Ranking academic institutions based on the productivity,impact,and quality of institutional scholars

Purpose:The quantitative rankings of over 55,000 institutions and their institutional programs are based on the individual rankings of approximately 30 million scholars determined by their productivity,impact,and quality.Design/methodology/approach:The institutional ranking process developed here considers all institutions in all countries and regions,thereby including those that are established,as well as those that are emerging in scholarly prowess.Rankings of individual scholars worldwide are first generated using the recently introduced,fully indexed ScholarGPS database.The rankings of individual scholars are extended here to determine the lifetime and last-five-year Top 20 rankings of academic institutions over all Fields of scholarly endeavor,in 14 individual Fields,in 177 Disciplines,and in approximately 350,000 unique Specialties.Rankings associated with five specific Fields(Medicine,Engineering&Computer Science,Life Sciences,Physical Sciences&Mathematics,and Social Sciences),and in two Disciplines(Chemistry,and Electrical&Computer Engineering)are presented as examples,and changes in the rankings over time are discussed.Findings:For the Fields considered here,the Top 20 institutional rankings in Medicine have undergone the least change(lifetime versus last five years),while the rankings in Engineering&Computer Science have exhibited significant change.The evolution of institutional rankings over time is largely attributed to the recent emergence of Chinese academic institutions,although this emergence is shown to be highly Field-and Discipline-dependent.Practical implementations:Existing rankings of academic institutions have:(i)often been restricted to pre-selected institutions,clouding the potential discovery of scholarly activity in emerging institutions and countries;(ii)considered only broad areas of research,limiting the ability of university leadership to act on the assessments in a concrete manner,or in contrast;(iii)have considered only a narrow area of research for comparison,diminishing the broader applicability and impact of the assessment.In general,existing institutional rankings depend on which institutions are included in the ranking process,which areas of research are considered,the breadth(or granularity)of the research areas of interest,and the methodologies used to define and quantify research performance.In contrast,the methods presented here can provide important data over a broad range of granularity to allow responsible individuals to gauge the performance of any institution from the Overall(all Fields)level,to the level of the Specialty.The methods may also assist identification of the root causes of shifts in institution rankings,and how these shifts vary across hundreds of thousands of Fields,Disciplines,and Specialties of scholarly endeavor.Originality/value:This study provides the first ranking of all academic institutions worldwide over Fields,Disciplines,and Specialties based on a unique methodology that quantifies the productivity,impact,and quality of individual scholars.

Problems Challenging the Academic Performance of Physics Students in Higher Governmental Institutions in the Case of Arbaminch, Wolayita Sodo, Hawassa and Dilla Universities

This study was conducted to examine problems that challenged academic performance of physics students in higher governmental institutions in the case of Arbaminch, Wolayita Sodo, Hawassa and Dilla Universities. Questionnaires, interviews and video recordings were used to collect relevant data for the study. Data from questionnaires was compiled and analyzed using a computerized data analysis package known as Statistical Package for Social Science SPSS 17.0. The Pearson chi-square test was used to compute to test association between dependent variable and independent variables and T-test was used to find out how academic performance varied with interest to subject matter. On the other hand, ANOVA test was used to test variation of the academic performance in study sites. Besides, percentages were used for comparison of data analysis. The findings reveal the existence of a significant influence of teachers both in fostering positive or negative attitude to subject (physics) and for their poor academic performance in lower class as well as in higher institutions. On the basis of the findings, the least percentage of students (16%) indicated that their current department was the best choice for them during application for admission. Whereas the highest percentage (84%) of sample class students was enrolled in department of physics without their interest and the academic performance (ESELS result), the highest percentage (70) of students who were admitted to department of physics was below 50%. The p values 0.01 and 0.00, respectively for students who are enrolled in department of physics with best choice and without their interest, are less than alpha level of significance (0.05), which reveals that, there is statistical significance academic performance deference between students in both cases. However, the difference is more significant for those students who are enrolled without their interest. By analysis of Pearson chi-square test summary in respective study sites, the p values 0.01, 0.007, 0.021 and 0.022 respectively are less than the alpha (α) level of significance of 0.05, which reveals that there is strong association between those variables. In the other corner of the ANOVA test analysis indicates that p value 0.01 is less than alpha level of significance 0.05. This reveals variation of academic performance of students between four higher governmental institutions where the study is made.

