Chapter 5. Priorities for developing the scientific and pedagogical potential of academic staff in Ukrainian universities under institutional autonomy

135 CHAPTER 5 CHAPTER 5 Priorities for Developing the Scientific and Pedagogical Potential of Academic Staff in Ukrainian Universities under Institutional Autonomy Abstract This study analyzes the priorities for developing the scientific and pedagogical potential of academic staff in Ukrainian universities under institutional autonomy. The research is based on a survey of 243 staff members, with data processed and analyzed using MS Excel. The findings show that, although human resources are the key asset of higher education, staff development is not sufficiently prioritized within university management systems. The most urgent needs identified include enhancing the prestige of the profession, strengthening motivation, reducing teaching workload, improving research infrastructure, introducing effective incentives, and establishing systematic monitoring and evaluation. Staff development is viewed both as a managerial challenge and as a vital resource for improving the effectiveness of universities in the knowledge economy. The chapter stresses that innovative personnel management practices should focus on recognition, engagement, and career growth, thereby fostering organizational resilience and international competitiveness. It concludes that creating effective incentive systems to stimulate participation in research and international projects must become a cornerstone of university policy, ensuring the sustainable development of Ukrainian higher education institutions. KEYWORDS Scientific and pedagogical potential, Ukrainian universities, institutional autonomy, academic staff development, knowledge economy, recognition and engagement, career growth, organizational resilience, international competitiveness, sustainable development. Marking the development of the "knowledge economy" as a national priority of Ukraine makes increased demands on local higher education institutions (HEIs) in terms of fulfilling their scientific and pedagogical potential. It is based on the potential ability of academic staff to produce new knowledge, ideas and innovations, transferring them to students, thus forming them as representatives of a new generation of professionals. DOI: 10.15587/978-617-8360-20-7.CH5 Yurii Skyba, Olena Otych, Iryna Drach, Volodymyr Kovtunets, Oleksandr Zhabenko, Valerii Yushchuk © The Author(s) of chapter, 2025. This is an Open Access chapter distributed under the terms of the CC BY license 136 CHAPTER 5 Educational policy and reforms: the impact of globalization Choosing as a basis the high points of international (Supporting growth and jobs – an agenda for the modernization of Europe's higher education systems [1]; Bucharest Communiqué [2]; Yerevan Communiqué [3]; Rome Ministerial Communiqué [4]) and national legislation and regulations on education (Law "On Education" [5]; Law "On Higher Education" [6]; National Report on the State and Prospects of Education in Ukraine, [7, 8]; Strategy for Higher Education Development in Ukraine for 2021–2031 [9]) on the value of scientific and pedagogical potential of higher education academic staff in building up higher education scientific and educational potential, foreign scientists scientists (K. Türk [10], Р. Seldin, J. E. Miller, C. A. Seldin [11], R. de la Torre, A. Lusa, M. Mateo, E.-H. Aghezzaf [12], etc.) and Ukrainian researchers (S. Kalashnikova, I. Drach, O. Kovalenko, S. Kurbatov, N. Nevmerzhycka, O. Palamarchuk, V. Ryabchenko, L. Chervona [13, 14], V. Lugovyi [15]; Yu. Skyba, G. Chornoivan, O. Zhabenko, I. Regeilo, O. Otych, V. Muromets, S. Melnyk [16, 17], O. Yaroshenko et all [18–20], Slyusarenko [21], Yakymenko et all [22], etc.) emphasize that the development of this potential is not an end in itself, but a factor in expanding the HEIs academic and institutional autonomy and strengthening the social function of higher education in society. However, according to the analysis of modern educational