TOP RESEARCHERS in the University are blaming low research output for UST’s failure to advance in the annual Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) world university ranking. UST however should improve its research profile as part of its academic mission, not because it wants to impress QS.
Clarence Batan, director of the Research Center on Culture, Education and Social Issues, attributed the low QS rating to the lack of faculty members doing research.
“The simple reason why we have a low rating is because we have not evolved yet to become a research university. The Commission on Higher Education requires 20 percent of tenured faculty members to become researchers. We have not fully reached that point,” he said in an interview with the Varsitarian.
TOP RESEARCHERS in the University are blaming low research output for UST’s failure to advance in the annual Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) world university ranking. UST however should improve its research profile as part of its academic mission, not because it wants to impress QS.
Clarence Batan, director of the Research Center on Culture, Education and Social Issues, attributed the low QS rating to the lack of faculty members doing research.
“The simple reason why we have a low rating is because we have not evolved yet to become a research university. The Commission on Higher Education requires 20 percent of tenured faculty members to become researchers. We have not fully reached that point,” he said in an interview with the Varsitarian.
UST landed on the published ranking of the QS world university rankings this year, even as it stayed in the same bracket for the fourth consecutive year. UST was placed in the 701+ bracket along with De La Salle University, and behind the state-run University of the Philippines and Ateneo de Manila.
UP jumped to the 374th place this year from the 400-410 bracket last year, while Ateneo de Manila held on to its spot at the 501-550 bracket.
In the QS research category, UST received two out of five stars, which is described by QS as “low.”
For UST to become a premiere research university in Asia, all faculty members should do research, Batan said.
“[It] may be too extreme because the only requirement is 20 to 30 percent, but that is the minimum requirement. There is no policy telling you that if you have 100 percent … that it is a sin,” Batan added.
But there should be a proper definition of a “researcher” in the UST, as the theses of undergraduate students and their advisers have also been counted as part of research accomplishments. QS however tracks “engagement” in publications, he said.
Focus on teaching
Batan also blamed the faculty structure that places more emphasis on teaching than on research.
“We are not yet fully departmentalized, our structure for vertical articulation is not yet fully implemented and we have not yet projected well the ways by which we could combine research with teaching, so we remain to be thinking about teaching rather than doing research,” Batan said.
A document obtained by the Varsitarian showed that the Office of the Vice Rector for Reseach and Innovation (OVRI) had proposed a new policy for faculty members to improve the research quality of the University in relation to the implementation of K to 12 scheme.
Under the proposal, instructors will be given research units by Academic Year 2017-2018 in addition to teaching units.
The proposed combined research and teaching load for faculty (excluding the Graduate School) without research grants is 15 units of research and six units of teaching. This will be equivalent to at least 30 hours of work per week.
Those with research grants will be given 18 units of research and three units of teaching, equivalent to 39 hours per week or more if the teaching load involves laboratory courses.
‘Administrators should do research, too’
Also under the OVRI proposal, faculty members with academic or administrative assignments may carry research loads of three to six units.
Deans may carry a six-unit research load without teaching while department chairmen may carry six-unit research and six-unit teaching loads. Assistant deans, college secretaries and directors may carry six-unit research and three-unit- teaching loads.
However, Maribel Nonato, vice rector for research and innovation, said not all faculty members would be given research loads immediately. They must first demonstrate research capacity.
“We invite [faculty members who are interested to do research] because they want to do research. [Research loads] are not freely given to those who will just research for higher salary,” she said in an interview with the Varsitarian.
The ideal setup is every faculty member is also researcher, but not everyone can fully commit to producing quality research, she said.
“Not everyone can be a researcher. There can be a good teacher but a bad researcher. [Research] is a vocation, just like the priesthood,” Nonato said.
Batan said administrative work should not be accepted as an excuse for not doing research.
“Administrative work should have been an affirmation of your being an academic,” he said.
QS rating not the goal
Batan and Nonato said the University should focus on delivering quality research rather than on ways to improve its rating in the QS survey.
“I do not want to say we’re doing all this because we want to improve our QS ranking. I have been so vocal to [Rector Fr. Herminio Dagohoy, O.P.] that we want to do this because we have a vision to achieve. Once we reach that vision, everything will fall into place,” Nonato said.
Batan was critical of the QS survey, saying it was all about the “globalized politics of knowledge” in the academe.
“You will be really surprised that QS is a reflection of social inequality in the world. You know the best schools are the best resource schools and so, what is it for? Does it translate to quality education in our University? Does it level up our research capability? Are they giving funds to help out universities to be better? That’s yet to be seen. It’s a business,” he said.
Batan noted that the University has produced numerous books, policy papers and creative works, but these were not part of the QS standards.
“That’s because of the politics of knowledge and the politics of recognizing the indefinite formula for impact factor [of published research],” he said.
