OER Statistics Framework: Recognizing and rewarding Open Educational Resources in Academic Evaluation

This paper investigates the use of traditional and altmetrics indicators to present a comprehensive study on the evaluation of academic monographs in the field of library and information studies. The research analyzes a dataset of 116 monographs published in the last five years, which are obtained from the Dimensions platform. Traditional citation counts were extracted from Dimensions, whereas altmetrics indicators were collected using API from Altmetric.com. This study investigates the relationship between traditional and altmetrics indicators and finds that altmetrics indicators measure the social impact of monographs, whereas traditional citation indicators measure the academic impact. Moreover, the study reveals that open access (OA) books are more likely to attract altmetrics indicators. This research demonstrates that altmetrics indicators can act as an insightful supplement to traditional citation-based indicators for evaluating academic monographs and further highlights the significance of the Dimensions platform for conducting academic book evaluations. Furthermore, this study provides empirical evidence on the complementarity of traditional and altmetrics indicators in evaluating academic monographs.

Domestic Problems and Countermeasures of College Teachers Scientific Research Evaluation System

With the rapid development of Internet technology, online academic communications are increasingly prevalent, the traditional ways of academic evaluation can’t comprehensively reflect the multi-dimensional impact of scientific publications, therefore altmetrics is widely concerned by scholars because of its objectivity, timeliness and openness. Based on Douban Reading platform, this paper uses descriptive statistical analysis, grouping analysis, correlation analysis and other statistical methods to conduct the altmetrics evaluation of 1000 highly-cited books in Chinese Book Citation Index. The results show that there is a weak correlation between citations and altmetrics indicators, suggesting that they reflect different aspects of books’ impact and they are complementary in the academic evaluation. What’s more, altmetrics indicators are different on discipline and year, the more applicable the discipline is, the higher the values of altmetrics indicators are. Meanwhile, compared with old books, new books published in recent years have an advantage in the altmetrics evaluation.

Evaluation of the discourse power in Chinese academic journals: A multi-fusion perspective

The style of study has a direct impact on the quality of school's education; and education quality directly affects the survival, development problem. Construction of good style of study is the universities' long-term and arduous task. Construction of good style of study is inseparable from the scientific and reasonable evaluation of the style of study. Academic atmosphere evaluation reflects the style of study of the present situation and existing problems, managers according to the evaluation results in the development of targeted academic improvement measures, so as to achieve the purpose to improve the style of study. Scientific and reasonable academic atmosphere evaluation is particularly important In order to realize the scientific and reasonable evaluation of the style of study is inseparable from the scientific and reasonable evaluation system and model study. How to establish a scientific, effective and simple style of study evaluation system and model? To solve this problem, the style of study construction, academic atmosphere evaluation can produce important influence.

Journal listings play an important role in current journal evaluation, publication reference, research assessment and position promotion. Considering the current orientation of science and technology development and the need of transformative changes in academic evaluation, this study aims to examine Nature Index journals list. The focus will be on exploring the coverage of research topics, assessing the innovation levels of the published papers, and identifying underrepresented research areas. The outcome will facilitate the identification of high-level science and technology journals that can serve as valuable references for the Nature Index team and relevant management and research institutions in their scientific research evaluation processes. The results of the study show that of the 3029 research topics in the science fields defined by OpenAlex, 2217 (73.19%) are covered by Nature Index journals. Across all 18 research disciplines outside of Dentistry and Veterinary, Nature Index journals show a clear advantage in academic quality (the average share of dominant research topics in each disciplinary category is around 90%). However, Nature Index journals have an advantage in terms of academic impact over the level of disruptive innovation. In this study, two journals have been also selected to supplement the latest Nature Index list by taking the disruptive innovation level as the core index and the academic influence and long-term development of the journals in the related research fields as the reference. Generally speaking, the list of Nature Index journals is relatively complete, but there is still room for adjustment. Nature Index journals have a high academic impact and disruptive innovation level in most of the research topics that they cover, but they are more focused on academic impact. Appropriately adding representative journals in uncharted research areas will enhance the application value of the Nature Index in academic evaluation.