practice, domestic universities do not fully make use of the opportunities, provided by the Laws of Ukraine "On Education" (2017) and "On Higher Education" (2014), to develop scientific and pedagogical potential of their academic staff. This is manifested in the lack of effective measures to raise the prestige of scientific and pedagogical work and motivate university staff for professional growth; work overload with educational and other activities; the dependence of HEI staff list on the number of students that creates risks for unemployment of research and teaching staff (RTS) and causes its migration, thus reducing human resource and scientific and pedagogical potential of the national higher school; obsolescence or total lack of research and information infrastructures for professors' self-training as well as for training higher education students that hinders the implementation of research-based training and professional development of research and teaching staff; insufficient development of organizational, methodological and financial mechanisms for managing professional development of research and teaching staff, monitoring its quality and evaluating results; weak contacts of HEIs with leading scientific institutions and stakeholders, etc. Thus, identifying the needs and thereafter determining the priorities for universities to manage the growth of professors' scientific and pedagogical potential is of high theoretical and practical importance for developing an effective strategy for their development, improving their ranking and ensuring the proper quality of higher education services based on modernization trends of European and domestic higher education in the process of joining European Higher Education Area. Analizing the latest scientific sources on this issue, we discovered that it incorporates scientific interests of many scientists in the field of educational/pedagogical sciences. Thus, the purpose of the study is to determine the development needs of academic staff's scientific and pedagogical potential of Ukrainian universities in the context of expanding institutional autonomy and to identify opportunities to consider when developing institutional development strategies at local universities. 137 chapter 5. Priorities for Developing the Scientific and Pedagogical Potential of Academic Staff in Ukrainian Universities under Institutional Autonomy CHAPTER 5 5.1 LATEST RESEARCH ANALYSIS In particular, the development issue of universities' research and innovation potential is re leased in the works of S. Kalashnikova, I. Drach, O. Palamarchuk, V. Ryabchenko, L. Chervona [13, 14], V. Lugovyi [15], O. Slyusarenko [21] and others; professional development technologies of reserach and teaching stuff and increase of its potential are covered in research papers of Yu. Skyba [16, 17], O. Yaroshenko [16–20], N. Divinska [18–20], O. Zhabenko [16–20], G. Chornoivan [16–20], I. Regeilo (16, 18–20), Otych O. [17], V. Muromets [16], Melnyk S. [23], I. Tamozhska, N. Tymofiienko, A. Demianiuk, M. Klyap, M. Tsurkan [24], S. Yakymenko, T. Vasіutina, D. Nefodov, L. Pankiv, A. Stryzhakov, M. Denysiuk [22] and others. Scientific sources, devoted to research in the field of higher education, characterize different types of reserach and teaching staff potential, namely: intellectual one (M. Dolishniy, K. Lipovska, S. Maniv, S. Illyashenko, etc.), emotional one (A. Gatsko, O. Smigunova, etc.), spiritual one (V. Panok, E. Pomitkin, etc.), leadership one (S. Kalashnikova, T. Gura, etc.) and personal one (D. Leontiev, V. Ryabchenko, etc.). At the same time, despite the significant number of papers on the problem of developing reserach and teaching staff potential, the priorities, needs and growth mechanisms of its scientific and pedagogical potential still remain insufficiently substantiated. According to our hypothesis, the development effectiveness of academic staff's scientific and pedagogical potential in Ukraine depends on the harmonization of their needs with the priorities of educational policy and strategies