scholarly journals Assessing Journal Quality in Mathematics Education

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Andrew Nivens ◽  
Samuel Otten

In this Research Commentary, we describe 3 journal metrics–the Web of Science's Impact Factor, Scopus's SCImago Journal Rank, and Google Scholar Metrics' h5-index—and compile the rankings (if they exist) for 69 mathematics education journals. We then discuss 2 paths that the mathematics education community should consider with regard to these citation-based metrics of journal quality: either working within the system to enhance our positioning or resisting or modifying the system itself.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nader Ale Ebrahim ◽  
Hadi Salehi

Nowadays, the h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or scholar. The index is based upon the set of the scientist's most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. Besides, the most commonly used measure of journal quality is Impact Factor. This is a number which attempts to measure the impact of a journal in terms of the average number of citations to recent articles published in the journal. So, receiving more citation is very important for authors and journals to get high h-index and impact factor. In this paper, we tried to analyses the effect of the number of available version from the web on receive more citations. We analyzed 10162 papers which are published in Scopus database in year 2010. Then we developed a software to collect the number of citations and versions of each paper from Google Scholar automatically.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nader Ale Ebrahim ◽  
Hadi Salehi

Nowadays, the h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or scholar. The index is based upon the set of the scientist's most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. Besides, the most commonly used measure of journal quality is Impact Factor. This is a number which attempts to measure the impact of a journal in terms of the average number of citations to recent articles published in the journal. So, receiving more citation is very important for authors and journals to get high h-index and impact factor. In this paper, we tried to analyses the effect of the number of available version from the web on receive more citations. We analyzed 10162 papers which are published in Scopus database in year 2010. Then we developed a software to collect the number of citations and versions of each paper from Google Scholar automatically.


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rayana Jaafar ◽  
Vijay Pereira ◽  
Samer S. Saab ◽  
Abdul-Nasser El-Kassar

PurposeWith over 3,000 academic journals in the fields of Business and Economics, most academics face a hard time selecting an adequate journal to submit their work to. In today's demanding academic environment and with the presence of different journal ranking lists (JRLs), the selection becomes more difficult when considering employment, promotion and funding. The purpose of this paper is to explore key differences among multiple JRLs pertinent to the latter common objectives. An extensive analysis is conducted to compare the content of journals in the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality list, Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) in the fields of Business and Economics. Then, a case of a university with medium research output is considered where scholarly performance evaluation is based on the ABDC Journal Quality List.Design/methodology/approachAfter ranking journals in the fields of Business and Economics based on SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator, JCR's Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and JCR's Eigenfactor (EF), a methodology is proposed to categorize journals in the three JRLs into the same categorization adopted by ABDC. The latter establishes a way to compare the four JRLs under consideration and serves as a basis to compare and analyze the content of journals in the ABDC Journal Quality list, Scopus and WoS. As a proxy impact metric, a normalized citation count is associated with each article based on Google Scholar. The publications of the considered university are then evaluated from the perspective of the four JRLs in terms of citation-based impact and quality while considering the exposure to popular world university ranking tables.FindingsFor journals classified under fourth tier by ABDC, over 53 and 59% are not indexed by Scopus and WoS, respectively. In this case study, over 42% of the publications appear in journals that are not listed in JCR despite the fact that over 94% of them are listed by the SJR list. Generally, publications that appear in journals listed by JCR achieve, on a yearly average, significantly higher citation rates when compared to those that appear in journals listed in ABDC and SJR Lists.Originality/valueA four-tier mapping is proposed for consistent comparison among JRLs. Normalized citation count associated with each article based on Google Scholar is employed for evaluation. The findings provide recommendations for scholars, administrators and global universities, including Euro-Med Universities, on which JRL can be more influential for both faculty development and positioning of the university.


2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-5
Author(s):  
Andres Pavas

In previous editorial letters, data regarding the Journal positioning, visibility and management have been presented. Regarding positioning in citational databases, in Pavas (2015), a comparison among the results in databases like Scimago Journal Rank (SJR), Journal Citation Report (JCR), and Google Scholar (GS) is shown. In Pavas (2016a), the h5 index of the Colombian engineering journals is highlighted. In terms of the journal’s visibility, in Pavas (2016b), indicators up to December 2016 are presented. The editorial team of Ingeniería e Investigación Journal (I&I for their initials in Spanish) wants to share with the authors and readers some of their recent results.


2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fayaz Ahmad Loan ◽  
Shueb Sheikh

Purpose This paper aims to identify the scholarly nature of the results retrieved by the Google Scholar on the five major global problems, i.e. global warming, economic recession, terrorism, HIV AIDS and child labour. Design/methodology/approach The five terms (global warming, economic recession, terrorism, HIV AIDS and child labour) were searched into the Google Scholar database, and the first 50 retrieved hits were manually analysed to record the relevant bibliographic details. The scholarship of the results was measured by quality indices like h-index, Altmetrics and Journal Impact Factor. The Scopus – the world’s biggest abstract and citation database – was used to identify the h-index of the prolific authors, citations of articles and impact factor of journals. Findings The study reveals that Google Scholar retrieves a good number of publications on the selected global problems from reputed publishers such as Nature Publishing Group, Elsevier, Cambridge University Press, Blackwell and Sage and published from well-developed countries such as the USA, UK and Switzerland. Google Scholar mostly retrieves articles and research papers from qualitative journals having a good impact factor such as Nature, Science, The Lancet, American Journal of Public Health, The Economic Journal, Social Science and Medicine and Annals of Tourism Research. These articles and books are contributed by the reputed authors having high h-index. The journal articles and books retrieved have also a good number of citations, although such results are limited. The results prove that Google Scholar is scholarly in nature to a great extent. Research limitations/implications The findings are limited to Google Scholar only and cannot be generalized for the rest of the search tools or databases. Further, the study included only five major global problems in the study, and thus, results cannot be applicable to other areas of knowledge. Practical implications The study is a checklist to know the retrieval performance of Google Scholar in terms of quality of content. Originality/value It is the first study of its kind that takes into account the nature of content on major global problems retrieved by the Google Scholar. It is also the first study that used bibliometric analysis to evaluate the quality of results retrieved.


2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 350-356
Author(s):  
Sarah Theule Lubienski

Analyses of disparities in students' mathematics experiences and outcomes are an essential part of efforts to promote equity. Scholars concerned about equity should not write off such analyses as mere “gap gazing.” Research on gaps between underserved groups and their more advantaged peers are important for shaping public opinion and informing education policy. Analyses of gaps also inform mathematics education research and practice, illuminating which groups and curricular areas are most in need of intervention and additional study. Instead of pulling back from gaps analyses, the mathematics education community should move toward more skilled and nuanced analyses and integrate research on instructional reforms with careful analyses of their impact on disparities in student outcomes broadly defined.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document