The Impact of the Third Mission on Teaching and Research Performance: Evidence From Academic Scholars in an Emerging Country

SAGE Open - Tập 11 Số 4 - 2021
Anh Nguyen-Quoc1, Minh Thang Le2, Hiep‐Hung Pham3,4
1University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University Hanoi, Hanoi, Vietnam
2Hanoi University of Science and Technology, Hanoi, Vietnam
3EdLab Asia Educational Research and Development Centre, Hanoi, Vietnam
4Phu Xuan University, Hue, Vietnam

Tóm tắt

Despite the plethora of empirical evidence on the associations between the third mission of academic scholars (i.e., academic engagement, academic commercialization, and public engagement) and their performance regarding two other missions (teaching and research), we have not known much about such relationships in the context of emerging countries such as Vietnam. To examine this problem, we delivered a survey with 245 Vietnamese academic scholars. Findings extracted from exploratory factor analysis revealed that the third mission of Vietnamese academic scholars might be divided into two distinct factors: (i) academic engagement and commercialization and (ii) public engagement and extra work. Subsequently, results of multiple regression revealed that while both academic engagement and commercialization, public engagement and extra work, as well as the interaction of these two factors, have positive impacts on research performance, only the second factor has a positive impact on teaching performance. This study extended the current mixed understandings on the associations among the three missions of academic scholars with evidence from an emerging country such as Vietnam. This study also provides implications for stakeholders, including policymakers, university leaders, and industry practitioners.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Abdi H., Williams L. J. (2010). Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational Statistics, 2(4), 433–459. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.101

Autio E. (1997). New, technology-based firms in innovation networks symplectic and generative impacts. Research Policy, 26(3), 263–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(96)00906-7

Azoulay P., Ding W., Stuart T. (2007). The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4), 599–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2006.05.015

Bentley P., Kyvik S. (2011). Academic staff and public communication: A survey of popular science publishing across 13 countries. Public Understanding of Science, 20(1), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510384461

Blagden D. (2019). Politics, policy, and the U.K. Impact agenda: The promise and pitfalls of academic engagement with government. International Studies Perspectives, 20(1), 84–111. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/eky007

Bozeman B., Gaughan M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Research Policy, 36(5), 694–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.007

Brooks H., Randazzese L. P. (1999). University-Industry relations: The next Four Years and beyond. In Branscomb L. M., Keller J. (Eds.), Investing in innovation: Creating and innovation policy that works (pp. 361–399). MIT press. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/University-Industry-Relations%3A-The-Next-Four-Years-Brooks-Randazzese/971d8302a5bc0ae1e3f71bc733ee1d7d2e7a9d61

Browne M. W., Cudeck R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005

Byrne B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/structural-equation-modeling-with-eqs-and-eqswindows/book4319

10.1007/978-1-4419-7509-6_7

10.1007/978-3-7908-2720-0_18

Chen A., Patton D., Kenney M. (2016). University technology transfer in China: A literature review and taxonomy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(5), 891–929. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9487-2

Chilvers J. (2013). Reflexive engagement? Actors, learning, and reflexivity in public dialogue on science and technology. Science Communication, 35(3), 283–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012454598

Crettaz von Roten F. (2011). Gender differences in scientists’ public outreach and engagement activities. Science Communication, 33(1), 52–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547010378658

Davies S. R. (2013). Constituting public engagement: Meanings and genealogies of PEST in Two U.K. Science Communication, 35(6), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547013478203

Davies S. R., Hara N. (2017). Public science in a Wired world: How online media are shaping science communication. Science Communication, 39(5), 563–568. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017736892

Doutriaux J., 1991, Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, 406

D’Este P., Perkmann M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z

Etzkowitz H., Webster A., Gebhardt C., Terra B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(99)00069-4

Galán-Muros V., Plewa C. (2016). What drives and inhibits university-business cooperation in Europe? A comprehensive assessement. R&D Management, 46(2), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12180

Geuna A., Nesta L. (2004). University patenting and its effects on academic research (No. 99; SPRU electronic working paper). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=492282

Godin B., Gingras Y. (2000). Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154300781782147

Greenwood M. R., Riordan D. G. (2001). Civic scientist/civic duty. Science Communication, 23(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547001023001003

