Volume 4, Issue 4 (December 2025)
IJER 2025, 4(4): 1-15 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Nourozi S, Ahmadi F, Shafizadeh H. (2025). Validation of an Intelligence Based Academic Governance Model in Comprehensive Universities of Tehran. IJER. 4(4), 1-15. doi:10.22034/ijer.4.4.9
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-492-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-492-en.html
1- PhD student, Department of Educational Management, Ga.C., Islamic Azad University, Garmsar, Iran
2- Department of Educational Management, Ga.C., Islamic Azad University, Garmsar, Iran ,ahmadif@iau.ac.ir
3- Department of Educational Management, Ga.C., Islamic Azad University, Garmsar, Iran
2- Department of Educational Management, Ga.C., Islamic Azad University, Garmsar, Iran ,
3- Department of Educational Management, Ga.C., Islamic Azad University, Garmsar, Iran
Abstract: (1364 Views)
Objective: This study aimed to design an intelligence-based academic governance model for Iran’s higher education system by identifying its key components and examining their causal relationships.
Methods: The research employed an applied, descriptive-correlational design. Structural equation modeling (SEM) using LISREL software was used to assess causal pathways among the variables. The statistical population included faculty members from public universities in Tehran in 2025. Data were gathered through a researcher-made questionnaire administered via stratified random sampling.
Results: The proposed model demonstrated an acceptable level of fit. The construct of intelligence-based academic governance had positive and significant effects on five dimensions: causal, contextual, intervening, strategic, and consequential factors. Path coefficients ranged from 0.68 to 0.83, with corresponding t-values greater than 1.96. The strongest effect was observed for the strategic dimension (β = 0.83, t = 11.86, p < 0.001), underscoring the central role of intelligence in guiding macro-level decisions and supporting forward-looking planning in higher education.
Conclusions: Achieving intelligent academic governance requires enhancing components such as institutional and academic autonomy, rule of law and transparency, stakeholder participation, intelligent management, knowledge governance, and universities’ social responsibility. The findings confirm that integrating intelligence into governance processes can significantly improve decision-making capacity and accountability, offering a technology-driven and participatory governance model for Iranian universities.
Methods: The research employed an applied, descriptive-correlational design. Structural equation modeling (SEM) using LISREL software was used to assess causal pathways among the variables. The statistical population included faculty members from public universities in Tehran in 2025. Data were gathered through a researcher-made questionnaire administered via stratified random sampling.
Results: The proposed model demonstrated an acceptable level of fit. The construct of intelligence-based academic governance had positive and significant effects on five dimensions: causal, contextual, intervening, strategic, and consequential factors. Path coefficients ranged from 0.68 to 0.83, with corresponding t-values greater than 1.96. The strongest effect was observed for the strategic dimension (β = 0.83, t = 11.86, p < 0.001), underscoring the central role of intelligence in guiding macro-level decisions and supporting forward-looking planning in higher education.
Conclusions: Achieving intelligent academic governance requires enhancing components such as institutional and academic autonomy, rule of law and transparency, stakeholder participation, intelligent management, knowledge governance, and universities’ social responsibility. The findings confirm that integrating intelligence into governance processes can significantly improve decision-making capacity and accountability, offering a technology-driven and participatory governance model for Iranian universities.
Keywords: Academic governance, Organizational intelligence, Smart university, Structural equation modeling, Higher education in Iran
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Studies
Received: 2025/05/21 | Accepted: 2025/08/11 | Published: 2025/12/1
Received: 2025/05/21 | Accepted: 2025/08/11 | Published: 2025/12/1
References
1. Abello Romero, J. B., López, D., Ganga, F., & Mancilla, C. (2021). Perceptions on regulation and asymmetry of information as critical factors in university governance in Latin America. SAGE Open, 11(2). [DOI:10.1177/21582440211023161]
2. Ahmed, A. A. S., Ali, F. E., & Taha, M. M. (2023). Academic governance strategies and their impact on the quality of educational performance. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 22(1), 1-6.
3. Al Sawafi, A., Banneheka, B. M. S. G., Hashim, M. W., Valsala, S., & Noushad, B. (2023). Development and Validation of a University Governance Index. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Organizational Studies, 18(2), 65. [DOI:10.18848/2324-7649/CGP/v18i02/65-92]
4. Alas, R., Elenurm, T., & Tafel Viia, K. (2010). Who is Driving Change? Corporate Governance and Organizational Change in Estonia. Journal of Baltic Studies, 41(1), 23-43. [DOI:10.1080/01629770903525308]
5. Ebrahimi, R., & Abdollahi, M. (2022). Analysis of smart governance components in Iran's higher education system with a data-driven approach [In Persian]. Public Management Researches, 14(4), 213-232.