of HEI institutional development. Therefore, there is a need for a special survey on RTS needs, and further research on possible models and plans for the development of domestic universities' scientific and pedagogical potential is of high demand. The study of priorities and needs for the development of scientific and pedagogical potential of Ukrainian universities' academic staff in the context of expanding institutional autonomy was conducted by researchers of the Department of Integration of Higher Education and Science of the Institute of Higher Education of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine during 2022–2024. To obtain empirical material, the researchers developed a questionnaire consisting of 6 closed-ended questions with 56 suggested answers, structured in blocks that covered the most important areas in developing scientific and pedagogical potential of Ukrainian universities' academic staff. The survey was conducted in the period from May to June and from September to October 2022. Reserach and teaching stuff from 11 universities of Ukraine (3 of them – classical, 4 – technical, 2 – economic, 1 – pedagogical and 1 – medical), in particular, from Sumy State University (SSU), Uzhhorod National University (UzhNU), Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University (ChNU), National Technical University "Kharkiv Polytechnic Institute" (NTU "KhPI"), Lutsk National Technical University (LNTU), National Aviation University (NAU), Kyiv National Economics University named after Vadym Hetman (KNEU), Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics (KhNUE), National Pedagogical Dragomanov University (NPU), National Pirogov Memorial 138 CHAPTER 5 Educational policy and reforms: the impact of globalization Medical University, Vinnytsya (NMUV), National University of Water Environmental Engineering (NUWEE) filled in the questionnaire. Higher education institutions represented 8 of the 25 regions of Ukraine, including the leading university centers – Kyiv and Kharkiv. The quantitative and qualitative analysis of the survey results was conducted using the methods of mathematical statistics based on Excel software. To determine the priority factor, the rating was based on the number of responses higher than 50%. In total, 243 universities' research and teaching staff took part in the survey on a voluntary basis, of which 75.3% have a scientific degree (Dr.Hab. – 24 people (9.9%), PhD – 159 people (65.4%)), no degree – 60 professors (24.7%). The distribution of the surveyed universities' research and teaching staff is shown on Fig. 5.1. 9.9 65.4 24.7 Dr.Hab. PhD No degree  Fig. 5.1 The share of surveyed research and teaching staff by category (%) 5.2 RESULTS ANALYSIS During the survey, considerable attention was paid to identifying factors that are impor tant for the development of scientific and pedagogical potential of local universities' academic staff. So, Question 1 "Which of the factors are key to career growth in your HEI?" gave us the following answers from the respondents (Table 5.1). The survey data, presented in Table 5.1, shows that the represented universities' research and teaching staff consider the "professional competence development" as the most important factor for career growth at the university (7 universities). The second most important factor is "international activity" (6 universities), the third place takes the "research achievements" factor (in 5 out of 11 universities the share of answers is higher 139 chapter 5. Priorities for Developing the Scientific and Pedagogical Potential of Academic Staff in Ukrainian Universities under Institutional Autonomy CHAPTER 5 than 50%) and the fourth place is "teaching achievements" (in 3 out of 11 universities a response rate is 50% or higher).  