Grimpe C., Fier H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: A comparison between the United States and Germany. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 637–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9140-4

Gulbrandsen M., Smeby J.C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6), 932–950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.004

Gulbrandsen M., Thune T. (2017). The effects of non-academic work experience on external interaction and research performance. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(4), 795–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9556-1

Haeussler C., Colyvas J. A. (2011). Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic entrepreneurship in the life sciences in U.K. And Germany. Research Policy, 40(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.012

Hair J. F., Black W. C., Babin B. J., Anderson R. E. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5). Pearson. https://www.amazon.com/Multivariate-Data-Analysis-Joseph-Hair/dp/0138132631

Heeler R. M., Whipple T. W., Hustad T. P. (1977). Maximum likelihood factor analysis of attitude data. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377701400105

10.2478/9783110686081-013

Hu L., Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Huong Thanh. (2020). Raise awareness about innovative startups among staff members and lecturers [nâng cao nhận thức về khởi nghiệp đổi mới sáng tạo trong đội ngũ cán bộ, giảng viên]. VNU. https://vnu.edu.vn/ttsk/?C1654/N22528/Nang-cao-nhan-thuc-ve-khoi-nghiep-doi-moi-sang-tao-trong-doi-ngu-can-bo,giang-vien.htm

Kato M., Odagiri H. (2012). Development of university life-science programs and university–industry joint research in Japan. Research Policy, 41(5), 939–952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.011

Kinh te & Do thi Newspaper. (2015). Nâng cao chất lượng giảng dạy nhờ nghiên cứu khoa học [improving the quality of teaching through scientific research]. Kinh Te&Do Thi newspaper. http://kinhtedothi.vn/nang-cao-chat-luong-giang-day-nho-nghien-cuu-khoa-hoc-35331.html

Klofsten M., Jones-Evans D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe – The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14(4), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008184601282

Lee N. M., VanDyke M. S. (2015). Set it and forget it: The one-way use of social media by government agencies communicating science. Science Communication, 37(4), 533–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015588600

Lee P. (2019). Tacit knowledge and university-industry technology transfer. In Rooskby J. H. (Ed.), Research handbook on intellectual property and technology transfer (UC Davis Legal Studies research paper forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3417933.

Liang X., Liu A. M. M. (2018). The evolution of government sponsored collaboration network and its impact on innovation: A bibliometric analysis in the Chinese solar P.V. sector. Research Policy, 47(7), 1295–1308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.04.012

Lin M.W., Bozeman B. (2006). Researchers’ industry experience and productivity in university–industry research centers: A “Scientific and Technical Human Capital” explanation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-005-6111-2

MacCallum R. C., Widaman K. F., Zhang S., Hong S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.4.1.84

Muscio A., Ramaciotti L., Rizzo U. (2016). The complex relationship between academic engagement and research output: Evidence from Italy. Science and Public Policy, 44(2), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scw057

Muscio A., Vallanti G. (2014). Perceived obstacles to University–Industry collaboration: Results from a qualitative survey of Italian academic departments. Industry and Innovation, 21(5), 410–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2014.969935

Neresini F., Bucchi M. (2011). Which indicators for the new public engagement activities? An exploratory study of European research institutions. Public Understanding of Science, 20(1), 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510388363

Perkmann M., Tartari V., McKelvey M., Autio E., Brostrom A., D’Este P., Fini R., Geuna A., Grimaldi R., Hughes A., Kitson M., Krabel S., Llerena P., Lissoni F., Salter A., Sobrero M. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialization: A review of the literature on university-industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2088253

Perkmann M., Walsh K. (2008). Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry. Research Policy, 37(10), 1884–1891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.009

Perkmann M., Walsh K. (2009). The two faces of collaboration: Impacts of university-industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6), 1033–1065. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtp015

Poliakoff E., Webb T. L. (2007). What factors predict scientists’ intentions to participate in public engagement of science activities? Science Communication, 29(2), 242–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547007308009

Quynh N. (2018). Cơ chế đặt hàng: Khoa học – công nghệ có “đất dụng võ” [ordering process: Science and technology show their useful]. Vietnam industry and trade newspaper. https://congthuong.vn/co-che-dat-hang-khoa-hoc-cong-nghe-co-dat-dung-vo-98825.html

Salahshour Rad M., Nilashi M., Mohamed Dahlan H., Ibrahim O. (2019). Academic researchers’ behavioural intention to use academic social networking sites: A case of Malaysian research universities. Information Development, 35(2), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666917741923

Schalet A. T., Tropp L. R., Troy L. M. (2020). Making research usable beyond academic circles: A relational model of public engagement. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 20(1), 336–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12204

Schwab K. (2019). The global competitiveness report. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2019.pdf

Sciarelli M., Landi G. C., Turriziani L., Tani M. (2021). Academic entrepreneurship: Founding and governance determinants in university spin-off ventures. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 46(4), 1083–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-020-09798-2

Shen Y.C. (2017). Identifying the key barriers and their interrelationships impeding the university technology transfer in Taiwan: A multi-stakeholder perspective. Quality & Quantity, 51(6), 2865–2884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0450-y

Ta H.T. (2018). Innovative start-ups in college: Starting from the change of perception [doanh nghiệp khởi nghiệp sáng tạo trong trường đại học: Bắt đầu từ sự thay đổi nhận thức]. Tiasang. http://ipp.vn/doanh-nghiep-khoi-nghiep-sang-tao-trong-truong-dai-hoc/

Thanh A. (2019). Technology transfer center in the school: Getting into the real substance? [Trung tâm chuyển giao công nghệ trong viện trường: Để đi vào thực chất?]. National Office of Intellectual Property of Vietnam. http://ipvietnam.gov.vn/nghien-cuu-ao-tao/-/asset_publisher/3KJODm0i3vkR/content/trung-tam-chuyen-giao-cong-nghe-trong-vien-truong-e-i-vao-thuc-chat-inheritRedirect=false

Tran T., Trinh T. P., Le C.M., Hoang L.K., Pham H.H. (2020). Research as a base for sustainable development of universities: Using the Delphi method to explore factors affecting international publishing among Vietnamese academic staff. Sustainability, 12(8), 3449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083449

Trinh T. P. T., 2020, Factors impacting international-indexed publishing among Vietnamese educational researchers, 10.1002/leap.1323

Office of Science and Technology and the Wellcome Trust (2001). Science and the public: A review of science communication and public attitudes toward science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science, 10(3), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/10/3/305

Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training. (2014). Circular 47/2014/TT-BGDĐT: Provisions working regime for lecturers [thông tư số 47/2014/TT-BGDĐT: Quy định chế độ làm việc đối với giảng viên]. Thu vien phap luat. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/giao-duc/Thong-tu-47-2014-TT-BGDDT-Quy-dinh-che-do-lam-viec-doi-voi-giang-vien-264369.aspx

Vietnam National Assembly. (2012). Luật giáo dục đại học. [higher education law] (publication no. 08/2012/QH13). Thu Vien Phap Luat. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/giao-duc/Luat-Giao-duc-dai-hoc-2012-142762.aspx

Vietnam National Assembly. (2013). Luật Khoa học và công nghệ. [science and technology law] (publication no. 29/2013/QH13). Thu Vien Phap Luat. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Cong-nghe-thong-tin/Luat-khoa-hoc-va-cong-nghe-nam-2013-197387.aspx

Vietnam National Assembly. (2018). Law no. 34/2018/QH14: Law on the amendments to the law on higher education [sửa đổi, bổ sung một số điều của luật giáo dục đại học]. Thuvienphapluat. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/giao-duc/Luat-Giao-duc-dai-hoc-sua-doi-388254.aspx

Vuong Q. H., La V. P., Vuong T. T., Ho M. T., Nguyen H. T., Nguyen V. H., Pham H. H., Ho M. T. (2018). An open database of productivity in Vietnam’s social sciences and humanities for public use. Scientific Data, 5(1), 180188. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.188

Wang Y., Hu R., Li W., Pan X. (2016). Does teaching benefit from university–industry collaboration? Investigating the role of academic commercialization and engagement. Scientometrics, 106(3), 1037–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1818-9

Watermeyer R. (2012). Measuring the impact values of public engagement in medical contexts. Science Communication, 34(6), 752–775. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547011432804

Willinsky J. (2003). Policymakers’ online use of academic research. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11, 2. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v11n2.2003

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

SAGE Open

Tập 11 Số 4

Thông tin tác giả