The Evaluation of Comprehensive Teaching and Research Efficiency and Its Key Influencing Factors Analysis of “Double First-Class” Universities in China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Research on the Evaluation Index System of Input-Output Efficiency of Universities
2.2. Evaluation of the Construction of DFCUs
2.3. Research on the Evaluation Method of Input-Output Efficiency of Universities
3. Establishment of the Evaluation Index System for CTRE of DFCUs
3.1. Selection of Indicator System
3.2. The Measurement of Indicators
4. The Evaluation Model of the Comprehensive Teaching and Research Efficiency of DFCUs in China Based on a Joint DEA Model
4.1. The Selection and Modeling Idea of the Joint DEA Model
4.2. The Steps of the Joint DEA Model
4.3. The Computer Algorithm for Solving the Joint DEA Model
5. An Empirical Study on the Evaluation of the Comprehensive Teaching and Research Efficiency of DFCUs in China
5.1. Collection of Evaluation Data
5.2. Efficiency Evaluation and Analysis
6. Analysis of the Factors Influencing the CTREs of DFCUs in China
7. Conclusions and Prospects
7.1. Research Conclusions
7.2. Research Implications
7.3. Research Prospects
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ahn, T.; Arnold, V.; Charnes, A.; Cooper, W.W. DEA and ratio efficiency analyses for public institutions of higher learning in Texas. Res. Gov. Nonprofit Account. 1989, 5, 165–185. [Google Scholar]
- Avkiran, N.K. Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian universities through data envelopment analysis. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2001, 35, 57–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnes, J. Measuring teaching efficiency in higher education: An application of data envelopment analysis to economics graduates from UK Universities 1993. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2006, 174, 443–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramzi, S.; Ayadi, M. Assessment of universities efficiency using data envelopment analysis: Weights restrictions and super-efficiency measure. J. Appl. Manag. Invest. 2016, 5, 40–58. [Google Scholar]
- Kempkes, G.; Pohl, C. The efficiency of German universities–some evidence from nonparametric and parametric methods. Appl. Econ. 2010, 42, 2063–2079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shen, H. The Definition of “Double First-class” Universities, Why They Should be Constructed and How. China Econ. Educ. Rev. 2017, 2, 11–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Liu, B.; Li, J. Evaluation and Research of World Class University: An Interview with Dr. John Vaugh, the Executive Vice President of AAU. Int. Comp. Educ. 2010, 32, 13–19. [Google Scholar]
- Ohtani, R.; Kamo, M.; Kobayashi, N. An introduction to the Research Excellence Framework: A new research evaluation framework for universities in the UK. Synthesiology 2013, 6, 118–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhao, L.; Liu, Z. Analysis of NRC 2006-2008 doctoral professional quality ranking system. Acad. Degrees Grad. Educ. 2010, 11, 72–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yue, W.J.; Sun, C.Q. Research on the construction of world class universities based on university ranking evaluation system. J. Henan Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2019, 3, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patricio, R.C.; Jesus, C.P.V.; Jorge, A.P. Evaluating the efficiency of the higher education system in emerging economies: Empirical evidences from Chilean universities. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2012, 6, 1441–1448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sagarra, M.; Mar-Molinero, C.; Agasisti, T. Exploring the efficiency of Mexican universities: Integrating data envelopment analysis and multidimensional scaling. Omega 2017, 67, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobrota, M.; Bulajic, M.; Bornmann, L.; Jeremic, V. A new approach to the QS university ranking using the composite I-distance indicator: Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2016, 67, 200–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bornmann, L.; Gralka, S.; Anegónm, F.D.M.; Wohlrabe, K. Efficiency of universities and research-focused institutions worldwide: An empirical dea investigation based on institutional publication numbers and estimated academic staff numbers. CESifo Work. Pap. Ser. 2020; advance online publication. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, H.; Jiang, H. Evaluation and Analysis of Key Influencing Factors of Scientific Research Efficiency of “Double First-Class” Universities in China. J. Grey Syst. 2021, 33, 32–45. [Google Scholar]
- Glass, J.C.; McCallion, G.; McKillop, D.G.; Rasaratnam, S.; Stringer, K.S. Implications of variant efficiency measures for policy evaluations in UK higher education. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2006, 40, 119–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moncayo–Martínez, L.A.; Ramírez–Nafarrate, A.; Hernández–Balderrama, M.G. Evaluation of public HEI on teaching, research, and knowledge dissemination by Data Envelopment Analysis. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2020, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, X.; Chen, Y. Evaluation of science and technology innovation capability of “double-class” universities:international experience and inspiration—Based on the examination of research evaluation systems in the UK, France, the US and Australia. Jiangsu High. Educ. 2017, 1, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, Y. Institutional analysis of university evaluation in China—Also on the evaluation of universities under the construction of “double first-class”. Tsinghua J. Educ. 2017, 38, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, D.; Ding, W.; Wang, Y.; Liu, S. Exploring the Role of International Research Collaboration in Building China’s World-Class Universities. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, D.; Guo, H.L. A study on performance evaluation of “double first-class” universities based on DEA-Malmquist model. Educ. Dev. Res. 2020, 40, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, B.L.; Zhao, Z.; Fang, F. Research on comprehensive evaluation of university research performance in the context of “double first-class”. China Univ. Sci. Technol. 2020, Z1, 53–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, G.; Zheng, B.; Shang, L. What makes “double-class” universities attractive to talent?—Evidence from a qualitative comparative analysis of fuzzy sets. Explor. High. Educ. 2021, 12, 30–38. [Google Scholar]
- Kuah, C.T.; Wong, K.Y. Efficiency assessment of universities through data envelopment analysis. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2011, 3, 499–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Qiao, L.B. Evaluation of Research-Teaching Comprehensive Efficiency of “985” Universities Based on Joint DEA Model. Sci. Res. Manag. 2015, S1, 210–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shao, Z. Research on the Evaluation and Countermeasures of Optimal Allocation of Regional Higher Education Resources in China (Doctoral Dissertation, Harbin Engineering University). 2006. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?dbname=CDFD9908&filename=2006133553.nh (accessed on 16 November 2006).
- Yuan, W.; Li, M.; Rong, Y. Study on the Running Efficiency of 72 Higher Educational Institutions Directly Under Ministry of Education in 2011—Based on DEA Model. China High. Educ. Res. 2013, 11, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Charnes, A.; Cooper, W.W.; Rhodes, E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1978, 2, 429–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, L.; Geng, Y.; Liu, Z.; Xue, B.; Liu, Z.; Liu, Z. Eco-efficiency evaluation of urban complex ecosystem based on emergy and data envelopment analyses. Chin. J. Ecol. 2014, 33, 462–468. [Google Scholar]
