Evaluation of the Integration of Teaching, Research, and Outreach Processes at UNIANDES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf2024.633Keywords:
institutional management, integration, evaluation, optimization, academic processesAbstract
Introduction: The integration of core processes in higher education institutions has been identified as a critical factor for enhancing academic and social impact. The present research focused on evaluating the efficiency in the integration of teaching, research, and community engagement functions at the Universidad Regional Autónoma de Los Andes.
Method: A quantitative approach was adopted, and the Analytic Hierarchy Process method was applied to integrate and weight relevant criteria based on the perceptions of administrators, faculty, students, and administrative staff. A structured survey was designed to collect data on the equity of workload distribution, the quality of research, participation in community engagement projects, and satisfaction with resource allocation. The information was processed using specialized software, generating comparison matrices that enabled the identification of priorities and the development of a ranking of improvement alternatives.
Conclusions: The results revealed that the distribution of workload exhibited imbalances that favored teaching to the detriment of research and community engagement. It was evidenced that the resources available for research were insufficient and that the integration of community engagement did not reach the desired level. The evaluation by experts established that the reassignment of workload emerged as the most viable strategy, followed by the strengthening of research resources and the restructuring of community engagement programs. It was observed that optimizing the integration of core processes requires structural changes and a reconfiguration of the distribution of responsibilities.
References
1. Aguiar-Melians G, Baute-Álvarez LM. La integración de los procesos sustantivos universitarios desde el proceso extensionista: una mirada a la teoría: Array. Maest y Soc [Internet]. 2020;17(3):454–67. Available from: https://maestroysociedad.uo.edu.cu/index.php/MyS/article/view/5213 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47189/rcct.v20i27.388
2. González-Cruz E, Hernández-Pérez G, Fernández-Clúa M de J, Padrón-Soroa SF. Auditoría de gestión de procesos sustantivos universitarios. Ing Ind [Internet]. 2015;36(2):151–62. Available from: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S1815-59362015000200005&script=sci_arttext
3. Álvarez Gómez GA, Viteri Moya JR, Viteri Intriago DA, Estupiñán Ricardo J. Integración de los procesos sustantivos para la mejora de la calidad del aprendizaje. Conrado [Internet]. 2021;17(80):21–7. Available from: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S1990-86442021000300021&script=sci_arttext&tlng=pt
4. Tolozano-Benítez R, Caicedo-Quiroz R, Carlin-Chávez E. Cultura investigativa y su relación con los procesos sustantivos universitarios integrados. Eur Public Soc Innov Rev [Internet]. 2024;9:1–18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-1805 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-1805
5. González IA, Fernández AJR, Gómez GAÁ. Diagnóstico de la gestión universitaria para la integración de los procesos sustantivos en la Universidad Regional Autónoma de Los Andes, Ecuador. Rev Inf Científica [Internet]. 2024;103(1 Sup):4860. Available from: https://revinfcientifica.sld.cu/index.php/ric/article/view/4860
6. Monge-Hernández C, Méndez-Garita NI, González-Moreno M. Barriers to the Institutionalization of University Extension: Experience of the Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica. Rev Electrónica Educ [Internet]. 2021;25(1):393–416. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-1.21 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-1.21
7. Saborido Loidi JR, Ortiz RA. La integración de la Universidad: experiencias de Cuba. Rev Cuba Educ Super [Internet]. 2018;37(3). Available from: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S0257-43142018000300017&script=sci_arttext
8. Ramos-Monge EL, Llinàs-Audet X, Barrena-Martínez J. Drivers and barriers of University Social Responsibility: integration into strategic plans. World Rev Entrep Manag Sustain Dev [Internet]. 2019;15(1–2):174–201. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1504/WREMSD.2019.098475 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/WREMSD.2019.10019894
9. Koryakina T, Sarrico CS, Teixeira PN. Third mission activities: university managers’ perceptions on existing barriers. Eur J High Educ [Internet]. 2015;5(3):316–30. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2015.1044544 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2015.1044544
10. Flores JA, Pernía ED. Tendencias globales que marcan el desarrollo de la educación superior en el Ecuador: pertinencia, regionalización y expansión de la oferta académica. Univ Rev Ciencias Soc y Humanas [Internet]. 2018;(29):217–39. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17163/uni.n29.2018.10 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17163/uni.n29.2018.10
11. Cruz CRN, Álvarez GV, Peña CRN. Perfeccionamiento de la estimulación a docentes en universidades: experiencias en universidades de Cuba y Ecuador. RILCO DS Rev Desarro sustentable, Negocios, Emprend y Educ [Internet]. 2023;5(49):51–66. Available from: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9213263 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51896/rilcods.v5i49.352
12. Pereira LG, Vallina MLB, Velásquez LMC, Quispe S del RL. Estrategia para desarrollar competencias profesionales en la educación superior a través de la integración de procesos sustantivos. REFCalE Rev Electrónica Form y Calid Educ ISSN 1390-9010 [Internet]. 2020;1–22. Available from: https://refcale.uleam.edu.ec/index.php/refcale/article/view/3215
13. Martínez-Fernández CN, Gaudiano EJG. Las políticas para la sustentabilidad de las Instituciones de Educación Superior en México: entre el debate y la acción. Rev la Educ Super [Internet]. 2015;44(174):61–74. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resu.2015.06.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resu.2015.06.002
14. Al Rawashdeh AZ, Mohammed EY, Al Arab AR, Alara M, Al-Rawashdeh B. Advantages and disadvantages of using e-learning in university education: Analyzing students’ perspectives. Electron J E-learning [Internet]. 2021;19(3):107–17. Available from: https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.19.3.2168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.19.3.2168
15. Rosario JPL. Transformación del docente en el siglo XXI: Integración de las TIC y su influencia sobre la educación primaria. Rev Arbitr Orinoco Pensam Y Prax [Internet]. 2024;14(3):40–52. Available from: https://revistaorinocopyp.org.ve/index.php/home/article/view/38
16. Páez DD, Díaz DÁ, Hernández CS, Miranda JRC, Sotolongo SM. Gestión de gobierno basado en el conocimiento, la ciencia, la tecnología y la innovación. J Sci Metrics Eval [Internet]. 2023;1(1):82–107. Available from: https://doi.org/10.69821/JoSME.v1iI.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.69821/JoSME.v1iI.6
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Iruma Alfonso González, Ariel José Romero Fernández (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