Academic Research in China on National Human Rights Institutions

I. Symposium on National Human Rights Institutions and Research Topics Academic research in the Chinese mainland on national human rights institutions started in February 2003. From October 16-17, 2004, the China University of Political Science and Law organized an international sympo- sium in Qingdao, Shandong Province, on research about national human rights protection institutions, inviting experts from Australia, South Africa and Canada to brief the symposium on related information concerning the Asia-Pacific region and South Africa as well as to provide information about Canada＇s National Human Rights Commission. Chinese participants also discussed the possibility of establishing a national human rights organization in China.

Academic institutional repositories in China:A survey of CALIS member libraries

Purpose: China Academic Library & Information System(CALIS) planned to launch an institutional repository(IR) project to promote IR development and open access at colleges and universities in China. In order to get to know the current state of IRs in academic institutions, with the help of Peking University Library, CALIS Administrative Center conducted this survey.Design/methodology/approach: We conducted an online survey of CALIS member libraries.Findings: Firstly, the development of IRs at China's colleges and universities is still in its infancy. Secondly, the Chinese colleges and universities have reached a consensus on the objective for having an IR. Thirdly, they are having high expectations of IR functions. Fourthly,they prefer to establish a centralized IR system at a minimum cost. Finally, there are both similarities and differences between the Chinese academic institutions and their counterparts in other countries in the state of IR development.Research limitations: The questionnaire needs to be improved because there is a lack of enough questions for those who do not plan to build an IR. Comparatively lower rate of valid questionnaire return can affect the accuracy of the results. It is hard to go into an in-depth discussion only based on the data collected from this questionnaire survey, and consequently,the findings from the survey can hardly present an accurate and comprehensive picture of the current state of IR development in the academic sector in China.Practical implications: The survey results provide essential foundation for CALIS IR project,and meanwhile the research can serve as a reference source for the future studies of the development of IRs at China's colleges and universities.Originality/value: It is the first national survey focused on the development of IRs in academic institutions in China.

The Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery,PLA General Hospital (national key academic unit) The PLA Institute of Otolaryngology (PLA key laboratory for acoustic trauma) The PLA Medical College Department of Deafness Education Key Laboratory

Led by four generations of leadership from late Prof.JIANG Sichang(academician,Chinese Academy of Engineering),Prof.YANG Weiyan(Honorary President,Division of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery,Chinese Medical Association),Prof.HAN Dongyi(President Elected,Division of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery,Chinese Medical Association)to now Prof.YANG Shiming(President,Division of Otolaryngologists,

Assessing the academic achievement of United States orthopaedic departments

BACKGROUND Assessing academic productivity allows academic departments to identify the strengths of their scholarly contribution and provides an opportunity to evaluate areas for improvement.AIM To provide objective benchmarks for departments seeking to enhance academic productivity and identify those with significant improvement in recent past.METHODS Our study retrospectively analyzed a cohort of orthopaedic faculty at United States-based academic orthopaedic programs.5502 full-time orthopaedic faculty representing 178 programs were included in analysis.Variables included for analysis were National Institutes of Health funding(2014-2018),leadership positions in orthopaedic societies(2018),editorial board positions of top orthopaedic journals(2018),total number of publications and Hirsch-index.A weighted algorithm was used to calculate a cumulative score for each academic program.This study was performed at a large,United States medical school.RESULTS All 178 programs included in analysis were evaluated using the comprehensive weighted algorithm.The five institutions with the highest cumulative score,in decreasing order,were:Washington University in St.Louis,the Hospital for Special Surgery,Sidney Kimmel Medical College(SKMC)at Thomas Jefferson University,the University of California,San Francisco(UCSF)and Massachusetts General Hospital(MGH)/Brigham and Women’s/Harvard.The five institutions with the highest score per capita,in decreasing order,were:Mayo Clinic(Rochester),Washington University in St.Louis,Rush University,Virginia Commonwealth University(VCU)and MGH/Brigham and Women’s/Harvard.The five academic programs that had the largest improvement in cumulative score from 2013 to 2018,in decreasing order,were:VCU,SKMC at Thomas Jefferson University,UCSF,MGH/Brigham and Women’s/Harvard,and Brown University.CONCLUSION This algorithm can provide orthopaedic departments a means to assess academic productivity,monitor progress,and identify areas for improvement as they seek to expand their academic contributions to the orthopaedic community.