- Banker, R.D.; Charnes, A.; Cooper, W.W. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag. Sci. 1984, 30, 1078–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, H.; Yang, Y.; Zhou, D. Analysis of influence factors on the efficiency of multiple inputs and multiple outputs problems. Syst. Eng.-Theory Pract. 2007, 3, 161–165. [Google Scholar]
- Beasley, J.E. Determine Teaching and Research Efficiencies. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 1995, 46, 441–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, M. Research on the efficiency assessment and its key influence factors of the investment in the environmental governance of China. Resour. Environ. Yangtze Basin 2012, 21, 111–116. [Google Scholar]
- Su, L.; Qiao, L. Output and Impact Study of Highly Cited Papers Under International Academic Collaboration Based on ESI. J. Mod. Inf. 2019, 39, 143–152. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, H. Alumni as an important social resource for “double-class” construction and university fundraising. Chin. High. Educ. 2017, 23, 42–43. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, C. The spirit of Jia Geng and alumni donations to schools. Chin. High. Educ. 2006, Z3, 34–36. [Google Scholar]
- Li, C.; Zhu, P. New thinking of local universities to raise funds for school operation—Based on the foreign model. Friends Account. 2014, 11, 124–126. [Google Scholar]
Serial Number | Indicator Name | Code | Index Attribute |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Number of professors | I1 | Shared input |
2 | Annual budget | I2 | |
3 | Quality of enrolled students | I3 | Teaching input |
4 | National Teaching Achievement Award | O1 | Teaching output |
5 | Prize in the student innovation competition | O2 | |
6 | Salary of graduates | O3 | |
7 | National Science and Technology Achievement Award | O4 | Scientific output |
8 | Number of subjects in the top 1% of ESI | O5 | |
9 | Number of citations per article | O6 | |
10 | Number of highly cited papers | O7 | |
11 | Equivalent number of granted invention patents | O8 | |
12 | Number of words in published monographs | O9 |
DFCUs | Input Indicator | Output Indicator | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shared Input | Teaching Stage | Research Stage | Teaching Stage | Research Stage | |||||||||||
… | … | … | … | … | |||||||||||
… | … | … | … | … | |||||||||||
… | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … |
… | … | … | … | … |
Index | Maximum Value | Minimum Value | Average Value | Standard Deviation | Range | Coefficient of Variation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I1 | 4544.25 | 1343.75 | 2686.44 | 990.57 | 3200.50 | 0.369 |
I2 | 269.50 | 35.80 | 88.54 | 50.45 | 233.70 | 0.570 |
I3 | 100.00 | 60.60 | 78.72 | 9.48 | 39.40 | 0.120 |
O1 | 55.50 | 1.50 | 9.00 | 11.21 | 54.00 | 1.246 |
O2 | 80.00 | 1.00 | 15.83 | 16.01 | 79.00 | 1.011 |
O3 | 11.71 | 5.10 | 7.52 | 1.62 | 6.61 | 0.215 |
O4 | 21.00 | 1.50 | 9.63 | 5.39 | 19.50 | 0.560 |
O5 | 21.00 | 7.00 | 13.54 | 4.34 | 14.00 | 0.321 |
O6 | 16.24 | 7.54 | 11.83 | 2.23 | 8.70 | 0.189 |
O7 | 1547.00 | 103.00 | 545.69 | 349.91 | 1444.00 | 0.641 |
O8 | 1325.20 | 73.30 | 490.00 | 344.85 | 1251.90 | 0.704 |
O9 | 22,446.00 | 1613.00 | 8371.42 | 5090.58 | 20,833.00 | 0.608 |
Name of University | CTRE | Teaching Efficiency | Research Efficiency | Ratio Used in Teaching Phase | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Value | Rank | Value | Rank | Value | Rank | Number of Professors | Annual Budget | |
U1 | 0.996 | 1 | 0.945 | 4 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.55 | 0.67 |
U2 | 0.987 | 2 | 0.183 | 15 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.30 | 0.35 |
U3 | 0.984 | 3 | 0.154 | 18 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.36 | 0.38 |
