Gender comparisons of Israeli social work faculty using h-index scores

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 439-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa S. Panisch ◽  
Thomas E. Smith ◽  
Tyler Edison Carter ◽  
Philip J. Osteen
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Full Professor ◽  
Senior Lecturer ◽  
Faculty Rank ◽  
H Index ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Social Work Faculty ◽  
Male Faculty

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the role of gender and faculty rank to determine their contribution to individual variance in research productivity for doctoral social work faculty in Israel. Design/methodology/approach H-index scores were used to assess research productivity. Quantitative comparisons of the h-index scores were performed for a sample (n=92) of social work faculty from Israeli universities with social work doctoral programs. Average h-index differences were assessed between genders at each tenure-track faculty rank and between faculty ranks for each gender. Findings Scholarly impact varied as a function of faculty rank. There was little indication of variance due to gender or the interaction of gender and rank. The average h-index of male faculty was higher than the mean h-index for women at the rank of lecturer and full professor. Women had a higher mean h-index than men at the rank of senior lecturer and associate professor. H-index means varied most at the full professor level. Originality/value Results were congruent with previous studies demonstrating that male faculty in the social sciences have higher overall h-index scores than women. However, this study was unique in its finding that this gap was reversed for Israeli social work faculty at the senior lecturer and associate professor. Further research is needed to examine the differences in publication patterns of social work faculty in different countries.

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.

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

Abstract 30: Sex Differences in Faculty Rank Among Academic Vascular Neurologists in the United States

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay A Bliss ◽  
Carol A Vitellas ◽  
Nayanika Challa ◽  
Vivien H Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Assistant Professor ◽  
The United States ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Academic Medical Centers ◽  
Full Professor ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
Faculty Rank ◽  
Medical Centers ◽  
Academic Medical

Introduction: The lower proportion of women at the rank of full professor compared to men has been documented in nearly all specialties. Women are under-represented in academic stroke neurology, but there is limited data. Methods: We reviewed all 160 U.S. medical schools and the associated medical centers for vascular neurologists. An internet search of stroke team websites and neurology department websites was performed from August 1, 2020 to August 25, 2020. We included 117 academic medical centers that had at least 1 vascular neurologist on faculty. We included vascular neurology ABPN certified or board eligible (fellowship-trained) neurologists. Data was collected on sex, academic rank, and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) certification status. ABPN board certification status was verified on the ABPN verify CERT website. Social medical women’s neurology groups were also queried for names of women full professor to cross check. Results: Among 540 academic ABPN vascular neurologists, 182 (33.8%) were women and 358 (66.3%) were men. Among academic ranks, women made up 108/269 (40.1%) of Assistant professors, 49/137 (35.8%) of Associate professors, and 25/134 (18.8%) of full professors. Twenty two academic centers had vascular neurology female professors on faculty, compared to 70 academic centers with male full professors on faculty. Twenty nine academic centers had multiple male professors on faculty compared to only 3 centers with multiple female full professors. Among women, 108 (59.3%) were assistant professor, 49 (26.7%) were associate professor, 25 (13.7%) were full professor. Among men, 161 (45.0%) were assistant professor, 88 (24.6%) were associate professor, and 109 (30.5%) were professor. There was a significant difference between academic rank based upon sex (p <0.0001). Conclusion: Among academic medical centers in the United States, significant sex differences were observed in academic faculty rank for ABPN vascular neurologists, with women less likely than men to be full professors. Further study is warranted to address the gender gap in the field of stroke.

Who Is Citing Your Work? Journals With Impact Factor and h-Index in Social Work and Related Fields

2020 ◽  
pp. 104973152096377
Author(s):  
Monit Cheung ◽  
Patrick Leung
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Journal Impact Factor ◽  
H Index ◽  
Journal Publishing ◽  
Social Work Faculty ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Journal Impact

Purpose: With journal publishing being an important task for academicians, this article aims to help faculty and researchers increase their productivity by identifying journals with influential impacts on producing scientific knowledge. Method: Since 2004, the authors compiled and updated a journal list annually for social work faculty to use. This list aims to help faculty and researchers, including doctoral students, identify journals with significant scholarly impacts in social work and related fields for national and international recognition. Results: A total of 221 journals are included in the study, covering 44 social work journals with two indexes reported in the Journal Citation Reports® with Journal Impact Factor® and the h-index. Discussion: This list aims to help scholars find appropriate journals for article submissions. The criteria for the authors to select journals to be included in the publication list are also discussed.