Towards impact tenacity of academic institutions: A case study in Informetrics

Academic institutions are important subjects of discipline construction and knowledge production.It is crucial to study and evaluate the impact of institutions,and scientific evaluation is conducive to the development of academic institutions and the improvement of organizational efficiency.Most of the existing bibliometric indicators measure the impact of academic institutions from the perspective of citations(or variations).In this paper,we focus on a different side of their impact,namely tenacity.We conceptualize impact tenacity of academic institutions and define a series of indicators for operationalization.Besides,we implement correlation analysis and principal component analysis to explore whether the impact tenacity indicators and other bibliometric indicators are related and on the same dimension,taking informetrics as the representative discipline.We find that there was a significant negative correlation between the defined impact tenacity and number of papers,number of citations,and number of authors,and involved indicators(i.e.,impact tenacity and other involved bibliometric indicators)describe two almost orthogonal dimensions.Moreover,this paper also selects the Max Planck Society and Taiwan Applied Research Laboratories(China)as case studies,and reveals that low-tenacity and high-tenacity institutions have quite different characteristics.Based on these findings,we make some constructive suggestions for research policy makers,such as considering maintaining a high tenacity of institutions by supplementing more academic training.

高校教师学术评价制度的历史流变、现实逻辑与改革图景

学术评价制度是高校学术管理的关键性制度,其从回归学术到“破五维”的嬗变过程体现了与国家宏观政策紧密耦合的特征。作为一种嵌入式的制度架构,教师学术评价是学术管理制度矩阵的核心要素,高校的分层发展格局、学科建设竞争、教师个体的职级晋升等多重逻辑的叠加效应,使教师学术评价制度呈现出异化现象。教师学术评价制度是高等教育管理制度体系的下位制度,其改革受到宏观制度“深层结构”的外生性动力影响,学术评价与资源的过度绑定、政府主导下的高校管理科层制、既定的学术评价制度产生的路径依赖,形塑着高校教师的学术偏好和学术秩序的重构过程。随着“破五维”改革推进,应从多个层面对教师学术评价制度进行优化:强化高校教师学术评价的多元主体治理,以科教融合为抓手增强高校教师学术评价制度的社会性导向,关注学科差异,实现“激励相容”。通过教师学术评价制度的供给侧结构性改革,引领高等教育高质量发展。

“发明学术”:民国时期《历史语言研究所集刊》与史语所学派的建构

民国时期中央研究院历史语言研究所代表了中国学术由传统走向现代的典范。《历史语言研究所集刊》以“发明学术”为定位,通过征稿、审稿等制度提升学术论文的质量,着力打造学术重心,注重培养学术后备军,推动了史语所学人的代际转换。因此,《集刊》可谓为建构史语所学派的主要阵地之一。

聚集学术机构知识的中心机构库(Institutional Repository)探析

本文首先介绍了机构库的定义及产生的原因,阐述了机构库的特点及国内外相关项目,然后从知识产权保护、经费管理、质量控制等方面论述了机构库存在的问题,最后分析了图书馆应如何面对机构库带来的机遇与挑战。

基于关联数据的机构知识库实体学术关系发现方法研究

文章分析机构知识库实体学术关系类型及其特征属性,依托关联数据构建机构知识库实体学术关系发现方法并阐释其具体操作流程,利用河海大学机构知识库数据开展实证检验。结果表明,使用该方法可实现机构知识库资源语义聚集与关联,提供基于关联数据的知识检索服务,以精准满足用户知识需求。

历史语言研究所与近代中国的人文社科研究

历史语言研究所通过团队搜集资料,积累了大量的档案文献,整理出版了一批影响深远的史料集、调查报告和论著,从而奠定了在学界的重要地位,树立了学术研究的新风气,成为学人效仿的榜样;其还利用商务印书馆的销售渠道,以及运用现代传播媒介,通过设置“议题”,使其学术理念、治学主张和研究方法得以迅速传播,渗透至文史研究的各个领域,汇聚成一个学术共同体,发展成为近代中国人文社科研究的典范,并与国外汉学研究产生交集,跨入国际学术之林。

