مطالعات اندازه گیری و ارزشیابی آموزشی

مطالعات اندازه گیری و ارزشیابی آموزشی

ابعاد ارزیابی کیفیّت فرایند پژوهش در دانشگاه: چارچوب تلفیقی مطالعات موجود با دیدگاه اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه شیراز

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 استادیار، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار، گروه مدیریت و برنامه ‏ریزی آموزشی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران
3 استاد، گروه مدیریت و برنامه ‏ریزی آموزشی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران
4 دانشیار، دانشکده روان شناسی و علوم تربیتی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
10.22034/emes.2025.2036235.2579
چکیده
هدف: پژوهش حاضر با هدف شناسایی ابعاد ارزیابی کیفیت فرایند پژوهش در دانشگاه از دو منظر پیشینه‏های پژوهشی و دیدگاه اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه شیراز انجام گردید.
روش پژوهش: به منظور تحقق هدف پژوهش با رویکرد پژوهش‏های کیفی، در مرحله اول به بررسی پیشینه نظری و پژوهشی مبحث ارزیابی کیفیت فرایند پژوهش در نظام دانشگاهی و در مرحله دوم مصاحبه‏های عمیق با اعضای هیات علمی دانشگاه شیراز پرداخته شد. جامعه آماری این پژوهش در مرحله دوم اساتید دانشگاه شیراز مشتمل بر 610 نفر (در سال 1400) بوده که براساس روش نمونه‏گیری ملاکی و اشباع نظری، تعداد 24 نفر از اساتید گروه‌های آموزشی فنی- مهندسی، کشاورزی، انسانی و علوم پایه که حداقل درجه دانشیاری در حوزه تخصصی خویش را داشته و در 5 سال اخیر به عنوان پژوهشگر برگزیده استانی و یا کشوری تعیین شده‌اند، بر حسب مورد مطالعه، انتخاب و با آنان مصاحبه عمیق به عمل آمد.
یافته‌ها: مجموع یافته‏های حاصل از این پژوهش، کیفیت فرایند پژوهش در دانشگاه را در دو مولّفه «کیفیت ارکان پژوهش» و «کیفیت نگارش پژوهش» و به ترتیب در 5 شاخص «هدف‏گذاری پژوهش»، «روش پژوهش»، «منابع پژوهش»، «رعایت ساختار نگارشی» و «رعایت الزامات فرایندی» مجموعاً در 18 نشانگر شناسایی نمود.
نتیجه‌گیری: رعایت مولفه‏ها و شاخص‏های کیفیت فرایند پژوهش در نگارش مقالات علمی، نه تنها به ارائه تصویری حرفه‏ای و منسجم از پژوهشگر و پژوهش او می‏انجامد؛ بلکه به داوران در ارزیابی دقیق‏تر، منصفانه‏تر و عینی‏تر مقاله کمک می‏کند و در نهایت منجر به ارتقای کیفیت فرایند ارزیابی پژوهش در نظام دانشگاهی خواهد شد
واژه‌های کلیدی: ارزیابی کیفیت، فرایند پژوهش، کیفیت فرایند پژوهشی، پژوهش در نظام دانشگاهی.
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Dimensions for Assessing the Quality of the Research Process at the University: An Integrative Framework of Existing Studies with the perspectives of Faculty Members at Shiraz University

نویسندگان English

Zeinab Peyravinejad 1
Ghasem Salimi 2
Mahdi Mohammadi 3
Reza Mohammadi 4
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Administration; Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Administration and Planning, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
3 Professor, Department of Educational Administration and Planning, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
4 Associate Professor, Department of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

Objective: This study aimed to identify quality assessment dimensions in the university research process from both existing literature and faculty perspectives at Shiraz University.
Methods: A qualitative approach was used. First, the team reviewed the theoretical and research background on quality assessment in academic research. The statistical population for this phase included 610 professors from Shiraz University (in 2020). Based on purposive sampling and theoretical saturation. Then, in-depth interviews were conducted with 24 faculty members from various departments, all of whom held at least an associate professor rank and were recognized as outstanding researchers in the past five years.
Results: The findings pinpointed two main components of research quality: "quality of research elements" and "quality of research writing," which included five indicators: "research goal setting," "research method," "references," "adherence to structural writing," and "adherence to procedural requirements," totaling 18 indicators.
Conclusion: Following quality components and indicators in scientific writing enhances the researcher’s professional image and aids reviewers in providing accurate assessments, ultimately improving the research evaluation process in academia.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Keywords: Quality evaluation
Research process
Quality of research process
Research in academic system

