How significant are the public dimensions of faculty work in review, promotion and tenure documents?

Much of the work done by faculty at both public and private universities has significant public dimensions: it is often paid for by public funds; it is often aimed at serving the public good; and it is often subject to public evaluation. To understand how the public dimensions of faculty work are valued, we analyzed review, promotion, and tenure documents from a representative sample of 129 universities in the US and Canada. Terms and concepts related to public and community are mentioned in a large portion of documents, but mostly in ways that relate to service, which is an undervalued aspect of academic careers. Moreover, the documents make significant mention of traditional research outputs and citation-based metrics: however, such outputs and metrics reward faculty work targeted to academics, and often disregard the public dimensions. Institutions that seek to embody their public mission could therefore work towards changing how faculty work is assessed and incentivized.

[1]  J. Ostriker,et al.  Taxonomy of Fields and Their Subfields , 2003 .

[2]  M. Seipel,et al.  Assessing Publication for Tenure , 2003 .

[3]  Ralph J. Dandrea,et al.  The Question of Data Integrity in Article-Level Metrics , 2015, PLoS biology.

[4]  Jill O'Neill NISO Recommended Practice: Outputs of the Alternative Assessment Metrics Project , 2016 .

[5]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  SSH & the City. A Network Approach for Tracing the Societal Contribution of the Social Sciences and Humanities for Local Development , 2016, ArXiv.

[6]  Susan K. Gardner,et al.  Evincing the Ratchet: A Thematic Analysis of the Promotion and Tenure Guidelines at a Striving University , 2014 .

[7]  S. Acker,et al.  Discipline and Publish: The Tenure Review Process in Ontario Universities , 2016 .

[8]  Nicolás Robinson-García,et al.  Manipulating Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: simple, easy and tempting , 2012, ArXiv.

[9]  Mary Anne Holmes,et al.  What Does It Take to Get Tenure , 2004 .

[10]  Hude Quan,et al.  Authors' opinions on publication in relation to annual performance assessment , 2010, BMC medical education.

[11]  Anatoliy A. Gruzd,et al.  Tenure and promotion in the age of online social media , 2011, ASIST.

[12]  Bruce Macfarlane,et al.  Defining and Rewarding Academic Citizenship: The implications for university promotions policy , 2007 .

[13]  Juan Pablo Alperin,et al.  The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future , 2018, F1000Research.

[14]  Peter Taylor,et al.  Citation Statistics , 2009, ArXiv.

[15]  Julia Rodriguez Awareness and Attitudes about Open Access Publishing: A Glance at Generational Differences , 2014 .

[16]  M. Chisolm,et al.  Social Media Scholarship and Alternative Metrics for Academic Promotion and Tenure. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[17]  Stefanie Haustein,et al.  Identifying diffusion patterns of research articles on Twitter: A case study of online engagement with open access articles , 2019, Public understanding of science.

[18]  Stacy Konkiel,et al.  Altmetrics: diversifying the understanding of influential scholarship , 2016, Palgrave Communications.

[19]  S. Rijcke,et al.  Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics , 2015, Nature.

[20]  K. Jhaveri,et al.  Does Academic Blogging Enhance Promotion and Tenure? A Survey of US and Canadian Medicine and Pediatric Department Chairs , 2016, JMIR medical education.

[21]  Judit Bar-Ilan,et al.  Acceptance of altmetrics by LIS scholars: An exploratory study , 2019, J. Libr. Inf. Sci..

[22]  Lynette Shultz,et al.  Assembling and Governing the Higher Education Institution , 2016 .

[23]  Emily S. Darling,et al.  The role of twitter in the life cycle of a scientific publication , 2013, ArXiv.

[24]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Using Altmetrics for Contextualised Mapping of Societal Impact: From Hits to Networks , 2016 .

[25]  Heather A. Piwowar,et al.  The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles , 2018, PeerJ.

[26]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  The metric tide: report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management , 2015 .

[27]  Jerome K. Vanclay,et al.  Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? , 2011, Scientometrics.

[28]  Peter Igo-Kemenes,et al.  Highlights from the SOAP project survey. What Scientists Think about Open Access Publishing , 2011, ArXiv.

[29]  Robert M. Diamond,et al.  Changing Priorities at Research Universities, 1991-1996. Based on: The National Study of Research Universities on the Balance between Research and Undergraduate Teaching (1992), by Peter J. Gray, Robert C. Froh, Robert M. Diammond. , 1998 .

[30]  Norman Louat,et al.  The evaluation of , 1974 .

[31]  James Wilsdon The Metric Tide: Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management , 2016 .

[32]  R. Green,et al.  THE SECOND DECADE OF THE FACULTY PUBLICATION PROJECT: JOURNAL ARTICLE PUBLICATIONS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF FACULTY SCHOLARSHIP , 2007 .

[33]  E. Williams,et al.  Assessing the future. , 1997, Nursing times.

[34]  C. J. King,et al.  SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION: ACADEMIC VALUES AND SUSTAINABLE MODELS , 2006 .

[35]  Wilhelm Peekhaus,et al.  An examination of North American Library and Information Studies faculty perceptions of and experience with open-access scholarly publishing , 2016 .

[36]  Kristi L. Palmer,et al.  Faculty attitudes toward Open Access and scholarly communications: Disciplinary differences on an urban and health science campus , 2017 .

[37]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  Tweets as impact indicators: Examining the implications of automated “bot” accounts on Twitter , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[38]  Peter Dahler-Larsen The Evaluation Society , 2011 .

[39]  A. Goldstein,et al.  Community engagement in US and Canadian medical schools , 2011, Advances in medical education and practice.

[40]  Éric Archambault,et al.  Proportion of Open Access Papers Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals at the European and World Levels—1996-2013 , 2014 .

[41]  A. Gaines From Concerned to Cautiously Optimistic: Assessing Faculty Perceptions and Knowledge of Open Access in a Campus-Wide Study , 2015 .

[42]  M. Wacha,et al.  The State of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles , 2017 .

[43]  G. Ramello,et al.  Open Access Journals and Academics' Behavior , 2014 .

[44]  Kai Simons,et al.  The Misused Impact Factor , 2008, Science.

[45]  Fereshteh Didegah,et al.  On the differences between citations and altmetrics: An investigation of factors driving altmetrics versus citations for finnish articles , 2017, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[46]  Wilhelm Peekhaus,et al.  How library and information science faculty perceive and engage with open access , 2015, J. Inf. Sci..

[47]  B. Jordan,et al.  More Than Likes and Tweets: Creating Social Media Portfolios for Academic Promotion and Tenure. , 2017, Journal of graduate medical education.

[48]  N. Robinson-García,et al.  Using Altmetrics for Contextualised Mapping of Societal Impact: From Hits to Networks , 2017 .

[49]  R. McLean,et al.  A better measure of research from the global south , 2018, Nature.

[50]  Ted I. K. Youn,et al.  Learning from the Experience of Others: The Evolution of Faculty Tenure and Promotion Rules in Comprehensive Institutions , 2009 .

[51]  Executive Summary,et al.  Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines - Executive Summary , 2010 .

[52]  Heather A. Piwowar,et al.  Altmetrics: Value all research products , 2013, Nature.

[53]  Kate T. Anderson,et al.  If Mobilizing Educational Research Is the Answer, Who Can Afford to Ask the Question? An Analysis of Faculty Perspectives on Knowledge Mobilization for Scholarship in Education , 2018 .

[54]  K. O’Meara Uncovering the Values in Faculty Evaluation of Service as Scholarship , 2002 .

[55]  Rodrigo Costas,et al.  The unbearable emptiness of tweeting—About journal articles , 2017, PloS one.

[56]  David H. Sinason,et al.  Pitfalls of Using Citation Indices for Making Academic Accounting Promotion, Tenure, Teaching Load, and Merit Pay Decisions , 2011 .

[57]  C. Sugimoto,et al.  What constitutes valuable scholarship? The use of altmetrics in promotion and tenure , 2016 .

[58]  David Moher,et al.  Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure , 2018, PLoS biology.

[59]  Patricia W. Elliott,et al.  Community Engaged Scholarship and Faculty Assessment , 2013 .

[60]  Kathleen de la Peña McCook,et al.  Library and Information Science Faculty , 1998 .

[61]  B. Malsch,et al.  Journal ranking effects on junior academics: Identity fragmentation and politicization , 2015 .

[62]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Usefulness of altmetrics for measuring the broader impact of research: A case study using data from PLOS and F1000Prime , 2014, Aslib J. Inf. Manag..

[63]  Ted I. K. Youn,et al.  Learning from the Experience of Others: The Evolution of Faculty Tenure and Promotion Rules in Comprehensive Institutions , 2009 .

[64]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics , 2014, J. Informetrics.

[65]  Janet Dagenais Brown Citation searching for tenure and promotion: an overview of issues and tools , 2014 .

[66]  K. O’Meara,et al.  Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship in faculty reward systems: Does It Make a Difference? , 2005 .

[67]  Euan Adie,et al.  The rise of altmetrics , 2015 .

[68]  K. O’Meara,et al.  Advancing Engaged Scholarship in Promotion and Tenure: A Roadmap and Call for Reform. , 2015 .

[69]  Victor M. H. Borden,et al.  Faculty Service Loads and Gender: Are Women Taking Care of the Academic Family? , 2017, SSRN Electronic Journal.