Project Materials

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING MANAGEMENT & STAFF RELATIONSHIP IN TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

It is surprising that few institutions have policies to monitor or develop and maximise these beneficial synergies, considering the centrality of staff relationships, the almost universal assumption that institutions benefit management staff, and the importance of scholarship (J.M. consulting 200, p.16).

It is important for academic administrators and leaders to be aware of the factors that either foster connections between an institution’s management and the relationships among its employees or work to separate academic pursuits from one another (Locke, 2004, pp. 108) Institutional policymakers can find useful information in this paper to help them foster a positive working relationship between faculty and discipline-based research.

On the other hand, a higher education institution’s policies and procedures centre on fostering relationships between staff members and among staff members themselves.

The higher education academy’s stated mission is “assisting institutions in developing strategies to enhance the learning experience for students” (higher education and academy, 2005a.), and they want to make sure that any recommendations they make are grounded in solid research.

The question of “what is distinctive about higher education?” was, in the end, the most important one for national systems and institutions to decide. Higher education stands out because it helps students and society at large comprehend the intricacies of our interconnected world.

On the other hand, many faculty members’ personal beliefs and motivations are influenced by their respect for and belief in the importance of relationships with other members of society.

While there is clearly a lot of work going into making these principles a reality, it’s important to note that it’s not uniformly distributed, a lot of it is tacit, and many institutional policies aren’t well-developed and even counterproductive to nexus.

The long-term benefits of staff relationships on student learning and motivation to learn have been shown in more recent studies. Furthermore, the facts of mass higher education lead researchers to conclude that the connection is not inherent but rather must be methodically included into course work, as well as departmental, institutional, and national plans.

So, while the connection would have been easier to make in an era of smaller classes, more selective admissions, and teachers who had more time to devote to each student, those days are over.

“The main hope for relating a genuinely student-centered undergraduate education lies in re-engineering the enter academic institution of higher learning,” stated Paul Ramsden (2001), who was then pro-vice chancellor (learning and teaching) at the University of Sydney and is now chief executive of the Higher Education Academy.

It is implied by the use of the word “engineer” that the link is not something that happens by itself but rather needs to be planned, made, built, and introduced.

If the connection was already there, the word “reengineer” implies that a lot of “re-inventing” is required to make sure it stays there or, better yet, that it is ingrained in many other places and activities.

Consequently, there is a great deal that individuals, groups, departments, and even entire nations can do to strengthen these connections (Jenkins et al., 2003).

Statement Of The Problem

The mission statement emphasised the importance of maintaining a strong dedication to learning-based teaching and improving scholarship by establishing obvious connections between research, professional practice, and teaching. Unfortunately, the policy statement did a poor job of demonstrating how this objective was carried out.

As an example, the only time that the “application” of research to teaching was a criterion for appointment, continuation, promotion, performance evaluation, or study leave applications for senior lecturer promotion was when it was part of the teaching category.

Proposal for new course assessment forms, department review, and internal grants procedure did not include the linkage. We hypothesise that the majority of academic institutions would follow this pattern of isolating and rewarding individual components rather than the whole.

To some extent, the fact that there is no correlation between classroom instruction and student achievement may be explained by the nature of the academic environment. (Mash and Hattie, 2004, pp. 5–6, emphasis added).

Purpose Of The Study

The primary objective of this research is to identify ways in which tertiary institutions might raise the bar on teaching quality, administration, and student-teacher interactions.

Examine the role of institutional rewards in fostering a sense of shared responsibility for faculty and students’ academic success.

This study aims to examine staff-student interactions.

In order to assess the effectiveness of the faculty and how it impacts student learning.

The goal is to find out what other people can do to help keep the staff and students at universities on good terms.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Is it possible for the connection between the university’s administration and faculty to raise the bar for academic excellence?

How much can a university’s compensation structure encourage faculty to integrate classroom instruction with student learning?

Is it possible for the actions of college faculty to promote communication between faculty and students?

What role can the academic staff play in improving students’ study habits?

What measures may be taken to ensure that faculty and students at higher education institutions continue to have cordial relationships?

In order to enhance the relationship between management and personnel, what could be the obstacle?