h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/21582440211020743
SAGE Open
Ap il-June 2021: 1 –15
© The Au ho (s) 2021
DOI: 10.1177/21582440211020743
jou nals.sagepub.com/home/sgo
C ea i e Commons CC BY: This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 License
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/) which pe mi s any use, ep oduc ion and dis ibu ion o
he wo k wi hou u he pe mission p o ided he o iginal wo k is a ibu ed as speci ied on he SAGE and Open Access pages
(h ps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-a -sage).
O iginal Resea ch
In oduc ion
In ecen yea s, Po uguese poly echnics ha e aced g owing
p essu e o become mo e esea ch- ocused and o ob ain he
igh o awa d PhD deg ees, a posi ion he Po uguese
Poly echnics Coo dina ing Council (PPCC) has publicly
de ended. This in e nal p essu e was heigh ened by an
O ganiza ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen
(OECD) epo (Guellec e al., 2018) s a ing ha Po uguese
poly echnics should be en i led o awa d doc o al deg ees.
Following his epo , he Po uguese Minis e o Science,
Technology and Highe Educa ion (P o esso Manuel Hei o )
se in mo ion he p ocedu e o d aw up a law con e ing
Po uguese poly echnics wi h his igh . The Po uguese
Council o Minis e s’ posi ion on he ma e was o mally
e ealed in a p ess elease on 15 h Feb ua y 2018 which
s a ed ha “ he doo is now open o he Poly echnics o con-
e doc o al deg ees ( . . . ).” The Minis e o Science,
Technology, and Highe Educa ion added ha his was a
c i ical s ep in he e o m o he Highe Educa ion Sec o in
Po ugal (Sil a, 2018).
The ex-p esiden o he PPCC (Nuno Mangas)
exp essed his sa is ac ion wi h he Go e nmen ’s deci-
sion in a p ess elease: “i is a posi i e measu e ha
mee s he guidelines o he Poly echnics and he PPCC”
(Lusa News Agency, 2018). The legisla i e p ocess lead-
ing o Dec ee-Law No. 65/2018 g an ing Po uguese
poly echnics he igh o awa d doc o al deg ees was
unde way, al hough some c i e ia and condi ions mus be
ul illed by poly echnic ins i u es. Mos Eu opean coun-
ies ha e a bina y sys em o highe educa ion (HE), in
which he e a e wo di e en ypes o ins i u ions, ha
is, adi ional (academic) uni e si ies and mo e oca-
ionally o ien ed ins i u ions; so why ade his sys em
ou in Po ugal? And why in Po ugal speci ically? A e
Po uguese public poly echnics (PPPs) adequa ely p e-
pa ed o awa d doc o al deg ees, namely in e ms o he
ole/commi men o he p o esso s o lec u e s and he
ela i e numbe and quali y o esea ch uni s is-a- is
Po uguese public uni e si ies (PPUs)?
This is such a ecen de elopmen ha he e a e no ye any
empi ical indings on he issue. An in-dep h analysis on he
ole o PPPs ole is he e o e equi ed o ill his empi ical gap
wi hin he scope o he quali y o HE in Po ugal. Thus, his
esea ch uses seconda y da a o analyze he esea ch s eng h
1020743SGOXXX10.1177/21582440211020743SAGE OpenB ás
esea ch-a icle20212021
1IN+, LARSyS, Ins i u o Supe io Técnico, Uni e sidade de Lisboa,
Po ugal
2Uni Coimb a, CeBER, Facul y o Economics, Po ugal
Co esponding Au ho :
Gonçalo Rod igues B ás, IN+, Cen e o Inno a ion, Technology and
Policy Resea ch, Ins i u o Supe io Técnico, Uni e sidade de Lisboa, A .
Ro isco Pais 1, Lisbon 1049-001, Po ugal.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
Awa ding PhD Powe s o
Poly echnics: An Academic T ap?
Gonçalo Rod igues B ás1,2
Abs ac
The aim o his a icle is o unde s and whe he he condi ions in Po uguese public poly echnics (PPPs) when s udying o
a PhD a e simila o hose in Po uguese public uni e si ies (PPUs). Th ee pilla s we e analyzed ( esea ch, academic s a
deg ee, and p eca ious a e o academic s a ), and o his end, we conduc ed independen sample - es s and designed a
co ela ion ma ix o shed ligh on he ela ionship be ween he pe cen age o p eca ious academic s a and he sho -
un a iables in he en i onmen o PPPs. The main indings e eal di e ences be ween PPUs and PPPs, indica ing ha
policymake s ailed o ensu e ha PPPs a e compe i i e is-a- is PPUs in his a ea. Dec ee-Law No. 65/2018 g an ing PPPs
he igh o awa d doc o al deg ees gi es ise o a numbe o isks: a loss o ocus in PPPs, he disappea ance o he mos used
sys em in highe educa ion (bina y o dual sys em), and he absence o highe ins i u ions in Po ugal ha p o ide p ac ical
aining. I his is he pa h chosen by policymake s and he na u e o cou se p og ams in PPPs and PPUs a e becoming mo e
simila , we s ongly ecommend ha simila condi ions should p e ail in he wo subsys ems; his en ails g ea e in es men
in PPPs and e en he possibili y o awa ding PhD p o essional deg ees in close connec ion wi h i ms and co po a ions.
Keywo ds
Po uguese public poly echnics, Po uguese public uni e si ies, highe educa ion policy, highe educa ion sys em.
2 SAGE Open
(o esea ch quali y) o R&D uni s, eaching quali y, and
managemen o highe educa ion ins i u es (HEIs) in Po ugal.
Based on hese c i e ia, ou modes in en ion is o unde s and
whe he PPPs and PPUs ha e simila condi ions o o e doc-
o al p og ams.
Al hough quali y is a highly con es ed concep , i mus
be he main p io i y o e e y HEI (Tam, 2001). Based on
Ghonji e al. (2015, p. 110), “ eaching quali y is highly
dependen on i s p o esso s and he capabili ies o acul y
membe s a e e y impo an .” These au ho s unde line he
ac ha eaching quali y is dependen on he capabili ies o
p o esso s and lec u e s.
