پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 41 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 1,101 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,444 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 17,026,585 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 11,940,008 |
طراحی مدل برای مطالعه تطبیقی دانشگاههای کشور | ||
| مدیریت سازمانهای دولتی | ||
| مقاله 7، دوره 10، شماره 2 (پیاپی 38)، فروردین 1401، صفحه 107-122 اصل مقاله (1.25 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: توصیفی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30473/ipom.2022.62283.4535 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| جعفر احدزاده فرهود بناب* 1؛ غلامرضا معمارزاده طهران* 2؛ نادر بهلولی زیناب3؛ یوسف بیگزاده4 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد بناب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بناب، ایران. | ||
| 2دانشیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران. | ||
| 3استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد بناب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بناب، ایران | ||
| 4استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد بناب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بناب، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| نظامهای مختلفی برای رتبهبندی دانشگاهها در سطوح ملّی و بینالمللی وجود دارد که دانشگاهها را با شاخصهای متفاوت، مورد سنجش قرار داده و نقاط ضعف و قوت آنها را در مقایسه با دیگر دانشگاهها نشان میدهند. اما نظام رتبهبندی دانشگاههای کشور که مبتنی بر شرایط ملی و بینالمللی باشد بیش از پیش حائز اهمیت است. بنابراین، هدف اصلی این پژوهش طراحی مدلی برای مطالعه تطبیقی و رتبهبندی دانشگاههای کشور است. این پژوهش از نظر هدف، کاربردی و از نظر نوع کمی-کیفی است. ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ آﻣﺎرى موردنظر ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ از اﻓﺮاد ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ و ﺑﺎ ﺷﻨﺎﺧت ﻛﺎﻓﻲ درﮔﻴﺮ در برنامهریزی ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪاى دانشگاهها در ﻛﺸﻮر میباشند. برای ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺣﺠﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ از روش اﺷﺒﺎع ﺗﺌﻮرﻳﻚ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده شده است. در این پژوهش ابتدا با ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ و ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ دﻗﻴﻖ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻣﻮﺟﻮد در اﻳﻦ ﺣﻮزه ﺷﺎﻣﻞ اﺳﻨﺎد ﻓﺮادﺳﺘﻲ، ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪه و نظامهای رتبهبندی دانشگاهی دنیا، اطلاعات لازم برای مباحث نظری جمعآوری شد. سپس با استفاده از روش تحلیل محتوا معیارها و شاخصهای ارزیابی دانشگاهها جمعآوری و در نهایت کار تعیین اوزان معیارها و شاخصها با تکنیک فرایند تحلیل سلسلهمراتبی (AHP) براساس نظرات افراد خبره انجام گرفت. در ﻧﻬﺎﻳت مدل موردنظر برای ارزیابی و رتبهبندی دانشگاههای ایران ارائه شد. براساس نتایج حاصل از این پژوهش هفت معیار و 33 مفهوم به دست آمد که در نهایت براساس تعیین اوزان، کیفیت آموزشی رتبه یک را به خود اختصاص داده است. رتبههای بعدی به ترتیب به کیفیت پژوهشی، اعتبار بینالمللی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی، میزان نوآوری و بازدهی مالی، نرخ تربیت متخصصان و امکانات و تسهیلات تعلق میگیرد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| فرایند تحلیل سلسلهمراتبی؛ مدل؛ مطالعه تطبیقی؛ نظام رتبهبندی؛ دانشگاه | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Designing a Model for Comparative Study of Iranian Universities | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Jafar Ahadzadeh Farhood Fonab1؛ Gholamreza Memarzadeh Tehran2؛ Nader Bohlooli Zinab3؛ yousef Beigzadeh4 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Public Administration, Bonab Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Department of Management, Qazvin, Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran. | ||
| 3Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Bonab Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran. | ||
| 4Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Bonab Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| There are various systems for ranking universities at the national and international levels which measure universities by different indicators and show their strengths and weaknesses compared to other universities. But the ranking system of the country's universities, which is based on national and international conditions, is more important than ever. Therefore, the main purpose of this research is to design a model for a comparative study and ranking of universities in the country. This research is applied in terms of purpose and is quantitative-qualitative in terms of type. The study population consists of experienced people involved in the development planning of universities in the country. To determine the sample size, the theoretical impregnation method was used. In this research, first, the necessary information for theoretical discussions was collected through deep study and review of related documents including the published scientific resources, Then, using the content analysis method, criteria and indicators of university assessment were collected, and finally, the task of determining criteria weights and indicators was done by analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method based on expert opinions. Finally, the model was presented to evaluate and rank the universities of Iran. According to the results of this research, seven criteria and 33 concepts were obtained, which, in the end, according to the weights criteria the ranks were rated. The following rankings are related to the quality of research, international credit, social and cultural credibility, the degree of innovation and financial efficiency, the rate of training of experts, and facilities. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Analytical Hierarchy Process, Comparative Study, Model, Ranking System, University | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abbasi Kasani, H., Abbasi Kasani, S., & Bagheri, P. (2017). A Comparative Study of Strategic Programs of Universities affiliated to the Ministry of Science and Medical Sciences Universities in Terms of viewpoints, Missions and Values. DSME. 4(1), 51-67. (In Persian) Abunouri, E., Niazy, E., & Taheri.D, M. (2012). Ranking the Factors of Knowledge Management in Selected Universities. Journal of Business Administration Researches. 3(5), 56=73. (In Persian) AliBeigi, A. H. (2005). Integrating sustainability into higher education. Collection of Higher Education and Sustainable Development Articles, Vol.1. (In Persian) AmirReza Alizadeh Majd, A.R. (2015). Entrepreneurial University: The third generation of academics. Karafarinenab, No 42. (In Persian) Asadi, F. & Noushin Esfahani, N. (2011). Perspective and mission of Non-Public (nonprofit) Higher Education Institutes. Higher Education Letter (HEL), 4(15), 115-134. (In Persian) Cakir, M.P. Acarturk, C. Alasehir, O. & Cilingir, C. (2015). A comparative analysis of global and national university ranking systems. Scieritionetrics, 103, 413-848. Daraio, C., Bonaccorsi, A., & Simar, L. (2015). Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 244, 918-930. Delanty, G. (2001). Challenging knowledge: the university in the knowledge society. Translator: Ali Bakhtiari Zadeh, Research Institute for Cultural and Social Studies Publications. (In Persian) Ebrahimi, Gh. A. & Bagherian, M. (2009). Monitoring and evaluating the university through functionality. Proceedings of the National Conference on Supervision and Evaluation of Higher Education. Shahid Beheshti University. (In Persian) Farajollahi, M., Hasani, K., Safari, S., & Moeinikia, M. (2017). Designing of the Organizational Structure of Open and Distance Universities: The Case Study of Payame Noor University. Research in School and Virtual Learning, 4(3), 49-64. (In Persian) Jovanovic, M., Jeremic, V., Savic, G., Bulajic, M., & Martic, M. (2012). How does the normalization of data affect the ARWU ranking?. Scientometrics, 93(2), 319-327. Lazaridis, T. (2010). Ranking university departments using the mean h-index. Scientometrics, 82(2), 211-216. Malekinia, E., Bazargan, A., & Vaezi, M. (2014). Ahmadian M. Identification and prioritization of sustainable university's factors. IRPHE. 20(3), 1-26. (In Persian) Mani, M. (2004). Academic development planning, concepts, experiences and theories. Shahid Beheshti University Press. Tehran. (In Persian) Mansouri, R. (2002). University and its definition. Rahyaft, 11(24). (In Persian) Najjari, R., & Madani, J. (2019). A comparative study of the structure and function of Payame Noor University with five open universities in the world. Public Organization Management, 1(17), 89-110. (In Persian) Nazanin Behzadi, N., Seyed Mostafa Razavi, S.M. & Hossein, S.R. (2015). Designing A Conceptual Model for an Entrepreneurial University; Using Corporate Entrepreneurship Approach. Entrepreneurship development, 7(4), 697-713. (In Persian) Pazhohesh Jahromy, A., & Pour Karimy, J. (2014). Analysis of the Forces Operating in an Entrepreneurial University and Academic Technology Transfer; Interdisciplinary Approach. Technology Transfer and Commercialization of Researches, 41(11), 14-20. QS World University Rankings. (2015). http://www.topuniversities.com/ qsworlduniversityrankings. Ranking of Islamic Countries Universities and Research Institutions ISC. (2015). http://ur.isc.gov.ir/default.aspx?Lan=en. Samari, E., Yamani Douzi Sorkhabi, M., Salehi Omran, E., Graeinejad, Gh.R. (2014). Investigate and identify the factors in the process of effective factors in the process of university development in Iranian public universities. Journal of Educational Planning Studies, 2(4), 67-100. (In Persian) SCImago Institutions Rankings. (2007). http://www.scimagoir.com. Souzanchi, E. (2015). Comparative Analysis of Universities Emersion and Evolution in Iran and in World: Recommendations for Universities Evolution. Science and Technology Policy Letters (JSTPL), 4(3), 9-28. (In Persian) Universiteit Leiden. (2015). Leiden university rankings. http://www.leidenranking.com. URAP-University Ranking by Academic Performance. (2014). http://www.urapcenter.org/2014. Webometrics (Cybermetrics Lab) [Spain]. (2004). http://www.webometrics.info/. Zakersalehi. Gh.R. (2017). A Comparative Study of Academic Management and Leadership Structure: A Case Study of Boards of Trustees. Iranian Higher Education, 8(3). 79-110. (In Persian) | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 349 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 297 |
||