OAI8: An overview of scholarly impact metrics; But: Why measure it at all in cases where the scholarly community truly has decision-making power, autonomy?

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

ContentThe interest in developing scholarly impact metrics is frequently justified by the need to objectively prioritize scarce resources and to better manage scholarly productivity. However, the study of scholarly communication in general, including scholarly impact metrics, has significant relevance to a number of other scientific domains such as computational social science, social network analysis, web science, and complex systems. In this presentation I will provide an overview of established scholarly impact metrics, grounding each in their respective scientific traditions and backgrounds. Changes in scholarly communication patterns, including the move to online environments and the increasing use of social media, have recently prompted a Cambrian explosion of new impact metrics derived from new data sources. These metrics may reflect previously unexplored facets of scholarly communication and impact, and may thus yield a more complete picture of scholarly communication. In my presentation I will provide an overview of these new metrics, and identify the opportunities as well as challenges that they present. 3 innovations: A: Citation based social metrics:

Degree; In-degree/Out-degree

Random walk; PageRank/Eigenvector

Shortest path; Closeness/Betweenness

B: Behavioural: 

Scholarly community and communication is moving online.

Data pertaining to online activities (implicit, behavioral) vs. citation data (explicit declaration of influence)

C: AltMetrics:  Behavioral AND “attention” data

Social media attention, bookmarking, mentions. Attempt to also capture “social” attention or public impact of scholarly work  Source:Metrics Session: An overview of scholarly impact metricsPresented by Mr. Johan BOLLEN on 19 Jun 2013 from 15:30 to 16:00Session: Plenary 2 PDF: http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=3&sessionId=4&resId=1&materialId=slides&confId=211600PPT: http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=3&sessionId=4&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=211600 ;
See on indico.cern.ch

Advertisements

Innovation in Business Education in Emerging Markets

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Cornell Chair and Professor of International Business Ilan Alon recently published Innovation in Business Education in Emerging Markets (Palgrave, 2013).  Alon and his co-editors, Victoria Jones and John R. McIntyre, invited scholars and educators from around the world to share their professional analyses and projections about the fastest growing markets for management education. This volume covers the spectrum from market analysis to critical commentary and promising new trends. Across the countries, themes and chapters in this book, the message is clear: innovation in instructional design and applications of new technologies can transform business education in emerging markets.

 

Emerging market economies account for 80% of the world’s population and some 75% of its trade growth in the foreseeable future. Management education can be a significant driver of growth in these markets, but the dominant US and European education models must be transformed to meet the unique needs of these regions.Innovation in Business Education in Emerging Markets provides insights for success that can be used by educators, administrators, policy makers and planners in rapidly growing education markets.

The editors invited scholars and educators from around the world to share their professional analyses and projections about the fastest growing markets for management education. This volume covers the spectrum from market analysis to critical commentary and promising new trends. Across the countries, themes and chapters in this book, the message is clear – innovation in instructional design and applications of new technologies can transform business education in emerging markets.

 

Contents:

 

PART I: REGIONAL TRAJECTORIES
1. Management Education in Africa: Prospects and Challenges; John Kuada
2. Advancing People Skills for 21st Century Business Education in Chile; María-Teresa Lepeley and Carlos A. Albornoz
3. Emerging Trends in Higher Education in the GCC: A Critical Assessment; Mourad Dakhli and Dina El Zohairy
4. An Overview of Indian Education System: From Its Religious Roots to Its Present Incarnation; Jitender Gill
5. The Development of Business Education in a Young, Entrepreneurial Country: The Case of Israel; Diana Bank and Tamar Almor
6. Business Education in the Emerging Economy of Vietnam:Twenty Years of Expectations, Illusions, and Lessons; Quan Hoang Vuong, Tri Dung Tran, Nancy K. Napier and Thuy Ha Dau

 

PART II: CONTENT ADAPTATIONS
7. Economic and Management Education in China: The Pros and Cons of Emulating the US Model; Penelope B. Prime
8. International Accreditation of Business Schools in Emerging Markets: A Study of FGV-EAESP and Insper in Brazil; Eric Ford Travis 9. Business Education and Ethics: The Case of Mexico as an Emerging Market; Francisco Iracheta and Diana Bank
10. Stakeholder Dialogues in Transition Economies: Educating and Training Leaders to Build Relations between Investors and Local Communities; Roland Bardy and Maurizio Massaro

 

PART III: NEW DIRECTIONS
11. A Review of the Current Status of Mobile Apps in Education: Implications for Emerging Countries’ Business Education Strategies Education; Christoph Lattemann and Ferial Khaddage
12. India Today: From Brain Drain to Brain Gain; P.J.Lavakare
13. Reaping the Benefits of Brain Circulation: The Impact of the Overseas Study and the Returnees on the Development of the Management Education in China; Wenxian Zhang
14. Outsourcing Global Skills Development to Australian Vocational Colleges: A Case Study on Reverse Transnationalization; Valeri Chukhlomin and Irina Chukhlomina
15. New Ways to Think About Business Education for Emerging Markets; Victoria Jones

 

Source:

Innovation in Business Education in Emerging MarketsEdited By Ilan Alon, Victoria Jones and John R. McIntyre
Palgrave Macmillan, June 2013
ISBN: 978-1-137-29295-7, ISBN10: 1-137-29295-4,
5.430 x 8.500 inches, 296 pages, 10 b/w tables, 9 figures,
See on us.macmillan.com

Identifying excellent researchers: A new approach for finding the one-in-a-hundred economists in a crowd of 32000

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract

Quantile kernel regression is a flexible way to estimate the percentile of a scholar’s quality stratified by a measurable characteristic, without imposing inappropriate assumption about functional form or population distribution. Quantile kernel regression is here applied to identifying the one-in-a-hundred economist per age cohort according to the Hirsch index.

 

The author:”The Hirsch index (Hirsch, 2005) is an often-used measure of life-time achievement. The Hirsch index is the highest number h for which holds that an author has h publications that are cited h times or more. The Hirsch index cannot fall over time and tends to increase. Any ranking based on the Hirsch index thus favours those with a longer career. This is fine for many purposes, but not if the aim is to identify excellent individuals in a cohort, e.g., for hiring scholars (Ellison, 2010). The Hirsch rate (Burrell, 2006 and Liang, 2006) – the Hirsch index over the number of active years – corrects for career length. However, the Hirsch rates assume a linear relationship between Hirsch index and active years. This may be problematic when comparing job candidates of different ages if the relationship is (locally) non-linear. This paper therefore proposes quantile kernel regression (Sheather & Marron, 1990) as a method to find exceptional researchers. Kernel regression does not impose linearity or any other functional form. Quantile regression focuses the analysis on exceptional, rather than average, scholars. The proposed method is applied to a sample of 32,000 economists. For illustration, I am looking for the one-in-a-hundred economists in each age group.”…..”In this paper, I propose quantile kernel regression as a way of identifying excellent scholars by cohort. Like the crown indicator, the proposed method finds people who stand out – but percentiles have a natural interpretation whereas z-scores do not (unless the distribution is Normal). Like the Hirsch rate, the proposed method distinguished between people of different age – but kernel regression does not impose linearity. I illustrate the proposed method with a large sample of economists. The results appear reasonable, but need to be tested still against data from other disciplines, against alternative assumptions on kernel regression, against alternative non-parametric methods, and against parametric methods for quantile regression. This is deferred to future research.”

 

Figure: Fig. 5. The 99%ile as estimated by the kernel density and as approximated by the Crown index (displayed on left axis) and the number of standard deviations (‘sigma’) between the mean and the 99%ile (displayed on the right axis).

Source:

Journal of Informetrics

Volume 7, Issue 4, October 2013, Pages 803–810

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.06.003

 Identifying excellent researchers: A new approachRichard S.J. Tola, b, c, d, a Department of Economics, University of Sussex, Jubilee Building, Falmer BN1 9SL, United Kingdomb Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlandsc Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlandsd Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
See on www.sciencedirect.com

The great divide between business schools research and business practice

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract

In their 2005 Harvard Business Review article, Bennis and O’Toole described business schools as being “on the wrong track” as a result of their focus on so-called scientific research. Some commentators argue that business schools have slowly lost their relevance since the end of the 1950s when they undertook a major overhaul in response to the harsh criticism of the Ford and the Carnegie Foundations on the state of theory and research in business administration. Inspired by Khurana’s (2007) book on the development of American business schools, this article describes the debate on the relevance of scientific business research that can be found in the popular business press and the academic literature, and suggests a number of structural and cultural changes to increase the relevance of business research and its impact on practice.

 

The authors: “instead of promoting top-tier academic journal publication as the highest benchmark, business schools should encourage the adoption of multiple models of academic inquiry coexisting on equal footing. Publishing in scholarly journals should not “count” more than writing case studies or developing industry notes for teaching tools”…”we have argued that a discrepancy between business research and business practice exists and is widening. Further research is needed to evaluate the magnitude
of this discrepancy.”

 

Source:

Canadian Journal of Higher Education
Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur
Volume 43, No. 1, 2013, pages 115-128
The Great Divide Between Business School Research and Business Practice
Isabelle Dostaler, Concordia University
Thomas J. Tomberlin, Carleton University

See on prophet.library.ubc.ca

Beyond the scholarly articl fixation; Evaluate your business school’s writings as if your strategy matters

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract

Business school publications are widely criticized for their lack of managerial or teaching relevance. One reason for this criticism is that business school scholarship is typically evaluated purely in terms of one type of work: academic journal articles that are meant to be read by other scholars. However, academics produce multiple types of publications, and business schools serve a wider range of stakeholders. These other stakeholders are often central to the schools’ purposes and may be critical in acquiring resources. These stakeholders probably prefer to see scholarship that is relevant for students or for practitioners. They may prefer scholarship that is ethically relevant or regionally relevant and otherwise different from the model that dominates U.S. journals. Technologies are now available to measure the impact of writings in a much wider range of venues than covered by the Social Sciences Citation Index in the Web of Science. Moreover, a wider range of measures, such as the size of writings’ readership, may be needed. We consider these issues and present some recommendations, arguing that faculty evaluations should follow an intentional strategy and not necessarily conform to the traditional default.

 

The authors:”As dean, you now recognize the concerns of the full set of stakeholders of your school, not just other scholars. Therefore, you charge a taskforce with the following four questions: (1) Who are the key stakeholders for your business school’s publications? (2) What types of publications do these stakeholders desire? (3) How can these publications be evaluated and rewarded? (4) What are the implications for changing your current evaluation and reward practices?”……..”The university business school can create and does create scholarship for many audiences. It is uniquely positioned to serve not only scholars but also students, executives, policymakers, and regional
leaders. What it needs is the will and clear strategic thinking. Otherwise, business schools will rightly continue to be seen as out of touch with key constituencies. This is the opportunity and the challenge that confronts the dean and all of us in business schools.”

 

Source:

Business Horizons

Volume 56, Issue 3, May–June 2013, Pages 323–331

 Evaluate your business school’s writings as if your strategy mattersJohn L. Cotton, ,Alex Stewart College of Business Administration, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881, U.S.A.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.01.010,
See on www.sciencedirect.com

The relationship between tweets and WoS citations; A new framework utilizing the coverage of articles and the correlation between Twitter mentions and citations to facilitate the evaluation of nove…

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Abstract:

Data collected by social media platforms have recently been introduced as a new source for indicators to help measure the impact of scholarly research in ways that are complementary to traditional citation-based indicators. Data generated from social media activities related to scholarly content can be used to reflect broad types of impact. This paper aims to provide systematic evidence regarding how often Twitter is used to diffuse journal articles in the biomedical and life sciences. The analysis is based on a set of 1.4 million documents covered by both PubMed and Web of Science (WoS) and published between 2010 and 2012. The number of tweets containing links to these documents was analyzed to evaluate the degree to which certain journals, disciplines, and specialties were represented on Twitter. It is shown that, with less than 10% of PubMed articles mentioned on Twitter, its uptake is low in general. The relationship between tweets and WoS citations was examined for each document at the level of journals and specialties. The results show that tweeting behavior varies between journals and specialties and correlations between tweets and citations are low, implying that impact metrics based on tweets are different from those based on citations. A framework utilizing the coverage of articles and the correlation between Twitter mentions and citations is proposed to facilitate the evaluation of novel social-media based metrics and to shed light on the question in how far the number of tweets is a valid metric to measure research impact.

The authors: “With less than 10% of PubMed documents mentioned, Twitter shows a much lower coverage of scholarly document than other social media platforms such as Mendeley and CiteULike, which is most likely due to the scholarly focus of the latter two. Nevertheless, we were able to demonstrate that there are some journals and specialties in biomedical science that are of greater interest to the Twitter community than others.”

Source:

Tweeting biomedicine: an analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literatureStefanie Haustein, Isabella Peters, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Mike Thelwall, Vincent LarivièrearXiv:1308.1838v1Fulltext: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.1838v1   ;

See on arxiv.org

RSS Business School News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Locations of Site Visitors

Altmetric Related stuf

if(typeof(AltmetricWidget) !== 'undefined'){ window.AltmetricWidget489 = new AltmetricWidget("AltmetricWidget489"); }}

%d bloggers like this: