TMU
Owner
Tarbiat Modares University (TMU) is the owner of HEHP.
0.8
Cite Score
Volume 12, Issue 2 (2024)
Health Educ Health Promot 2024, 12(2): 331-340 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
History
Received: 2024/03/2 | Accepted: 2024/08/6 | Published: 2024/08/20
Received: 2024/03/2 | Accepted: 2024/08/6 | Published: 2024/08/20
How to cite this article
Karimi Z, Arasteh H, Ghaffari R, Abbasian H, Abdollahi B. Designing a Comprehensive Model for Evaluating the Performance of Clinical Faculty Members. Health Educ Health Promot 2024; 12 (2) :331-340
URL: http://hehp.modares.ac.ir/article-4-74110-en.html
URL: http://hehp.modares.ac.ir/article-4-74110-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Department of Educational Administration, Faculty of Management, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
2- Medical Education Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
2- Medical Education Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
Keywords:
| Abstract (HTML) (1417 Views)
Full-Text: (552 Views)
Introduction
Today, higher education institutions are facing pressures such as increasing global competition, struggle for survival and longevity, increasing costs, being accountable for providing high-quality services to beneficiaries, and the speed of technological changes. It is important to evaluate the expertise and competencies of faculty members in order to know the degree of success in educational, research, and clinical activities and to be responsive to the expectations of the stakeholders in view of the changes in the competitive world [1]. Based on this, the performance evaluation of clinical faculty members has been defined as an official measure for universities of medical sciences. This performance evaluation has led to a judgment about the performance of medical schools. Therefore, the performance evaluation system of clinical faculty members is related to different elements and processes that produce performance evaluation data and provide useful performance in the university education system by using its results [2].
Performance evaluation is a process that includes feedback from each identified and evaluated result that determines employee performance and provides job guidance and a context for developing work performance for the employee in order to achieve organizational goals [3].
Having an accurate evaluation model for faculty members can be a guide for implementing development goals and increasing quality and improving university performance. Each faculty member follows a diverse set of activities that include educational, research, and therapeutic activities in the field of medical sciences. The field in which a clinical faculty member spends most of his time, apart from the field of teaching and research, is the field of treating patients in the office or educational clinics and operating rooms.
In general, the indicators used for performance evaluation should be such that they increase the accuracy, accuracy and effectiveness of the evaluation process; It means that these indicators can be trusted and are not based on a specific person or method, can recognize the differences between the members and separate them from each other, and can be accepted and believed by the people under evaluation.
Although the evaluation system of faculty members has existed and is implemented in universities for a long time, but various researches show that only a few universities have been able to manage it comprehensively and systematically. Often, each university has its own evaluation system based on previous records and expectations from academic staff members, which sometimes does not allow comparing academic staff members of different universities with each other [4].
Mirzakhani et al. identified three main components and twelve indicators. They ranked indicators in the following order: The dimension of consulting services including the competence components of foreign relations, intercultural, creativity and innovation and technology; the research dimension including communication competence, new technology, innovation and creativity and entrepreneurship and cognitive competence and the education dimension including teaching quality, spiritual, psychological and managerial competence were identified and ranked as sub-components. The fit rate of the model was estimated at 0.62, which shows the strong fittness of the model of performance evaluation standards of faculty members [5].
The data obtained from the interview analysis of the study of Raoufi Kelachayeh et al. showed 6 main themes and 21 sub-themes. The main subject includes research activities (3 subjects), educational activities (3 subjects), executive services (2 subjects), growth (4 sub-subjects), professional ethics (3 subjects) and personal ethics (6 subjects). There was a deep understanding of academic faculty members' performance criteria in 6 main topics and 21 sub-topics [6].
Karimi et al. by analyzing the content of the interviews, show four components of professional knowledge, professional skills, and professional ethics and personality traits were identified to evaluate the performance of Farhangian University professors. Also, the findings of the confirmatory factor analysis shows that all the items of professional knowledge, professional skills, professional ethics and personality traits, except for the item of power of criticism and analysis in professional knowledge and frankness in speech and behavior in personality traits, explained the variance of the identified component scores well [7].
Abed et al. conclude that the existing criteria for evaluating the performance of academic faculty members are not sufficient and have shortcomings; In this way, in the existing evaluation system, only the demands and expectations of the educational system are taken into account, and the opinions of professors and students are not taken into account [8].