Howe e , in hei analysis o English and Sco ish uni e si-
ies, Lopes and Dewan (2015) con i med ha eaching quali y
can be se iously a ec ed by he p eca ious employmen condi-
ions o p o esso s. Indeed, Cou ois and O’Kee e (2015, p.
61) aised he ollowing ques ion: “wha is he impac on
equali y in educa ion o a sys em whe e s uden s who need he
mos suppo a e augh by p eca ious wo ke s, whose own
wo king condi ions make i impossible o adequa ely suppo
s uden s?” Is he e an o e -emphasis on sho - e m speci ic
skills ins ead o a s a egic app oach o HE (Ma in, 2003)?
Gi en his line o easoning and some o he sho - un a i-
ables/cons ain s ha a ec HEIs managemen e e ed in se -
e al case s udies (Mai , 2015), i is impo an o analyze he
con ac s o p o esso s/lec u e s pe yea in PPPs and he co -
ela ion wi h he (a) numbe o cou ses, (b) numbe o s u-
den s, (c) numbe o places a ailable o unde g adua e
s uden s, (d) numbe o s uden s en olled in all deg ee le els
o e ed by PPPs (bachelo and mas e deg ees), (e) numbe o
new unde g adua e s uden s. These co ela ions will p o ide a
clea e unde s anding o he ole o p o esso s/lec u e s in
PPPs, ha is, whe he hey a e iewed as a s uc u al key in
HE o as me ely use ul o sa is y a sho - e m need.
On he con a y, T ow (1996) ecognized ha esea ch
quali y is undamen al o he assessmen o HEIs, and
Johnes (1996) included esea ch ou pu as a measu e o
pe o mance o U.K. uni e si ies. The e o e, esea ch
quali y is also an impo an measu emen o uni e si y pe -
o mance (Teichle , 2005).
The a icle is s uc u ed as ollows. Sec ion “The Highe
Educa ion Con ex in Po ugal and Some Eu opean T ends”
p o ides an o e iew o he bina y sys em o HE ha p e-
ails in Po ugal. This is ollowed by a li e a u e e iew
desc ibing he s a e o he a o he key elemen s in HE o
hypo heses. The me hodological sec ion explains he
esea ch design, a iable measu es, da a analysis, and
esea ch p ocedu es. The ollowing sec ion p esen s he
esul s wi hou making any subjec i e in e p e a ion.
Sec ion “Discussion” discusses he empi ical indings in
he ligh o he li e a u e e iew and aises se e al p ac ical
ques ions ha s ill emain. The main conclusions a e d awn
in sec ion “Concluding Rema ks” be o e add essing policy
implica ions, u he esea ch lines, and s udy limi a ions.
The Highe Educa ion Con ex in
Po ugal and Some Eu opean T ends
I is impo an o no e ha Po uguese HE is p edominan ly a
bina y sys em composed o uni e si ies and poly echnic
ins i u es, al hough we b ie ly p esen o he ins i u ions ha
play a c i ical ole in he HE ecosys em.
Poly echnic ins i u ions a e o ien ed owa d he de elop-
men o applied esea ch aimed a unde s anding and sol ing
conc e e p oblems, he p o ision o a solid cul u al and ech-
nical aining a a highe le el, he de elopmen o he capac-
i y o inno a ion and c i ical analysis, and he p o ision o
bo h heo e ical and p ac ical scien i ic knowledge and i s
applica ion o he pu poses o ca ying ou p o essional
ac i i ies.
On he con a y, uni e si ies a e o ien ed owa d esea ch
and knowledge c ea ion wi h he aim o ensu ing a solid sci-
en i ic and cul u al p epa a ion, p o iding he echnical ain-
ing necessa y o p o essional and cul u al ac i i ies, and
os e ing he capaci ies o design, inno a ion and c i ical
analysis.
The abo e desc ip ions, based on he Basic Law o he
Educa ional Sys em in Po ugal es ablished by law 46/1986
and upda ed by laws 115/1997, 49/2005, and 85/2009, a e
e idence o he di icul y aced when in e p e ing and dis in-
guishing be ween he compe ences o he wo ypes o HEIs.
Howe e , he wo sys ems a e in ac qui e di e en .
While he Po uguese poly echnics p o ide a mo e p ac ical
aining and a e p o ession-o ien ed, he HE in uni e si ies is
g ounded on a s ong heo e ical base and ocuses hea ily on
esea ch. Fo ins ance, Po uguese poly echnics o e a sho
cycle o s udies en i led cu so écnico supe io p o issional
(CTeSP), which no mally las ou cu icula semes e s
including a aining pe iod in he wo kplace. In addi ion,
hey o e bachelo and mas e p og ams. P io o Dec ee-
Law No. 65/2018, doc o al p og ams we e only a ailable in
Po uguese uni e si ies.
We should also unde line wo c i ical ins i u ions o sci-
ence and HE in Po ugal: Fundação pa a a Ciência e
Tecnologia (FCT) and Agency o he E alua ion and
Acc edi a ion o Highe Educa ion (simpli ied by he ac o-
nym A3ES). The FCT is he e e ence o scien i ic esea ch
and echnology de elopmen . Mos scien i ic esea ch in
Po ugal is conduc ed in R&D ins i u ions inanced and e al-
ua ed by he FCT. The esea ch encompasses all scien i ic
ields, om li e and heal h sciences o social sciences and
humani ies, om enginee ing and exac sciences o na u al
and en i onmen al sciences. The FCT cu en ly inances 342
public and p i a e R&D uni s in Po ugal. Mo eo e , i e al-
ua es he quali y o esea ch o ins i u es o acul ies inside
public and p i a e esea ch ins i u ions and gi es hem a sci-
en i ic ca ego y. The e a e six quali a i e scien i ic ca ego-
ies: excep ional, excellen , e y good, good, ai , and poo .