Gender comparisons of social work faculty using H-Index scores

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 1547-1557 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Edison Carter ◽  
Thomas E. Smith ◽  
Philip J. Osteen
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
H Index ◽  
Gender Comparisons ◽  
Social Work Faculty

The 100 Most Influential Contemporary Social Work Faculty as Assessed by the H-Index

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 696-700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Thyer ◽  
Thomas E. Smith ◽  
Philip Osteen ◽  
Tyler Carter
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
H Index ◽  
Social Work Faculty

The Beginning of the End

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Parisa Khoshpouri ◽  
Rayeheh Bahar ◽  
Pegah Khoshpouri ◽  
Amitis Ebrahimi ◽  
Omid Ghahramani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Leadership Positions ◽  
H Index ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Male Faculty

Abstract Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between gender, research productivity, academic rank, and departmental leadership positions of pathology faculty in North America. Methods The online information presented for the faculty members in all American- and Canadian-accredited pathology residency programs’ official websites and Elsevier’s SCOPUS were queried to assess research productivity, academic ranks, and leadership positions. Results Among 5,228 academic pathologists included in our study, there were 3,122 (59.7%) males and 2,106 (40.3%) females. Male faculty held higher academic ranks (being professor) and leadership positions (chair/program director) (P &lt; .0001). Males were more likely to hold combined MD-PhD degrees (P &lt; .0001) than females. The median h-index for the male faculty was 17 vs 9 for the female faculty (P = .023). Conclusions Gender has a significant influence on leadership positions, academic ranks, and research productivity among pathology faculty members in North America.

scholarly journals Impact of Achieved Tenure and Promotion on Faculty Research Productivity at a School of Pharmacy

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
David Scott ◽  
Michael Kelsch ◽  
Daniel Friesner
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
Pharmacy Practice ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Full Professor ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Pharmaceutical Sciences ◽  
Promotion And Tenure ◽  
Time Of Application ◽  
Publication Rates ◽  
Faculty Research Productivity

Objective: Critics of the promotion and tenure system contend that promotion and tenure may lead to a decline in research productivity (“dead wood phenomena”) by those faculty. To assess this perception, we compiled the publications and grants at the time of application for promotion, and again through 2017 for the same faculty following promotion and/or tenure. Methods: Promotion documents at a school of pharmacy at a public Midwestern university were assessed. Mean publication rates and grant dollars per year per faculty member were compared to the same group of faculty (n=13) pre and post-promotion. Results: At the time of promotion to associate professor, mean numbers of total publications per year per faculty in the pharmacy practice department were 1.1, compared to 1.4 post-promotion. For pharmaceutical sciences department faculty, corresponding means were 5.0 and 4.1, respectively. At the time of promotion to full professor, mean numbers of total publications per year for pharmacy practice faculty were 7.0, compared to 7.2 post-promotion. For pharmaceutical sciences faculty, corresponding means were 3.5 and 4.7, respectively. For grant activity, both associate professors and full professors increased the mean total dollars per year from pre-promotion to post-promotion for both departments. Conclusion: Research productivity at this school of pharmacy continues to be either maintained or increased since promotion for the collective group of faculty. This evidence runs counter to the perception that promotion and tenure may lead to decreased scholarly productivity. The study provides a roadmap for other schools/colleges to quantify research productivity and make comparisons to national mean levels reported in the literature.    Article Type: Original Research

IDENTIFICATION OF STRATEGIC PRIORITIES OF INVESTMENT INTO DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGETICS

2017 ◽  
pp. 52-59
Author(s):  
Svitlana Sivitska
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Alternative Energy ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Integrated Analysis ◽  
Energy Investment ◽  
Renewable Sources ◽  
Renewable Sources Of Energy ◽  
National Technical ◽  
The Matrix

UDC 338:336.02:621.311 Svitlana Sivitska, Ph.D., Associate Professor at Finance and Banking Department, Vice-Rector for Scientific, Educational, Social Work and International Cooperation. Poltava National Technical Yuri Kondratyuk University. Identification of strategic priorities of investment into development of alternative energetics. There are the stages of the methodology for choosing the strategic priorities of investing in alternative energy explored in the article. The potential of alternative energy analyzed. The strategic priorities of alternative energy have been explored. An integrated analysis of the potential of alternative energy is carried out on the territorial basis done. The matrix of choice of strategic priorities of investing in alternative energy determined. Keywords: energetic security, alternative energetics, renewable sources of energy, investment, strategic priorities, matrix.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document