Table 5.1 Factors important for career growth in HEIs, in number of persons, % University Number of persons Total Teaching achievements Research achievements Professional competence development International activity Quant. % Quant. % Quant. % Quant. % Quant. % SSU 3 23 13 100 4 30.8 12 92.3 13 100 UzhNU 11 32.4 22 64.7 20 58.8 18 52.9 34 100 ChNU 6 31.6 13 68.4 7 36.8 5 26.3 19 100 NTU "KhPI" 17 54.8 14 45.2 9 29 5 16.1 31 100 LNTU 8 38 15 71.4 12 57.1 6 28.6 21 100 NAU 11 57.9 15 78.9 16 84.2 18 94.7 19 100 NUWEE 8 34.8 11 47.8 11 47.8 5 21.8 23 100 KNEU 10 50 5 25 13 65 11 55 20 100 KhNUE 6 30 9 45 15 75 11 55 20 100 NPU 6 26 8 34.8 14 60.7 6 26 23 100 NMUV 3 15 8 40 12 60 12 60 20 100 Considering the results of the survey of research and teaching staff, professional competence development is one of the most important factors in career development. So, we believe that universities should introduce and expand using various forms and technologies to improve their level, including seminars, workshops, trainings, webinars, master-classes, open courses, etc. Let us note that the importance of "international activity" for the career growth was indicated by the respondents from 2 universities – NAU and SSU (94.7% and 92.3%, respectively); "research achievements" were noted by only 1 university – SSU (100%), "professional competence develop ment" – NAU (84.2%) and KhNEU (75%), "teaching achievements" – NTU "KhPI" (54.8%) and NAU (57.9%). Thus, as seen from the results, the "teaching achievement" factor has the least impact on the development of a university professor's professional career. However, in our opinion, the universities' lack of desire to provide quality teaching in general has a negative impact on the education quality of its students. 140 CHAPTER 5 Educational policy and reforms: the impact of globalization In addition, the questionnaire revealed such answers of the respondents as: activity, desire to do business and work in a team, closeness to administration, family ties, financial incentives for people who is able to promote career growth. These answers show that universities do not always consider professor's achievements in his/her career. Factors inhibitting career and professional growth, as believed by the respondents, are: overload of educational and other work – 20.4%, outdated and weak material and technical base – 20%, weak contacts with leading scientific institutions – 18.7%, lack of scientific manager/ supervisor – 12.1%, low foreign language proficiency level – 11.7%, unfavorable psychological atmosphere in the team – 9%, low level of computer proficiency – 7.7%. Regarding Question 2 of our survey “What forms of RTS professional development/advanced training are implemented in your HEI?”, the following distribution of answers was established (Table 5.2).  Table 5.2 Forms of RTS professional development , implemented in HEI, in number of persons, % List of professional development forms University SSU UzhNU ChNU NTU "KhPI" LNTU NAU KNEU KhNUE NPU NMUV NUWEE Number of persons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Mandatory trainings/ courses for young academic staff 3 4 – 15 6 5 5 6 – 3 7 % 23 11.8 – 48.4 28.6 26.3 25 30 – 15 30.4 Mandatory trainings/ courses for new academic staff 3 1 – 8 1 2 3 – – 1 4 % 23 2.9 – 25.8 4.8 10.5 15 – – 5 17.4 Trainings/ courses for the developmen/ modernization of educational disciplines 7 6 2 10 2 8 10 17 12 7 6 % 53.8 17.6 10.5 32.3 9.5 42.1 50 87 52.1 35 26 Mentoring – 4 6 8 4 15 1 2 1 7 4 % – 11.8 31.6 25.8 19 78.9 5 10 4.3 35 17.4 141 chapter 5. Priorities for Developing the Scientific and Pedagogical Potential of Academic Staff in Ukrainian Universities under Institutional Autonomy CHAPTER 5  Continuation of Table 5.2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Elective/on-demand courses 11 2 4 10 3 7 10 10 – 6 8 % 84.6 5.9 21 32.2 14.3 36.8 50 50 – 30 34.8 Trainings on the use of IT in teaching 10 4 1 7 1 – 12 14 14 1 6 % 76.9 11.8 5.3 22.6 4.8 – 60 70 60.9 5 26 Trainings for researchers 5 2 – 3 5 10 2 1 – 1 2 % 38.5 5.9 – 9.7 23.8 52.6 10 5 – 5 8.7 Internship in Ukraine (in other HEIs, research institutions, enterprises, etc.) 8 27 14 23 18 17 11 7 14 12 12 % 61.5 79.4 73.7 74.2 85.7 89.5 55 35 60.9 60 52.2 Internship abroad (in other HEIs, research institutions, enterprises, etc.) 8 16 10 15 18 