Research Performance of Higher Education Institutions BIENVENIDO L

Vol 5 No.1 December 2007 ISSN: 2094-1064 Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7828/ljher.v5i1.6 Research Performance of Higher Education Institutions BIENVENIDO L. GREGORIO [email protected] Universidad de Zamboanga Final Revision Accepted: May 3, 2007 Abstract - Higher education institutions in Zamboanga Peninsula continue to have low participation in research among their members of the faculty, which in turn affects the research outputs of Research Centers (RCs). The study assessed the research performance and outputs of teachers and RCs among HEIs in Zamboanga City. Public and private schools have similar research performances in terms of the number of researches performed by each teacher-researcher; and with the number of researchers per research. In both cases however, HEIs Most of the researches can be classified as institutional, descriptive in type, mostly published in in-house journals and not peer reviewed. Utilization of research outputs is limited much as most researches are school-funded. CHEDRO and ZRCs lacked coordination and initiative to take the lead in building the culture of research among the HEIs in the city. Access to foreign funding, international refereed journals and genuine utilization of research outputs are for the moment marginal. Concluding, the HEIs in Zamboanga City have relatively low research outputs even more among the colleges. Key words - Research performance, research centers, peer review INTRODUCTION Research is one of the tri-fold functions of every higher education institution. Like instruction and community services, research holds a significant role in the furtherance 63 Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research of the teaching-learning process. Despite this significance, research has not been well understood or accepted as a component of higher instruction by some members of the academe. Factors like teachers’ teaching loads and lack of administrative support are common reasons among teachers in teaching-based higher education institutions not to get involved in research works. Empirical research has not yet been widely considered as part and parcel of the teaching function of teachers in higher education institutions. The Commission on Higher Education made research a criterion in the grant of university status as well as in the conferment of de-regulated and autonomous status. CHED Memorandum Order Number 8, series of 2000, was issued to further the role of research among higher education institutions by creating Zonal Research Centers or ZRCs in the country and providing subsidy to Zonal Centers in the pursuit of research undertaking following the adoption of the National Higher Education Research Agenda or NHERA. Despite this policy, only twelve (12) higher education institutions qualified as Zonal Research Centers. For Region IX, Mindanao State University-Iligan Institute of Technology is designated as Zonal Research Center despite its being outside the political subdivision of the Zamboanga Peninsula and the presence of three (3) universities in Zamboanga City. Higher Education Institutions in Zamboanga City have yet to begin establishing their Research Centers (RCs) or Research Offices (ROs) to institutionalize research in their priority programs. To do this, each institution has to harness the best talents among its members of the academe and instill capability building to sow the seeds for the Culture of Research, a task that requires investment in human resource. Evaluation of research outputs has been crucially crafted in such a way as to make research productivity more relevant and useful. Research outputs must impact society by the generation of more concrete and empirical explanations to knowledge formation or theories that have practical applications. Because research capability among teachers and financial resources are scarce commodities, only few higher education institutions in the country could be acclaimed as research-based institutions. At present, still many of the higher education institutions are teaching-based although efforts have been expended to cope with the requirements of CHED on research especially the provision on research in the IQuAME. For this reason, there is a need to take an empirical look at the higher education institutions’ status in terms of research performance of their research centers and faculty. FRAMEWORK The study adopts the following theories explained below in an effort to help in the contextualization of the research framework and variables used in the study. Capability and Performance. In terms of capability and performance as variables of this study, the research adopts the Skinner’s Operant Conditioning Theory of 64 Research Performance of Higher Education Institutions B.L. Gregorio Learning. Performance of researchers is the result of processed inputs that lead them to generate certain research outputs. Therefore, it is very significant that capability building must be an essential phase of any research effort. Skinner (2007) developed his theory in the 1930s in an attempt to analyze how animals and humans alike undergo the process of learning. Focus was, however, made on the learned behavior rather than on cognitive learning that makes his theory a behavioral approach. The theory on learning espoused by Skinner (2007) equally applies in research capability building and performance much in the same way as in any learning process for which the theory was first developed. The theory is best explained following the five (5) basic Principles of Operant Conditioning, namely Reinforcement; Punishment; Shaping; Extinction; and Generalization-Discrimination. Accordingly, learning starts with reinforcement. By reinforcement is meant that learners are introduced to a learning situation by way of experience. Experiences must be as pleasant as possible so as to strengthen or sustain the performance of similar behavior. Huberman (1995), explaining reinforcement as used by Skinner and Thorndike, shows two (2) types of reinforcement - Positive Reinforcement and Negative Reinforcement. It is positive when a pleasant stimulus is presented every time the expected behavior is performed. It is negative when certain behavior is discouraged. Turnbull (1992) explains, however, that there are two (2) components of Negative Reinforcement. The escape component of Negative Reinforcement suggests that certain behavior is performed to escape experiencing unpleasant stimulus while the avoidance or omission component of Negative Reinforcement suggests that certain behavior is performed to avoid experiencing unpleasant consequences. Applied in the area of research performance, the theory explains that the reward system in the institutional policy may be an agent of reinforcement by which researchers are motivated to undertake research works. It is, however, more of a positive rather than a negative reinforcement. As in theory, motivation in practice is important to lead people to undertake research. This comes in forms of additional monetary incentives and increase in academic rank of teachers in college. But as a prelude to actual performance, teacher-researchers must first have enough grounding to undertake research works whether through formal studies or training. Fuhrman (1992) emphasizes that punishment performs learning role. Punishment as agent of learning means that a behavior is weakened by delivering an unpleasant stimulus or consequence as a result of the continuous performance of the discouraged behavior. It comes in the same mode as reinforcement. It is a Positive Punishment when behavior is reduced through the instigation of unpleasant stimulus like inflicting pain for a wrong act done. It is a Negative Punishment when the behavior is reduced through removing the pleasant stimulus as a result of the continuous behavior like taking out a privilege previously granted. This principle in Operant conditioning is 65 Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research neither particularly relevant in research capability building nor in actual research performance because non-performance in research is not a punishable omission. Shaping as a principle in Operant Conditioning means introducing the simplest things where humans have never encountered before. From the simplest idea, learners are introduced to the more complex of things until they get mastery of the learned behavior. This kind of principle is used to teach children in the preschool level to prepare them for higher school tasks. When applied to research, this is a very good preparation in capability building although since researchers are professionals, they are presumed to have prior knowledge of research even though they may not have the experience in performing it extensively. Extinction as another principle in Operant Conditioning means the reduction of reinforcement causing the decline in the learned behavior. Huberman (1992) explains that learned behavior is not permanent. As such, its performance is diminished over time with the reduction of the required reinforcement that first led to that behavior. Forgetting replaces memory of the thing, reduces behavior. As in any learning process, constant and regular capability building in research is essential until mastery is achieved. Research is an applied science that means theories learned must be applied in actual research performance; hence, constant practice is essential to avoid the loss of mastery needed in actual performance. Re-training is an important strategy in this case. Generalization as another

Load more