The mediation effect of the research in teaching quality: balancing research and teaching efforts Frederic Marimon Jasmina Berbegal Marta Mas

The mediation effect of the research in teaching quality:balancing research and teaching efforts

Frederic MarimonJasmina Berbegal

Marta Mas

Index

1. Framework… description of current situation2. Empirical analysis: …in my university3. Conclusions: can it be applied to other

situations?

1 Framework… 2 Empirical analysis… 3 Conclusions

1 Framework……description of current situation

UIC : University of general purpose:

• Degree courses: 14• Number of students enrolled: 4.401

Undergraduates: 3.261Postgraduates: 1.140, of which:

371 are studying doctorate degrees421 are studying Masters courses348 are studying postgraduate degrees

• Number of students per lecture: 60-80• Professor / student ratio: 7,55• Number of teachers: 583• Staff: 242• Proportion of UIC graduates who successfully secure employment:

88,75%….1 Framework… 2 Empirical analysis… 3 Conclusions

http://www.uic.es/en


• UIC is a private university; all revenues comes from students' tuitions; no government support is received.

• Our tuitions are 10 times the public fees…• Why should someone pay it?



A high proportion (40%) of the teaching programme is set aside for practical-based classes. Most of our teachers have professional backgrounds and the university nurtures a very close relationship with business via its work experience programmes. The aim is to equip the student with all the knowledge, skills and talents demanded by the market, while also providing a solid training in the fundamental values of Christian Humanism.



Aim:Student satisfaction

Promotion on students satisfaction?

Retribution system:1. Promotion based on accreditations2. Academic activity charge based on “Agreement”



Retribution system:1. Promotion based on accreditations2. Activity charge based on “Agreement”

The national agencies for university quality provide “ACCREDITATION” for academics (based mainly on research):

The higher the accreditation you got, the higher the position your university will give you

The activity is based on:

• 33% Teaching• 33% Research• 33% Management

Increasing Research will decrease teaching



Aim:Student satisfaction

Promotion on students satisfaction?

Retribution system:1. Promotion based on accreditations2. Activity charge based on “Agreement”

Formal message is:

“Take good care of your students”

Retribution system message is:

“Take good care of your research”


2 Empirical analysis: …in my university

• Introduction• Objective• Methodology• Results


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityIntroduction

research

teachingParadigm A

Paradigm B

Paradigm C



Three paradigms

A. Teaching and research are complementary and mutually reinforcing.

B. Teaching and research are mutually exclusive.

C. Teaching and research have no interrelation.


PARADIGM ATeaching and research are complementary and mutually reinforcing ...

• Research favors updating knowledge.

• Textbooks may not be current in rapidly developing areas.

• Research helps instill a critical approach rather than a passive acceptance of facts.

• Students appreciate academics who present their research and engage in discussion.

• A successful research professor increases confidence, leading to better performance in the classroom.


PARADIGM BTeaching and research are mutually exclusive.

• Time is limited; conflicts might arise balancing effort between teaching and research.

• Teaching and research require different features and it is unlikely that the same person might accomplishes high performance in both.

• The promotion based solely on academic research causes diminishing effort devoted to teaching.

• Scholars try to incorporate their research on the content of their teaching program.

• Research can lead to strong viewpoints and consequently to be inflexible to alternative views raised in the classroom.

• Researchers tend to keep their syllabus level too high.



research

teaching

…even though…Can an academic has two "standards" of behavior? Degree & Masters

…master degree


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityObjective

Assessing to which extent the student satisfaction is influenced by the experience of the lecturer or by the research quality of the lecturer.


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityMethodology

• Sample: 229 academics of UIC with official accreditation in research

• Variables– Satisfaction– Experience (years in UIC)– Research quality

• Validation of the quality teaching scale• Assessing the mediation role of “research” between

experience and student’s satisfaction (teaching quality)


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityMethodology: variables

Variables: Satisfaction (teaching quality)

Planification

Interaction

Results

Organisation & PlanningThe reading list and additional materials for the course contributed to improving my appreciation and understanding of the subject.The course organisation and activities were well prepared and thoroughly explained by the lecturer.The workload of this course was appropriate to set time for learning.