The consistency of impact of preprints and their journal publications

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to introduce altmetric indicators and combine with traditional citation indicators to comprehensively evaluate the impact of academic journals from the perspective of multidimensional and multi-indicator fusion.Design/methodology/approachThe authors take international multidisciplinary journals as an example, combining 14 traditional citation indicators of academic journals and introducing 14 altmetric indicators to build a comprehensive evaluation model of the impact of academic journals (academic impact and societal impact). At the same time, the authors systematically construct a journal evaluation indicator system from three dimensions. Then, the indicators data of three dimensions are evaluated by normalized processing, correlation analysis, reliability and validity analysis, PCA and factor analysis.FindingsTwo-dimensional and three-dimensional analyses can exactly provide some useful information for academic journals’ location in the respective coordinate systems. There are strong positive correlations among the measured indicators in the three dimensions, and each indicator has a significant consistency between whole and internal. The correlation coefficient between FD1 and FD2 is 0.888 with a strong positive correlation. It shows that the traditional citation indicators provided by WoS and Scopus database are highly consistent, and they are comparable and alternative in evaluating the academic impact of journals. The correlation coefficients of FD1, FD2 with FD3 are 0.831 and 0.798. There are strong positive correlations among them, which indicate that the evaluation of journals’ societal impact based on altmetrics indicator can be considered as a potential supplement to academic impact evaluation based on citation and to reflect the multidimensional nature of journals impact in an immediate way.Originality/valueMultidimensional and multi-indicator perspective evaluation can provide references for the selection of impact evaluation indicators and model optimization of academic journals, and also provide new ideas for improving the status of the impact evaluation of academic journals.

The development of open peer review has provided a new perspective on academic evaluation. By exploring the relationship between peer review indicators and impact indicators including Citation and AAS, as well as delving into the value of papers from the perspective of peer reviewers, this research offers insights to improve academic evaluation systems. The study focuses on papers about three topics: Cardiovascular Diseases, Respiratory Tract Diseases, and Neoplasms. It utilizes open peer reviews from H1 Connect, analyzing them from two dimensions: review indicators and scientific research contributions. Regarding review indicators, attention is paid to the RNumber and the RStar. The analysis of contributions is based on the Becker Medical Library’s research evaluation model, which is used to design a classification system for contribution types. This study employs the "GPT4O-mini" model to extract sentences describing scientific research contributions from peer review texts, and then categorizes them according to the designed classification system. The findings reveal that, in terms of review indicators, there are significant differences across topics, with a notable positive correlation existing between the RNumber, RStar, Citation, and AAS. In terms of scientific research contributions, these contributions are primarily concentrated in the dimensions of Knowledge Advancement and Clinical Implementation, with slight differences in contribution types among the topics. Contributions regarding clinical trial outcomes and healthcare services are more prominent in Cardiovascular Diseases, while theoretical contributions are more apparent in Respiratory Tract Diseases. Regarding contribution co-occurrence, Knowledge Advancement and Economic and Community Benefits contributions often do not occur simultaneously. Papers that contribute to the discovery of new ideas, data methods, or clinical management and treatment are more likely to exhibit multiple types of contributions. Contributions to public health policies often appear separately. Generally, papers tend to focus on making significant contributions in one specific area, with the occurrence of multiple types of contributions being relatively rare. Academic evaluation should effectively integrate peer review with impact indicators, while deeply exploring the scientific research contributions of papers. It is crucial to consider both the diversity of contributions and the thematic differences to build a more comprehensive, scientific, and effective academic evaluation system.

Academic teaching performance is recognized as a top instrument in reducing student dropout. This paper proposes a fuzzy logic based expert system which helps the teachers perform their own evaluation of academic teaching and research activities, in order to match them to requirements for each study cycle (introductory, specialization, master). The developed expert system also offers a way of monitoring the progress of teachers’ performances and to provide additional explanations about which aspects still need improvement. The system was tested using artificial data. The results show the most appropriate teacher for every study cycle.

