Identification of the Determinants of the Academic Functions Quality Based on the Glassick's Six Criteria for Scholarship

Background & Objective: The quality of functions and the academic environment of universities have been considered to be significant challenges in higher education, which have been addressed using several approaches. The present study aimed to assess the determinants of the quality of academic and scientific functions based on the Glassickchr('39')s six criteria for scholarship. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted with a mixed qualitative-quantitative approach. The qualitative segment was based on content analysis via semi-structured interviews with 20 higher education professionals in the four fields of medical sciences, humanities, basic sciences, and engineering. Data collection continued until data saturation, and data analysis was performed using the deductive reasoning method. In the quantitative segment, the face and content validity of the questionnaire was initially assessed from the perspective of five medical and higher education specialists. The construct validity of the researcher-made instrument was evaluated by 300 faculty members of Shiraz University and Shiraz University of Medical Sciences with the completion of 265 questionnaires. In addition, the reliability of the instrument was confirmed at the Cronbachchr('39')s alpha coefficient of 0.96, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed in SPSS version 22 and LISREL version 8.8. Results: In the qualitative content analysis, 153 open codes were summarized in six main classes, 13 intermediate components, and 29 items. In the EFA, the highest factor loading belonged to the chr('39')knowledge disseminationchr('39') items, such as the presence of an established mechanism for information distribution, recording and maintaining of knowledge and expertise, and individual beliefs for knowledge dissemination. The other EFA factors included effective results, preparedness, methodicalness, purposefulness, and self-criticism. The fit index of the CFA was also confirmed by the CFI, GFI, and NFI with the values of less than 0.90. Conclusion: In addition to established mechanisms, knowledge dissemination is influenced by latent factors such as trust, interaction, and internal commitment. Moreover, knowledge dissemination was most commonly affected by communication as it also has an influential factor in the development of other components due to its impact on the flow of knowledge and information in an organization.