Utilising content marketing metrics and social networks for academic visibility

There are numerous assumptions on research evaluation in terms of quality and relevance of academic contributions. Researchers are becoming increasingly acquainted with bibliometric indicators, including; citation analysis, impact factor, h-index, webometrics and academic social networking sites. In this light, this chapter presents a review of these concepts as it considers relevant theoretical underpinnings that are related to the content marketing of scholars. Therefore, this contribution critically evaluates previous papers that revolve on the subject of academic reputation as it deliberates on the individual researchers’ personal branding. It also explains how metrics are currently being used to rank the academic standing of journals as well as higher educational institutions. In a nutshell, this chapter implies that the scholarly impact depends on a number of factors including accessibility of publications, peer review of academic work as well as social networking among scholars.peer-reviewe

Markets for Reputation: Evidence on Quality and Quantity in Academe

We develop a theory of the market for individual reputation, an indicator of regard by one’s peers and others. The central questions are: 1) Does the quantity of exposures raise reputation independent of their quality? and 2) Assuming that overall quality matters for reputation, does the quality of an individual’s most important exposure have an extra effect on reputation? Using evidence for academic economists, we find that, conditional on its impact, the quantity of output has no or even a negative effect on each of a number of proxies for reputation, and very little evidence that a scholar's most influential work provides any extra enhancement of reputation. Quality ranking matters more than absolute quality. Data on mobility and salaries show, on the contrary, substantial positive effects of quantity, independent of quality. We test various explanations for the differences between the determinants of reputation and salary.mobility, quality/quantity trade-off, salary determination

Applied Evaluative Informetrics: Part 1

This manuscript is a preprint version of Part 1 (General Introduction and Synopsis) of the book Applied Evaluative Informetrics, to be published by Springer in the summer of 2017. This book presents an introduction to the field of applied evaluative informetrics, and is written for interested scholars and students from all domains of science and scholarship. It sketches the field's history, recent achievements, and its potential and limits. It explains the notion of multi-dimensional research performance, and discusses the pros and cons of 28 citation-, patent-, reputation- and altmetrics-based indicators. In addition, it presents quantitative research assessment as an evaluation science, and focuses on the role of extra-informetric factors in the development of indicators, and on the policy context of their application. It also discusses the way forward, both for users and for developers of informetric tools.Comment: The posted version is a preprint (author copy) of Part 1 (General Introduction and Synopsis) of a book entitled Applied Evaluative Bibliometrics, to be published by Springer in the summer of 201

Assessing iSchools

Over the past decade, iSchools have emerged to educate the next generation of information professionals and scholars. Claiming to be edgy and innovative, how can and should these schools function in the spirit of assessment that now drives so much in the university? This essay, which explores how well we can assess iSchools, emerged from a doctoral seminar. Academic Culture and Practice, taught by Richard Cox and including four doctoral student participants and the Dean of School of Information Studies at the University of Pittsburgh, Ronald Larsen. The doctoral students, among other activities, were required to work on assignments to support a self-study for the University of Pittsburgh's reaccreditation by the Middle States Association. As we proceeded through the course, we found ourselves increasingly drawn to questions about how iSchools, in their nascent state, can assess themselves. Four major areas—reputation, evaluating productivity in scholarly publishing, student evaluation of teaching, and student satisfaction with their academic programs—that emerged based on student interest as the seminar proceeded are discussed

The graduate law degree holders in the legal education market

Given that the law is helpful, essential and non-separable with our lives, we surely would like to know the people that make laws and who practice in the legal profession. This query is the recent theme we have pursued in this and other related projects. The investigation has revealed a knowledge economy (savoir-faire) that has entwined law and the actions of law people, which growingly became edged to explain their behavior and moral and professional conduct. The expectation has been that graduate law classes are for foreign lawyers who would return to their home country to work as international lawyers or as professors. That has long been deemed as a given; but the precise reality has not been previously unraveled. With this backdrop, the current paper purports to survey the status and performance of graduate law degree holders in US law school, to rank global law schools, and explore the implications and findings concerning the processes and outcomes of their missions

Users' trust in information resources in the Web environment: a status report

This study has three aims; to provide an overview of the ways in which trust is either assessed or asserted in relation to the use and provision of resources in the Web environment for research and learning; to assess what solutions might be worth further investigation and whether establishing ways to assert trust in academic information resources could assist the development of information literacy; to help increase understanding of how perceptions of trust influence the behaviour of information users

Compelling Orthodoxy: Myth and Mystique in the Marketing of Legal Education

[Excerpt] “In many ways, the story of modern legal education reads like a grim fairy tale, whose moral dénouement is no less compelling, and perhaps more consequential, than its fabulist forbearers. In this regard the marketing of legal education may aptly be illustrated by fable, such as that of The Trees and the Bramble Bush, which concerns the folly of electing a king. When some beautiful trees decide to look for a leader, they offer the throne to the olive, the fig and the vine; each in turn refuses, preferring to keep to its own fruitful role. The bramble steps in and accepts, soon making threats of what will happen to those that do not accept him. The result is perhaps the law of unintended consequences at play, but it has implications for both the quality of legal education and the treasured concept of academic freedom. Certainly, the realm of scholarship has been invaded by the image-seekers and image-makers. Legal scholarship is unique in ways that are both interesting and problematic. It has become a phenomenon of epic proportions; the bulk of what we know of such writing emanates from the 190-plus law schools approved by the American Bar Association, which collectively produce more than 680 legal journals.

Evaluate Your Business School’s Writings As If Your Strategy Matters

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