Page 1 of 10
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 9, No. 9
Publication Date: September 25, 2022
DOI:10.14738/assrj.99.13148. Kaguhangire-Barifaijo, M. (2022). Dynamics in the Pursuance of Higher Education’s Mandate Amidst Workload Policy: The Optimism
for Academics’ Career Growth. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(9). 465-474.
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Dynamics in the Pursuance of Higher Education’s Mandate
Amidst Workload Policy: The Optimism for Academics’ Career
Growth
Maria Kaguhangire-Barifaijo
ABSTRACT
The paper explores multiple challenges encountered by academics in an attempt to
fulfil the mandate of higher education institutions in Uganda of; teaching, research
and service to community. Whereas teaching is the core function of any university,
research and the third mission had majorly been used to inform most personnel
decisions, thereby threatening not only quality but academics’ enthusiasm and
growth. Two HEIs; Makerere University and Uganda Management Institute (UMI),
were purposively selected to unravel the underlying dynamics using a descriptive
design. It was revealed that university teaching was the most gratifying profession,
and a cardinal role why universities exist, but research was a prerequisite for
exception instructional delivery, evidence based teaching, institutional and
individual visibility. Similarly, masterly through research was provided effective
service to the community. Nonetheless, as individual academics strive to balance
the three roles of teaching, research and service, the policy on minimum workload
that majorly focuses on teaching load, has remained a hurdle, thereby jeopardizing
academics’ career growth and progression. Paradoxically, even those who have
endeavored to publish, suffer not only serious burnout and lack of adequate time to
prepare for teaching, but their contract renewals that are constantly in jeopardy
due to workload deficits. These stringent benchmarked evaluation tools, have
threatened not only individual and institutional profiling, but also, diminished
professorial collegiate. Further, it is recommended that institutions review their
workload perimeters to take into consideration other aspects such as; number of
students one has supervised, program development and review, representation on
professional bodies and leadership.
Key Words: attribution theory, research output, teaching load, university mandate,
workload
INTRODUCTION
University’s mandate has continued to be a controversial debate and a troubling one, especially
in their hierarchical order of importance, of teaching, research and service to community
(Kaguhangire, 2020). More recently, the topic has become even more complex with increased
issues of equity versus quality, with universities’ tripartite function, whose clear order of
importance is never specified (Miller, Taylor & Bedeian, 2011). Yet, as this confusion continues
to grow, it becomes more difficult to quantify their accomplishments, especially those activities
that lack clear tangibles, including; graduate supervision, attendance of meetings,
administration and leadership, attending workshops and conferences, counseling and
mentoring of students, external examination, providing their expertise through consultancy
services. Whereas the interpretation and ranking of the importance of specific mandate
Page 2 of 10
466
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 9, Issue 9, September-2022
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
continue to obscure evaluation practices of faculty, it has also left many academics in total
dismay, as to what exactly to put their weight behind in order to remain relevant, become
visible and feel accomplished. Worse still, as these professionals strive to fulfill their mandate
critical competing demands, such as; increased enrolment, societal expectations and questions
of quality, emerge, amidst excessive competition for scarce resources, especially for research
activities, thereby deflating their research enthusiasm (Benderly, 2014). Whereas research is
considered a highly regarded requirement, it does not come the easy way, especially with
competing activities that sometimes occur simultaneously, and with equal importance, amidst
high expectations on both quantity and quality (Moosa, 2018). Such expectations for academics
to “Publish or Perish”, has put them on pressure to research and publish (Fanelli, 2010). Hence,
scholars who publish infrequently because their focus is often on ‘teaching’ have lost
opportunities for career growth because such activities do not result into publication
(Morisano, 2013).
The context and problem
As Ugandan Universities strive to become research-led institutions they are confronted not only
with the multiplicity of activities embedded in the three arms of the mandate, that makes it
difficult for academics to balance these three roles of teaching, research and service to
community (Civera, et al 2020). More challenges have recently been imposed by regulatory
bodies on ‘who should supervise what’, ‘who should teach which level’, and; minimum
graduation load – making it even more enigmatic than the requirement of ‘research and
publication’. The system of ‘performance-based pay’, ‘minimum work-load’, as well as the
demand for ‘value-for-money’ have all made academics’ career growth prospects a quagmire
(Kaguhangire, Nkata & Namubiru, 2021). Therefore, this situation has not only affected staff
motivation and retention, but threatens ‘quality’ as institutions resort to utilization of ‘part- time’ staff who often lack enthusiasm and commitment due to the nature of their employment
relationships (Barifaijo et al, 2009). Nonetheless, whereas the usage of part-time staff should
be a bridge-gap measure for various reasons, efforts to nurture and promote full-time staff has
hit hitches caused by institutional structures that are rigid and obstructive. Although, it is
practically impossible for anyone to satisfactorily and effectively perform all the three functions
without affecting quality, but also cause health-related challenges. Remarkably, all the three
aspects of the mandate attract rewards, e.g; financial (for extra teaching hours) and
commendation letters (for outstanding performance in instructional delivery), under “The
teaching function”, and a ‘commission’ (for attracting a project that generate income for the
institute), under “Service and Consultancy function” and; promotion (for satisfactory research
output), for the “Research function”.