培养过程中的条件保障如何影响博士生就读满意度?——基于26所普通高校的调查研究

通过对26所普通高校学术学位博士生的问卷调查,探究培养过程中条件保障的现状以及各类条件保障对博士生就读经历满意度的影响。研究发现:第一,高校的管理制度和导师指导能够较好地满足博士生需求,国际交流和奖助机制的支持力度较弱,科研训练硬件条件充分但课题项目等软件资源匮乏。第二,“双一流”建设地方高校和非“双一流”建设高校在多项条件保障上优于“双一流”建设部属高校;理工科在科研训练条件上具有显著优势,但人文社科的导生互动更加深入,不同学科在不同的奖助来源上各有优势。第三,各类条件保障均能够有效地提升博士生的就读经历满意度,其中,管理制度的推动作用最强,奖助机制的作用最弱。对此,在博士生培养过程中应激励深度的科研参与,推进良性的导生互动,拓展对外交流渠道,健全落实管理制度,优化资助体系结构。

卫生机构工作者参与卫生学术社团情况调查

目的了解浙江某省级卫生机构工作者近5年参与学术社团活动情况,探索学术社团活动对卫生机构工作者及学科的建设性意义,并为促进卫生机构工作者与学术社团良性发展提供科学建议。方法采用问卷调查,收集浙江省某省级卫生机构工作者2018年1月—2022年12月学术社团活动参与情况,采用描述性统计分析卫生机构工作者人口学特征,采用χ^(2)检验分析不同人群参加学术社团活动情况及其满意度分布特征差异。结果有效问卷264份,被调查者职称分布分别为初中级25.00%、副高级39.39%、正高级35.61%。年龄集中于>40~50岁(41.67%);工作年限集中于>9~19年(39.39%);专技分类以医师系列为主(64.39%);学科分类主要集中于卫生管理学(15.15%)、结核病学(11.36%)和职业放射卫生学(11.36%),不同职称卫生工作者年龄、工作年限、专技分布、学科分类比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。卫生工作者参与学术社团为1~10个,平均每人参加社团数量3个;正高职称中82.98%的工作者在学术社团中担任委员以上职务;56.82%的卫生工作者经常参加卫生学术社团活动。不同职称工作者参加的社团数量、担任社团职务、参与社团活动频率的分布情况比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。43.94%卫生工作者对社团活动频率表示满意,47.73%卫生工作者认为社团活动对学科建设水平提升表示满意,43.94%卫生工作者认为社团活动对个人学术能力提升表示满意。结论卫生学术社团在人才引育、科研发展和学科建设等方面发挥着重要作用,但在人才留用、政府职能承接和运行机制等方面还存在一些亟待完善的问题。正高职称卫生机构工作者在卫生学术社团中的职务优势明显,而初中级职称卫生机构工作者参与度较低。卫生学术社团应充分发挥专家的带头示范作用,强化战略管理意识,提高投入、提升参谋能力和完善相关政策法规,更好地承接政府职能。同时,鼓励初中级职称卫生机构工作者积极参与卫生学术社团活动,形成可持续发展的人才梯队。

航空科技协同创新主体策略及影响因素研究——“政产学研金”视角下的演化博弈与仿真

航空产业是国之重器,必须坚持自主创新,推进高端装备和核心技术自主可控,航空科技创新是实现航空产业高质量发展的重要内容。建立航空科技协同创新演化博弈模型,对协同创新主体策略选择及影响因素进行分析,通过数值仿真模拟创新主体意愿变化和稳定策略形成的动态演化过程。研究表明,不同背景下航空科技协同创新主体策略演化呈现不同规律,优稳定策略的形成受协同各方交互作用和相关因素差异化影响。以创新主体策略演化至优稳定策略为导向提出建议:提高政府调控行为与协同创新过程配适度;优化协同创新运行机制;结合航空企业自身创新情况形成差异化融资方案。