15 7 9 6 11 9 % 61.5 47 52.6 48.4 85.7 78.9 35 45 26 55 3.1 Total, respondents 13 34 19 31 21 19 20 20 23 20 21 % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 The analysis of the results, given in Table 5.2, testified that Ukrainian universities actively use a wide range of capacity development forms for their research and teaching staff. First of all, this is an "internship in Ukraine" (in 9 universities the indicator is higher than 50%); "internship abroad" is on the second position (in 5 – the indicator is higher than 50%); in third place – training on the use of IT in teaching and trainings/courses for the development/modernization of educational disciplines (in 4 – the indicator is higher than 50%); the fourth position was taken by elec tive/on-demand courses (in 3 – the indicator is higher than 50%); mentoring for researchers (1 – the indicator is higher than 50%); in fifth place – mandatory trainings/courses for young academic staff and mandatory trainings/courses for new academic staff (no university has scored higher than 50%). Given that the internship procedure for research and teaching staff in Ukraine is somewhat formal for a number of reasons, primarily the lack of funds, we consider it appropriate to introduce training systems in universities to enhance research and teaching staff's research and methodological competence. 142 CHAPTER 5 Educational policy and reforms: the impact of globalization In our opinion, universities do not pay enough attention to such technologies for developing research and teaching staff's potential as "peer to peer development", training for young researchers and young professors that have recently become increasingly popular in the educational community. We believe that the active use of the proposed technologies in universities would contribute, on one hand, to improving the research quality, on the other – to increase the higher education quality at different levels. On the positive side, universities are actively responding to the challenge of digitizing higher education, in particular by offering "training on the use of IT in teaching". It is also obvious that the above-mentioned development form of research and teaching staff'spotential is further relevant, as well as the content expansion of proposals related to the digitalization processes in higher education. The next Questions 3 of the questionnaire aimed at discovering forms for teaching com petence development, implemented at the university. The results of the survey are presented in Table 5.3.  Table 5.3 Forms for teaching competence development, implemented at the university, in number of persons, % List of forms for teaching competence development University SSU UzhNU ChNU NTU "KhPI" LNTU NAU KNEU KhNUE NPU NMUV NUWEE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Mandatory trainings/ courses to improve teaching Number of persons 4 2 - 5 4 1 4 7 4 4 3 % 30.8 5.9 16.1 19 5.2 20 35 17.4 20 13 Elective trainings/ courses to improve teaching Number of persons 10 6 3 19 5 13 8 15 16 12 9 % 76.9 17.6 15.9 61.3 23.8 68.4 40 75 69.6 50 39.1 Research on teaching and learning in higher education Number of persons 2 6 5 9 6 17 6 7 2 5 3 % 15.4 17.6 26.3 29 28.6 89.5 30 35 8.7 25 13 Recognition/ promotion of best teaching practices Number of persons 13 12 1 3 4 2 7 1 2 2 9 % 100 35.3 5.3 9.7 19 10.5 35 5 8.7 10 39.1 Professor's e-portfolio Number of persons 23213021216 % 15.4 8.8 10.5 3.2 14.3 10 5 8.7 5 26.1 143 chapter 5. Priorities for Developing the Scientific and Pedagogical Potential of Academic Staff in Ukrainian Universities under Institutional Autonomy CHAPTER 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Methodological seminars Number of persons 10 11 13 22 12 16 8 8 12 10 9 % 76.9 32.3 68.4 70.9 57.1 84.2 40 40 52.2 50 39.1 Feedback from fellow teachers Number of persons 4 15 12 17 9 5 8 8 6 7 9 % 30.8 44.1 63.2 54.8 42.9 26.3 40 40 26.1 35 39.1 Total, respondents Number of persons 13 34 19 31 21 19 20 20 23 20 21 % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Based on the results, presented in Table 5.3, we established that Ukrainian universities do not have a sufficiently powerful arsenal of forms for teaching competence development of their research and teaching staff. First of all, these are methodological seminars (in 7 universities the indicator is higher than 50%); in the second position – elective trainings/courses to improve teaching (in 6 universities the indicator is higher than 50%); in third place – feedback from fellow teachers (in 2 – the indicator is higher than 50%); the fourth position was taken by research on teaching and learning in higher education and recognition/promotion of best teaching practices (in 1 (SSU) – the indicator is higher than 50%). At the same time, no university has received more than 50% of such forms for teaching competence development as mandatory training/courses to improve teaching and professor's e-portfolio. Among other options for teaching competence development of research and teaching staff, mentioned by the respondents, was self-study of best practices and success cases of other HEIs. In our opinion, the lack of attention of university management to recognition/promotion of best teaching practices has a negative impact on the motivation of research and teaching staff to improve the teaching quality. The analysis of universities by categories showed that considerable attention to teaching competence development of research and teaching staff is paid in the classical SSU and in technical – NAU and LNTU. We believe it is caused by the university administration awareness that in order to train a high-quality specialist, higher education professors must have not only scientific and professional knowledge, but also strategies, technologies and methods of transferring this knowledge as well as mastering the basics of pedagogical skills. We defined the following distribution of answers to Question 4 “What motivational/stimulating tools are used in your HEI for professional development?” (Table 5.4). The results of the survey prove the fact that various tools of personnel and financial policies are used in Ukrainian universities to stimulate the RTS' professional development. The analysis of respondents' responses to the motivating/stimulating tools, used in universities to develop  Continuation of Table 5.3 150 CHAPTER 5 Educational policy and reforms: the impact of globalization dosvidu rozvytku instytutsiinoho potentsialu universytetiv u konteksti hlobalnoho liderstvа. Vyshcha osvita Ukrainy, 2, 107. Available at: https://ihed.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/ 09/Analiz_rozv_instituciyn_potencialu_Univ_liderstvo_IVO-Avtors-kolektiv_2016-110p.pdf 14. Baladzhy, O., Drach, I .I., Kalashnikova, S. A., Kovalenko, O. M., Kurbatov, S., Nevmerzhytska, N. M. et al.; Kalashnikova, S. A. (Ed.) (2017). Rozvytok instytutsiinoho potentsialu universytetiv u konteksti hlobalnoho liderstva. Kyiv: Instytut vyshchoi osvity NAPN Ukrainy. Available at: https://lib.iitta.gov.ua/id/eprint/711064/ 15. Lugovyi, V. (2020). Vyshcha osvity ukrainy: problemy yakosti. "Osvita i suspilstvo, 10, 9–10. Available at: https://naps.gov.ua/ua/press/about_us/2219/ 16. Zhabenko, O., Muromets, V., Reheilo, I., Skyba, Yu., Chornoivan, H., Yaroshenko, O.; Skyba, Yu. (Ed.) (2020). Teoretychni osnovy rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnoho potentsialu universytetiv Ukrainy u konteksti rozshyrennia instytutsiinoi avtonomii. Part 1. Kyiv: IVO NAPN Ukrainy, 113. https://doi.org/10.31874/978-617-7486-40-3-2020 17. Skyba, Yu., Chornoivan, H., Zhabenko, O., Yaroshenko, O., Otych, O., Melnyk, S.; Skyba, Yu. (Ed.) (2021). Analiz providnoho vitchyznianoho ta zarubizhnoho dosvidu z rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnoho potentsialu universytetiv. Part 2. Kyiv: IVO NAPN Ukrainy. https://doi. org/10.31874/978-617-7644-51-3-2021 18. Yaroshenko, O. H., Zhabenko, O. V., Skyba, Yu. A., Divinska, N. O., Reheilo, I. Yu., Chornoivan, H. P.; Yaroshenko, O. H. (Ed.) (2020). Teoretychni osnovy i tekhnolohiia profesiinoho rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv universytetiv v umovakh intehratsii vyshchoi osvity i nauky. Kyiv: Printeko, 439. Available at: https://ihed.