CONDITIONS SURROUNDING PUBLICATION PERFORMANCE OF FACULTY MEMBERS OF TWO SELECTED HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS IN EASTERN VISAYAS
Niño Antonio Perante Villalino
The quality of research outputs disseminated by researchers is one of the factors that affect a country’s development (Lacanilao, 2009). As Kearney (2009) stated, the scientific knowledge generated should be placed at the service of development by applying it in real situations. Therefore, a research process should not end up to the gathering and interpretation of data only; it should span until the publication of research results inasmuch as research is not meant to be kept. In the Philippines, however, only a small fraction of the research outputs are published as scientific papers (Lacanilao, 2009). In fact, the Philippines lags behind other countries in the Southeast Asia in terms of research publication. According to Bagarinao (n.d., as cited by Lacanilao, 2009), in 1980, Philippines lagged behind Thailand and Malaysia but ahead of Indonesia and Vietnam in the number of research publication. However, Indonesia overtook the Philippines in the mid 1990s; Vietnam did so in the mid 2000s.
In Region 8, there has been a wide difference in the number of articles in journals and publications indexed by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and Scopus among faculty of State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) in the last five years. Based on the data from the Commission on Higher Education-Zonal Research Center (CHED-ZRC), the number of publications in peer-reviewed journals rose from 34 in 2006 to 41 in 2007. It dropped to 38 in 2008, then to 24 and 20 in 2009 and 2010, respectively. This low publication performance among faculty members of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the country is the reason why only three universities made it to the 2010 Top 200 Asian Universities (Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd, 2010).
In the Philippine context, there is still a sketchy explanation why researchers do not publish research results. Also, there is no visual model yet that can identify and explain the conditions surrounding the publication performance of faculty members of HEIs in the Philippines, specifically in Region 8. This study aimed to fill in this gap and generate a theoretical model to answer the research question: Why is it that some researchers publish their research results while others do not? This study is important because the theoretical model that could be generated could serve as basis for academes and funding agencies to strengthen their policies on improving faculty members’ publication performance.
This study followed the grounded theory tradition. According to Bitsch (2005), a grounded theory project usually does not begin with a theory from which the hypotheses are deducted. It starts with a research question, and what is applicable to this question is allowed to emerge during the research process. Glaser (2004) emphasized that in grounded theory studies, the data are not forced to fit into the theory; rather the theory is inducted from the data. Furthermore, he explained that grounded theory is developed by collecting scientific facts, constantly verifying it, and modifying the concepts and relationships to attain its fit, relevance, and workability.
Following the grounded study design, the study was conducted in the main campuses of two HEIs in Eastern Visayas. These two universities are research universities. University 1 is an established research university, while University 2 is a developing one. Prior to the conduct of the study, the researcher sought endorsement from the director of CHED-ZRC Region 8. The endorsement letter was attached to the researcher’s letter addressed to the presidents of the two universities. Upon approval of the university presidents, the official roster of faculty members of the HEI was secured from the human resource office. This...
Cited: Bitsch, V. (Spring 2005). Qualitative research: A grounded theory example and evaluation criteria. Journal of Agribusiness, 23(1), 75-91.
Chiovitti, R.F. & Piran, N. (2003). Rigour and grounded theory research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44(4), 427-435.
Creswell, J.W. (1998) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. USA: Sage Publications.
Glaser, B.G. (January 2004). Naturalist inquiry and grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 5(7).
Glaser, B.G. & Holton, J. (May 2004). Remodeling grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 5(2).
Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd. 2010 (n.d.) Asian university ranking- top 200. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/asian-university-rankings/2010
Wassenaar, J. (March 2006). Publication performance of individual scientists in consolidated versus non-consolidated teams with different team status level. Undergraduate manuscript, University of Twente, Netherlands.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document