U4 | 0.981 | 4 | 0.132 | 22 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.32 |
U5 | 0.958 | 5 | 0.196 | 14 | 0.969 | 5 | 0.67 | 0.60 |
U6 | 0.943 | 6 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.702 | 12 | 0.44 | 0.33 |
U7 | 0.932 | 7 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.831 | 8 | 0.45 | 0.43 |
U8 | 0.904 | 8 | 0.171 | 16 | 0.915 | 6 | 0.48 | 0.55 |
U9 | 0.902 | 9 | 0.859 | 5 | 0.905 | 7 | 0.35 | 0.48 |
U10 | 0.879 | 10 | 1.000 | 1 | 0.461 | 22 | 0.56 | 0.68 |
U11 | 0.736 | 11 | 0.618 | 10 | 0.743 | 9 | 0.32 | 0.65 |
U12 | 0.729 | 12 | 0.158 | 17 | 0.737 | 10 | 0.40 | 0.69 |
U13 | 0.699 | 13 | 0.154 | 19 | 0.706 | 11 | 0.63 | 0.64 |
U14 | 0.668 | 14 | 0.128 | 24 | 0.676 | 13 | 0.69 | 0.33 |
U15 | 0.659 | 15 | 0.691 | 7 | 0.657 | 14 | 0.36 | 0.65 |
U16 | 0.639 | 16 | 0.531 | 12 | 0.645 | 15 | 0.30 | 0.31 |
U17 | 0.627 | 17 | 0.707 | 6 | 0.415 | 25 | 0.30 | 0.35 |
U18 | 0.604 | 18 | 0.482 | 13 | 0.608 | 16 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
U19 | 0.588 | 19 | 0.620 | 9 | 0.532 | 21 | 0.30 | 0.31 |
U20 | 0.588 | 20 | 0.625 | 8 | 0.450 | 23 | 0.30 | 0.40 |
U21 | 0.587 | 21 | 0.140 | 21 | 0.593 | 17 | 0.35 | 0.34 |
U22 | 0.583 | 22 | 0.154 | 20 | 0.588 | 18 | 0.45 | 0.54 |
U23 | 0.564 | 23 | 0.065 | 26 | 0.578 | 19 | 0.51 | 0.30 |
U24 | 0.528 | 24 | 0.128 | 23 | 0.533 | 20 | 0.42 | 0.39 |
U25 | 0.487 | 25 | 0.547 | 11 | 0.212 | 26 | 0.30 | 0.69 |
U26 | 0.442 | 26 | 0.112 | 25 | 0.446 | 24 | 0.45 | 0.41 |
U27 | 1.000 | — | 1.000 | — | 1.000 | — | 0.580 | 0.480 |
U28 | 0.054 | — | 0.016 | — | 0.054 | — | 0.300 | 0.530 |
U29 | 0.343 | — | 0.422 | — | 0.316 | — | 0.300 | 0.320 |
Minimum value | 0.442 | 0.065 | 0.212 | 0.300 | 0.300 | |||
Maximum value | 0.996 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.690 | 0.690 | |||
Average value | 0.738 | 0.442 | 0.689 | 0.418 | 0.465 |
Shared Indicators | Average | Equal to 30% | Less than 50% | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of DFCUs | Percentage | Number of DFCUs | Percentage | ||
Number of professors | 41.8% | 7 | 26.9% | 20 | 76.9 % |
Annual budget | 46.5% | 2 | 7.7% | 16 | 61.5 % |
No. | Index | Indicator Name | Grey Correlation Degree | Sort |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | I1 | Number of professors | 0.826 | 7 |
2 | I2 | Annual budget | 0.839 | 2 |
3 | I3 | Quality of enrolled students | 0.791 | 10 |
4 | O1 | National Teaching Achievement Award | 0.784 | 11 |
5 | O2 | Prize in the student innovation competition | 0.765 | 12 |
6 | O3 | Salary of graduates | 0.839 | 3 |
7 | O4 | National Science and Technology Achievement Award | 0.821 | 8 |
8 | O5 | Number of subjects in the top 1% of ESI | 0.834 | 5 |
9 | O6 | Number of citations per article | 0.809 | 9 |
10 | O7 | Number of highly cited papers | 0.848 | 1 |
11 | O8 | Equivalent number of granted invention patents | 0.827 | 6 |
12 | O9 | Number of words in published monographs | 0.836 | 4 |
Average value | 0.818 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Li, H.; Ma, D.; Cui, W.; Tao, M.; Zhang, J. The Evaluation of Comprehensive Teaching and Research Efficiency and Its Key Influencing Factors Analysis of “Double First-Class” Universities in China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15020978
Li H, Ma D, Cui W, Tao M, Zhang J. The Evaluation of Comprehensive Teaching and Research Efficiency and Its Key Influencing Factors Analysis of “Double First-Class” Universities in China. Sustainability. 2023; 15(2):978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15020978
Chicago/Turabian StyleLi, Hongwei, Dongyang Ma, Wei Cui, Min Tao, and Jiahui Zhang. 2023. "The Evaluation of Comprehensive Teaching and Research Efficiency and Its Key Influencing Factors Analysis of “Double First-Class” Universities in China" Sustainability 15, no. 2: 978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15020978