeholders. The second is the appearance of forces that promote a delocalisation of collegiality, where academics invest in external scientific networks to assert collegiality and self-governance and may disinvest in their own institution, thus contributing to the redefinition of academic citizenship. Status differentiation among academic colleagues is associated with the externalisation of collegiality. Mechanisms to associate collegiality with changes in universities and their environment need to be further explored.

This article examines the discourse of appointment, promotion, and tenure (APT) documents for academic librarians. Discourse analysis can illuminate the social role of language, social systems, and social practices.

This qualitative research analyzes the APT documents for librarians from a group of US universities (n = 50) whose librarians are tenured faculty (n = 35). Linguistic features were examined to identify genre (text type) and register (language variety) characteristics.

The documents showed strong relationships with other texts; vocabulary from the language of human resources (HR); grammatical characteristics such as nominalization; passive constructions; few pronouns; the “quasi-synonymy” of series of adjectives, nouns, or verbs; and expression of certainty and obligation. The documents have a sociolinguistic and social semiotic component. In using a faculty genre, librarians assert solidarity with other faculty, while the prominent discourse of librarians as practitioners detracts from faculty solidarity.

This research is limited to librarians at US land grant institutions. It has implications for other research institutions and other models of librarian status.

This research can help academic librarians fulfill their obligations by understanding how values encoded in these documents reflect positive and negative approaches.

Higher education and academic librarianship are in a state of flux. Understanding the discourse of these documents can help librarians encode appropriate goals and values. Little has been written on the discourse of librarianship. This is a contribution to the understanding of librarians as a discourse community and of significant communicative events.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the available literature on engagement of faculty members teaching in higher education institutions and present forth a strong foundation for researchers of the same area to gain insight into the available literature and prospects of faculty engagement.

Exploratory study has been conducted using different keywords to draw a list of relevant research papers on Google Scholar and several online databases like Emerald Management, EBSCO Host, Elseiver, etc.

Various definitions of the major constructs have been captured from which dimensions have been explored. Identification of dimensions and factors has been done by performing extensive literature review. Studies so conducted on the major construct have been tabulated to present a comprehensive picture. Universities across the world have been studied to find out differences with respect to India in terms of their higher education system and practices related to faculty.

The paper is original and holds significance as not much literature is available on faculty engagement in published domain and higher education has become an area of keen interest in present times. This paper will give a strong foundation of literature to future researchers who want to pursue their studies in this area.

There are two grounds in the USA for bringing a claim of race or gender discrimination: discriminatory intent; and discriminatory effect. As to age discrimination, however, a plaintiff is allowed to bring a claim only on grounds of discriminatory intent. Argues that, with regard to age discrimination in the university, discriminatory effect and discriminatory intent are one: discriminatory intent is hidden inside certain employment practices which appear to be “facially neutral” but are not. In other words, stripped of its disguises discriminatory effect which persists is discriminatory intent. Identifies five strategies to disguise disparate treatment as disparate impact: resistance, pretense, evasion, denial and approval. Explains how a specific university employed these five strategies to hide its discriminatory intent behind discriminatory effect.

This chapter discusses the challenges of safeguarding academic freedom during leadership transitions and organizational change in universities. Examples from a large public university illustrate current challenges and provide perspective for proactive measures to protect academic freedom. While the context and details are unique to the institution featured in the chapter, the lessons gleaned from each vignette offer valuable insight to faculty and university leaders who are motivated to better understand and uphold the principles of academic freedom and, more broadly, protected speech with higher education. To support academic leaders in achieving these goals, a conceptual framework for shared leadership through shared governance to support academic freedom is presented. The chapter concludes with recommendations for leveraging shared leadership to foster a university culture that supports of academic freedom.

The study aimed at identifying the degree of professional competence of faculty members from the students’ perspective at Kuwait and Palestine Technical University Kadoorie, and identifying the effect of the variables of gender and academic year.

The researchers developed a 24-item questionnaire and administered it to 115 students each from Kuwait (male: 57, female: 58) and Palestine Technical University Kadoorie (male: 21, female: 94). The study used a descriptive approach to analyze the collected data.

According to the students' perspective, the average professional competence of faculty members at Kuwait University is 2.74 for the teaching competencies, 2.29 for the technology competencies, 2.65 for the evaluation competencies and 2.71 for the human competencies. Similarly, at Palestine Technical University Kadoorie, the mean of the professional competencies of faculty members from the students' perspective is 2.31 for the teaching competencies, 1.96 for the technology competencies, 2.24 for the evaluation competencies and 2.34 for the human competencies. There were significant differences in the degree of professional competence at Kuwait and Palestine Technical University Kadoorie due to the gender of all domains in favor of females. There were significant differences in the degree of professional competence in Kuwait due to the academic year of the technology domain between the first year and second year, in favor of the second year. There were significant differences due to the variable of the academic year of the human domain between the first year and the third year, in favor of the third year. There were significant differences in the degree of professional competence at Palestine Technical University Kadoorie due to the academic year of the technology domain (second, third, fourth year and more) and second year, in favor of (the second year). There were significant differences due to the academic year of the human domain between the first and second year, in favor of second year.

The authors hope that their findings will inspire further research in this area and help universities to better support their faculty members and improve student outcomes.

With a focus on Canada, but framed by similar and shared concerns emerging in the United States, this chapter examines the current status of what constitutes and defines academic freedom for academic librarians and the rights and the protections individual, professional academic librarians have with respect to the freedom of speech and expression of their views in speech and writing within and outside of their institutions. It reviews the historical background of academic freedom and librarianship in Canada, academic freedom language in collective agreements, rights legislation in Canada versus the United States as it pertains to academic librarianship, and rights statements supported by Canadian associations in the library field and associations representing members in postsecondary institutions. The implications of academic librarians using the new communication technologies and social media platforms, such as blogs and networking sites, with respect to academic freedom are examined, as well as, an overview of recent attacks on the academic freedom of academic librarians in the United States and Canada. Included in this analysis are the results of a survey of Canadian academic librarians, which examined attitudes about academic freedom, the external and internal factors which have an impact on academic freedom, and the professional use of new communication technologies and social media platforms.