Various universities founded as research universities in the 19th century conducted research that assisted the progress of various fields in European and American countries. Research universities/research-based universities are characterized by the presence of research activities in the Tri Dharma of Higher Education. Several universities in Indonesia have declared themselves to be research universities, and others are in the process of doing so. Research universities must meet various indicators, all of which stem from research activities. The purpose of this paper is to investigate and compare the readiness of Universitas Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya (UWKS) to become a research university. One method for achieving these goals is the formation of research groups. This essay uses a narrative review design. A UWKS is a private university founded in 1981 in Surabaya, East Java. A long track record of research since its establishment is sufficient provision to prepare it to become a research university. This is also supported by the university's academic community and the foundation that manages it, when viewed from the vision, mission, and objectives. The formation of various research groups could be the start of the development of research universities. They will enable lecturers to produce targeted outputs as indicators of research performance, such as research groups for early detection of chronic degenerative diseases based on specific Indonesian polymorphisms. The paper's conclusion was that UWKS has the potential to become a research university based on its track record. The formation of many research groups is one way to accomplish this.

Making a Difference: Fifty Years of Indigenous Programs at Monash University, 1964–2014

The publication of scientific research is principally information published in scientific journals and they are cornerstone of knowledge dissemination, as well as an essential criterion for academic and scientific evaluation, recruiting funds and career progression. However, it is very difficult to apply right measures and scientific criteria which can objectively assess scientific research. For many years there has been a great interest in scientific ranking and evaluation of scientific journals, but also of scientific contribution of scientists. It is generally accepted that the IF (WoS) and the total number of citations of articles published in the journal, are the most relevant parameters of the journal's significance. However, the scientific significance of a scientist is much more complicated to evaluate and the value of their scientific production cannot be directly reflected by the importance of the journals in which their articles are published. The majority of existing science metric systems, which evaluate the achievement of scientists are focused solely on the number of citations of their articles. Based on a long term of academic experience, the author describes and evaluates the most known scientific databases which are used in biomedical sciences. Also, the author proposes Z-score as a new science metric system which takes into account the current IF (WoS) and total number of citations of the journal in which the article is published, as well as author's contribution to the scientific article. In that way, proposed criteria greatly remedy major discrepancies in evaluating scientific production of individual authors and institutions.

The modern university may arguably be characterised by a steadfast belief in the mutually beneficial relationship between the teaching and research activities of its academics. Quantitative studies however have repeatedly demonstrated negative or zero correlation between the various teaching and research measures employed at the individual academic level. Very few investigations contributing to the teaching–research nexus debate have examined the student perspective. The present study therefore looked at the influence of the teaching–research nexus in facilitating student learning. The results of a survey and follow-up discussion groups conducted as part of the present investigation appear to indicate that there is limited benefit to the student at the tangible, tacit or global level of the teaching and research relationship. There is also no support for the premise that active research involvement of an academic is a requirement for good teaching. The central conclusion of the study is in fact that the teaching and research activities of academics should be treated as unrelated entities. Although it is necessary and beneficial to retain an effective teaching–research nexus at the institutional and departmental levels, students do not appear to benefit greatly from individual teaching staff involvement in research activities. At an individual level, research and teaching activities compete for limited time and resources with little benefit of the transference between these reported as evident by students.

The purpose of this article is to look at the internationalization of both Japanese faculty members’ teaching and research activities and their affiliated institutions, as well as their views on international connections between research universities and non-research universities based on major findings from the latest national survey which was implemented in 2011. The study begins with a brief introduction to the research framework and methodology. Then by dividing all Japanese universities into two types—research universities and non-research universities—it examines important observations about the teaching and research activities which were undertaken by individual academics and occurred in their institutions, as well as individual academics’ attitudes toward international issues. The study concludes by providing two major findings: First, the overall internationalization of Japan’s universities is primarily concerned with the attraction of foreign students to Japanese campus and sending out Japanese students to other countries at an institutional level, while at an individual level, a majority of academics are still receptive to new ideas from foreign books and journals in comparison with their views on other international connections; second, there appears to be a much higher level of international activities in which respondents from research universities are involved and which are carried out in research universities. Furthermore, the study presents some implications for research, policy, and institutions.