The ca ego y awa ded has a g ea impac on he le el o
B ás 3
inancing ecei ed om he budge a y unds p o ided by
FCT. A3ES is he au ho i y o he e alua ion and acc edi a-
ion o HEIs and hei s udy cycles in Po ugal. Acco ding o
he Di ec o a e Gene al o Highe Educa ion, A3ES is “an
independen body is-à- is s a e and ins i u ions and aims o
p omo e and ensu e quali y in highe educa ion.”
The wo HE subsys ems in Po ugal (PPPs and PPUs)
ha e been complemen a y, jus as in mos Eu opean coun-
ies (Ky ik, 2004; Machado e al., 2008). Indeed, he bina y
sys em is common in Eu ope, in o he wo ds, he uni e si-
ies’ ole is complemen ed by p o essional and oca ional
HEIs; acco ding o Lepo i e al. (2016); only he Uni ed
Kingdom and F ance ha e uni a y sys ems, bu he e is e i-
dence ha mo e coun ies a e adop ing his sys em in Eu ope
(San oalha e al., 2018). In ac , he name gi en o he HEIs
p o iding p ac ical aining and p o ession-o ien ed eaching
a ies ac oss coun ies: poly echnic ins i u es, oca ional
uni e si ies, p o essional uni e si ies, poly echnic uni e si-
ies, echnical uni e si ies, applied echnological uni e si-
ies, college o highe oca ional s udies, o , he mos
common, uni e si ies o applied sciences. No wi hs anding,
excluding he Uni ed Kingdom and F ance, doc o a e deg ees
in Eu ope a e usually o e ed by uni e si ies and no by he
as majo i y o he abo e HEIs.
The bene i s o a bina y sys em lie in he di e si y o HE
(Codling & Meek, 2006; an Hou en, 2018) wi h p o es-
sional and oca ional HEIs sp ead ac oss di e en egions
mo e han uni e si ies (San oalha e al., 2018; Teichle ,
2008; Teixei a e al., 2014a). Despi e he p e alence o he
bina y sys em ac oss Eu ope, he e a e signs o ensions
be ween he wo subsys ems (San oalha e al., 2018), and i is
a gued ha he bina y sys em p o ec s uni e si y clien ele
(Ma ginson, 2016).
Unde a neo-ins i u ionalis app oach, some isomo phic
p essu es end o homogenize di e en HEIs (Lepo i e al.,
2014) leading o con e gence in o a uni a y sys em (Pinhei o
e al., 2019). Despi e he end owa d a homogenized and
uni ied sys em b ough by he Bologna p ocess (Wi e e al.,
2008), i is impo an o no e he e u n o he bina y sys em
in Finland, Swi ze land, and Aus ia (Lepo i e al., 2014).
Rega dless o he HE sys em and despi e Bologna
e o m, each coun y has i s own idiosync asies.
Ne e heless, Pinhei o and Young (2017, p. 119) high-
ligh ed Eu opean “e o s o mode nize uni e si y sys ems
in he con ex o ising compe i ion and p essu es owa d
e ical and ho izon al di e en ia ion,” assuming his ac
as a cu en end in HE.
Li e a u e Re iew and Hypo hesis
De elopmen
The no ion o quali y in HE is iewed in di e en ways
(Lindsay, 1992), and he e is li le consensus on i s de ini ion
(Wes e heijden e al., 2007). Quali y depends on he iews o
di e en s akeholde s (Ha ey & G een, 1993; New on,
2010) which S ikan han and Dal ymple (2007) a gue can be
di ided in o ou main g oups: use s o se ices (s uden s),
p o ide s ( unding bodies and he communi y, axpaye s),
use s o ou pu s (employe s), and employees o he sec o
(academics and adminis a o s).
Coa es (2005) discusses s uden s’ engagemen as an ele-
men o quali y, while Wa n and T an e (2001) add ess he
ex en o which he de elopmen o g adua es’ gene ic com-
pe encies p edic s s uden s’ pe cep ions o he o e all quali y
o hei deg ee o i s i ness o pu pose o en y in o he
wo kplace. Ma sh (1987) emphasizes he ele ance o s u-
den s’ pe cep ions as a measu e o quali y in HE and con-
duc ed a e iew o he ex ensi e li e a u e on he use o
s uden e alua ions and hei link wi h eaching e ec i e-
ness. Mo eo e , Ramsden (1991, p. 132) a gues ha s uden s
can con ibu e o he quali y assessmen in se e al domains
o HE, such as: “en husiasm and in e es o eache s; clea
o ganisa ion and goals; eedback on lea ning; he encou age-
men o s uden independence and ac i e lea ning; an app o-
p ia e wo kload and ele an assessmen me hods; he
p o ision o a sui ably challenging academic en i onmen .”
On he con a y, employe s see quali y p ima ily in e ms
o he ou pu s (Chua, 2004), namely he skill se ha he s u-
den b ings o he wo kplace. Employe s’ iews on he qual-
i y o a ange o capabili ies o uni e si y g adua es ha e
emained consis en o e ime (Shah e al., 2015).
Despi e he s uden s’ and employe s’ con ibu ions o he
assessmen o HEI quali y, his s udy ocuses on he pe spec-
i e o p o ide s and HE employees, ha is, only on endog-
enous ac o s o he HEIs.
P o ide s o HE play a i al ole in bo h he quali y and
assessmen o he ins i u ions. Quali y is o en judged by
he ins i u ion’s epu a ion and he le el o i s esou ces
(As in & Solmon, 1981), which a e p o ided by go e n-
men , unding agencies o p i a e ini ia i e. Highligh ing
go e nmen s’ ob ious unc ion as esou ce p o ide s,
Zaman (2015, p. 7) a gues ha “Policymake s’ objec i es
should be o ensu e scien i ic achie emen , o c ea e new
oppo uni ies and o place he eaching, esea ch, economic
and social sec o s on one line.”
Resea ch is conduc ed by a wide ange o ac o s om
inside and ou side HEIs, and i e lec s di e en in e es s and
backg ounds. In line wi h he Bologna and Lisbon p ocesses,
scien i ic esea ch on HE is ecei ing g owing a en ion
(B ennan & Teichle , 2008); Teichle (2005) and F enken
e al. (2017) con i med he impo ance o he esea ch le el
as a measu emen o uni e si y pe o mance.
