Iranian Higher Education
Volume 15, Issue 1 (2023)
ihej 2023, 15(1): 17-37 |
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:
Davarpanah S H, Hoveida R, Yousof Boroujerdi R. Interpretative-Structural Analysis of Academic Misbehavior Indicators in Iranian Higher Education: A Mixed-Methods Study. ihej 2023; 15 (1) : 2
URL: http://ihej.ir/article-1-1992-en.html
URL: http://ihej.ir/article-1-1992-en.html
1- Assistant Professor of Higher education Management, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan. Isfahan, Iran. , h.davarpanah@edu.ui.ac.ir
2- Associate Professor of Educational Management, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan. Isfahan, Iran.
3- Assistant Professor of Educational Management, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan. Isfahan, Iran.
2- Associate Professor of Educational Management, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan. Isfahan, Iran.
3- Assistant Professor of Educational Management, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan. Isfahan, Iran.
Abstract: (1877 Views)
Introduction: The University is a key and determining factor in the progress and development of any country. One of the biggest challenges that threaten the well-being of this pillar is the detrimental phenomenon of academic misbehavior. To prevent and mitigate the impacts of this problem, which has gripped the higher education system; It is crucial to identify indicators of academic misbehavior. This research aims to conduct a comprehensive interpretive structural analysis of the indicators of academic misbehavior in Iranian higher education.
Methodology: This study employs a mixed-method sequential exploratory design, with data collected in two stages (qualitative and quantitative). In the qualitative stage, information was gathered through unstructured interviews with experts and analysis of expert’s speeches and interviews. Initially, unstructured interviews were conducted with 17 targeted experts and university faculty members using purposive-snowball sampling and the "theoretical saturation" criterion. In the second step, 12 speeches and interviews with experts from various media platforms were purposefully selected and subjected to thematic analysis. In the quantitative stage, a questionnaire was developed and administered to a panel of 8 academic staff members to collect data. Interpretive structural modeling (ISM) was employed to establish the relationships between the indicators and derive their interpretive structural model.
Findings: The results revealed that the priority indicators of academic misbehavior within the higher education system are as follows: Selling university degrees, bullying, scientific exploitation, negative team building, favoritism, cheating, and scientific plagiarism, and the establishment of markets for the sale of scientific products, and corrupt localizability socializability and false identification.
Conclusion: In the present study, with the structural-interpretive approach, indicators of misbehavior in the Iranian higher education system were prioritized in five levels. So in the first level, the indicator “false identification” was the most effective, and in the fifth level, the three indicators “Selling university degrees”, “bullying” and “scientific exploitation” were the most effective. In general, By identifying and prioritizing these indicators, this study provides a better understanding of the issue and facilitates the adoption of appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate academic misbehavior.
Methodology: This study employs a mixed-method sequential exploratory design, with data collected in two stages (qualitative and quantitative). In the qualitative stage, information was gathered through unstructured interviews with experts and analysis of expert’s speeches and interviews. Initially, unstructured interviews were conducted with 17 targeted experts and university faculty members using purposive-snowball sampling and the "theoretical saturation" criterion. In the second step, 12 speeches and interviews with experts from various media platforms were purposefully selected and subjected to thematic analysis. In the quantitative stage, a questionnaire was developed and administered to a panel of 8 academic staff members to collect data. Interpretive structural modeling (ISM) was employed to establish the relationships between the indicators and derive their interpretive structural model.
Findings: The results revealed that the priority indicators of academic misbehavior within the higher education system are as follows: Selling university degrees, bullying, scientific exploitation, negative team building, favoritism, cheating, and scientific plagiarism, and the establishment of markets for the sale of scientific products, and corrupt localizability socializability and false identification.
Conclusion: In the present study, with the structural-interpretive approach, indicators of misbehavior in the Iranian higher education system were prioritized in five levels. So in the first level, the indicator “false identification” was the most effective, and in the fifth level, the three indicators “Selling university degrees”, “bullying” and “scientific exploitation” were the most effective. In general, By identifying and prioritizing these indicators, this study provides a better understanding of the issue and facilitates the adoption of appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate academic misbehavior.
Article number: 2
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |