Professorship Conferral: A Comparative Study of International Practices and the Requirement for Regulatory Flexibility
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51699/ijise.v3i4.202Keywords:
Professorship, International Practices and Regulatory flamework.Abstract
The awarding of the title "professor" is an important academic distinction that varies greatly between institutions and geographical areas of the world. With a focus on geographic differences, institutional autonomy, and the underlying philosophical and pedagogical reasons, this comparative research examines the different processes and standards used to assign teachers. A professor may be a more flexible title linked to professional achievement or institutional requirements in some countries, while in others it is considered a purely academic degree obtained through years of study, teaching and publication. The study examines the legal framework that governs the awarding of chairs, highlighting strict and codified procedures in some areas and contrasting them with more adaptable and contextual methods in other areas. However, the need for regulatory flexibility in the allocation of chairs is a key argument of this analysis, especially given the changing needs of higher education and the increase in international mobility of academics. Traditional requirements for faculty positions, such as publications or tenure-based promotion, may no longer be sufficient in light of increased interdisciplinary research, innovations in teaching approaches and the evolving circumstances of higher education funding.To maintain academic rigor and institutional integrity, the study promotes a more dynamic and inclusive model that takes into account a wider spectrum of professional and academic contributions. The study examines best practices and potential barriers to implementing more flexible models by comparing global practices in North America, Europe, Asia and Africa. Thus, to ensure that the title “professor” remains relevant and meaningful in the contemporary academic landscape, the study concludes with suggestions for developing a balanced framework that supports academic excellence, taking into account the various ways in which academics contribute to their fields A renowned Ugandan academic and political scientist, Professor Mahmood Mamdani, has advocated regulatory flexibility in seat allocation. He drew attention to the need for a nuanced approach to academic leadership, particularly in African universities where institutional and academic circumstances may differ from strict Western standards. According to Mamdani, a more context-specific approach to the chair’s needs one that recognizes a range of academic activities, such as community engagement and beneficial institutional leadership—could improve Africa’s intellectual development. Adding traditional academic results. The conferment of the title of professor is a key stage in an academic career and signifies a degree of achievement and competence that varies significantly between educational systems around the world. Many elements, including academic cultures, institutional goals, social expectations and legal frameworks, influence this complex process. According to the department’s research, regulatory flexibility is absolutely necessary to adapt to the different contexts that define higher education in the world.
References
P. K. Arnold, “Regulation and function of the mammalian tricarboxylic acid cycle,” J. Biol. Chem., vol. 299, no. 2, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102838.
A. O. Stucki, “Use of new approach methodologies (NAMs) to meet regulatory requirements for the assessment of industrial chemicals and pesticides for effects on human health,” Front. Toxicol., vol. 4, 2022, doi: 10.3389/ftox.2022.964553.
S. Cantero-Chinchilla, “Deep learning in automated ultrasonic NDE – Developments, axioms and opportunities,” NDT E Int., vol. 131, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2022.102703.
A. H. Jagaba, “Sequencing batch reactor technology for landfill leachate treatment: A state-of-the-art review,” J. Environ. Manage., vol. 282, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.111946.
V. Z. Gjorgievski, “The potential of power-to-heat demand response to improve the flexibility of the energy system: An empirical review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 138, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110489.
A. Khaksari, “Sizing of electric vehicle charging stations with smart charging capabilities and quality of service requirements,” Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 70, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.102872.
J. Lowitzsch, “Renewable energy communities under the 2019 European Clean Energy Package – Governance model for the energy clusters of the future?,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 122, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.109489.
F. Pallonetto, “On the assessment and control optimisation of demand response programs in residential buildings,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 127, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.109861.
U. Datta, “Battery energy storage system control for mitigating PV penetration impact on primary frequency control and state-of-charge recovery,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 746–757, 2020, doi: 10.1109/TSTE.2019.2904722.
M. Barbero, “Critical evaluation of European balancing markets to enable the participation of Demand Aggregators,” Appl. Energy, vol. 264, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114707.
M. B. Farooq, “The shaping of sustainability assurance through the competition between accounting and non-accounting providers,” Accounting, Audit. Account. J., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 307–336, 2019, doi: 10.1108/AAAJ-10-2016-2756.
P. Jackson, “Using the Analytical Target Profile to Drive the Analytical Method Lifecycle,” Anal. Chem., vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 2577–2585, 2019, doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.8b04596.
J. Strickland, “Status of acute systemic toxicity testing requirements and data uses by U.S. regulatory agencies,” Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., vol. 94, pp. 183–196, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.01.022.
S. Beg, “Pharmaceutical QbD: Omnipresence in the product development lifecycle,” Eur. Pharm. Rev., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 58–64, 2017.
H. ElMaraghy, “Smart Adaptable Assembly Systems,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 44, pp. 4–13, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2016.04.107.
Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). (2016). Equality and Diversity in Higher Education.
Kearney, M. H., et al. (2019). Innovations in Academic Promotion: A Comparative Study. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management.
Kezar, A. (2018). Understanding and Reducing Faculty Disengagement: A Study of the Faculty Experience. Research in Higher Education.
Shin, J. C., & Harman, K. (2020). Higher Education in Asia: Quality, Access, and Equity. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management.
Tierney, W. G., & Bensimon, E. M. (2021). Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. Journal of Higher Education.
University of Melbourne. (n.d.). Promotion to Professor Guidelines.
University of Oxford. (n.d.). Recognition of Distinction Scheme.
Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT). (2019). Institutional Autonomy and Academic Freedom.
European University Association (EUA). (2019). The Future of Higher Education: A European Perspective.