Go e nmen s and au ho i ies a ound he wo ld a e ying
o alloca e mo e unds o esea ch pu poses. Fo example, in
Finland, which is equen ly ecognized o i s exempla y
educa ion, poly echnics and uni e si ies o applied sciences
nei he engage in esea ch no o e pos g adua e educa ion
(Geuna & Ma in, 2003). The e o e, Teixei a e al. (2014b)
conclude ha be ween 2003 and 2009, PPUs had a s onge
esea ch mission han PPPs. E en in he Uni ed Kingdom,
4 SAGE Open
which “g an ed” uni e si y s a us o poly echnics in 1992,
he conclusion emains he same; when compa ing “old” uni-
e si ies o he “new” uni e si ies ( o me poly echnics), he
“old” ones ha e a much highe le el o esea ch (Mo gan,
2004). The e idence is so clea ha an analysis conduc ed by
esea ch o ien a ion in 19 coun ies only includes uni e si-
ies awa ding doc o a e deg ees (i.e., i excludes poly ech-
nics and eaching- ocused colleges) (Ben ley e al., 2015).
Gi en hese ac s, PPUs a e likely o ha e mo e and highe
anked esea ch cen e s han PPUs. In ligh o hese di e -
ences in HE, we should es he ollowing hypo hesis o
Po ugal:
Hypo hesis 1: PPUs ha e mo e and be e - anked esea ch
cen e s han PPPs.
Go e nmen s a e he e o e no only he p o ide s o
esou ces o HE, bu hey also play a egula o y ole in
assu ing quali y. Fo ins ance, go e nmen egula ion
helped esol e he c isis o HE in A ica, Asia, and La in
Ame ica (Nea e & an Vugh , 1994). Al hough HE in mos
coun ies is la gely inanced by go e nmen s, acco ding o
Land y and Neubaue (2016), his is no he case in he
Uni ed S a es, whe e adical changes in he inancial s uc-
u e o e he pas 30 yea s ha e led o a signi ican educ-
ion in public unding. Bu whe he unding is public,
p i a e, o blended, Usman (2014) no es ha e ec i e pol-
icy has an impac on HE and de ines s a egic di ec ions
and esou ces ha can achie e ins i u ional missions wi h
quali y. Ano he egula o y unc ion o he public, p i a e,
o blended ins i u ions is o assu e quali y in HE (T ow,
1996); al hough each coun y has na ional-le el acc edi a-
ion and quali y-assu ance sys ems, i is necessa y o ha -
monize he quali y o HE o acili a e educa ion mobili y
ac oss coun ies, cul u es, and ju isdic ions (Al bach &
Knigh , 2007). The p o ide s o HE ha e a di ec (o indi-
ec ) in luence on he quali y o hei academic s a , and as
a gued by Hennig-Thu au e al. (2001), he quali y o each-
ing and he s uden s’ emo ional commi men o hei ins i-
u ion a e c ucial o s uden loyal y.
Cha e ji and Ki an (2017) a gue human capi al also has a
signi ican in luence on HEI pe o mance. F om Becke ’s
iew, human capi al is simply he o mal educa ion and skills
acqui ed in and ou o he job con ex (Becke , 1962, 1964);
as a esul , educa ional a ainmen is o en used as a p oxy o
human capi al le els (OECD, 1998) e en hough his can be
measu ed in o he ways (Noe e al., 2017).
In he academic en i onmen , eache quali y can be
e ec i ely assessed by eache s’ ce i ica ion (Goldhabe &
An hony, 2007). Fo ins ance, he Times Highe Educa ion
Wo ld Uni e si y ankings e alua e he eaching domain by
means o he a io o doc o a es o bachelo s and he a io o
doc o a es awa ded o academic s a , among o he indica-
o s. As such, he link be ween quali y eaching and he qual-
i ica ions o eaching s a is becoming ecognized quali y
c i e ia. In addi ion, he Bologna p ocess has pu p essu e on
p o esso s o s eng hen hei esea ch and compe encies
p o iles, and no ably o hold a PhD deg ee.
P o esso s’ quali ica ions in luence eaching quali y
(Coch an-Smi h, 2003) and “ eache p epa a ion and ce i i-
ca ion a e by a he s onges co ela es o s uden achie e-
men ” (Da ling-Hammond, 2000, p. 1). Mo eo e , public
p essu e on uni e si ies leads o imp o emen s in he quali y
o educa ion gene ally and he eaching quali ies o he lec-
u e s/p o esso s in pa icula (Keesen e al., 1996). Po ugal
is no excep ion o his end. The e is in ense public and ins i-
u ional p essu e on lec u e s/p o esso s, and holding a PhD
is an almos manda o y equi emen o eaching. D awing
on he indings o Teixei a e al. (2014b) o a sample o 30
Po uguese HEIs be ween 2003 and 2009, he quali ica ions
o academic s a (measu ed by he numbe o s a wi h
PhDs in HEIs) inc eased signi ican ly bu PPUs ha e a
mo e academic s a wi h PhDs han PPPs. In ligh o his, we
p opose he ollowing hypo hesis:
Hypo hesis 2: In Po ugal, PPUs ha e mo e PhD p o es-
so s/lec u e s pe s uden han PPPs.
The academic ole o employees in he sec o is di ided
in o he h ee domains o eaching, esea ch, and se ice
(Hous on e al., 2006); eaching and esea ch a e he p edom-
inan a eas (Cadez e al., 2017), while se ice o adminis a-
ion akes a seconda y ole.
Howe e , a p eca ious academic en i onmen (p o esso s
on sho - e m con ac s) may educe mo i a ion and lead o
declining s uden a endance (Kallebe g, 2009). Typically,
empo a y adjunc p o esso s ha e li le job secu i y due o
hei con ingen du ies, and hei s uden s exp ess less in e -
es in hei subjec s han hose o ull- ime acul y membe s
(Be inge & Long, 2004). A seminal a icle by labo econo-
mis s de ines con ingen wo k as “any job in which an indi-
idual does no ha e an explici o implici con ac o
long- e m employmen o in which he minimum hou s
wo ked can a y in a nonsys ema ic manne ” (Poli ka &
Na done, 1989, p. 11). This is usually he wo k ypology o
pa - ime p o esso s, in i ed p o esso s, o empo a y/gues
adjunc p o esso s in HEIs.