学术职业视角中大学教学评价制度改革困境与出路

大学教学评价制度改革的重心在于实现教师与学生的主体价值,并据此评价大学教师作为学术职业的本质价值。基于学术职业视角,大学教师学术发展与教学质量改进应置于制度统一体中,以此增强教学评价的针对性与合法性。但是,评教制度一统性与教学发展多样性矛盾、单一化评教导向割裂教与学的内在联系、教学活动的复杂性与教学的不可评价性,以及绩效评价原则在教学评价改革中难以奏效等问题,已经深刻影响大学评教制度改革实效。大学需重新构思重视教学、回归教学、研究教学与激励教学的制度框架,促进多主体联动展开教学评价,推动以教与学为中心的改革,加强教学学术与实践融合,构建责权利相统一体系,才能推动大学教师的职业发展。

国际中文教育研究现状、热点与趋势——基于CiteSpace的文献计量分析(2019—2023)

通过文献计量可视化分析软件CiteSpace对中国知网(CNKI)收录的2019—2023年在中文核心期刊和专业普刊上发表的国际中文教育领域的论文进行统计分析发现:国际中文教育领域的核心作者群已基本形成,发文机构以高校为主,但相互间的合作较少;研究热点聚焦孔子学院发展、国际中文教学、华文教育和国际中文教师教育四类;未来研究将持续关注国际中文教学模式、区域国别中文教育、国际中文教学资源、“中文+职业技能”教育和国际中文教育标准建设。

基于00后大学生学习特征的高校“五位一体”学风建设探赜

高校学风建设关乎人才培养质量,是高校办学的发展之魂、立校之本。当代00后大学生的学习特征不同以往,这对高校学风建设提出了更高的要求。影响00后大学生学风问题的因素主要包括社会因素、家庭因素、教师因素、学生自身因素。高校应基于目前00后大学生的学习特征,以及对影响00后大学生学风问题的因素分析,积极探索构建针对00后大学生的学风建设育人体系,即“五位一体”学风建设育人体系,从“机制”构建保障学风“、三风”营造培育学风、“树典型、助帮扶”激发学风“、四大课堂”开拓学风“、生涯指导”引领学风五个维度构建学风建设路径,不断提升育人质量。

Humanitarian action in academic institutions:a case study in the ethical stewardship of unidentified forensic cases

Forensic anthropologists are often responsible for the management of long-term unidentified individuals.Others have contextualised these decedents—many of whom likely belonged to socially,politically,and/or economically marginalised groups in life—as part of a larger identification crisis in the US.However,there has been little discussion surrounding how this humanitarian crisis has manifested in academic institutions,where anthropologists often provide medicolegal consultation and act as long-term stewards of the unidentified.The Identification&Repatriation Initiative was created at the Forensic Anthropology Centre at Texas State University(FACTS)to recognise and investigate unidentified human remains in long-term storage.Our paper outlines common challenges that were encountered during our initial reassessment of unidentified cases at FACTS,emphasising the detrimental impacts of inconsistent procedures,loss of context,and case fatigue.It is likely that other academic institutions face similar challenges,and by highlighting these issues we hope to help initiate a larger conversation concerning ethical stewardship of human remains in these settings.By incorporating humanitarian perspectives into forensic casework,anthropologists in academia can better advocate for the long-term unidentified.

CEO学术经历对企业绿色创新的驱动效应——环境注意力配置与产学研合作赋能双重视角

从高阶理论出发,结合注意力基础观和资源基础观,围绕CEO学术经历对企业绿色创新水平的驱动效应及其具体作用机制进行深入研究。结果表明,与不具备学术经历的CEO相比,具备学术经历的CEO能够显著提高企业绿色创新水平;当CEO在学术经历中取得较高职称、具有工科背景、任职于高层次学术机构时,这种效应更加显著;公司所在地较高的社会信任水平、儒家文化氛围能够增强CEO学术经历对企业绿色创新水平的提升效应。中介效应检验发现,具有学术经历的CEO能够在企业绿色创新中发挥人力资本和社会资本的双重作用,并通过提高环境注意力,促进企业开展产学研合作,提高企业绿色创新水平。结论可为企业从高管选聘视角提高绿色创新水平提供参考。