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/ 02/Tehnologiya_prof_rozvitku_pracivn_VNZ_Monogr_IVO-2020-439p_avtors-kolektiv.pdf 19. Divinska, N., Diachenko, N., Zhabenko, O., Reheilo, I., Skyba, Yu., Chornoivan, H., Yaroshenko, O.; Yaroshenko, O. (Ed.) Teoretychni osnovy i tekhnolohiia profesiinoho rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv universytetiv v umovakh intehratsii vyshchoi osvity i nauky. Part 2. Kyiv: Instytut vyshchoi osvity NAPN Ukrainy, 105. Available at: https://ihed.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/ 2019/07/Teor_osnovi_prof_rozvitku_pracivn_analitich_IVO-2018-105p_avtors-kolektiv.pdf 20. Divinska, N., Diachenko, N., Zhabenko, O., Reheilo, I., Skyba, Yu., Chornoivan, H., Yaroshenko, O.; Yaroshenko, O. (Ed.) (2018). Teoretychni osnovy i tekhnolohiia profesiinoho rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv universytetiv v umovakh intehratsii vyshchoi osvity i nauky. Kyiv: Instytut vyshchoi osvity NAPN Ukrainy, 72. Available at: https://ihed.org.ua/ wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Teor_osnovi_prof_rozvitku_pracivn_metodit_IVO-2018-72p_ avtors-kolektiv.pdf 21. Sliusarenko, O. M. (2015). Rozvytok naivyshchoho universytetskoho potentsialu v umovakh hlobalizatsii. Kyiv: Priorytety, 384. Available at: https://lib.iitta.gov.ua/id/eprint/10225/1/ 2015_mon_Sluisarenko.pdf 22. Yakymenko, S., Vasіutina, T., Nefodov, D., Pankiv, L., Stryzhakov, A., Denysiuk, M. (2023). Main directions of innovative transformations in higher education. Revista Amazonia Investiga, 12 (63), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.34069/ai/2023.63.03.3 151 chapter 5. Priorities for Developing the Scientific and Pedagogical Potential of Academic Staff in Ukrainian Universities under Institutional Autonomy CHAPTER 5 23. Vitrenko, Yu., Vlasova, I., Vorona, V., Kiriienko, D., Zhyliaiev, I., Kovtunets V., Melnyk, S.; Kovtunets V. (Ed.) (2020). Analiz providnoho vitchyznianoho ta zarubizhnoho dosvidu shchodo mekhanizmiv finansovoi avtonomii zakladiv vyshchoi osvity. Kyiv: Printeko, 336. Available at: https://ihed.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Analiz_dosvidu_fin-avtonomii_zVO_ch12_analit_IVO-2020-336p_avtors-kolektiv.pdf 24. Tamozhska, I., Tymofiienko, N., Demianiuk, A., Klyap, M., Tsurkan, M. (2023). Features of professional and pedagogical activity of a higher education teacher. Revista Amazonia Investiga, 12 (63), 148–155. https://doi.org/10.34069/ai/2023.63.03.13 25. Pro naukovu i naukovo-tekhnichnu diialnist (2015). Zakon Ukrainy No. 848-VIII. 26.11.2015. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/848-19 26. Pro profesiinyi rozvytok pratsivnykiv (2012). Zakon Ukrainy No. 12.01.2012. Available at https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/4312-17 27. Deiaki pytannia profesiinoho rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv (Metodychni rekomendatsii dlia profesiinoho rozvytku naukovo-pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv). Nakaz MON Ukrainy No. 1504. 04.12.2020. Available at: https://cprvmr.edu.vn.ua/material/nakaz-monukra-ni-v-d-04-grudnya-2020-r.-1504-deyak-pitannya-profes-jnogo-rozvitku-naukovo-pedagog-chnih-prac-vnik-v-metodichn-rekomendac-dlya-profes-jnogo-rozvitku-naukovo-pedagog-chnih-prac-vnik-v 28. Deiaki pytannia pidvyshchennia kvalifikatsii pedahohichnykh i naukovo-pedahohichnykh pratsivnykiv (2019). Postanova Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy No. 800. 21.08.2019. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/800-2019-%D0%BF#Text 29. Pro Stratehiiu liudskoho rozvytku (2021). Ukaz prezydenta ukrainy No. 225/2021. 02.06.2021. Available at: https://www.president.gov.ua/documents/2252021-39073 30. Human Development Report 2019. Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st century (2019). United Nations. Available at: https:// hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2019