Volume 7, Issue 14 (2014)                   JMED 2014, 7(14): 20-30 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Tootoonchi M, Yamani N, Taleghani F. Evaluation of administrative performance indicators used for academic promotion: viewpoints of faculty members of Iranian medical universities. JMED 2014; 7 (14) :20-30
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-201-en.html
Evaluation of administrative performance indicators used for academic promotion: viewpoints of faculty members of Iranian medical universities
Mina Tootoonchi1 , Nikoo Yamani1 , Fariba Taleghani2
1- Medical Education Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
2- Nursing and Midwifery Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences
Abstract:   (25744 Views)
Background: Faculty members’ performance in administrative services to academy and society is considered in their academic promotion criteria. This study assesses the reasonability and attainability of these indicators according to the faculty members working in Iranian Medical Universities in 2011-2012. Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was performed in 13 medical universities in Iran. Using stratified sampling, 350 faculty members were selected. A researcher-made questionnaire was used to assess the attainability and reasonability of service indicators mentioned in promotion bylaw with a scoring scale of 1-5. Mean and standard deviation of scores for each indicator was calculated. Results: The total mean scores of 11 service indicators, for reasonability and attainability were 32.18(±12.11) and 39.37(±11.58), out of 55, respectively. The highest reasonability scores belonged to “being administrator of research projects”, “administrating activities in Educational Development Center (EDC)”, and “managerial activities in different levels”. The highest attainability scores were given to “administrative activities in scientific journals”, “being administrator of research projects”, “administrating activities in Educational Development Center (EDC)”, and “effective work in scientific associations”. Conclusion: Faculty members did not rate service indicators mentioned in promotion bylaw as much reasonable, but believed that they are somehow attainable. Revision of these indicators to make them more relevant to the responsibility values is recommended. Also developing management skills and providing appropriate partnership opportunities for faculty members’ service tasks, and facilitating their cooperation with scientific journals and associations, could improve the attainability of these indicators.
Keywords: Academic Promotion, Faculty evaluation, Academic Management, Evaluation Criteria
Full-Text [PDF 156 kb]   (3571 Downloads)    
Subject: Medical Education
Received: 2013/07/3 | Accepted: 2013/12/28 | Published: 2014/06/21
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.