6. Ebrahim-pour, H., & Khalili, H. (2011). From good governance to sustainable governance [In Persian]. In Proceedings of the 8th International Management Conference (27-28 Azar), Tehran: Ariana Research Group.
7. Fathollahi, A., Yamani, M., Sabbaghian, Z., Farasatkhah, M., & Ghazi-Tabatabaei, M. (2014). Content analysis of Iran's five development plans with regard to higher education governance models [In Persian]. Journal of the Iranian Higher Education Association, 4, 47-82.
8. Gheyrivani, Gh., Montazeri, M., & Zahedi, Sh.-S. (2023). Proposing a smart governance model with a focus on human resource development and training in the public sector [In Persian]. Management and Educational Perspective Quarterly, 5(1), 111-141.
9. Gheyrivani, Gh., Montazeri, M., & Zahedi, Sh.-S. (2024). Presenting a model of factors influencing smart governance in the country [In Persian]. Value Creation in Business Management, 4(1), 279-301.
10. Kauko, J., & Wiborg, S. (2020). Governance and Learning in Higher Education: Contemporary European Experiences. Higher Education Policy, 33(2), 145-162.
11. Kazemian, Gh., Ghorbanizadeh, V., Va'ezi, R., & Shahmohammadi, M. (2019). A model of the role and structure of local governance in Iran's management system [In Persian]. Public Management, 11(2), 179-202.
12. Kodrado, M. (2021). Students' Participation and Social Responsibility in University Governance. Tertiary Education Management, 27(3), 211-228.
13. Mitchell, B. (2023). The Road to Better Governance in American Higher Education. Forbes.
14. Mohtaram, M., & Pakbaz, Z. (2022). Market Oriented University Governance and Knowledge Commercialization. Tehran: Conference on Education.
15. Morley, L. (2006). Quality and Standards of Higher Education Provision in England. HEFCE.
16. Nashif, A. (2019). University Governance and Accountability Frameworks. Asian Journal of Education, 7(4), 87-112.
17. Pourazat, A.-A., Abbasi, T., Maqsoudi-Kenari, Sh., & Namdar-Juybari, M.-M. (2024). Investigating the role of core components of smart governance in realizing a smart city (Case study: Tehran) [In Persian]. Public Management, 16(3), 535-561.
18. Rabanikhah, F., Khorsandi, A., Tehranchi, M.-M., Ghiathi-Nadoshan, S., & Elyasi, M. (2023). Explaining the dimensions and components of academic governance [In Persian]. Iranian Higher Education, 15(3), 91-113.
19. Razavi, M., & Karami, Z. (2021). Evaluating the performance of universities based on indicators of academic governance and scientific effectiveness [In Persian]. Research and Planning in Higher Education, 27(3), 89-110.
20. Shahpouri, F., & Kalantari, H. (2016). Analyzing the challenges of higher education governance in Iran with emphasis on university autonomy and accountability [In Persian]. Research and Planning in Higher Education, 23(2), 97-118.
21. Shakib, A., Zarrinkia, M., & colleagues. (2022). Examining good governance in Iranian public universities with emphasis on participation, accountability, and transparency [In Persian]. Iranian Journal of Higher Education Management, 12(2), 45-62.
22. Tasten, S., & Davoudi, R. (2021). Academic Governance and Institutional Agility. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(1), 54-77.
23. William, L., & Waugh, J. R. (2003). Issues in University Governance: Professional and Less Academic. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 585, 84.
24. Williams, G. (2019). Governance of Higher Education Institutions: An International Perspective. London: Routledge.
25. Wolfe, R., & Dilworth, R. (2020). Effectiveness of Higher Education Governance Structures. Journal of Higher Education, 91(6), 834-850.
26. Yáñez, S., Uruburu, Á., Moreno, A., & Lumbreras, J. (2019). Sustainability Report as a Strategic Vision Tool in Higher Education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 57-66.
27. Yonezawa, A. (2014). The Academic Profession and University Governance Participation in Japan. Educational Studies in Japan, 8, 19-31. [DOI:10.7571/esjkyoiku.8.19]
28. Zhou, Q., & Li, H. (2022). Data Driven Decision Making and Transparency in University Governance in China. International Journal of Education Management, 36(3), 411-42.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