The jou nal New Di ec ions o Highe Educa ion pub-
lished a special issue documen ing he ac ha poo ins i u-
ional assimila ion by pa - ime acul y ad e sely a ec s
s uden lea ning. The e ec s included educed ins uc ional
quali y, lack o cu icula cohesion, and weak guidance
(Benjamin, 2003a, 2003b; C oss & Goldenbe g, 2003;
Elman, 2003; Schus e , 2003; Thompson, 2003; Townsend,
2003). Uni e si y eaching, an occupa ion A onowi z (2001)
e e ed o as “ he las good job in Ame ica,” is also becom-
ing p eca ious wi h he isk o nega i e long- e m conse-
quences such as lowe eache quali y.
Se e al s udies sugges ha pa - ime adjunc p o esso s
inc ease college d opou a es (Be inge & Long, 2007;
B ás 5
Eh enbe g & Zhang, 2005), educe s uden s’ in e es in a
cou se (Be inge & Long, 2004), o in la e g ades and ha e
nega i e impac s on subsequen ou comes when compa ed o
ull- ime acul y membe s (Ran & Xu, 2019). Leslie (1998)
poin ed ou ha pa - ime adjunc p o esso s o en do no
ha e PhDs o o he e minal deg ees and so may p o ide
in e io ins uc ion. Pa - ime p o esso s may also p o ide
poo e supe ision, be less commi ed o eaching, and less
willing o ex end eaching beyond he class oom (Pisani &
S o , 1998), leading o wo se ou comes o s uden s and
inc eased wo kloads o ull- ime acul y (Ma o a, 2019). In
addi ion, as empo a y acul y a e gene ally dissa is ied wi h
hei employmen condi ions (Ful on, 2000; Gappa & Leslie,
1993), some esea che s ques ion whe he his ad e sely
a ec s hei job pe o mance (Ba nes & O’Ha a, 1999;
Leslie, 1998) and educes commi men o he HEIs (Ba nes
& O’Ha a, 1999). P o esso s and lec u e s who a e in non-
enu e- ack posi ions, namely gues p o esso s and pa -
ime p o esso s in Po ugal, a e bo h hi ed o a limi ed
pe iod o ime.
Inc easing compe i ion, cons ain s on expendi u e and
he p essu es on science and uni e si ies o os e a knowl-
edge-based economy ha e esul ed in an o e -emphasis on
sho - e m speci ic skills a he han a s a egic ision o HE
(Ma in, 2003). Fu he mo e, Mai (2015) explo es in de ail
sho - e m pa hs o manage HEIs, and some a iables wi hin
his sho - e m app oach a e ele an o ou analysis.
Howe e , a long- un, s a egic, and planning app oach
should p e ail o e sho - un managemen in HEIs (S ike,
2017), as he la e en ails high isks (Ma in, 2003).
In ac , he emphasis on sho - e m speci ic skills a he
han a s a egic ision o HE has gi en ise o cons ain s
ha can a ec he leng h o academics’ con ac s. Al hough
he sho - e m iew is igh ly c i icized, i does ha e he
ad an age o a scale e ec (Wing ield, 2012) and cos -sa -
ings when ec ui ing empo a y p o esso s (Ma o a, 2019);
howe e , hese ad an ages a e no applicable a he PhD
le el. This scale e ec is no e iden in PhD p og ams whe e
ull- ime s uden s usually ake 3 o 5 yea s o comple e hei
s udies (Wing ield, 2012). Supe iso s’ in ol emen wi h
HEIs and hei s uden s du ing PhD s udies is i al, and
eache ins abili y h ough empo a y con ac s can unde -
mine his ela ional us (Be nal e al., 2015).
Po uguese HEIs ha e aced cu s in unding and a
decline in he numbe o applican s (Hen iques e al., 2018);
he end owa d ull- ime p o esso s in uni e si ies has no
been seen in poly echnics in Sou he n Eu ope (Guba e a
e al., 2017); and inally, he a o emen ioned scale e ec
can occu due o he ac ha unde g adua e cou ses a e he
co e o p o essional/ oca ional HEIs. This leads o he ol-
lowing hypo heses:
Hypo hesis 3a: The numbe o in i ed o pa - ime lec u -
e s/p o esso s in PPPs is posi i ely ela ed o a sho - un
app oach o he academic en i onmen .
Hypo hesis 3b: The a e o p eca ious con ac s o aca-
demic s a in PPPs is highe han in PPUs.
To sum up, he esea ch hypo heses we e based on wo
pilla s o Boli e ’s (2015) wo k: esea ch ac i i y and each-
ing condi ion.
Me hods
Da a
HEIs in Po ugal a e composed o 16 PPUs and 15 PPPs.
Howe e , some PPUs also ha e poly echnic schools
(se en) and o he HE schools ( i e) ha comple e he
poly echnic sys em in Po ugal. Thus, i is mo e co ec o
say ha Po ugal has a o al o 27 uni s in he Poly echnic
sys em, and we e e o all o hese as PPPs. Indeed, his is
also how he Di ec ion o Educa ion and Science S a is ics
in Po ugal sepa a es he uni e si y sys em (16 HEIs)
om he poly echnic sys em (27 HEIs). On a e age,
acco ding o his las sou ce, PPUs had 184,617 s uden s
pe yea om 2001/2002 o 2017/2018, while PPPs had
108,535 s uden s pe yea .
To es he esea ch hypo heses, seconda y da a on he HE
sys em we e ga he ed om he FCT and he Di ec ion o
Educa ion and Science S a is ics in Po ugal. As ou aim is o
unde s and he a gumen s unde lying he s uc u al change in
Po uguese HE e lec ed by Dec ee-Law No. 65/2018, he
da a a ailable un il his legal no m (no la e han 2018) mus
be collec ed.
D awing on Mai ’s (2015) case s udies and he a o emen-
ioned sou ces, he ollowing a iables guiding a sho - e m
app oach in HEIs managemen a e used: numbe o unde -
g adua e p og ams, numbe o s uden places pe yea , s u-
den en olmen , and en y o new s uden s. Desc ip i e
s a is ics a e a ailable in Appendix A (Hypo hesis 1),
Appendix B (Hypo hesis 2), and in Appendix C (Hypo heses
3a and 3b).
Resea ch Ou line and P ocedu es
As he objec i e is o compa e PPUs and PPPs in di e en
dimensions h ough Hypo heses 1, 2, and 3b, independen
samples - es s we e applied o de e mine whe he he e was
a signi ican di e ence in he popula ion o he wo sample
means (PPUs and PPPs). Following no mali y es s (Shapi o–
Wilk o Kolmogo o –Smi no es s) o add ess he no mal-
i y o da a, pa ame ic, o nonpa ame ic independen
samples - es s we e pe o med.
On he con a y, whe he no mal dis ibu ed (Pea son co -
ela ion) o nonno mal dis ibu ed da a (Spea man’s ank
co ela ion o Kendall’s ank co ela ion), Hypo hesis H3a
was es ed using a co ela ion ma ix o unde s and he ela-
ionship be ween he a e o p eca ious employmen and he
sho - un a iables o he academic en i onmen .

6 SAGE Open
Excluding he i s hypo hesis (whe e he numbe o PPPs
is e en highe han he numbe o PPUs), some a iables
mus be ha monized o pe mi compa isons as a esul o he
subs an ial di e ence in he size o PPPs and PPUs. To o e -
come his issue, wo a ios we e c ea ed:
Hypo hesis 2: ,
numbe o academics a wi h PhD
numbe o s uden
i
si
i
n
,
,
=
∑
1
whe e i ep esen s each HEI and is he academic yea
(2001/2002 o 2017/2018).
Hypo hesis 3: lim
numbe o academics a
wi h i ed e m con ac i,,
,
,
i
i
n
numbe o academics a
=
∑
1
whe e i ep esen s each HEI and is he academic yea
(2010/2011 o 2015/2016).
Resul s
Resea ch
Ou o 342 R&D Uni s inanced by FCT, cu en ly only 18
a e p ima ily linked o PPPs; ha is, he as majo i y a e
di ec ly o indi ec ly un by PPUs. This means ha app oxi-
ma ely 5% o all R&D uni s inanced by FCT a e di ec ly led
by PPPs. Fu he mo e, da a p o ided by FCT con i m ha
he e a e 53 p i a e R&D ins i u ions (app oxima ely 16% o
R&D uni s) and 271 R&D uni s led by PPUs (app oxima ely
79% o R&D uni s). These da a clea ly demons a es he
ela i e insigni icance o R&D uni s un by PPPs in he aca-
demic ecosys em.
Tu ning o he FCT assessmen o R&D uni s, he las
assessmen is om 2013 when 322 R&D uni s om PPPs
(18 R&D uni s), PPUs (256 R&D uni s), and p i a e ins i u-
ions (48 R&D uni s) we e e alua ed as excep ional (highes
sco e) o poo (lowes sco e). Figu e 1 p o ides an o e iew
o he R&D uni s assessmen .
Figu e 1 shows ha none o he PPP R&D uni s ob ained
a g ade o “ e y good”; indeed, hey we e all e alua ed as
“good,” “ ai ,” o “poo .” In con as , mo e han 86% o he
PPU R&D uni s we e e alua ed as a leas “good.”
I is use ul o ans o m hose a iables o he g ade
scale o o dinal a iables anging om 6 (excep ional) o 1
(poo ). Fi s , he no mali y o he g ade scale mus be
es ed (Table 1).
Table 1 shows ha g ade a iable does no ollow a no -
mal dis ibu ion; he e o e, nonpa ame ic es s should be
used o compa e he PPP R&D uni s wi h he PPU R&D
Figu e 1. Assessmen o Po uguese R&D uni s in 2013.
Sou ce. FCT (2015).
Table 1. Tes s o No mali y (G ades o R&D Uni s).
Va iable
Kolmogo o –Smi no aShapi o–Wilk
S a is ic d Signi icance S a is ic d Signi icance
G ade .181 322 .000 .924 322 .000
aLillie o s signi icance co ec ion.
B ás 7
uni s by e alua ing he mean di e ence be ween hem
(Tables 2 and 3).
Tables 2 and 3 show ha he g ades o R&D uni s in PPUs
a e highe han he g ades o R&D uni s in PPPs. This di e -
ence was s a is ically signi ican (1% le el) in he wo HEI,
and he o icial da a a e conclusi e. Thus, ou i s hypo he-
sis ha PPUs ha e mo e and be e - anked esea ch cen e s
han PPPs is con i med. On a e age, he g ades o R&D
uni s in PPUs (3.73) a e app oxima ely 76% highe han in
PPPs (2.11)—see Appendix A.
Quali ica ions o Academic S a
Simila ly, o de e mine he a io o PhD P o esso s o s u-
den s, i is necessa y o con i m he no mal dis ibu ion o he
da a (Table 4).
Conside ing he a io o e 17 yea s (2001/2002 o
2017/2018) o PPUs and PPPs wi h a signi icance le el o
5%, bo h es s allow us o ejec he null hypo hesis o da a
no mali y. Thus, nonpa ame ic es s a e pe o med.
Al hough small samples a e gene ally c i icized as hey
canno bene i om cen al limi heo em, ha is, o use
dis ibu ion-based es , a nonpa ame ic es allows us o
analyze he di e ence be ween he academic s a wi h a
PhD in PPPs and in PPUs o e 17 yea s (2001/2002 o
2017/2018)—Tables 5 and 6.
Tables 5 and 6 show ha he e is a highe p e alence o
academic s a wi h PhD pe s uden in PPUs han in PPPs.
This di e ence was s a is ically signi ican (1% le el) in he
wo HEI and he o icial da a a e conclusi e. Acco ding o
he Di ec ion o Educa ion and Science S a is ics, he e we e
12,009 p o esso s wi h a PhD in PPUs compa ed wi h 4,452
in PPPs in 2017/2018. These esul s allow us o con i m he
second hypo hesis, namely ha PPUs ha e mo e PhD p o es-
so s/lec u e s han PPPs. Mo eo e , desc ip i e s a is ics
show ha , on a e age, PPUs ha e mo e han wice as many
academic s a wi h a PhD deg ee pe s uden (.0525) as
PPPs (.0205)—see Appendix B.
P eca ious En i onmen and Sho -
Te m Con ac s
Following he p e ious p ocedu es, he no mali y o he a i-
ables ela ed o he p eca ious en i onmen in PPPs mus be
es ed (Table 7).
The Shapi o–Wilk es p esen ed in Table 7 allows us o
conclude ha none o he a iables ollow a no mal dis ibu-
ion (p alues < .05); he e o e, nonpa ame ical es s, such
as Spea man’s ank co ela ion o Kendall’s ank co ela ion
(ins ead o Pea son co ela ion) mus be used o analyze he
co ela ion be ween a iables.
The esul s om Tables 8 and 9 show ha he p eca ious
a e in PPPs is posi i ely ela ed o he sho - un con ingen-
cies ( he a iables p esen ed in he i s ow). The highe he
numbe o unde g adua e p og ams, numbe o s uden
places pe yea , s uden en olmen s o en y o new s uden s,
he g ea e he p eca ious a e in PPPs. Rega dless o he
a e, he co ela ions be ween he p eca ious a e in PPPs and
he o he a iables (linked o sho - un con ingencies) a e
always s a is ically signi ican in bo h co ela ion es s, as
shown in Tables 8 and 9. This inding suppo s he hi d
hypo hesis, namely ha he low o in i ed o pa - ime lec-
u e s/p o esso s om PPPs in Po ugal is posi i ely ela ed
o he sho - un academic en i onmen .
Ha ing con i med ha he p eca ious a e did no ollow
a no mal dis ibu ion h ough nonpa ame ic es s (Table 7),
i is hen necessa y o de e mine whe he he e is any di e -
ence be ween he p eca ious a e in PPPs and PPUs (Tables
10 and 11).
The null hypo hesis o equal popula ion means (PPUs and
PPPs) is ejec ed; Tables 10 and 11 show ha he p eca ious
a e in PPPs is highe han in PPUs, and his di e ence was
s a is ically signi ican (1% le el). These esul s suppo
Hypo hesis 3b, namely ha he p eca ious a e o academic
s a is highe in PPPs han in PPUs. On a e age, om
2010/2011 o 2015/2016 academic yea s, he majo i y o aca-
demic s a in PPPs a e p eca ious (54.73%); he p eca ious
a e in PPUs (32.31%) is 22.42 pe cen age poin s below ha
o PPPs (see Appendix C).
Discussion
The h ee pilla s analyzed ( esea ch, academic s a deg ee,
and he p eca ious a e o academic s a ) e eal subs an ial
di e ences be ween PPUs and PPPs. Gi en he esou ces
a ailable and he esea ch le el on hese wo sys ems, i can
be concluded ha PPUs a e be e p epa ed o o e PhD p o-
g ams han PPPs; mo eo e , he o e iding objec i e o PPPs
is o p o ide a p ac ical aining and deeply p o ession-o i-
en ed s udies. In addi ion, he bina y sys em makes HE mo e
di e se (Codling & Meek, 2006). The measu e p oposed by
Table 2. Sums o Ranks.
Va iable R&D uni s NMean ank Sum o anks
G ade PPPs 18 46.00 828.00
PPUs 256 143.93 36,847.00
To al 274
PPPs = Po uguese public poly echnics; PPUs = Po uguese public
uni e si ies.
Table 3. Tes S a is ics.
Tes s and signi icance le el G ade
Mann–Whi ney U657.000
Wilcoxon W828.000
Z−5.246
Asymp. signi icance ( wo- ailed) .000
No e. G ouping a iable (R&D uni s).
8 SAGE Open
he Po uguese go e nmen shows u he discon inui y wi h
he oles a ibu ed o PPPs and he e o e dis up s hei spe-
ci ic eaching and esea ch ac i i ies.
O e ing PhD cou ses is no in line wi h he key pu pose
o PPPs and, mo e impo an ly, i will change hei space in
HE, hei ele an ole in human capi al aining and hei
p epa a ion o s uden s o he labo ma ke . In o he wo ds,
his measu e means PPPs will be eaching he highes le el in
he HE sys em bu wi h condi ions below hose o e ed by
PPUs. This aises h ee po en ial p oblems: (a) PPPs could
lose hei ocus on p ac ical and oca ional eaching in he
HE sys em, (b) he e is a eal isk ha p ac ical and oca-
ional eaching will no longe be a ailable in he HE sys em,
and (c) he PPPs a e now PPUs’ di ec compe i o s bu do no
ha e he same condi ions.
We should be awa e ha “HEIs and hei s a a e in ol ed in
mul iple games, wi h compe ing goals and di e en ules.
Meanwhile HE policy-making o en lacks cohe ence, wi h con-
adic o y ou comes in di e en a eas o policy” (T owle &
Bambe , 2005, p. 79). The esul s e eal he huge gap be ween
PPUs and PPPs and con i m policymake s’ a o emen ioned
lack o cohe ence wi h he in oduc ion o his measu e in he
Po uguese HE sys em. Indeed, i has p ac ical consequences.
In addi ion o con i ming ha PPUs ha e mo e and be e -
anked esea ch cen e s han PPPs, he esul s also e eal ha
esea ch in PPPs is e y weak. PPPs a e a om assu ing he
scien i ic achie emen de ined by Zaman (2015). The e o e,
whe e should he PhD s uden s om PPPs conduc hei
esea ch wo k? Do he ew esea ch cen e s un by PPPs
ha e he necessa y condi ions o suppo he wo k o PhD
s uden s? Do PPPs ha e esea ch acili ies whe e PhD s u-
den s eel hey can wo k well?
Fu he o his c i ical issue, he esul s con i med he
second hypo hesis ha PPUs ha e mo e PhD p o esso s/
lec u e s pe s uden han PPPs, al hough i should no be
neglec ed he ema kable e olu ion o PPPs on his domain,
pa icula ly in he las decade. Gi en he impo ance o
quali ica ions o eaching quali y (Coch an-Smi h, 2003)
and s uden s’ achie emen (Da ling-Hammond, 2000),
how can PPPs o e a PhD cou se i only 44% o hei aca-
demic s a had a PhD deg ee in 2018 acco ding o he
Di ec ion o Educa ion and Science S a is ics in Po ugal?
How many PhD heses can a p o esso be expec ed o
supe ise? How many cou ses should be gi en by a p o es-
so in a PhD p og am?
Las bu no leas , Hypo heses 3a and 3b con i med he
p e alence o sho - e m con ac s among academic s a in
PPPs, which os e s a sho - e m academic en i onmen .
This may lead o poo s uden a endance (Kallebe g, 2009),
inc ease s uden d opou a es (Be inge & Long, 2007;
Eh enbe g & Zhang, 2005), educe academic s a ’s commi -
men (Ba nes & O’Ha a, 1999) and e en se iously a ec
eaching quali y (Cou ois & O’Kee e, 2015; Lopes &
Dewan, 2015). F om a concep ual and managemen poin o
iew, PPPs may su e om wha Ma in (2003) e e s o as
an o e -emphasis on sho - e m speci ic skills a he han a
s a egic ision o HE. I should be s essed ha mos aca-
demic s a in PPPs (almos 55% in he las academic yea
a ailable) ha e a p eca ious labo con ac . This is a huge
ba ie o eaching in PPPs gene ally (Cou ois & O’Kee e,
Table 5. Sums o Ranks.
Va iable HEI Numbe o academic yea s Mean ank Sum o anks
Ra io (academic s a wi h PhD/s uden s) PPPs 17 9.06 154.00
PPUs 17 25.94 441.00
To al 34
No e. HEI = highe educa ion ins i u ion; PPPs = Po uguese public poly echnics; PPUs = Po uguese public uni e si ies.
Table 6. Tes S a is ics.
Tes s and signi icance le els
Ra io (academic s a
wi h PhD/s uden s)
Mann–Whi ney U1.000
Wilcoxon W154.000
Z −4.943
Asymp. Sig. ( wo- ailed) .000
Exac sig. (2*[one- ailed sig.]) .000
Exac sig. ( wo- ailed) .000
Exac sig. (one- ailed) .000
Poin p obabili y .000
No e. G ouping a iable (HEI). HEI = highe educa ion ins i u ion.
Table 4. Tes s o No mali y.
Va iable
Kolmogo o –Smi no aShapi o–Wilk
S a is ic d Signi icance S a is ic d Signi icance
Ra io (academic s a wi h PhD/s uden s) .154 34 .040 .902 34 .005
aLillie o s signi icance co ec ion.
B ás 9
Table 7. Shapi o–Wilk Tes .
Va iables Obs W V Z P ob > z
P eca ious a e in PPPs 162 0.95099 6.093 4.113 0.00002
Numbe o unde g adua e p og ams 162 0.92259 9.623 5.154 0.00000
Numbe o s uden places pe yea 162 0.86292 17.040 6.454 0.00000
S uden en olmen 162 0.79179 25.882 7.406 0.00000
En y o new s uden s (unde g adua e p og ams) 162 0.79882 25.007 7.327 0.00000
No e. PPPs = Po uguese public poly echnics.
Table 8. Spea man’s Rank Co ela ion.
Va iables (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)
P eca ious a e in PPPs (A) 1
Numbe o unde g adua e p og ams (B) .323* 1
Numbe o s uden places pe yea (C) .399* .954* 1
S uden en olmen ( i s one—all p og ams) (D) .415* .952* .986* 1
En y o new s uden s (unde g adua e p og ams) (E) .441* .925* .981* .983* 1
No e. PPPs = Po uguese public poly echnics.
*Indica es he s a is ical signi icance o he co ela ion a he 5% le el.
Table 9. Kendall’s Rank Co ela ion.
Va iables (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)
P eca ious a e in PPPs (A) 1
Numbe o unde deg ee p og ams (B) .223* 1
Numbe o s uden places pe yea (C) .294* .796* 1
S uden en olmen ( i s one—all p og ams) (D) .315* .799* .903* 1
En y o new s uden s (unde g adua e p og ams) (E) .322* .754* .891* .898* 1
No e. PPPs = Po uguese public poly echnics.
*Indica es he s a is ical signi icance o he co ela ion a he 5% le el.
Table 10. Sums o Ranks.
Va iable HEI NMean ank Sum o anks
P eca ious a e PPPs 162 155.09 25,124.00
PPUs 84 62.58 5,257.00
To al 246
No e. HEI = highe educa ion ins i u ion; PPPs = Po uguese public poly echnics; PPUs = Po uguese public uni e si ies.
Table 11. Tes S a is ics.
Tes s and signi icance le el P eca ious a e
Mann–Whi ney U1,687.000
Wilcoxon W5,257.000
Z−9.669
Asymp. sig. ( wo- ailed) .000
No e. G ouping a iable (HEI). HEI = highe educa ion ins i u ion.
•• In PPPs, how can a p o esso wi h a p eca ious
employmen si ua ion ( ypically a 6-mon h o 1-yea
con ac ) supe ise a PhD hesis which usually akes 2
o 3 yea s o comple e?
•• How should such a p o esso eac in hese
ci cums ances?
•• Should a p o esso wi h a p eca ious con ac e use o
supe ise a PhD s uden ?
•• How migh ee-paying PhD s uden s espond when
hei esea ch p oposal is ejec ed by a p o esso wi h
a p eca ious con ac ?
•• A e policymake s and people esponsible o PPPs
awa e o his issue?
2015) bu in pa icula in PhD cou ses which equi e a deep
bond be ween he PhD s uden and his o he supe iso
(Lee, 2008). These indings aise he ollowing ques ions: