عنوان مقاله [English]
Background and objective: Public-private partnership reduces the project fund. Besides, it focuses on utilizing private-sector capacities such as knowledge and specialized experience. The aim of this study was to match the public-private partnership models in medical education in five continents to choose a suitable model for the medical education system.
Methods and Materials: This study has compared the public-private partnership models in higher education. The valid databases and websites of major universities across five continents have been searched by proper keywords of public-private partnership. The sampling of universities was done based on strategic choice, purposefulness, and access to information.
Results: One of the good models of the partnership was to use private sector resources to train trainees in the real work environment that has benefited both public and private partners. The private sector partner had cheaper labor and the public sector partner saved money. There were furthermore, another appropriate model was consulting and knowledge transfer services for the private sector by the public sector.
Conclusion: It seems that using private-sector resources for clinical education as a public-private partnership in universities of medical sciences are suitable. On the other hand, the public sector lays education policy and regulation and monitors the quality and quantity of education. Correspondingly, the private sector will be responsible for providing learning space, transfer of knowledge and specialized experience.
1. Ter-Minassian T. Public-private partnerships. International Monetary Fund Fiscal Affairse Department. 2004.
2. JABBARI BH, GHOLAMZADEH NR, Jannati A, Dadgar E. Introducing public-private partnership options in public hospitals. 2013.
3. Rabie A, Nazarian Z. The obstacles to the privatization of higher education in Iran and providing solutions for their elimination. Iranian of Higher Education. 2012;4(2):171-206(persian).
4. Brinkerhoff DW, Brinkerhoff JM. Public–private partnerships: Perspectives on purposes, publicness, and good governance. Public administration and development. 2011;31(1):2-14.
5. Salehi-Amiri R, hekmatpour M. The implications of privatization in higher education. National Congress of Higher Education in Iran; Tehran: SID; 2017.
6. Baer HA. Why is the Australian government interested in complementary medicine? A case study of economic rationalism. Complementary health practice review. 2007;12(3):167-78.
7. Ervin C, O'Sullivan A, Miteva E. Enhancing skills through public-private partnerships in education in Ukraine: the case of agribusiness. 2012.
8. Golich VL, Haynes S, Kreidler S. Using Public Private Partnerships to Accelerate Student Success. Metropolitan Universities. 2018;29(3):73-84.
9. Jordan SM, Shorter CA, Weinshall I. A Tale of Two Cities: Using Public-Private Partnerships to Create Higher Education Opportunities. Trusteeship. 2013;21(1):28-34.
10. Mgaiwa SJ, Poncian J. Public–private partnership in higher education provision in Tanzania: implications for access to and quality of education. Bandung: Journal of the Global South. 2016;3(1):6.
11. Patrinos H. Public-private partnerships: Contracting education in Latin America. World Bank Working Paper Washington, DC: World Bank. 2006.
12. Silva H, Bühler FR, Maillet B, Maisonneuve H, Miller LA, Negri A, et al. Continuing medical education and professional development in the European Union. Pharmaceutical Medicine. 2012;26(4):223-33.
13. Smolicz J. Privatization in Higher Education: EMerging Commonalities and Diverse Educational Perspectives in the Philippines, Australia, Poland and Iran. Journal of development. 1999;9:50-9.
14. Tilak JB, editor Current trends in private higher education in Asia. Proceedings of the international conference of privatization in higher education; 2008.
18. Schanck G, Lamont T. PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIPS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 2010.
20. https://www.stanford.edu/. su.
21. Partnerships & Industry. University of Oxford msdhwmoau.
22. Mugume T, Luescher TM. The politics of student housing: Student activism and representation in the determination of the user-price of a public–private partnership residence on a public university campus in South Africa. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa. 2015;3(1):1-17.
23. https://www.ru.ac.za/. Ru.
24. https://www.sun.ac.za/english. su.
25. http://www.uct.ac.za/. cu.
26. Malaysia(UPM).http://www.upm.edu.my/?L=en. UP.
27. Faculty of Medical Sciences UoDwfai.
28. University.www.useoul.edu/ SN.
29. http://www.cmu.edu.cn/en/. CMU.
30. Kumari J. Public–private partnerships in education: An analysis with special reference to Indian school education system. International Journal of Educational Development. 2016;47:47-53.
31. Verger A. Framing and selling global education policy: the promotion of public–private partnerships for education in low-income contexts. Journal of Education Policy. 2012;27(1):109-30.
32. Roshan A, editor Indicators of Higher Education Privatization in Iran. National Congress of Higher Education in Iran; 2017; Tehran.