Academic profession in Serbia Survey 2012 – Initial results Predrag Lažetić, Ivana Živadinović

Academic profession in SerbiaSurvey 2012 – Initial results

Predrag Lažetić, Ivana ŽivadinovićCentre for Education Policy, Belgrade

2

Outline1. Background2. Methodology

- Questionnaire

- Sample3. Findings

- Basic facts

- Work situation and academic activities

- Research

- Management and administration4. Further steps

3

I Background• Research project – Socially responsible university

(January - October 2012)• Two parts: a)Survey of the academic profession with the focus on social

engagement of academics b)Series of interviews on discourse about the idea of

university and its role in society

Survey on the representative sample of academic staff at Serbian universities (both private and public)

Variables exploring the behaviors and attitudes of academics.

Some variables comparable with CAP data and research. More extensive sections exploring social engagement of

academic staff.

4

1. Socio-biographic background

2. Social engagement

3. Work situation and academic

activities

4. Research

5. Management and administration

II Methodology

2.1 Questionnaire – 5 major parts

5

• two-stage stratified random sample• n = 646• responce rate: 52.48%

2.2 Sample

University %Singidunum

University 4.2

University of

Belgrade42.9

University of

Kragujevac8.8

University of Nis 9.8

University of Novi

Pazar4.5

University of Novi

Sad27.9

University of Arts 2.0

II Methodology

6

III Findings3.1 Basic characteristics

n %

Juniors 260 40,6

Seniors 381 59,4

Total 641 100

Academic rankGender

7

3.1 Career mobility

III Findings

Changed

Faculty (%)

Changed University

(%)

Changed Country (%)

No 80.4 85.1 95.3

Yes 19.6 14.9 4.7

Large majority of academic staff obtained their BA, MA and PhD degrees at the same faculty, same university and same country

8

3.2. Work situation and academic activities

III Findings

DE IT NL NO PT UK SR Higher education institutions 10,2 19,7 14,2 12,5 13,2 12,7 15

Research institutes 5,7 5,8 6,0 7,6 5,2 4,6 9,5Other governmental and public sector institutions

5,4 6,3 5,2 6,9 7,0 7,6 8,2

Industry or private sectors institutions 3,7 3,8 6,1 4,2 5,9 5,5 4,5

Self employment 6,3 6,2 6,2 6,1 8,8 6,0 9,9

Duration of Employment in Different Sectors (mean)

9

III Findings3.3. Work situation and academic activities

FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SR

Full-time employed 81 69 97 72 90 86 87 89

Part-time employed 5 27 2 25 8 10 10 8.4

Part-time with payment according to work tasks

0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0

Other 13 5 1 2 2 4 2 2.4

Current Full-time and Part-time Employment (%)


FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRNone (*) 100 43 77 80 72 79 80 61In addition to your current employer, you also work at another research institute or higher education institution

0 45 8 6 13 4 7 13

In addition to your current employer, you also work at a business organization outside of academe

0 5 2 3 3 2 2 8

In addition to your current employer, you also work at a non-profit organization or government entity outside of academe

0 3 4 4 4 2 4 4.8

In addition to your current employer, you are also self-employed

0 12 7 7 8 8 6 2.5

Other 0 1 6 2 0 5 5 11

Additional Employment and Remunerated Work (%)


FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRTo a management position in your higher education/research institution

21 32 26 21 39 37 28 12

To an academic position in another higher education/research institute within the country

33 53 29 50 40 44 62 13

To an academic position in another country 28 27 39 44 16 10 27 18

To work outside higher education/research institutes

49 34 31 21 20 29 22 19

Total 130 146 125 137 116 120 140 100Count (n) 326 394 224 115 151 55 377 646

Action taken for Major Changes in Job (percent of respondents who reported major changes in their job; multiple responses)

12



Very much improved and improved 27 9 13 19 15 31 15 62

Remained same 39 37 31 40 43 27 25 18

Got worse 34 54 55 40 42 42 60 21

Arithmetic mean 3,1 3,6 3,6 3,3 3,3 3,2 3,6 2,5

Perceived Changes in Working Conditions in Higher Education (percent; arithmetic mean)

Nema statistički značajnih razlika u odnosu na pol i na akademsko zvanje

13



High 67 57 64 75 68 56 45 82

Medium 24 28 29 17 23 27 36 12

Low 10 16 7 9 9 17 18 6.2

Arithmetic mean

2,3 2,5 2,2 2,1 2,2 2,6 2,7 2,4

Job satisfaction (%)

U Srbiji nema statistički značajnih razlika u odnosu na pol i na akademsko zvanjeZnačajna korelacije jednino sa neto primanjima