Abbaspour et al. realize that the quality of faculty members' performance as the main variable of the research is influenced by various factors. The structure of the research model consists of 9 causal components, 8 mediating or intervening components, 17 strategic components, 9 contextual components, and 10 components as a result of realizing the quality of academic staff performance. Therefore, improving the quality of faculty members' performance requires adopting a systematic approach to the factors affecting academic quality [9].
Shafiee & Sobhani conducted a study with a mixed research approach and multi-level analysis. The results of the empirical analysis show that the research performance in different faculties is statistically significantly different and the intra-unit correlation value of 0.8 confirms the hierarchical structure of the statistical data and makes it necessary to use the multi-level modeling method. The findings from the interviews have shown that providing a single research performance evaluation system for university faculty members, regardless of the nature of the disciplines, paying little attention to global experiences in the field of performance evaluation, and without considering a suitable motivational system, leads to the research behavior of the members. Academic faculty has turned towards quantitative research, weak innovation in research without regard to social responsibility, so that according to academic faculty members, the university does not have a proper research performance evaluation system [10].
The research instrument of Khadivi & Alahverdi Khan Vaziri inspired by the major and minor components was developed in the form of Likert scale questionnaire with 80 questions. The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by face validity, and the reliability of the questionnaire was calculated 95% through the use of Cronbach’s Alpha. The results of the factor analysis showed that the seven components of professional commitment, research activities, professional development, teaching and training activities, consulting, administrative and scientific services, and political and social activities of the model were confirmed [11].
Sumande & Ruiz determined the clinical performance of staff nurses in Level III private hospitals. Determination of the clinical competency measured using the questionnaire checklist adopted from the nursing core competency standards. Results indicated that the overall clinical performance of staff nurses in the Beginning Nurses’ Role in Client Care, Leadership and Management, and Research are competent based on the evaluation of respondents. Staff nurses’ performance, according to profile divulges no significant difference in client care, leadership, and management, while a significant difference is found in research when the highest educational attainment and location of hospital affiliation are considered. Evaluation of those with master's degree is significantly higher than those with bachelor's degree and with master's units. In terms of the current position, the findings disclosed a significant difference in beginning nurses’ roles in leadership and management. The correlation of client care, leadership, and management, and research revealed a directly proportional relationship [12].
Yousif & Shaout reviewed the literatures in the first phase in order to determine and define the suitable quantitative and qualitative criteria and then design and exploit pairwise comparison and evaluation forms through a survey to get experts opinions/preference on the evaluation criteria that are used to measure the universities and academic staff performance. This paper presents a fuzzy logic computational model based on this survey to measure and classify the performance of Sudanese universities and academic staff, which includes computation of criteria weights and overall evaluation of Sudanese universities and academic staff using AHP and TOPSIS techniques [13].
Arnautu & Panc conducted an interdisciplinary study situated in between the concern for the quality of the education process and efficient human resources management. These two needs (quality in education and efficiency in the management of human resources) can be addressed through the introduction of a system of performance appraisal for faculty members. The purpose of the present study is to create a valid and objective tool of evaluating and appraising faculty members [14].
Stoklasa et al. drew the evaluation model of faculty members of Palacky University in the Czech Republic in two dimensions of activities, which are pedagogic activities and research and development activities. The evaluation indicators of pedagogic activities include teaching, student guidance, and work related to the development of study areas. Also, the evaluation indicators in research and development activities are publishing articles in prestigious and important journals, books, patent registrations, etc., project and plan management, and membership in the editorial board [15].
Considering the importance of evaluating the performance of clinical academic faculty members as an important strategy to improve the quality of medical education and treatment and that effective and efficient evaluation should include effective feedback and simply inform the relevant academic faculty member and vice-chancellor of the performance evaluation results, and most of the mentioned studies have rarely examined the missions and missions of clinical faculty members in a comprehensive and systematic manner, and with respect to the fact that such evaluations provide comprehensive, clear and specific information about the factors affecting the quality of clinical faculty members' performance for We will not provide.
The current research is trying to provide a comprehensive model for evaluating the performance of clinical academic faculty members, individual goals and organizational goals, individual performance indicators and organizational performance indicators to match and align in it and thus create more coherence and integration between the performances of different levels, That the result will be to improve the overall effectiveness of the system. In this regard, by reviewing the literature and taking advantage of the opinions of experts, a proposed model is formed, and after that, the mentioned model is used in the faculties of medical sciences, so that its feasibility is also discussed and checked. Therefore, the current research has been conducted with the aim of value indicators of the performance of clinical scientific components based on the organization's performance evaluation model.
