The current and desirable states in research unit management models to enhance the research capacity of private universities

Meanmas Pranpa; Pongsin Viseshsiri; Pruet Siribanpitak

Authors

Meanmas Pranpa Division of Educational Administration, Department of Educational Policy, Management and Leadership, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
Pongsin Viseshsiri Division of Educational Administration, Department of Educational Policy, Management and Leadership, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
Pruet Siribanpitak Division of Educational Administration, Department of Educational Policy, Management and Leadership, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand

Keywords:

current and desirable states, research unit management models, research capacity, private universities

Abstract

The objective of this research was to study the current and desirable states in the research unit management models to enhance the research capacity of private universities. Six management models, namely; Formal, Collegial, Political, Subjective, Ambiguity, and Cultural, modified from Bush’s Theory of management, were chosen for the conceptual framework of this research. Questionnaires with structured questions were utilized to collect data from the Vice President of the department of Research Affairs, Directors or Heads of the Research Unit, the Faculty Deans and the Lecturers in forty-two private universities under the Office of the Higher Education Commission. Data analysis was administered in the forms of frequency, mean, standard deviation and Modified Priority Need Index (PNI_modified). The findings are as follows: 1) The current states of Formal Management Model ( =3.57, S.D.=0.95) was found to have the highest mean scores, followed by the Collegial, Cultural, Political, Subjective and Ambiguity, respectively, 2) The desirable states of Collegial management model was shown to have the highest mean scores ( =3.98, S.D.
=0.92), followed by the corresponding 5 management models as mentioned in the current states respectively, 3) According to the PNI, research unit management should prioritize the Collegial Management Model (PNI=0.228) followed by Political, Cultural, Subjective, Formal, and Ambiguity, respectively and 4) Key informants suggested that (1) a high amount of obligated teaching duties have hindered the task of conducting new research, (2) grants given to researchers at private universities should be partially supported by government, (3) research unit heads should be proactive and openly service-minded with their staff and (4) motivational incentives from private universities themselves such as an environment of professional academic facilities or awards can assist in conducting and creating a higher capacity of quality and quantity in research studies.

References

Boonprasert, M., Tantanadecha, S., & Polsarum, P. (2003). Management innovation in higher education. A research and development project report in higher education management system. Bangkok, Thailand. Office of Education Council. Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://backoffice.onec.go.th/uploads/Book/521-file.pdf

Bush, T. (2011). Theories of educational leadership and management. 4th ed. London, England: SAGE Publications.

Chongkhlaiklang, S. (2014). A management model for the empowerment of teachers in Basic Education Institutions. Journal of Education Studies. 42(4), 78-92. Retrieved from Journal of Education Studies, Chulalongkorn University database.

Jitpimolmard, S. (2013). The role of universities for the country development by research. The Thailand Research Fund (TRF). Retrieved from http://www.cupt.net/ research/presentation/p019.pdf

Office of the Higher Education Commission. (2011). Manual of educational quality assurance: internal audit of higher education B.E.2010. Bangkok, Thailand. Ministry of Education.

Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment(Public Organization). (2013). Manual for higher educational institutions: the third-round of external quality assessment for higher education 2011-2015 (3rd ed.). Bangkok, Thailand.

Sri-iam, S. (2010). Open mind “Chiradet Ousawat” president of private university association: critical private university, critical higher education. Retrieved from http://www.gotoknow.org/posts/204505

Sukhatunga, S. (2010). Multi-case comparative study of the roles of research divisions among research and non-research universities (Master’s Thesis, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand).

Teerawatee, T. (2015). A synthesis model of academic administration of the Buddhist Scripture School, General Education Division. RMUTT global business and economics review, 10(1), 19-32. Retrieved from RMUTT open journal systems database.

The Times Higher Education. (2016 a). World university rankings. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/ world-university-rankings

The Times Higher Education. (2016 b). World university rankings 2015-2016 methodology. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ranking-methodology-2016

Wiratchai, N., & Wongvanich, S. (1999). A synthesis of research in education using meta-analysis and content analysis. A research report. Bangkok, Thailand. Office of National Committee of Education, Office of Prime Minister.

Yurarach, S. (2013). The quality development of Thai graduates’ to ASEAN. Journal of Education. Naresuan University, 15(4), 142-153. Retrieved from Naresuan University Journal database.