14



Teaching 13,6 11,6 18,1 18,5 11,6 19,7 16,0 17

Research 20,2 18,3 17,3 14,5 14,6 13,2 13,5 18

Service 2,0 6,1 3,7 1,9 1,3 1,7 1,4 6.7

Administration 4,0 3,2 4,1 5,5 4,2 4,1 9,6 5.3Other academic activities 2,4 2,4 2,3 2,8 2,1 2,5 3,4 7

Total hours per week 42,2 41,6 45,5 43,2 33,7 41,2 43,8 45,3

Count (n) 935 915 1635 310 662 398 687 646

Hours Spent on Academic Activities when Classes are in Session (arithmetic mean of hours per week)

15


FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRYou spend more time than you would like teaching basic skills due to student deficiencies

42 53 51 53 36 64 65 44

You are encouraged to improve your instructional skills in response to teaching evaluations

12 32 60 49 49 37 54 73

You incorporate discussions of values and ethics into your course content

45 40 38 46 41 71 70 54

Grades in your courses strictly reflect levels of student achievement

91 62 80 57 75 54 82 72

Positive Views and Activities About Teaching (percent; responses 1 and 2)

16

3.4 ResearchIII Findings

FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRServed as a member of national/ international scientific committees/ boards/bodies

32 26 63 50 47 49 30 56

Served as a peer reviewer (e.g. for journals, research sponsors, institutional evaluations)

59 47 67 82 66 61 81 57.1

Served as an editor of journals/book series 20 34 12 29 15 22 23 23.

5Served as an elected officer or leader in professional/academic associations/ organizations

37 36 14 23 19 30 15 28.9

Service Activities in Current Academic Year

17

3.4 Research

FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRPrimarily in teaching 7 8 2 5 2 6 9 14

In both, but leaning towards teaching

14 22 22 17 16 40 23 45

In both, but leaning towards research

43 41 64 52 51 47 41 28

Primarily in research 36 29 12 26 31 7 27 14

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Count (n) 1034 1003 1691 372 879 297 793 627

Preferences for Teaching/Research (%)

III Findings

18

3.3 Administration and management

FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRAt the level of the department or similar unit

36 54 43 77 35 44 37 42

At the level of the faculty, school or similar unit

12 18 22 33 12 20 19 17

At the institutional level 6 7 7 8 11 9 9 4

High Personal Influence at Institution Level (%; responses 1 and 2)

III Findings

19

3.3 Administration and management

FI DE IT NL NO PT UK SRA strong emphasis on the institution's mission 55 36 20 51 41 51 58 44

Good communication between management and academics

31 19 26 23 33 32 21 61

A top-down management style 52 44 52 54 29 49 68 64

Count (n) 969 925 1677 301 840 360 691 646

Strong Views of Institutional Management and Administration (%; responses 1 and 2)

III Findings

20

III Findings3.4 Management and administration

Very

influential

Somewhat

influential

Not influential

How influential are you, personally, in helping to shape key academic policies at your department?

43,0 27,2 29,7

How influential are you, personally, in helping to shape key academic policies at your faculty?

17,7 17,4 65,0

How influential are you, personally, in helping to shape key academic policies at at your university?

4,3 6,1 89,6

Influence (%)

21

3.4 Management and administrationIII Findings

Teaching Research Administration

No one 4,2 7,3 28,2Self evaluation 28,0 29,9 19,3External reviewers 2,3 36,7 2,9Your students 77,1 2,9 4,0Faculty management 24,9 22,0 29,6Members of other departments within the faculty

4,5 9,3 3,1

Head of department 22,9 22,9 20,9Peers in department or unit 21,8 26,8 13,6

By whom is your teaching, research and administration regularly evaluated?

3.4 Management and administrationIII Findings

I agree

I do not know

I do not agree

There is a clear development strategy at my institution. 45,1 29,8 25,1

There is a strong orientation towards increasing the students performance and completion rate at my institution.

49,1 36,2 14,7

There is a strong orientation towards faculty income increasing at my institution. 48,9 36,7 14,4

Record keeping about students presence, pre-examination activities and exams takes too much time to teachers /assistants and associates at my institution.

54,2 24,5 21,3

Faculty management fulfills their tasks successfully at my institution. 58,7 27,8 13,6

Information flow is good at my institution. 49,7 25,2 25,2I am regularly informed about events at the faculty. 68,3 21,4 10,3

Title

d

23

IV Further steps

• Further analysis - Influence of the academic rank,

discipline, institution, gender etc.

• Further comparative analysis

d

24

THANK YOU!!!

Predrag LažetićCentre for Education [email protected]

Academic profession in Serbia Survey 2012 – Initial results Predrag Lažetić, Ivana Živadinović

Documents

Transcript of Academic profession in Serbia Survey 2012 – Initial results Predrag Lažetić, Ivana Živadinović