MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599004596

Foreign Faculty Hiring Program - FFHP: The Brain-Gain Drive of the Higher Education Commission in Pakistan

2013· dissertation· en· W2599004596 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A. Mughul

Bibliographic record

VenueTrepo - Institutional Repository of Tampere University · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Human Resource DevelopmentGhulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering Sciences and TechnologyDepartment for International DevelopmentUniversity Grants CommissionMinistry of Education, IndiaEuropean CommissionTimes Higher EducationUniversitetet i OsloTampereen YliopistoInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsCommissionBrain drainPolitical scienceMedical educationPsychologyBusinessMedicineLabour economicsEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis explores the strengths and weaknesses of the Foreign Faculty Hiring Program (FFHP) in Pakistan from the ‘participant’s perspective’. The purpose of this research was to disclose the prime interest of foreign faculty members in joining the FFHP in order to gain a deeper knowledge and understanding about their experiences during their current tenure. In addition, the aim was to determine how important role FFHP has played so far in reversing the brain-drain into brain-gain. Apart from this, the argument of this study was to reveal the fact that foreign faculty hiring does not appear to represent something unique. To support this argument the researcher presented a contextual framework based on Indian Muslim education system during the British rule in the 19th century India and described the pre-partition situation of higher education. Similarly, the post-partition history of higher education in Pakistan was also discussed to highlight the efforts of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) in Pakistan since 2000. The researcher has described the reform and expansion movement of HEC especially in the era of globalization and internationalization. To investigate issues related to this work, the researcher adopted a qualitative case study methodology incorporating some quantitative techniques. The data collection methods used in this research included documents (such as: historical texts, publications, government documents, official reports, online papers, etc.) and web self-administered questionnaire.\n\nThe Web-SAQ, consisting of 30 questions, was sent to foreign faculty members who joined the FFHP since 2004 onwards. From a total of 145 recipients, 43 male and female returned the online-questionnaire making an average of 30% response rate. The mean age of the participants, who represented 12 different countries and 5 continents of the world, was 53.20 years. The researcher examined and analyzed the data utilizing the “mixed methods approach” by using two different techniques: (1) basic descriptive statistics through reporting of percentages and mean responses of foreign faculty via SurveyGizmo, and (2) qualitative content analysis of open-ended responses. Data from this research confirms that almost 100% of respondents wanted to contribute in reversing the brain-drain and their overall satisfaction level towards FFHP was high. However, findings also indicate that foreign faculty members have experienced a variety of challenges and problems in terms of university politics and bureaucratic regulatory structure and as such have a great deal to cope with from an emotional point of view. Finally, the study reveals that foreign faculty members are not highly valued in Pakistan by their local counterparts. To address all such issues, the researcher has made some recommendations and well grounded suggestions which may be of interest to general readers as well as Higher Education researchers for further study.\n\nKey words: Higher Education, Foreign Faculty, Internationalization, Brain-Drain/Gain

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrepo - Institutional Repository of Tampere UniversitySame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207