Implementation & Interaction The lecturer clearly presents and highlights the most important points of the course.The students were encouraged by the lecturer to take part in the class discussions.The lecturer properly answers students’ questions and guides students in the development of the different tasks to be completed.The lecturer uses didactic resources that facilitate the learning process.The content of the exams and other assessed assignments matched the course contentThe lecturer showed a genuine interest in all of the students and was readily available to students outside of class time.

ResultsThe task performed by this lecturer has helped me to improve my knowledge, skills or attitudes.


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityMethodology: variables

Variables: Research quality(Accreditation ANECA or AQU)

Coding Accreditation (Original name)Accreditation

agency0 Professor de universitat privada AQU

1Profesor colaborador ANECAProfessor col·laborador AQU

2Profesor ayudante doctor ANECALector AQU

3Profesor contratado doctor ANECAProfesor de universidad privada ANECA

4 Profesor titular ANECA5 Professor agregat AQU6 Profesor catedrático ANECA7 Catedràtic d’universitat AQU


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityMethodology: validation satisfaction scale

Satisfaction construct: reliability and validityOrganization Interaction

item standardized load t-value r2 item standard

ized load t-value r2

P1 0.890 - 0.792 P4 0.949 - 0.900P2 0.908 14.854 0.824 P5 0.924 22.408 0.853P3 0.900 14.205 0.810 P6 0.963 39.599 0.927

P7 0,955 26.583 0.912P8 0,906 18.893 0.821P9 0.781 9.071 0.609

Alpha Cronbach 0.922 0.968CR 0.927 0.969AVE 0.809 0.837

Fit indices Identified model

Satorra-Bentler scaled χ2 = 31.58(9 freedom degrees) p-value = 0.00024Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.944RMSEA = 0.105


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityMethodology: Non-parametric test for the three

dimensions of satisfaction No-parametric

test for independent

samples

Categories comparison Test for independent samples Dimension Significance Result

1 Gender Women, Men Mann–Whitney U testPlanification 0.896

No differenceInteraction 0.814

Results 0.734

2 Faculty ARQ, CES, CJP, COM ,EDU ,FCS, HUM, ODO Kruskall-Wallis testPlanification 0.000

Significant differencesInteraction 0.000

Results 0.000

3 Knowledge area Engineering, Health Sciences, Social and Law sciences, Humanities Kruskall-Wallis test

Planification 0.001Significant differencesInteraction 0.003

Results 0.024

4 Study level Master, degree Mann–Whitney U testPlanification 0.202

No differenceInteraction 0.191

Results 0.483

5 Academic position

Col·laborador, Ajudant, Ajudant doctor, Adjunt, Lector, Contractat Doctor, Agregat, Catedràtic Kruskall-Wallis test

Planification 0.307No

differenceInteraction 0.224Results 0.180

6 Institutional relationship Funtional, Organical Mann–Whitney U test

Planification 0.494No

differenceInteraction 0.675Results 0.373

7 Accredited research

Professor de universitat privada AQU, Profesor colaborador ANECA, Professor col·laborador AQU , Profesor ayudante doctor ANECA, Lector AQU, Profesor contratado doctor ANECA ,Profesor de universidad privada ANECA, Profesor titular ANECA, Professor agregat AQU, Profesor catedrático ANECA, Catedràtic d’universitat AQU

Kruskall-Wallis test

Planification 0.000

Significant differences

Interaction 0.000

Results 0.000

8Internal teaching assessment Improvement is required, favorable, very favorable Kruskall-Wallis test

Planification 0.003Significant differencesInteraction 0.015

Results 0.019


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityMethodology: models

Experience Qualityc’ (a) Model for the total effect

of experience on quality

Experience

Research

Quality

a b

c

(b) Model for the mediator effect of research between experience and quality


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityResults: Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)

SEM1 (total effect) SEM2 (composed effect)

Dependent variables

Independent variables Quality Research Quality

Experience 0.086 (1.449) c’ 0.431 (6.745) a 0.210 (2.919) c

Research - - -0.287 (-3.993) b

R2 0.007 0.186 0.075In the cells the standardized coefficients and in brackets its t-values.

