Abstract: (1017 Views)
Promotion and commitment are the most crucial steps in the professional life of faculty members. Considering the importance of performance evaluation and promotion systems for faculty members, it is essential for managers to identify strengths and weaknesses and improve the educational environment. this study aims to perform a comparative analysis of the promotion systems at the top 10 medical universities worldwide, based on the Times Higher Education compared to those in Iran’s medical universities.
this comparative study were gathered from the websites of the mentioned universities, while information on Iran was extracted based on the 2014 Faculty Promotion Regulations. To analyze the collected data, George E. Zieber’s model was applied, which includes four stages: description, interpretation, juxtaposition, and comparison, used in comparative studies. Various headings in the promotion systems, such as evaluation methods, evaluation levels, scope, evaluation criteria, and timing, were classified.
The primary distinction lies in the implementation and scoring system, which is generally quantitative. Additionally, given the governmental management of universities, the use of a unified approach across all fields and educational groups presents an undeniable concern. The findings suggest that to address the existing gaps and improve the faculty promotion system, actions such as "goal-setting for the promotion system, preventing the promotion process from becoming merely an administrative procedure, conducting a thorough analysis of the foundations and policies of the promotion and evaluation systems in global universities, and adapting global promotion systems to reflect societal values" are recommended.
this comparative study were gathered from the websites of the mentioned universities, while information on Iran was extracted based on the 2014 Faculty Promotion Regulations. To analyze the collected data, George E. Zieber’s model was applied, which includes four stages: description, interpretation, juxtaposition, and comparison, used in comparative studies. Various headings in the promotion systems, such as evaluation methods, evaluation levels, scope, evaluation criteria, and timing, were classified.
The primary distinction lies in the implementation and scoring system, which is generally quantitative. Additionally, given the governmental management of universities, the use of a unified approach across all fields and educational groups presents an undeniable concern. The findings suggest that to address the existing gaps and improve the faculty promotion system, actions such as "goal-setting for the promotion system, preventing the promotion process from becoming merely an administrative procedure, conducting a thorough analysis of the foundations and policies of the promotion and evaluation systems in global universities, and adapting global promotion systems to reflect societal values" are recommended.
Keywords: Performance Evaluation, Faculty Promotion, Medical Universities, QS Ranking Systems, Higher Education, Scientific Development, Educational Quality, Comparative Analysis
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-By-NC), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Contact Information
© 2015 All Rights Reserved | Development Strategies in Medical Education
Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb
Development Strategies in Medical Education by http://dsme.hums.ac.ir/ is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.