In order to propel quality, university managers in Uganda have endeavored to devise strategies
to step up the function of research and enable individual faculty engage in research activities,
such as; organizing quarterly research seminars for staff and funding for research, funding
conference attendance, organizing institutional and international conferences, and establishing
journals (Komakech, 2019). Further, by the virtue of their roles, academics participate in
graduate research supervision, that should give them a leverage in research and publication
(Barifaijo et al, 2016). Regrettably, whereas, service to community is often encouraged, the
measures of its contribution in career growth decisions, is minimal because it stops at the initial
stages, yet, measures of teaching that guide personnel decisions, are also based on students’
evaluation, while measures of research function that lead to “academics’ career growth” is
Page 3 of 10
467
Kaguhangire-Barifaijo, M. (2022). Dynamics in the Pursuance of Higher Education’s Mandate Amidst Workload Policy: The Optimism for Academics’
Career Growth. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(9). 465-474.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.99.13148
determined by journal publications (Barifaijo and Namara, 2016). In order to unravel the
dynamics in the pursuance of HEIs’ mandate, three questions were posed: (1) why do
individuals yearn for university teaching? (2) how does workload policy affect academics’
performance evaluation? and; (3) what are the implications of diminished academics’ career
growth?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Increasingly, the environment in which academics operate is becoming more complex, thereby
causing mixed reactions, disengagement, diminished motivation, lost commitment, but also,
high attrition rates (Biagioli & Lippman, 2020). In fact, the malaise among academics has
attracted close scrutiny so as to eliminate the risk of shirking, toxicity, incivility and other
deviant behaviors (Kaguhangire-Barifaijo & Nkata, 2020). Unfortunately, although such
interventions are created for the supportive, co-operative and developmental purposes with
which evaluations are usually executed, it has been misconstrued as pessimistic mind-set
intended to frustrate academics’ struggles for their rights, attain academic freedom, work-life- balance, and to undermine their good will (Civera, et al 2020). Essentially, academics engage in
various activities, including; research, supervision, attending viva voce examinations and
proposal defense, organizing seminars, reaching the community, assessing students,
participating on institutional committees, preparing for classes; and many others. Holiday or
no holiday, leave or no leave, vacation or no vacation, they are ever in the race to keep up with
the latest knowledge (Paideya and Bengesai, 2017). Other enigmatic yet critical activities
include; course work/tests, examinations and dissertations assessment. In fact, Jeans & Murphy
(2009), affirm that this activity was the toughest and perhaps the most undesirable in the
academic profession, to say the least. Yet, although these activities demand ‘all the faculties’ of
an individual executing them, they contribute the ‘least’ or even ‘none’ during performance
evaluation of staff (Kaguhangire-Barifaijo, 2020). For those holding leadership positions, it
becomes even more complex given the regular meetings and reports demanded.
Theoretical exploration
The paper was guided by Weiner’s (1974), Attribution Theory, to explain how achievements
are obtained through the identification of individuals’ ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck, as
the most important factors in everyone’s ambition. The theory classifies attributions along
three causal dimensions as; locus of control, stability, and controllability – where, the locus of
control dimension has two poles: internal versus external locus of control; the stability
dimension captures whether causes change over time or not (Fanelli, 2010). For example,
ability can be classified as a ‘stable, internal cause’, and effort as ‘unstable and internal’. On the
other hand, controllability contrasts ‘causes one can control’ such as; skill/efficacy, from ‘causes
one cannot control’, such as; aptitude, mood, others’ actions, and luck, to be able to execute a
task such as; ability to conduct to do research and publish – amidst all the prevailing dynamics
(Weiner, 2012). The theory espouses that, there is a strong relationship between ‘self-concept
and achievement’; and, that ‘causal attributions determine affective reactions to success and
failure’. For example, one will take pride for the genuine and original piece of research done by
self that has been finally accepted after numerous trials. When at last it has been published in
a credible journal – it generates great positive affect.” Hence, academics with publications that
causes self-esteem will lead to higher feeling of achievement, tend to attribute success to
internal, stable, uncontrollable factors such as ability, while they contribute failure to either
internal, unstable, controllable factors such as effort, or external, uncontrollable factors such as