Participants and Methods
The current study is applied research carried out in Tabriz University of medical sciences in 2023. Also, in terms of the nature of the research, it is classified as qualitative research. In the qualitative part, the model has been presented, and in the quantitative part, its implementation in the faculties of medical sciences has been discussed. Qualitative tools, including exploratory interviews, have been used to identify performance evaluation indicators of faculty members.
The statistical population of this research was academic experts in the field of evaluating the performance of clinical faculty members. Inclusion criteria for selecting people for interview, included specialized knowledge and experience in the field of performance evaluation, awareness of the macro policies of the education and evaluation system, research records, authorship, translation, etc. in the field of performance evaluation, having responsibility in the university, high experience of teaching in science schools medical and their interest in participating in the research. People who did not show interest in continuing the interview were excluded from the study. In the current research, 15 people from this group of participants were selected using snowball sampling method and they were interviewed. Before the start of each interview, a summary of the research plan, the results of the research background, along with the research objectives and questions for study and initial preparation were sent to the interviewees via email.
At the beginning of each interview session, the tasks performed were briefly explained. Then, the interview questions were asked. Snowball sampling method was used to conduct in-depth interviews. In this method, an initial group is selected for interview, and then the next groups are introduced by the same group, and sampling continues until the research reaches theoretical saturation and data sufficiency; Therefore, after each interview, the interview file was listened to and notes were taken. In the next stage, the coding method was implemented. After analyzing the data collected during two stages of open and central coding, the primary conceptual model of the research was presented.
To determine content and form validity, all identified components were examined and judged by experts and their ability to be included in the final evaluation tool was determined. For this purpose, the identified components were included in the questionnaire of the panel of experts, in which each component was judged based on the four criteria of necessity, relevance, clarity and measurability and in a spectrum of four options.
According to statistical principles, first, the average necessity score was examined based on the content validity ratio (CVR) to determine whether the most correct content (necessity of the question) was selected or not. In order to determine the content validity of the questionnaire, the experts were requested to answer each of the questions in the form of it is necessary, it is not necessary but it is useful and it is not necessary. The answers were calculated based on the CVR formula and adapted to the Laushe table, and numbers higher than 0.5 were accepted.
After determining and calculating the CVR, the content validity index (CVI) of Waltz and Basel was examined. For this purpose, specialists were asked to comment on each of the following three criteria based on a four-part Likert scale (unrelated, somewhat related, related, and completely related). Acceptance of items was higher than 0.7.
Findings
All 15 interviewees had PhD degrees and they were academicians (Table 1).
Table 1. Demographic information of the interviewees in the qualitative section
![src=./files/hehp/images/HTML_Publish/74110/1.png]()
Identifying the symptoms and performance evaluation components of the clinical faculty members of the faculties of medical sciences
The data obtained from the interview and analysis showed that there was 8 main themes and 28 sub-themes. Professional commitment with 5 themes (functionality, social ethics, altruism, action initiative and goodwill); Professional development with 3 contents (topical knowledge, educational knowledge, general knowledge); Professional skills with 4 topics (professional leadership, managerial skills, compiling-implementing and evaluating the organization's goals and realizing the goals and plans of human resources management); Research skills component with 4 topics (expertise, new technology, value and communication); Personality characteristics component with 4 themes (agreeable, patient, openness and sociability); Teaching and educational activities with 4 subjects (specialization, teaching quality, classroom management and clinical area); Consulting services with 3 contents (innovation and creativity, foreign relations and technology) and social-political activities were identified as a single category (Table 2).
Table 2. Main themes and sub-themes extracted from the interviews
![src=./files/hehp/images/HTML_Publish/74110/2.png]()
1- Professional commitment
The findings of the research showed that one of the criteria for evaluating the performance of clinical faculty of the university was professional commitment based on duty, social ethics, altruism, action initiative and goodwill. Some of the sample sentences of the interviewees that represent the content of the topics are as follows:
Participant 1 believed that “Adherence of the professor to the principles, rules and regulations is very important, and this should be given basic attention in the evaluation of the professors”.
While, participant 8 expressed that “In my opinion, trust, discipline, accuracy and duty are among the things that a university professor must have, and duty and professional ethics are considered performance evaluation indicators”.
Participant 4 said that “Academic faculty members should be well-dressed in appearance and dress so that students and staff can identify with them and also adhere to Islamic-national values and norms”.
Participant 11 mentioned that “A professor must be committed to the quality of the educational system, respect the rights of students and colleagues, have a cooperative spirit, and be a pioneer in sharing knowledge”.
2- Professional development
Another finding was professional development with 3 contents (topical knowledge, educational knowledge, general knowledge) which was extracted from the interview. For example, participant 8 expressed that “What is considered important in evaluating the performance of professors is having up-to-date knowledge in his specialty, does he have the necessary scientific and specialized knowledge and information in this field that he is teaching or not”?
Participant 6 mentioned that “By gaining more experience, he has complete mastery over the subject and content of the courses and can analyze and review the upper documents and use them in the content of the teaching courses”.
In addition, participant 13 believed that “It is very important that the professor is familiar with up-to-date educational resources and content and conveys them to students and colleagues”.
Participant 3 said “In my opinion, professional development and its increasing promotion are very important in the teaching profession, and it should be evaluated how much the professors work for their professional development and growth”.
3- Professional skills
Professional skills with 4 themes (professional leadership, managerial skills, organization-implementation and evaluation of organization goals and realization of human resources management goals and plans) were extracted from the interviews.
Participant 7 expressed “In my opinion, the professor should strengthen his skills and acquire new skills. Communication and ethical skills are very important in evaluating the teacher's performance”.
Participant 12 believed that “The performance of the professor should be such that the students put responsibility, creativity, hope, trust and cooperation at the forefront of their work with the actions and behavior of the professor”.
Participant 5 mentioned that “The professor must always see the students with one eye and provide them with mental health by not discriminating between students and have the ability to understand the motivations of the students so that he can take steps in line with the development of educational and educational goals”.
Participant 10 said “In my opinion, the professor's commitment and sense of responsibility and empathy with the students, as well as understanding and anticipating their needs, are among the things that can be considered in evaluating the professors' performance”.
4- Research skills
The findings indicated that one of the criteria for evaluating the performance of clinical board members is research skills based on specialized research skills, new technology, value and communication. In the following, some of the participants raised the following topics. For example participant 9 presented that “Compiling articles with standard quality and publishing them in prestigious journals, publishing specialized books, participating in conferences as presenters or speakers, and organizing internal and external research exhibitions are considered to be the most important indicators for evaluating professors' performance”.
Participant 6, on the other hand, expressed that “In my opinion, a professor should have the ability to carry out national and international research projects and be able to cooperate with other groups in the university in the field of research projects”.
Participant 2 believed that “The professor should be able to link and connect the educational and research activities of the university with the social, economic and cultural needs and conditions”.
Participant 14 expressed that “Regarding the research method, the professor should update his kno
Today, higher education institutions are facing pressures such as increasing global competition, struggle for survival and longevity, increasing costs, being accountable for providing high-quality services to beneficiaries, and the speed of technological changes. It is important to evaluate the expertise and competencies of faculty members in order to know the degree of success in educational, research, and clinical activities and to be responsive to the expectations of the stakeholders in view of the changes in the competitive world [1]. Based on this, the performance evaluation of clinical faculty members has been defined as an official measure for universities of medical sciences. This performance evaluation has led to a judgment about the performance of medical schools. Therefore, the performance evaluation system of clinical faculty members is related to different elements and processes that produce performance evaluation data and provide useful performance in the university education system by using its results [2].
Performance evaluation is a process that includes feedback from each identified and evaluated result that determines employee performance and provides job guidance and a context for developing work performance for the employee in order to achieve organizational goals [3].
Having an accurate evaluation model for faculty members can be a guide for implementing development goals and increasing quality and improving university performance. Each faculty member follows a diverse set of activities that include educational, research, and therapeutic activities in the field of medical sciences. The field in which a clinical faculty member spends most of his time, apart from the field of teaching and research, is the field of treating patients in the office or educational clinics and operating rooms.
In general, the indicators used for performance evaluation should be such that they increase the accuracy, accuracy and effectiveness of the evaluation process; It means that these indicators can be trusted and are not based on a specific person or method, can recognize the differences between the members and separate them from each other, and can be accepted and believed by the people under evaluation.
Although the evaluation system of faculty members has existed and is implemented in universities for a long time, but various researches show that only a few universities have been able to manage it comprehensively and systematically. Often, each university has its own evaluation system based on previous records and expectations from academic staff members, which sometimes does not allow comparing academic staff members of different universities with each other [4].
Mirzakhani et al. identified three main components and twelve indicators. They ranked indicators in the following order: The dimension of consulting services including the competence components of foreign relations, intercultural, creativity and innovation and technology; the research dimension including communication competence, new technology, innovation and creativity and entrepreneurship and cognitive competence and the education dimension including teaching quality, spiritual, psychological and managerial competence were identified and ranked as sub-components. The fit rate of the model was estimated at 0.62, which shows the strong fittness of the model of performance evaluation standards of faculty members [5].
The data obtained from the interview analysis of the study of Raoufi Kelachayeh et al. showed 6 main themes and 21 sub-themes. The main subject includes research activities (3 subjects), educational activities (3 subjects), executive services (2 subjects), growth (4 sub-subjects), professional ethics (3 subjects) and personal ethics (6 subjects). There was a deep understanding of academic faculty members' performance criteria in 6 main topics and 21 sub-topics [6].
Karimi et al. by analyzing the content of the interviews, show four components of professional knowledge, professional skills, and professional ethics and personality traits were identified to evaluate the performance of Farhangian University professors. Also, the findings of the confirmatory factor analysis shows that all the items of professional knowledge, professional skills, professional ethics and personality traits, except for the item of power of criticism and analysis in professional knowledge and frankness in speech and behavior in personality traits, explained the variance of the identified component scores well [7].
Abed et al. conclude that the existing criteria for evaluating the performance of academic faculty members are not sufficient and have shortcomings; In this way, in the existing evaluation system, only the demands and expectations of the educational system are taken into account, and the opinions of professors and students are not taken into account [8].
Abbaspour et al. realize that the quality of faculty members' performance as the main variable of the research is influenced by various factors. The structure of the research model consists of 9 causal components, 8 mediating or intervening components, 17 strategic components, 9 contextual components, and 10 components as a result of realizing the quality of academic staff performance. Therefore, improving the quality of faculty members' performance requires adopting a systematic approach to the factors affecting academic quality [9].
Shafiee & Sobhani conducted a study with a mixed research approach and multi-level analysis. The results of the empirical analysis show that the research performance in different faculties is statistically significantly different and the intra-unit correlation value of 0.8 confirms the hierarchical structure of the statistical data and makes it necessary to use the multi-level modeling method. The findings from the interviews have shown that providing a single research performance evaluation system for university faculty members, regardless of the nature of the disciplines, paying little attention to global experiences in the field of performance evaluation, and without considering a suitable motivational system, leads to the research behavior of the members. Academic faculty has turned towards quantitative research, weak innovation in research without regard to social responsibility, so that according to academic faculty members, the university does not have a proper research performance evaluation system [10].
The research instrument of Khadivi & Alahverdi Khan Vaziri inspired by the major and minor components was developed in the form of Likert scale questionnaire with 80 questions. The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by face validity, and the reliability of the questionnaire was calculated 95% through the use of Cronbach’s Alpha. The results of the factor analysis showed that the seven components of professional commitment, research activities, professional development, teaching and training activities, consulting, administrative and scientific services, and political and social activities of the model were confirmed [11].
Sumande & Ruiz determined the clinical performance of staff nurses in Level III private hospitals. Determination of the clinical competency measured using the questionnaire checklist adopted from the nursing core competency standards. Results indicated that the overall clinical performance of staff nurses in the Beginning Nurses’ Role in Client Care, Leadership and Management, and Research are competent based on the evaluation of respondents. Staff nurses’ performance, according to profile divulges no significant difference in client care, leadership, and management, while a significant difference is found in research when the highest educational attainment and location of hospital affiliation are considered. Evaluation of those with master's degree is significantly higher than those with bachelor's degree and with master's units. In terms of the current position, the findings disclosed a significant difference in beginning nurses’ roles in leadership and management. The correlation of client care, leadership, and management, and research revealed a directly proportional relationship [12].
Yousif & Shaout reviewed the literatures in the first phase in order to determine and define the suitable quantitative and qualitative criteria and then design and exploit pairwise comparison and evaluation forms through a survey to get experts opinions/preference on the evaluation criteria that are used to measure the universities and academic staff performance. This paper presents a fuzzy logic computational model based on this survey to measure and classify the performance of Sudanese universities and academic staff, which includes computation of criteria weights and overall evaluation of Sudanese universities and academic staff using AHP and TOPSIS techniques [13].
Arnautu & Panc conducted an interdisciplinary study situated in between the concern for the quality of the education process and efficient human resources management. These two needs (quality in education and efficiency in the management of human resources) can be addressed through the introduction of a system of performance appraisal for faculty members. The purpose of the present study is to create a valid and objective tool of evaluating and appraising faculty members [14].
Stoklasa et al. drew the evaluation model of faculty members of Palacky University in the Czech Republic in two dimensions of activities, which are pedagogic activities and research and development activities. The evaluation indicators of pedagogic activities include teaching, student guidance, and work related to the development of study areas. Also, the evaluation indicators in research and development activities are publishing articles in prestigious and important journals, books, patent registrations, etc., project and plan management, and membership in the editorial board [15].
Considering the importance of evaluating the performance of clinical academic faculty members as an important strategy to improve the quality of medical education and treatment and that effective and efficient evaluation should include effective feedback and simply inform the relevant academic faculty member and vice-chancellor of the performance evaluation results, and most of the mentioned studies have rarely examined the missions and missions of clinical faculty members in a comprehensive and systematic manner, and with respect to the fact that such evaluations provide comprehensive, clear and specific information about the factors affecting the quality of clinical faculty members' performance for We will not provide.
The current research is trying to provide a comprehensive model for evaluating the performance of clinical academic faculty members, individual goals and organizational goals, individual performance indicators and organizational performance indicators to match and align in it and thus create more coherence and integration between the performances of different levels, That the result will be to improve the overall effectiveness of the system. In this regard, by reviewing the literature and taking advantage of the opinions of experts, a proposed model is formed, and after that, the mentioned model is used in the faculties of medical sciences, so that its feasibility is also discussed and checked. Therefore, the current research has been conducted with the aim of value indicators of the performance of clinical scientific components based on the organization's performance evaluation model.
Participants and Methods
The current study is applied research carried out in Tabriz University of medical sciences in 2023. Also, in terms of the nature of the research, it is classified as qualitative research. In the qualitative part, the model has been presented, and in the quantitative part, its implementation in the faculties of medical sciences has been discussed. Qualitative tools, including exploratory interviews, have been used to identify performance evaluation indicators of faculty members.
The statistical population of this research was academic experts in the field of evaluating the performance of clinical faculty members. Inclusion criteria for selecting people for interview, included specialized knowledge and experience in the field of performance evaluation, awareness of the macro policies of the education and evaluation system, research records, authorship, translation, etc. in the field of performance evaluation, having responsibility in the university, high experience of teaching in science schools medical and their interest in participating in the research. People who did not show interest in continuing the interview were excluded from the study. In the current research, 15 people from this group of participants were selected using snowball sampling method and they were interviewed. Before the start of each interview, a summary of the research plan, the results of the research background, along with the research objectives and questions for study and initial preparation were sent to the interviewees via email.
At the beginning of each interview session, the tasks performed were briefly explained. Then, the interview questions were asked. Snowball sampling method was used to conduct in-depth interviews. In this method, an initial group is selected for interview, and then the next groups are introduced by the same group, and sampling continues until the research reaches theoretical saturation and data sufficiency; Therefore, after each interview, the interview file was listened to and notes were taken. In the next stage, the coding method was implemented. After analyzing the data collected during two stages of open and central coding, the primary conceptual model of the research was presented.
To determine content and form validity, all identified components were examined and judged by experts and their ability to be included in the final evaluation tool was determined. For this purpose, the identified components were included in the questionnaire of the panel of experts, in which each component was judged based on the four criteria of necessity, relevance, clarity and measurability and in a spectrum of four options.
According to statistical principles, first, the average necessity score was examined based on the content validity ratio (CVR) to determine whether the most correct content (necessity of the question) was selected or not. In order to determine the content validity of the questionnaire, the experts were requested to answer each of the questions in the form of it is necessary, it is not necessary but it is useful and it is not necessary. The answers were calculated based on the CVR formula and adapted to the Laushe table, and numbers higher than 0.5 were accepted.
After determining and calculating the CVR, the content validity index (CVI) of Waltz and Basel was examined. For this purpose, specialists were asked to comment on each of the following three criteria based on a four-part Likert scale (unrelated, somewhat related, related, and completely related). Acceptance of items was higher than 0.7.
Findings
All 15 interviewees had PhD degrees and they were academicians (Table 1).
Table 1. Demographic information of the interviewees in the qualitative section
Identifying the symptoms and performance evaluation components of the clinical faculty members of the faculties of medical sciences
The data obtained from the interview and analysis showed that there was 8 main themes and 28 sub-themes. Professional commitment with 5 themes (functionality, social ethics, altruism, action initiative and goodwill); Professional development with 3 contents (topical knowledge, educational knowledge, general knowledge); Professional skills with 4 topics (professional leadership, managerial skills, compiling-implementing and evaluating the organization's goals and realizing the goals and plans of human resources management); Research skills component with 4 topics (expertise, new technology, value and communication); Personality characteristics component with 4 themes (agreeable, patient, openness and sociability); Teaching and educational activities with 4 subjects (specialization, teaching quality, classroom management and clinical area); Consulting services with 3 contents (innovation and creativity, foreign relations and technology) and social-political activities were identified as a single category (Table 2).
Table 2. Main themes and sub-themes extracted from the interviews
1- Professional commitment
The findings of the research showed that one of the criteria for evaluating the performance of clinical faculty of the university was professional commitment based on duty, social ethics, altruism, action initiative and goodwill. Some of the sample sentences of the interviewees that represent the content of the topics are as follows:
Participant 1 believed that “Adherence of the professor to the principles, rules and regulations is very important, and this should be given basic attention in the evaluation of the professors”.
While, participant 8 expressed that “In my opinion, trust, discipline, accuracy and duty are among the things that a university professor must have, and duty and professional ethics are considered performance evaluation indicators”.
Participant 4 said that “Academic faculty members should be well-dressed in appearance and dress so that students and staff can identify with them and also adhere to Islamic-national values and norms”.
Participant 11 mentioned that “A professor must be committed to the quality of the educational system, respect the rights of students and colleagues, have a cooperative spirit, and be a pioneer in sharing knowledge”.
2- Professional development
Another finding was professional development with 3 contents (topical knowledge, educational knowledge, general knowledge) which was extracted from the interview. For example, participant 8 expressed that “What is considered important in evaluating the performance of professors is having up-to-date knowledge in his specialty, does he have the necessary scientific and specialized knowledge and information in this field that he is teaching or not”?
Participant 6 mentioned that “By gaining more experience, he has complete mastery over the subject and content of the courses and can analyze and review the upper documents and use them in the content of the teaching courses”.
In addition, participant 13 believed that “It is very important that the professor is familiar with up-to-date educational resources and content and conveys them to students and colleagues”.
Participant 3 said “In my opinion, professional development and its increasing promotion are very important in the teaching profession, and it should be evaluated how much the professors work for their professional development and growth”.
3- Professional skills
Professional skills with 4 themes (professional leadership, managerial skills, organization-implementation and evaluation of organization goals and realization of human resources management goals and plans) were extracted from the interviews.
Participant 7 expressed “In my opinion, the professor should strengthen his skills and acquire new skills. Communication and ethical skills are very important in evaluating the teacher's performance”.
Participant 12 believed that “The performance of the professor should be such that the students put responsibility, creativity, hope, trust and cooperation at the forefront of their work with the actions and behavior of the professor”.
Participant 5 mentioned that “The professor must always see the students with one eye and provide them with mental health by not discriminating between students and have the ability to understand the motivations of the students so that he can take steps in line with the development of educational and educational goals”.
Participant 10 said “In my opinion, the professor's commitment and sense of responsibility and empathy with the students, as well as understanding and anticipating their needs, are among the things that can be considered in evaluating the professors' performance”.
4- Research skills
The findings indicated that one of the criteria for evaluating the performance of clinical board members is research skills based on specialized research skills, new technology, value and communication. In the following, some of the participants raised the following topics. For example participant 9 presented that “Compiling articles with standard quality and publishing them in prestigious journals, publishing specialized books, participating in conferences as presenters or speakers, and organizing internal and external research exhibitions are considered to be the most important indicators for evaluating professors' performance”.
Participant 6, on the other hand, expressed that “In my opinion, a professor should have the ability to carry out national and international research projects and be able to cooperate with other groups in the university in the field of research projects”.
Participant 2 believed that “The professor should be able to link and connect the educational and research activities of the university with the social, economic and cultural needs and conditions”.
Participant 14 expressed that “Regarding the research method, the professor should update his kno