Iranian Higher Education
Volume 13, Issue 3 (2021)
ihej 2021, 13(3): 44-64 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Yamani Douzi Sorkhabi M, Goldasteh A, khosravi H, Mohammadi Moein M. Comparison of strategic planning documents in selected public universities of the country. ihej 2021; 13 (3) :44-64
URL: http://ihej.ir/article-1-1795-en.html
URL: http://ihej.ir/article-1-1795-en.html
1- Shahid Beheshti University, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Department of Higher Education
2- University of Science and Culture, Department of Educational Sciences
3- Shahid Beheshti University, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Department of Higher Education ,H.khosravi5970@yahoo.com
2- University of Science and Culture, Department of Educational Sciences
3- Shahid Beheshti University, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Department of Higher Education ,
Abstract: (2190 Views)
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to compare the official documents of strategic planning in selected public universities of the country in order to answer these two main questions: what are the differences and similarities between the formal and content elements of strategic planning documents of the selected public universities? Is there a unique design in these documents that fits the specific characteristics of their intended university? The research uses a mixed method. In the qualitative section, the content analysis method was used to review and analyze university documents and patterns, and the quantitative method (descriptive statistics) was used to examine the matrix of differences and similarities between program documents and existing planning patterns. The sample universities were 10 including Shahid Beheshti, Tabriz, Kharazmi, Semnan, Shiraz, Amir Kabir Industrial, Isfahan Industrial, Sharif Industrial, Kashan and Mazandaran university. The selected strategic planning models were 11 including Mintzberg, Barker & Smith, Johnson, Nostridge, New Orleans, University Association, Claire, Cleland and King, Steiner, Wisconsin, Kaufman, and Herman model. The findings show that in examining the documents, there are different differences between the content elements of the mentioned universities, while in terms of examining the formal elements, there are many similarities between them. And this trend is also true for selected planning patterns. Therefore, it is concluded that none of the surveyed universities, especially in terms of content elements, have designed a specific model for their university, but have adapted them. And this adaptability can challenge the success of universities in enforcing regulatory program documents.
Keywords: Strategic planning documents, strategic planning models, higher education planning, comparative study, public universities
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |