American Social Work and Psychology Faculty Members' Scholarly Productivity: A Controlled Comparison of Citation Impact Using the h-Index

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (8) ◽  
pp. 2448-2458 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Barner ◽  
M. J. Holosko ◽  
B. A. Thyer
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
H Index ◽  
Psychology Faculty

Comparing reputation vs h-index rankings of doctoral programs

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-99
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Smith ◽  
Tyler Edison Carter ◽  
Philip J. Osteen ◽  
Lisa S. Panisch
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
Strong Predictor ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
H Index ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Social Work Faculty ◽  
College Age ◽  
Ranking Systems

Purpose This study builds on previous investigations on the scholarship of social work faculty using h-index scores. The purpose of this paper is to compare two methods of determining the excellence of social work doctoral programs. Design/methodology/approach This study compared rankings in 75 social work doctoral programs using h-index vs the US News and World Report (USNWR) list. The accuracy of predicting scholarly productivity from USNWR rankings was determined by joint membership in the same quantile block. Information on USNWR rankings, h-index, years of experience, academic rank, and faculty gender were collected. Regression analysis was used in creating a predictive model. Findings Only 39 percent of USNWR rankings accurately predicted which programs had their reputation and scholarly productivity in the same rating block. Conversely, 41 percent of programs had reputations in a higher block than their scholarly productivity would suggest. The regression model showed that while h-index was a strong predictor of USNWR rank (b=0.07, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.08), additional variance was explained by the unique contributions of faculty size (b=0.01, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.02), college age (b=0.002, 95% CI: <0.001, 0.003), and location in the southeast (b=−0.22, 95% CI: −0.39, −0.06). Originality/value For many programs, reputation and scholarly productivity coincide. Other programs have markedly different results between the two ranking systems. Although mean program h-indices are the best predictor of USNWR rankings, caution should be used in making statements about inclusion in the “top 10” or “top 20” programs.

The 5-Year BSW–MSW Program: A New Curricular Option

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-82
Author(s):  
Shirley Simon ◽  
Edward Gumz ◽  
Susan Grossman ◽  
James Marley ◽  
Yolanda Golden
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Social Work Education ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Admission Process ◽  
Msw Students ◽  
School Of Social Work ◽  
Work Education

This article describes and analyzes the development and implementation of a 5-year BSW–MSW program at a Midwestern school of social work. Key pedagogical and programmatic considerations in the development of such programs are identified. Specific information about the admission process and curricular pathway is provided. Five-year and traditional MSW students are compared on their performance in foundation-level MSW courses. The results of evaluative surveys of faculty members and 5-year students are also presented. The potential role of 5-year programs in social work education is discussed.

Comparing the research productivity of social work doctoral programs using the h-Index

2018 ◽  
Vol 116 (3) ◽  
pp. 1513-1530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Smith ◽  
Kat S. Jacobs ◽  
Philip J. Osteen ◽  
T. Edison Carter
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
H Index

Assessing Academic Advising: A Developmental Approach

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-49
Author(s):  
Mary Daly ◽  
Nancy Sidell
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Academic Advising ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Public Institution ◽  
Developmental Approach ◽  
Student Researchers ◽  
Initial Survey ◽  
Implicit Curriculum

This article describes one program's efforts at assessing academic advising as a part of the implicit curriculum. Following an initial survey undertaken by faculty members, student researchers were engaged to qualitatively study academic advising. Research, data, and statistics were evaluated to determine advising strengths and challenges for social work majors enrolled in a small public institution. Although most interviewees reported having good advising experiences, they suggested additional advisor contact, more handouts, expanded office hours, and monthly group meetings as possible improvements. University-sponsored training sessions for advisors were also recommended. Ways in which this assessment model can be replicated and recommendations for future efforts are offered.

Cross-CTSA Evaluation of KL2 Scholars' Scholarly Productivity Using Bibliometrics and Federal Follow-on Funding (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelli Qua ◽  
Fei Yu ◽  
Tanha Patel ◽  
Gaurav Dave ◽  
Katherine Cornelius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Federal Funding ◽  
The Other ◽  
Scholarly Productivity ◽  
Training Success ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Time Point

BACKGROUND Evaluating outcomes of a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hub’s clinical and translational research (CTR) training (e.g., KL2 program) requires selecting reliable, accessible, and standardized measures. Since measures of scholarly success usually focus on publication output and extramural funding, CTSA hubs have started to use bibliometrics to evaluate the impact of their supported scholarly activities. However, the evaluation of KL2 programs across CTSAs is limited, and the use of bibliometrics and follow-on funding is minimal. OBJECTIVE This study sought to evaluate scholarly productivity, impact, and collaboration using bibliometrics and federal follow-on funding of KL2 scholars from three CTSA hubs and define and assess CTR training success indicators. METHODS The sample included KL2 scholars from three CTSA institutions (A-C). Bibliometric data for each scholar in the sample were collected from both SciVal and iCite, including scholarly productivity, citation impact, and research collaboration. Three federal follow-on funding measures (at the five-year, eight-year, and overall time point) were collected internally and confirmed by examining NIH RePORTER. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analysis were computed using SPSS to assess bibliometrics results and federal follow-on funding of KL2 scholars. RESULTS A total of 143 KL2 scholars were included in the sample with relatively equal groups across three CTSA institutions (A-C). The included KL2 scholars produced more publications and citation counts at the eight-year than the five-year time point (3.4 vs. 3.75 publications per year on average; 26.16 and 26.44 citations per year respectively). Overall, the KL2 publications from all three institutions were cited twice as much as others in their fields based on NIH Relative Citation Ratio. KL2 scholars published work with researchers from other US institutions over two times (five-year point) or three and a half times (eight-year point) more than others in their research fields. Within five-year and eight-year post-matriculation, 44% (n = 63) and 52% (n = 74) of KL2 scholars achieved federal funding respectively. Institution C's KL2-scholars had a significantly higher citation rate per publication than the other institutions (p < .001). Institution A had a significantly lower rate of nationally field-weighted collaboration compared to the other institutions (p < .001). Institution B Scholars were more likely to have received federal funding than scholars at Institution A or C (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS Multi-institutional data showed a high level of scholarly productivity, impact, collaboration, and federal follow-on funding achieved by KL2 scholars. This study provided insights on using bibliometric and federal follow-on funding data to evaluate CTR training success across institutions. CTSA KL2 programs and other CTR career training programs can benefit from these findings in terms of understanding metrics of career success and using that knowledge to develop highly targeted strategies to support early-stage CTR investigators' career development.

scholarly journals Perception towards quality and effectiveness of social work education through open and distance learning

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bishnu Mohan Dash
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Distance Learning ◽  
Social Work Education ◽  
Field Work ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Interview Guide ◽  
Open And Distance Learning ◽  
School Of Social Work ◽  
Work Education

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the perception of the students towards the quality and effectiveness of social work education offered by Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) through open and distance learning (ODL). Design/methodology/approach The sample size consisted of 150 students, 15 academic counsellors engaged in either teaching or development sectors, or faculty members of School of Social Work of IGNOU. The methods of data collection included interviews and content analysis. Interview schedule for students, interview guide for academic counsellors and interview guide for faculty members were used. Findings The study centres were allotted as per student’s choice. Students were satisfied with the counsellors because of their support, availability, contact, accessibility and assisting the students to clearing their doubts. The study found that the student’s attendance in counselling sessions was found to be negligible, even a large number of respondents were not aware of the ODL system. The study also shows that students face lots of problem with regard to their field work supervision and other components of field work as were also neglected. Practical implications The findings of the study are extremely relevant for formulating necessary guidelines for improving the social work education through ODL mode. The study recommends revision of course materials translated in Hindi language, holding of individual and group conferences regularly as well as proper evaluation of field work reports. Originality/value This is first such study conducted in India to examine the effectiveness of social work education through ODL.

Scholarly Productivity of Editors of Social Work and Psychology Journals

2002 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 1051-1054 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Pardeck
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Scholarly Productivity

This study explored the scholarly productivity of editors of selected social work and psychology journals. Analysis indicated that editors of psychology journals had statistically significantly greater scholarly achievement than editors of social work journals. These findings suggest that scholarly achievement as measured appears to be of less importance in appointing editors to the five selected social work journals than in appointing editors to the five selected psychology journals.

Council on Social Work Education

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia M. Watkins ◽  
Jessica Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Social Work Education ◽  
Educational Innovation ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Development Research ◽  
The Social ◽  
Work Programs ◽  
Social Work Programs ◽  
Work Education

The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) provides leadership in social work education through faculty development, research, and accreditation of baccalaureate and master's social work programs. As of February 2012, 689 social work programs were accredited by CSWE. These programs represent an estimated 7,500 faculty members and 82,000 students at the baccalaureate and master's levels. CSWE promotes continued educational innovation and relevancy through setting accreditation standards, which are regularly revised by volunteer representatives from the social work education and practice community and approved by the CSWE Board of Directors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document