References  

Afshari, M., Mahram, B. & Noghani, M. (2013). Developing indicators to assess the quality of research papers in humanities using the Merton’s norms. Journal of Science & Technology Policy. 6(1): 49-66.
Aubert Bonn, N., & Pinxten, W. (2021). Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2)—a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science. Research Integrity and Peer Review6, 1-18.
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).. Washington, DC: Author.
Baleghi Damavandi S, Zameni F, Taghvaee Yazdi M. Presenting a Model of Impact of Research Ethics on the Quality of Research of Faculty Members. J Babol Univ Med Sci 2019; 21 (1) :223-229
Bazargan, A. (2003). Capacity Building for Evaluation and Enhancement of Quality in the Higher Education System: International Experiences and National Necessities in Creating an Appropriate Structure. Majlis and Research (Special Issue on Higher Education): 41.
Behravan, H. (2003). Definition of research in the views of faculty members and its relationship with the willingness to engage in various scientific activities. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences of Tabriz University, 11: 37-64.
Belcher, B. M., Rasmussen, K. E., Kemshaw, M. R., & Zornes, D. A. (2016). Defining and assessing research quality in a transdisciplinary context.Research Evaluation25(1), 1-17.
Bergmann, M., Brohmann, B., Hoffmann, E., Loibl, M. C., Rehaag, R., Schramm, E., & Voß, J. P. (2005). Quality criteria of transdisciplinary research.A guide for the formative evaluation of research projects. ISOE-Studientexte, (13).
Boaz, A., & Ashby, D. (2003). Fit for purpose?: assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice. London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice.
Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2018). Beyond bibliometrics: A review of research evaluation methods for measuring the impact of research on society and policy. Research Evaluation, 27(1), 121-134.
Çavaş, B., Çavaş, P., Anagün, Ş. (2023). Assessment and Evaluation in Science and Technology Education. In: Akpan, B., Cavas, B., Kennedy, T. (eds) Contemporary Issues in Science and Technology Education. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 56. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24259-5_6.
Cozby, P. C., Worden, P. E., & Kee, D. W. (1989). Research methods in human development. Mayfield Publishing Company.
Danaei Fard, H. (2009). An Analysis of Barriers to Knowledge Generation in Field of the Humanities: Some Recommendations for Promoting the Capacity of Iranian Science Policy. Journal of Science and Technology Policy2(1), 2-15.
De Jong, S. P., Van Arensbergen, P., Daemen, F., Van Der Meulen, B., & Van Den Besselaar, P. (2011). Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases. Research Evaluation20(1), 61-72.
Fitzgerald, L.; Ruth, S.; Jan, Cilliers. (1991). "Quality and the research assessment exercise: just one aspect of performance". Quality Assurance in Education, Vol.9, No.1, 5-13.
Flick, U. (2019). Research assessment and the role of the research process: A framework for evaluating the quality of research. Chapter 12. In D. Silverman (Ed.), The Qualitative Researcher's Companion (3rd ed., pp. 259-276). Sage Publications Ltd.
Furlong, J. & Oancea, A. (2008). Assessing Quality in Applied and Practice-based Educational Research, A Framework for Discussion. Oxford University Department of Educational Studies.
Geiger, G. R. (2021). Formative assessment in doctoral education: A guide for faculty and program leaders. Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Guthrie, S., Wamae, W., Diepeveen, S., Wooding, S. & Grant, J. (2013). ‘Measuring Research – A Guide to Research Evaluation Frameworks and Tools.’ Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, As of 20 August 2019: https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG1217.html.
Hassanain, M., Anil, S., & Abdo, A. (2016). Institutional Research Evaluation Model (IREM): A framework for measuring organizational research trends and impact and its application in medical academia in Saudi Arabia. Journal of epidemiology and global health.
Jaroonkhongdach, W., Todd, R. W., Hall, D., & Keyuravong, S. (2011). Three Dimensions of Research Quality. Proceedings of the International Conference: Doing Research in Applied Linguistics
Johnson, R. B.  & Christensen, L.  (2012). Educational research: Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed approaches (3rd Ed.). Translate by Khosravi Babadi, A., Poushne, K. & Aghazadeh, M. (2012), Tehran: Aeij.
Kasperaviciute, R (2013). Application of ISO 9001 and EFQM excellence model within higher education institutions:Practical experiences institutions, SocialTransformations in Contemporary Society,Vol.1, Pp.81-92.
Khaki, Gh. (2013). Grounded theory research methods in management. Tehran: Foujan Publishing. Specialized Association of Research and Development Centers of Industries and Mines, Unit for the Management of Research and Development, October 2006.
Kulczycki, E., Rozkosz, E. A., Szadkowski, K., Ciereszko, K., Hołowiecki, M., & Krawczyk, F. (2021). Local use of metrics for the research assessment of academics: The case of Poland. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management43(4), 435-453.
Lee, A., & Scallon, K. (2020). Research ethics in higher education: A guide for students. Routledge.
Philips, M. (2012). Research Universities and Research Assessment. League of European Research Universities. LERU's Research Policy Committee.
Sadooghi, M. (2007). Delving into the Philosophical foundations of quantitative and qualitative research in behavioral sciences. Seminary & University Journal Methodology of Social Science, 13(52): 83-103.
Sandström, U., & Van den Besselaar, P. (2020). Rethinking research assessment: A call for a process-oriented approach. Studies in Higher Education, 45(1), 18-33.
Lee, K. P., Schotland, M., Bacchetti, P., & Bero, L. A. (2002). Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles. Jama287(21), 2805-2808.
Lehtinen, U., Öhlén, J., & Asplund, K. (2005). Some remarks on the relevance of basic research in nursing inquiry. Nursing Philosophy6(1), 43-50.
Litman, T. (2012). Evaluating Research Quality: Guidelines for Scholarship. International Electronic Symposium on Knowledge Communication and Peer Reviewing, International Institute of Informatics and Systemics (www.iiis.org).
Mahdi, R. (2010). Factors affecting research in technical engineering department. Rahyaft, 47: 67-75.
Margherita, A., Elia, G., & Petti, C. (2022). What is quality in research? Building a framework of design, process and impact attributes and evaluation perspectives. Sustainability14(5), 3034.
Mårtensson, P., Fors, U., Wallin, S. B., Zander, U., & Nilsson, G. H. (2016). Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary approach to assessing research practice and quality. Research Policy45(3), 593-603.
Martin, M., Michel, M. & Stella, A. (2009). External quality assurance in higher education. Translate by Mohammadi, R. Tehran: Publication Center of the Educational Assessment Organization.
Mohammadi, M., Ameli, O. & Mohammadi, S.F. (2002). Quality standards in the research organization - a model for quality assurance in the research organization and a strategy for organizing the country's research system. Rahyaft: 27.
Moskovitz, C., Saha, S., & Harmon, B. (2023). The Structure of Scientific Writing: An Empirical Analysis of Recent Research Articles in STEM. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 54(3), 265–281.
Murad, S. M. A., Hashim, H., Jusoh, M., & Zakaria, Z. Y. (2019). Sustainability assessment framework: a mini review of assessment concept. CHEMICAL ENGINEERING72.
Naderi, E. & Seifnaraghi, M. (2009). Research methods and how to evaluate them in the humanities (with an emphasis on educational sciences). Tehran: Arasbaran Publishing.
Noaman, A. Y., Ragab, A. H. M., Fayoumi, A. G., Khedra, A. M., & Madbouly, A. I. (2013, September). HEQAM: A developed higher education quality assessment model. In Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), 2013 Federated Conference on (pp. 739-746). IEEE.
Nouruzi, A., Abolghasemi, M. & Ghahramani, M. (2015). Exploring Barriers to Science Production from the Viewpoint of Shahid Beheshti University Faculty Members. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration6(22), 77-108.
Ochsner, M., Hug, S. E., & Daniel, H. D. (2012). Four types of research in the humanities: Setting the stage for research quality criteria in the humanities. Research Evaluation22(2), 79-92.
Ochsner, M., Hug, S. E., & Daniel, H. D. (2014). Setting the stage for the assessment of research quality in the humanities. Consolidating the results of four empirical studies. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft17(6), 111-132.
Rabbani, A., Hemmati, R., Ghazi Tabatabaei, M. & Dadhir, A. (2011). New Modes of Knowledge Productions and Doing Science: A Sociological Reflection on Shift in Ethical Standards and Scientific Conduct in the Epoch of Technoscience. Ethics in Science and Technology 2011; 6 (1) :12-24
Rowlands, J., & Wright, S. (2021). Hunting for points: the effects of research assessment on research practice. Studies in Higher Education46(9), 1801-1815.
Sadoughi, M. (2007). Inquiry into the philosophical foundations of quantitative and qualitative research in behavioral sciences. Journal of Methodology in Humanities, 52(13).
Slack, N. & et al. (1998). Operation management. 2nd. London: Pitman. Quoted in Boaden, Ruth; Jan, Cilliers. (2001) "Quality and the research assessment exercise: just one aspect of performance". Quality Assurance in Education, Vol.9,No.1, 5-13.
Smith, A. (2001):. "Never mind the width, feel the quality: improving VET research in Australia". British Medical Journal, Vol.26, No.6, 421-428.
Suskie, L. (2022). Assessing student learning in higher education: A guide to learning outcomes, assessment techniques, and grading practices. Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Talebi,Fahimeh ,Jahed,Hossein Ali ,sarikhani,nahid.  (2021). Designing a Research Quality Improvement Model in Iranian Higher Education System, Quarterly Ethical Research (Association for Islamic Thought), 2(11): 145-158.
Tight, M. (2023). Enhancing research quality in higher education: A guide for leaders and practitioners. Routledge.
Yousofi Afrashteh, M. (2015). A review of dimensions of educational quality in engineering education. First International and Fourth National Conference on Engineering Education, Shiraz University, November 10-12.