2023, no. 11
PHILOSOPHY & SOCIOLOGY

Performance evaluation systems for research and teaching staff: The attitude of university teachers

Ivan A. AleshkovskiORCID, Aleksandr A. GrebenyukORCID, Ekaterina I. EfimenkoORCID

DOI 10.20339/am.11-23.017pp. 17–24UDC 37880 RUB

PDF

Bookmark

Abstract

This article summarizes the results of a survey and semi-structured interviews of Russian university teachers regarding the systems of performance evaluation of research and teaching staff and their effectiveness. The results of the study revealed that university teachers have a positive attitude to the methods of stimulating research and teaching staff performance applied in higher education. At the same time, the degree of teachers’ satisfaction and evaluation of systems’ effectiveness directly depend on the specifics of their application in a particular higher education institution. The results of the study confirm the overall trend towards increasing importance of scientific components in the performance evaluation of research and teaching staff at universities. The results can become a prerequisite for the development of new criteria for ensuring the effectiveness of social and labor relations with university teachers.

References

  1. Abramov, R.N., Gruzdev, I.A., Terentev, E.A. Working Time and Role Strains of Research and Teaching Staff in a Modern Russian University. Educational Studies. 2017. No. 1. P. 88–111. DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2017-1-88-111

    DOI 10.17323/1814-9545-2017-1-88-111
  2. Bondarenko, V.V., Seleznev, P.S., Tanina, M.A., Yudina, V.A. Increasing the Competitiveness of Russian Universities in the World Educational Space in the Face of Global Threats // Education and Law. (5). 2020. P. 186-190. DOI: 10.24411/2076-1503-2020-10533
    DOI 10.24411/2076-1503-2020-10533
  3. Ganchenko, I.O., Grivennaja, E.N. Actual Problems of Introduction of a Rating Estimation of Scientific and Pedagogical Activity of the Faculty of a Higher Educational Institution. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2020. No. 2 (46). 2020. P. 157–162.

  4. Gozalova, A.V., Ryzhova, V.S., Skachkova, L.S. Whether Academic and Teaching Staff are Universal. Upravlenets [The Manager]. 2022. Vol. 13. No. 5. P. 85–101. DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-5-6

    DOI 10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-5-6
  5. Dezina, I.G., Kliuchaev, G.A. Russian Education for Innovative Economy: ‘The Pressure Points’. Sociological Studies. 2018. No. 9. P. 40–48. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250001957-5

    DOI 10.31857/s013216250001957-5
  6. Kehm, B.M. Universities’ ratings — impact and unforeseen side-effects. Sociological Studies. 2016. No. 8. P. 71–80. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250001960-9.

    DOI 10.31857/s013216250001960-9
  7. Kiryushina, M.A., Alekseeva, Ya.I., Rudakov, V.N. Teaching Practices of University Faculty and Researchers: Information Bulletin. Moscow: HSE Press, 2023. 40 p.

  8. Klimuk,V.V., Nikishova, A.V., Komarov, O.E. Methodology for Evaluating the Performance of the Teaching Staff of Universities (rating system). Alma mater (Vestnik vysshey shkoly). 2016. No. 11. P. 79–83. DOI: 10.20339/AM.11-16.079

    DOI 10.20339/am.11-16.079
  9. Kozmina, Ya.Ya. Preferences of professors about research and teaching. Educational Studies. 2014. No. 3. P. 135–151. DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2014-3-135-151

    DOI 10.17323/1814-9545-2014-3-135-151
  10. Kochukhova, E.A. Academic profession as perceived by faculty. Educational Studies. 2020. No. 2. P. 278–302. DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2020-2-278-302

    DOI 10.17323/1814-9545-2020-2-278-302
  11. Kuzminov, Ya.I., Yudkevich, M.M. Russian Universities: how the system works. Moscow: HSE Publishing House, 2021. 616 p.

  12. Kurbatova, M.V., Kagan, E.S. Opportunism of University Lecturers As a Way to Adaptate the External Control Activities Strengthening. Journal of Institutional Studies. 2016. Vol. 8. No. 3. P. 116–136. DO1: 10.17835/2076-6297.2016.8.3.116-136

  13. Osipov, A.M. Trojan Horses of Neo-liberalism in Education. Sociological Studies. 2017. No. 8. P. 136–146.

  14. Polevaya, M.V. Performance evaluation system of employees of higher education institutions: current practice and key performance indicators. Social and labor research. 2019. No. 37 (4). P. 98–105. DOI: 10.34022/2658-3712-2019-37-4-98-105

    DOI 10.34022/2658-3712-2019-37-4-98-105
  15. Prakhov, I.A. Basic practices of scientific activity and publication activity of university teachers: bulletin. Moscow: HSE Press. 2021. 28 p. DOI: 10.17323/978-5-7598-2604-0

    DOI 10.17323/978-5-7598-2604-0
  16. Rudakov, V.N. Differences in the position of university professors by age group. Moscow: HSE Press, 2020. — Monitoring of Education Markets and Organizations. Iss. 13.

  17. Seroshtan, M.V., Ketova, N.P. Modern Russian Universities: Positioning, Development Trends, Potential to Enhance Competitive Advantages. Higher Education in Russia. 2020. Vol. 29. No. 2. P. 27–40. DOI: 10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-2-27-40

    DOI 10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-2-27-40
  18. Sivak, Ye., Yudkevich, M. Academic Profession in a Comparative Perspective: 1992–2012. Foresight-Russia. 2013. Vol. 7. No. 3. 2013. P. 38–47.

  19. Ball, S.J. The Teacher’s Soul and the Terrors of Performativity. Journal of Education Policy. 2003. No. 2. P. 215–228.

  20. Connell, R. The Neoliberal Cascade and Education: an Essay on the Market Agenda and Its Consequences. Critical Studies in Education. 2013. Vol. 54. No. 2. P. 99–112.