Education-focused roles represent a large and rapidly increasing share of the academic workforce in UK higher education. This expansion has resulted in the emergence of dedicated career tracks running in parallel with established teaching and research routes. Role descriptors and promotion criteria for these roles typically require evidence of…

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the variables that drive the rating within the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) list. The list is used in so many different ways throughout academic research that a better understanding of its component parts is essential. Design/methodology/approach: The 2016 list was used as a base and…

This article explores what an uneven embrace of community engagement means for faculty as they apply for tenure and promotion. It closely examines how three faculty members (including the author) from different departments framed and discussed their engaged scholarly contributions in the presence or absence of departmental guidelines on engaged…

As publication pressure has increased in the world of higher education, more journals, books, and other publication outlets have emerged. Thus it is critical to develop clear criteria for effectively evaluating the quality of publication outlets. Without such criteria funding agencies and promotion committees are forced to guess at how to evaluate…

A broad-scale quantification of the measure of quality for scholarship is under way. This trend has fundamental implications for the future of academic publishing and employment. In this essay we want to raise questions about these burgeoning practices, particularly how they affect philosophy of education and similar sub-disciplines. First,…

The definition and nature of scholarship is undergoing a transformation across North American medical schools. Some medical schools have adopted broadened views of scholarship that recognize and reward nontraditional scholarly works. This study investigated whether nontraditional scholarly works such as MedEdPORTAL publications contribute to…

Describing, explaining, and discussing various modern indices of scholarly impact as accomplished by Ruscio, Seaman, D'Oriano, Stremlo, and Mahalchik (this issue) is highly commendable, as such measures get increasingly important in hiring and promotion decisions. The author agrees with almost all points made in the target article, except the…

Ruscio and colleagues (Ruscio, Seaman, D'Oriano, Stremlo, & Mahalchik, this issue) provide a thoughtful empirical analysis of 22 different measures of individual scholarly impact. The simplest metric is number of publications, which Simonton (1997) found to be a reasonable predictor of career trajectories. Although the assessment of the scholarly…

Ruscio et al. (Ruscio, Seaman, D'Oriano, Stremlo, & Mahalchik, this issue) write of a thing with which scientists and scholars are all too familiar, the assessment of published research and of its authors. The author was startled to discover how little the agenda of the paper seems to engage with factors one relies on for salary and promotion…

As part of its Andrew W. Mellon Foundation-funded Future of Scholarly Communication Project, the Center for Studies in Higher Education (CSHE) has hosted two meetings to explore how peer review relates to scholarly communication and academic values. In preparation for an April 2010 workshop, four working papers were developed and circulated. They…

This article defines applied rhetorical work as integral to the intellectual work of writing program administration and asks our professional organizations to classify it as such within our position statements. With a specific case, it offers a generative framework for representing and assessing the work's scholarly commons for professional…

Commonwealth funding formulae have caused Australian universities to become obsessed with maximising external research funding. Considerable pressure is applied to faculties, departments and scholars to apply for funding, and relative success in attracting it is given excessive weight in evaluating research performance. This may be productive in…

This chapter considers the limitations of traditional faculty assessment systems in the context of Boyers' four domains of scholarship and suggests a new organizing template for realigning assessment systems to accommodate work in all four domains. (EV)

Discusses influences on the definition of scholarship (such as discipline, priorities of the institution and academic unit, and interests of the individual), traces recent developments in how the scholarly role of faculty members is viewed, and recommends an institutional approach for bringing fairness and quality into faculty reward systems. (EV)

The Peer Review Workgroup of the Community-Engaged Scholarship for Health Collaborative developed a novel set of quality community-engaged scholarship characteristics and a resource package aimed at two primary audiences: faculty seeking promotion or tenure based on community-engaged scholarship; and review, promotion, and tenure committee members…