高校教师科研与教学关系的实证研究

An Empirical Study on Relationship between Research and Teaching of College and University Faculty

采用"高校教师工作绩效与胜任特征问卷"调查了442名高校教师,旨在了解科研与教学之间的关系。结果发现:高校教师教学效能与科研绩效之间是相关而非独立的关系(r=0.35,p<.001),通过非递归结构方程模型发现,科研与教学之间是单向的影响关系,即科研绩效显著正向影响教学效能,而非相反;对高校教师教学效能影响最大的是沟通合作能力(β=.58),其次是科研绩效(β=0.18),二者共可解释教学效能变异的44%。群组比较发现,普通本科高校与高职(专科)院校教师在结构模型M3的路径系数上无显著差异。研究支持高校教师科研与教学之间是"源"与"流"的关系。

There is much debate about the relationship between research and teaching among researchers on whether they are independent or related,positively related or negatively related,with one-way or two-way influence.To study the relationship between research and teaching,442 university and college teachers were investigated in this study using“Faculty Job Performance and Competency Self-evaluation Questionnaire”.The questionnaire includes four factors which are self-evaluated teaching effectiveness,research performance,competency of communication and cooperation,and competency of creativity and innovation.The composite reliability of the above four factors in this study are.86,.87,.88 and.86 respectively,which indicates good model quality.Confirmatory factor analysis is used to test common method biases,and the model fit indices show that the 4-factor model fits the best and there are no serious biases in this study.More specifically,this study focuses on the following four questions:The first question is about whether the relationship between research performance and teaching effectiveness is independent or related.Through SEM model,the results show that faculties’self-evaluated teaching effectiveness and research performance are related,the path coefficient was.35(p<.001)no matter which variable is predictor,which indicates that they can account for 12%variance of each other.Therefore,the independent hypothesis of research and teaching is rejected.The second question is about the influence direction(one-way vs.two-way)between research performance and teaching effectiveness.Through SEM non-recursive model analysis,a one-way significant positive path is found from research performance to teaching effectiveness and not the vice.The path coefficient from research performance to teaching effectiveness is 0.24(p<0.001),while the coefficient from teaching effectiveness to research performance is only-0.09(p=0.303).Therefore,the result confirms the one-way influence direction from research to teaching.The third question is about which variable is more influential when using both teacher competency and research performance to predict teaching effectiveness.The results show that research performance and competency of communication and cooperation can account for 44%variance of teaching effectiveness,while the standardized path weight of the former(β=0.18,p<.001)is smaller than the latter(β=0.58,p<.001).The competency of creativity and innovation has indirect influence on teaching effectiveness via research performance,and the total standardized indirect effect is 0.10.Therefore,the results confirm that competency of communication and cooperation is more influential than research performance in predicting teaching effectiveness.The fourth question is to test whether the SEM structural path weights are same between 4-year university faculty and 3-year vocational college faculty.The results show that there is no significant group difference in the structural weights between faculty of these two kinds of institutions.The results indicate that the relationships between the concepts in the SEM model may reflect the common law of higher education.In conclusion,this study indicates that research performance and teaching effectiveness do relate and the influence direction is one-way from the former to the latter.The effect of competency of communication and cooperation on teaching effectiveness is bigger than that of research performance.The relationships between teacher competency,research performance and teaching effectiveness show no difference between 4-year university faculty and 3-year vocational college faculty.This study supports that the relationship between research and teaching is as with“fountain source”and“water”.