Scholarly behaviour and evaluation criteria: Uncovering the superficial characteristics that lead to higher citations

Do scholars adjust their publication behaviour depending on the criteria used in their evaluation? Maarten van Wesel presents findings showing how the publishing behaviour of scholars changed when evaluation switched from emphasising ‘publish-or-perish’ to impact factors. Whilst this may suggest a shift from quantity to quality, the number of citations a paper receives not only depends on its scholarly value, but also on seemingly superficial characteristics of a paper

Collaborative e-Learning: e-Portfolios for Assessment, Teaching and Learning

This paper presents an innovative approach to e-learning by exploring a number of initiatives where there is a move towards collaborative use of Personal Development Plans (PDPs) integrated with e-portfolios as mechanisms for delivering such plans. It considers whether such a move towards more product orientated assessment might enhance student learning experiences. Outcome based assessment and the use of e-portfolios also implies that a course may be delivered in a blended learning format and whether this change of culture in the higher education sector has an impact on tutors' course delivery and students' learning. The transition towards collaborative use of e-portfolios is presented in this paper. It addresses specifically the development of the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) and the use of e-portfolios and how collaborative e-learning is achieved at the School of Education, Social Work and Community Education (SESWCE) of the University of Dundee (UoD). This transition is eventually assessed by listening to students. Their views have supported the e-learning experience achieved at SESWCE. Opportunities have been generated for collaborative e-learning and it has allowed UoD to work towards the national targets in this particular field

Ideas and integrity; how ideas of what is important influence scholarly work

Recent big cases of scientific misconduct have led to an increase in debates about integrity of scientists and their work. These cases do not originate out of nothing but are the extremes of trends in contemporary science. Inspired by the Weberian notion about the functioning of ideas in the conduct of people, one can infer that the ideas of what is important in science, being published and being cited a lot, have had an impact on the interests and, thus, on the action of scholars. The pressure to publish has led to changes in publication behavior as is previously researched. Being cited often is also considered important but its impact on scholarly conduct is less well studied. This paper will build on research and tries to link this to historical trends in scholarly work. Doing so helps us to understand how, when, and why scholars are lead astray

Evaluation by Citation: Trends in Publication Behavior, Evaluation Criteria, and the Strive for High Impact Publications

Criteria for the evaluation of most scholars’ work have recently received wider attention due to high-profile cases of scientific misconduct which are perceived to be linked to these criteria. However, in the competition for career advancement and funding opportunities almost all scholars are subjected to the same criteria. Therefore these evaluation criteria act as ‘switchmen’, determining the tracks along which scholarly work is pushed by the dynamic interplay of interests of both scholars and their institutions. Currently one of the most important criteria is the impact of publications. In this research, the extent to which publish or perish, a long standing evaluation criterion, led to scientific misconduct is examined briefly. After this the strive for high impact publications will be examined, firstly by identifying the period in which this became an important evaluation criterion, secondly by looking at variables contributing to the impact of scholarly papers by means of a non-structured literature study, and lastly by combining these data into a quantitative analysis

“That machine from hell”; Word Processing in Sociology

Scholars spend much of their time processing words with the help of a computer. Yet not too long ago, scholars would have typed or even written their lectures and articles by hand, and often a secretary would have (re)typed the final version. This paper examines the transition from one set of socio-technical relationships to another, focusing on resistance to change and the closure that has led to the current ubiquity of word processors. The article draws on insights from Science and Technology Studies (STS), and on material from email and telephone interviews conducted with older and retired members of university sociology departments in the English-speaking world

Integrating e-learning and classroom learning; four years of asynchronous learning to improve academic competences

In an ever-changing world, competencies to process information efficiently are essential. However, several researchers indicate that graduates have limited abilities to solve complex problems in reality. In this paper, a possible solution to increase competences in effective searching, analysing and comparing information is provided. In a blended-learning environment, students had to share information before coming to class. The results of an analysis of four consecutive years of computer-supported learning in a master-course indicate that students are willing to share information when conditions are favourable. In addition, a specific redesign of the task, control and social dimension let to increased knowledge sharing. Future research is necessary to assess whether this also has increased performance

Comparing students’ perceptions of paper-based and electronic portfolios

\Electronic portfolios offer many advantages to their paper-based counterparts, including, but not limited to working on ICT skills, adding multimedia and easier sharing of the portfolio. Previous research showed that the quality of a portfolio does not depend on the medium used. In this article the perceived support for self-reflection of an electronic portfolio and a paper-based portfolio in the same ecological setting are compared. We made use of the fact that during this study about half of the first year medical students was using an electronic portfolio (n = 157) and the other half a paper-based portfolio (n = 190). Nine questions were added to the standard end of the block evaluation, which is handed to 25 percent of year one educational groups. Findings suggest that perceptions about the support for self-reflection, and the usefulness of compiling a portfolio, do not differ between students using an electronic portfolio and students using a paper-based portfolio. Résumé : Les portfolios électroniques offrent de nombreux avantages comparativement à leurs homologues de papier, entre autres la possibilité de perfectionner les compétences liées aux TIC, d’ajouter des éléments multimédias et de partager plus facilement le portfolio. Des études précédentes ont montré que la qualité d’un portfolio ne dépend pas du support utilisé. Dans le présent article, nous comparons l’aide à l’autoréflexion perçue pour un portfolio électronique et un portfolio sur support papier dans le même environnement. Dans le cadre de cette étude, nous avons profité du fait qu’environ la moitié des étudiants de première année en médecine utilisait un portfolio électronique (n = 157) et l’autre moitié, un portfolio sur support papier (n = 190). Neuf questions ont été ajoutées à l’évaluation normale remise à 25 pour cent des groupes de première année à la fin du bloc de formation. Les résultats suggèrent que les perceptions des étudiants à l’égard de l’aide à l’autoréflexion et de l’utilité de compiler un portfolio ne diffèrent pas entre les utilisateurs de portfolios électroniques et les utilisateurs de portfolios sur support papier

Comparing students’ perceptions of paper-based and electronic portfolios

\Electronic portfolios offer many advantages to their paper-based counterparts, including, but not limited to working on ICT skills, adding multimedia and easier sharing of the portfolio. Previous research showed that the quality of a portfolio does not depend on the medium used. In this article the perceived support for self-reflection of an electronic portfolio and a paper-based portfolio in the same ecological setting are compared. We made use of the fact that during this study about half of the first year medical students was using an electronic portfolio (n = 157) and the other half a paper-based portfolio (n = 190). Nine questions were added to the standard end of the block evaluation, which is handed to 25 percent of year one educational groups. Findings suggest that perceptions about the support for self-reflection, and the usefulness of compiling a portfolio, do not differ between students using an electronic portfolio and students using a paper-based portfolio. Résumé : Les portfolios électroniques offrent de nombreux avantages comparativement à leurs homologues de papier, entre autres la possibilité de perfectionner les compétences liées aux TIC, d’ajouter des éléments multimédias et de partager plus facilement le portfolio. Des études précédentes ont montré que la qualité d’un portfolio ne dépend pas du support utilisé. Dans le présent article, nous comparons l’aide à l’autoréflexion perçue pour un portfolio électronique et un portfolio sur support papier dans le même environnement. Dans le cadre de cette étude, nous avons profité du fait qu’environ la moitié des étudiants de première année en médecine utilisait un portfolio électronique (n = 157) et l’autre moitié, un portfolio sur support papier (n = 190). Neuf questions ont été ajoutées à l’évaluation normale remise à 25 pour cent des groupes de première année à la fin du bloc de formation. Les résultats suggèrent que les perceptions des étudiants à l’égard de l’aide à l’autoréflexion et de l’utilité de compiler un portfolio ne diffèrent pas entre les utilisateurs de portfolios électroniques et les utilisateurs de portfolios sur support papier