Scholarlink

<p>Setting priorities is crucial for optimising research in resource-constrained environments, so we identify higher education (HE) research priorities at one regional Australian university. Employing constructivism, we conducted a three-round modified-Delphi with an expert panel (n = 64) using online questionnaires. Analysis included descriptive statistics (quantitative items), and content/theme analysis (qualitative). We collected 37 panellist-identified priorities (Round 1):&#xa0;the top three were AI in HE, how best to teach innovatively, and equity in HE. Across all three rounds, 48 priorities were considered with 31 achieving high importance and consensus: the top three were student engagement, how to teach creative/critical thinking skills, and how technology impacts HE. Key rationales underlying panellists’ priorities were conducting research to improve student learning, workforce preparedness, and aligning with institutional values. Findings align partly with international priority-setting exercises, but also reveal novel insights specific to the regional context. Although institution-specific, findings offer broader relevance and a replicable methodology for other HE institutions identifying research priorities.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Identifying higher education research priorities at a regional Australian university: a modified-Delphi study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月25日

查看全文
  • Dara Tafazoli,
  • Charlotte E. Rees,
  • Susan Ledger,
  • Liam Phelan,
  • Tegan Bradley,
  • Kathleen Butler,
  • Bonnie McBain,
  • Julie Reis,
  • Jude Weidenhofer,
  • Tamara Young

摘要

Setting priorities is crucial for optimising research in resource-constrained environments, so we identify higher education (HE) research priorities at one regional Australian university. Employing constructivism, we conducted a three-round modified-Delphi with an expert panel (n = 64) using online questionnaires. Analysis included descriptive statistics (quantitative items), and content/theme analysis (qualitative). We collected 37 panellist-identified priorities (Round 1): the top three were AI in HE, how best to teach innovatively, and equity in HE. Across all three rounds, 48 priorities were considered with 31 achieving high importance and consensus: the top three were student engagement, how to teach creative/critical thinking skills, and how technology impacts HE. Key rationales underlying panellists’ priorities were conducting research to improve student learning, workforce preparedness, and aligning with institutional values. Findings align partly with international priority-setting exercises, but also reveal novel insights specific to the regional context. Although institution-specific, findings offer broader relevance and a replicable methodology for other HE institutions identifying research priorities.