Ethical beliefs and behaviour of university educators: evidence from Russia

Abstract

PurposeThis exploratory study aims, firstly, to analyse and categorise judgements on ethical behaviour and actual behaviour of university educators. Secondly, the study addresses the impact of demographic data, such as gender, age and role on these issues.Design/methodology/approachWe utilised online survey data from academic employees of four leading universities in Russia, who are involved in teaching activities. In this study, we used correlation, regression and factor analyses.FindingsOur results demonstrate that teaching, while too distressed to be effective, is a common experience among university educators. By contrast, the rarest categories include teaching under the influence of drugs or alcohol. In addition, there is a high congruence between beliefs and respective behaviours. Females are typically more ethical in both judgements and actual behaviour. Factor analysis of behaviours yielded 16 interpretable factors.Practical implicationsFirstly, the salary of the university educators should be adequate and competitive and match with their workload. Secondly, the work of the educators should be given recognition that may become their stimuli for improvement in university teaching. Thirdly, universities should develop ethics centres, which help faculty members and students to take the right decisions in situations involving questionable behaviour in the classroom. Lastly, the development of ethical codes, for faculty members and students, may become their guidance in situations with ethical dilemmas.Originality/valueThis study contributed to the very limited research on the ethical aspects of higher education in Russia.

Quality management of higher education within the framework of the socio-investment model of economic growth: State audit and financial control

“…To overcome this limitation, it is advisable to take into account the results of several university rankings. Timofeyev and Dremova (2022), the article proves that the peculiarity of the socio-investment model of economic growth in Russia does not hinder, but supports its implementation. The impact of the labor market on the market of higher education services is not unilateral (direct), but it also has the opposite effect -these markets are systemically interdependent and influence each other.…”

“…The described feature has a contradictory interpretation in the existing literature, where the authors note the increased risks of imbalance associated with it, the increasing disparity of the higher education services market from the labor market (Crowley-Vigneau et al, 2022;Taranov and Ugnich, 2022;Timofeyev and Dremova, 2022). This could potentially limit the contribution of social investment to economic growth.…”