JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND PLANNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Year:2019 | Volume:24 | Issue:4 |Papers Count:7

Countries’ economic growth and development are significantly dependent on their productive capacity. In this research, we aimed to investigate which components of a knowledge-based economy has a more meaningful role in the production capacity. In order to measure production capacity, we used one of the most up-to-date indexes, the economic complexity index. The research used data panel consist of the 11-year period (2016-2006) for 113 countries. By using the Principal Components Analysis (PCA), the variables of the knowledge-based economy were converted into four main indicators. The results showed that there is a positive and significant relationship between the strengthening of all of the knowledge-based economy's dimensions with economic complexity. The results showed that the most important and most influential variable on the economic complexity is the education indicator. Afterwards, institutional and economic incentives, innovation system, and information and communication infrastructure have the highest direct effect, respectively.

Economic growth is one of the main goals of societies, in which economic well-being is achieved. So far, various theories have been proposed regarding the factors influencing economic growth. However, in this study, using an econometric model, the role of human capital and structural changes on economic growth were investigated simultaneously. The case study was conducted during the period of 1986-2015 for the MENA region countries. The results of the research showed that human capital (expenditures by the government in higher education) have a positive and significant effect on economic growth, but industrialization's structural changes have not been able to affect the economic growth of the region. However, the effect the interaction of human capital and structural changes on economic growth was insignificant. In other words, the expenditures on higher education in the countries under study has not been effective in the industrialization process. In addition, openness to trade and investment have a positive and significant effect on economic growth, but two variables of government size and population growth have a negative and no significant effect on economic growth.

Today, causal relationships between universities and regions indicate that if there is synergy between the university system and the regional system, both sides will benefit from the value added. The purpose of this study was to present a suitable and efficient model for analyzing the development of university-region relations. In this study, mixed-exploratory research design method was used. In the qualitative part, the content analysis method was used by interviewing 15 informants. In the quantitative part, the structural-interpretive modeling (ISM) approach was used. Since this approach is based on expert opinion, the opinions of 29 experts in the field of academia and region were used. The results led to the classification of factors affecting the development of university-region relationships and the design of a model for these factors. The results of this research lead to the rating of the factors affecting the development of university-region relations and designing a model based in these factors. The findings also showed that sustainable and research-based development, university-region relationship, and strategic and development-oriented management are the most important factors in development of the university – region interactive development.

The present study has identified the barriers of knowledge creation system by using a qualitative-explorative research approach at universities. In this research, 14 experts from the knowledge creation area were interviewed by semi-structured exploratory method and the information obtained from these interviews were analyzed through content analysis method. The findings showed the barriers of knowledge creation as following: faculty members did not have enough motivation to create new knowledge and they do not take the time to do basic and applied research. Furthermore, they are lacking the basic skills needed for knowledge creation: and knowledge sharing is not important to them. In addition, there is no appropriate organizational structure, and there is a lack of knowledge creation culture at the university. There is not enough support from university senior administrators for creating knowledge; there is not enough human resources development system; postgraduate studies have been neglected; there is insufficient communication at national and international levels; the knowledge network has not been designed and deployed; the interdisciplinary studies have not been carried out as needed; there is inadequate facilities and equipment (hardware and software); sufficient funds are not allocated to the university; and there are no specific policies for effective communication between industry and the university. Finally, the role of knowledge-creation has been neglected in university strategies and policies. These barriers are classified into three categories: organizational, personal, and support factors.

The aim of the present study was to describe, analyze and combine the presented analysis about factors influencing the development of university faculty members through meta-analysis of previously conducted research. The related written works such as thesis and articles registered in Irandoc, Magrian, SID and Nourmags published during 2008-2017 were reviewed. Of these, fifteen studies were selected for deep examination. Data analysis was done using SPSS, Excel and CMA2 software. In descriptive statistics, frequency and percentage frequency, and in inferential statistics, for calculating effect size, Hedge’ s g and fixed and random effect model were used. To determine the level of significance and combine effect sizes, Chi-square and Weiner T were used respectively. The Funnel Plot was used for bias publication. For its elimination, Duval & Tweedi fitness test was utilized for both fixed and random effect size. To determine the homogeneity of the studies, Q and I2 tests were used which revealed that they were not homogeneous. The calculated effect size for the studies under both the fixed effects model was 0. 612 and the random effects was 2. 253 that was statistically significant for the studied variable. Additionally, the findings of combination of Weiner T probability showed that there was a significant difference between the combined effect sizes. Finally, 112 factors that significantly influencing the development of faculty members were identified. Internal and individual factors had most frequencies than other factors. .

The purpose of this research was to conceptualize the phenomenon of bullying from the perspective of the faculty members of Tehran's comprehensive universities. Using Charm's constructivists approach, this research was carried out in the interpretative paradigm with a qualitative approach based on the research method of the grounded theory. In-depth unstructured informants and interviews were used to collect data. The research informants were selected by purposeful sampling strategies with maximum diversity and theoretical sampling. The research informants included 32 faculty members (assistant professors, associate professors and professors) of comprehensive universities in Tehran. The data were analyzed in three stages: initial, focal and theoretical coding. The research findings showed that the phenomenon of bullying in Iran's higher education has verbal and social dimensions. This phenomenon has emerged due to organizational and individual circumstances and has led to reactions such as avoidance, confrontation and acceptance. These reactions have been affected by the response of authorities, the resilience of individuals in the context of academic structure and culture, and have led to occupational, personal, social and economic vulnerabilities. The root of this phenomenon can be traced back to family, education, and general culture of the society. One of the policy solution is to turn bullying into a macro socio-structural discourse, to pay attention to administrators as the most important barriers to occurrence and exposure to the phenomenon, and to launch an appeal mechanism with structural power.