[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-593776-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-593776-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","predictors-of-teacher-educators-research-productivity","Predictors of Teacher Educators' Research Productivity","","Study examines how teacher educators’ research productivity (RP) relates to their background and professional characteristics, attitudes, motives, obstacles, and research time. Data include 161 teacher educators from four teacher education colleges in Israel. Findings show five significant predictors of RP: academic degree, rank, administrative position, desire to develop new knowledge and learn from research findings, and perceived insufficient research competence and self-confidence. These variables explain 37.2% of RP variance and inform recruitment, assignment, and professional development for new faculty.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/predictors-of-teacher-educators-research-productivity/593776/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/predictors-of-teacher-educators-research-productivity/593776.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"4398046744996","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What variables were found to predict teacher educators’ research productivity (RP)?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The study identified five significant predictors: academic degree, rank, administrative position, desire to develop new knowledge and learn from research findings, and perceived insufficient research competence and self-confidence.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was RP defined and measured in this study?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"RP was treated as a composite indicator based on counts of published/accepted outputs, typically weighted by type of publication and other factors; the text also presents a logarithmic approach to account for negative skew.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What proportion of RP variance did the predictors explain?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"The five predictors accounted for 37.2% of the variance in research productivity (RP).","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},593776,1792251890,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":11,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":133,"file_id":134,"file_url":135,"file_type":136,"file_size":137,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":127,"language":138,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":139,"faqs":140,"seo_title":141,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":142,"read_time":143,"preview_page_count":4},4398046744996,"Australian Journal of Teacher Education  \n\n| Volume 42 | Issue 11 | Article 3 |\n| --- | --- |\n| 2017\u003Cbr>Predictors of Teacher Educators' Research Productivity\u003Cbr>FadiaM. Nasser-Abu Alhija Tel Aviv University, [fadia@post.tau.ac.il](fadia@post.tau.ac.il)\u003Cbr>Arin Majdob\u003Cbr>Tel Aviv University, [arinmajd@gmail.com](arinmajd@gmail.com) |  |\n\nRecommended Citation  \nNasser-Abu Alhija, F. M., & Majdob, A. (2017). Predictors of Teacher Educators' Research Productivity. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42 (11).  \nRetrieved from [http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol42/iss11/3](http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol42/iss11/3)  \nThis Journal Article is posted at Research Online.  \n[http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol42/iss11/3](http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol42/iss11/3)  \nAustralian Journal of Teacher Education  \nPredictors of Teacher Educators' Research Productivity  \nFadia Nasser-Abu Ahija, Tel Aviv University, Israel  \nArin Majdob, Tel Aviv University, Israel  \nAbstract: This study examined the relationship between teacher  \neducators' research productivity (RP) and their background and  \nprofessional characteristics, attitudes, motives, obstacles and time  \ndevoted to research. The sample included 161 teacher educators from  \nfour teacher education colleges in Israel. The findings indicate the  \nsignificance of five variables for predicting RP: academic degree,  \nrank, administrative position, desire to develop new knowledge and  \nlearn from research findings and perceived insufficient research  \ncompetence and self-confidence. These variables account for 37.2% of  \nthe variance in RP. The results from this study provide useful  \ninformation for teacher education institutions and policy makers  \nregarding variables significantly related to RP. These variables  \nshould be addressed when recruiting teacher educators, assigning  \nadministrative duties and designing professional development  \nprograms, particularly for new career faculty.  \nIntroduction  \nHistorically, teacher education colleges were established as teaching institutions with an emphasis on teaching rather than on research. In the last two decades, reforms introduced into these institutions have included a research focus as well, and the role of teacher educators as researchers has gained noticeable attention in the literature (Borg & Alshumaimeri, 2012) .  \nThe importance of research in higher education institutions is attributed to two main factors. First is the notion that research improves teaching (Middaugh, 2000) and contributes to continuous professional development (Livingston, McCall & Morgado, 2009) . Thus, advancing research capability as a way of strengthening teacher education communities is viewed as a key factor in enhancing the quality of student and teacher learning (Arreman, 2008; Lunenberg, Ponte, & van De Ven, 2007) . Second, research productivity (RP) has become the iconic indicator for institutional prestige as one of the vital resources required by higher education institutions for maintaining operation and facilitating development and growth. In higher education institutions, particularly in the US and Europe, publication records are an important factor in faculty performance evaluations, research grant awards, salary decisions and promotion, which allow faculty members to move through the academic pipelines (Ming, 2010)  \nIn Israel, where this study was conducted, research authorities and committees have been established in teacher education colleges to encourage research by teacher educators. However, the efforts and resources invested for this purpose have not always been productive, and the content and level of the research conducted are still being debated (Yogev & Yogev, 2006) . Therefore, investigating the factors that may be affecting teacher educators' RP is vital, and this was the focus of the current study.  \nVol 42, 11, November 2017 34  \nAustralian Journal of Teacher Education  \nResearch Productivity  \nThere is no single definition for RP, and various","cbCaircI7Er3SCcG","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaircI7Er3SCcG","pdf",911387,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n# Research Productivity\n## Definitions and measurement of RP\n## Weighting of research outputs\n## RP indicators and formulas","[{\"question\":\"What variables were found to predict teacher educators’ research productivity (RP)?\",\"answer\":\"The study identified five significant predictors: academic degree, rank, administrative position, desire to develop new knowledge and learn from research findings, and perceived insufficient research competence and self-confidence.\"},{\"question\":\"How was RP defined and measured in this study?\",\"answer\":\"RP was treated as a composite indicator based on counts of published/accepted outputs, typically weighted by type of publication and other factors; the text also presents a logarithmic approach to account for negative skew.\"},{\"question\":\"What proportion of RP variance did the predictors explain?\",\"answer\":\"The five predictors accounted for 37.2% of the variance in research productivity (RP).\"}]","Predictors of Teacher Educators' Research Productivity | PDF",1792077896,48]