Quality of Teaching and Research in Public Higher Education in Poland: Relationship with Financial Indicators and Efficiency

Open access


Purpose: The article addressed the problem of relationships between university funding and efficiency on the one hand and the quality of teaching and research on the other.

Methodology: The measurement of teaching and research quality in Polish universities was derived from two sources: 1) evaluation scores of teaching quality given to universities by the Polish Accreditation Committee, and 2) the research category grades given to university departments or units by the Polish Committee for Evaluation of Scientific Units. Subsequently, the quality measurements were correlated with financial indicators and efficiency scores obtained from data envelopment analysis.

Findings: The correlation and regression results indicated that public universities that have received higher scores of teaching quality simultaneously have higher average scientific categories. There was also a substantial relationship between the revenue per student and the revenue per teacher and variables describing quality but the regression analysis exhibited opposite directions regarding the type of quality indicator.

Research limitations/implications: The quality of teaching and research at universities was assessed despite the limited availability of internal information gathered from higher education institutions (HEIs).

Practical implications: The authorities of a university can simultaneously track the improvement of quality or financial efficiency without losing their interdependence when reforms of HEI operations are conducted.

Originality: The study proposed new measurements of quality derived from external evaluation bodies and investigated the relations of these measures with selected financial and efficiency indicators.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abbott M. and Doucouliagos C. (2003). The efficiency of Australian universities: a Data Envelopment Analysis. Economics of Education Review22: 89–97 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7757(01)00068-1

  • Agasisti T. and Bonomi F. (2014). Benchmarking universities’ efficiency indicators in the presence of internal heterogeneity. Studies in Higher Education39(7): 1237–1255 https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.801423

  • Ahn T. Charnes A. and Cooper W.W. (1988). Some statistical and DEA evaluations of relative efficiencies of public and private institutions of higher learning. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences22: 259–269 https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0121(88)90008-0

  • Athanassopoulos D. and Shale E. (1997). Assessing the comparative efficiency of higher education institutions in the UK by means of Data Envelopment Analysis. Education Economics5: 17–134 https://doi.org/10.1080/09645299700000011

  • Avkiran N.K. (2001). Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian Universities through Data Envelopment Analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences35: 57–80 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0121(00)00010-0

  • Banker R.D. Charnes A. and Cooper W.W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science30(9): 1078–1092 https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078

  • Beck N.L. and Katz J.N. (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review89: 634–647 https://doi.org/10.2307/2082979

  • Bergseth B. Petocz P. and Dahlgren M.A. (2014). Ranking quality in higher education: guiding or misleading? Quality in Higher Education20(3): 330–347 https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2014.976419

  • Breu T.M. and Raab R.L. (1994). Efficiency and perceived quality of the nation’s top 25 national universities and national liberal-arts colleges – an application of Data Envelopment Analysis to higher-education. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences28: 33–45 https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0121(94)90023-X

  • Central Statistical Office (2011). Higher Education Institutions and their Finances in 2010.

  • Central Statistical Office (2012). Higher Education Institutions and their Finances in 2011.

  • Charnes A. Cooper W. W. and Rhodes E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 2(6): 429–444 https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8

  • Ćwiąkała-Małys A. (2010). Ustalenie efektywności procesu kształcenia publicznych uczelni akademickich przy wykorzystaniu nieparametrycznej metody analizy nakładów i wyników DEA. Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości55: 25–43.

  • Dunbar H. and Lewis D.R. (1995). Departmental productivity in American universities: economies of scale and scope. Economics of Education Review14: 119–144 https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(95)90393-M

  • Jabnoun N. (2015). The influence of wealth transparency and democracy on the number of top ranked universities. Quality Assurance in Education23(2): 108–122 https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-07-2013-0033

  • Johnes J. and Johnes G. (1995). Research funding and performance in UK university departments of economics: A frontier analysis. Economics of Education Review14(3): 301–314 https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(95)00008-8

  • Johnes J. (2006). Data Envelopment Analysis and its application to the measurement of efficiency in higher education. Economics of Education Review25: 273–288 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2005.02.005

  • Kmenta J. (1997). Elements of Econometrics. 2nd ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.15701

  • Leifner I. (2003). Funding resource allocation and performance in higher education systems. Higher Education46(4): 469–489 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027381906977

  • Michael S.O. (2005). The Cost of Excellence: The Financial Implications of Institutional Rankings. International Journal of Educational Management19(5): 365–382 https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540510607716

  • Mizikaci F. (2006). A systems approach to program evaluation model for quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education14(1): 37–53 https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880610643601

  • Sav G.T. (2012). Productivity efficiency and managerial performance regress and gains in United States universities: a Data Envelopment Analysis. Advances in Management and Applied Economics2(3): 13–32.

  • Sav G.T. (2013). Four-stage DEA efficiency evaluations: Financial reforms in public university funding. International Journal of Economic & Finance5(1): 24–33.

  • Sułkowski Ł. (2016). Kultura akademicka. Koniec utopii? Warszawa.

  • Tomkins C. and Green R. (1988). An experiment in the use of Data Envelopment for evaluating the efficiency of UK university departments of accounting. Financial Accountability and Management44: 147–164 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.1988.tb00066.x

  • Worthington C. and Lee B.L. (2008). Efficiency technology and productivity change in Australian universities 1998–2003. Economics of Education Review27: 285–298 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.09.012

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 151 106 9
PDF Downloads 93 63 1