The letters a, b, c, c’ correspond to the notation in figure 1.

Fit indices

Satorra-Bentler scaled χ2 (fd) 110.42 (42) 131.48 (51)S-B scales χ2/ freedom degrees 2.63 2.58

Comparative fit index (CFI) 0.923 0.923Root mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) 0.085 0.083

2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityResults: Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)

Standardized coefficient(t-statistic)

Experience

Research

Quality

a b

c

Experience Qualityc’

0,086(1.449)

0,431(6.745)

0,210(2.919)

-0,287(-3.993)

1.- According to the typology of Zhao et al. (2010), this is the case of competitive mediation (1).

c’ = c + (a*b)

c‘: total effectc: direct effecta*b: indirect effect

2.- Both direct and indirect effect are significant, but pointing in opposite direction

3.-Current incentive systems at universities impacts negatively on student satisfaction

(1) a*b is significant, according to the Sobel statistic

2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityResults: multigroup analysis according to the

institutional relationship (functional vs organic)

Standardized Paths

Non standardized paths(t-value)

Univariate increment

Functional subsample

Organic subsample χ2 Probability

Research → Teaching quality -0.181 -0.354 -0.089 (-3.927) * 4.620 0.032

Experience → Teaching quality -0.011 -0.022 -0.002 (-0.294) 1.556 0.212

Experience → Research -0.042 -0.043 -0.019 (-0.978) 1.465 0.226

Teaching quality → Results 0.942 0.895 1.163 (16.903) * 0.547 0.460

Teaching quality → Interaction 0.993 1.000 1.214 (15.098) * 0.010 0.919

Experience

Research

Quality

a b

c

The “b” path is significantly different: it is more negative for the organic staff. Apparently, they do not care so much for their teaching.


2 Empirical analysis: …in my universityResults: multigroup analysis according to the knowledge area

(health&thecnics vs social&law&humanities)

Experience

Research

Quality

ab

c

-0.248 (h&t)-0.170 (ssc&hum)

0.143 (h&t)0.092 (ssc&hum)

The “competitive mediation” for health and technic areas is stronger than in social and humanities sciences


3 Conclusions

Dilemma for the managers of the university.

Research is needed:• Prestigious of the university depends on research.• The official evaluation of the degrees from the government

also is highly based in the quality of the research.• Policies to develop academic careers in the university

depend at great extent on the research

Teaching quality is needed:• Student’s tuition is the only income.


3 Conclusions

Dilemma for the academics.

Research is required in order to improve their position: academics that have reached a high level in their research are neglecting their teaching responsibilities.

1. The higher the research level an academic attain, the higher the tendency to develop research.

2. Getting an organic position causes a relaxation in the teaching effort, since the position is stable and the future evolution depends mainly on research.

3. Once an academic has been enrolled in some projects and research groups, and consequently increasing the research level, the lecturer gets an impetus in order to go on with his/her research, forcing him/her to devote time to research in detriment of teaching, etc…


3 Conclusions

research

teaching

Paradigm B

2.- Management messages

1.- There is a tradeoff between lecturing and research

2a Formal communication:Prioritizes teaching

2b : Retribution systemPrioritizes research

Academic decision • Problems with “Student satisfaction”• Good performance in the university system


3 Conclusions

• In other words… without research, the students’ satisfaction would increase in a high degree; nevertheless, the system (the government that authorizes providing university titles) does not allow it.

• Co-exist two aims, apparently both competing for the academic talent.

• Lecturers decide focusing on research, looking for personal objective, neglecting teaching efforts.


3 Conclusions

research

teachingHow to migrate to the excellence area?


Thank you very much…

Documents

The mediation effect of the research in teaching quality: balancing research and teaching efforts Frederic Marimon Jasmina Berbegal Marta Mas