Roles, requirements and autonomy of academic researchers

Niemczyk, Ewelina K.; Rónay, Zoltán

doi:10.1111/hequ.12403

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The goal of TTS worldwide, and dominantly in the US, is to reward for the extra effort put in whereas TTS in Pakistan relates with monetary rewards. Here, faculty members rushed to increase research papers for getting financial benefits associated with TTS (Niemczyk & Rónay, 2022). TTS required an efficient, robust, and comprehensive performance management system (PMS), which was missing in the collegial structure and culture of the university.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rewarding academics: Experiences of the Tenure Track System in Pakistan

Khan

Jabeen

Christensen

2022

Higher Education Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pakistan introduced the Tenure Track System (TTS) as a new performance-based reform in public universities in 2005. The purpose of this study is to understand the experiences of higher education authorities, university leaders and tenure-track faculty about the implementation of this reform. This is a qualitative interpretive study and utilised a nested case study design, focusing on two cases-Science Faculty and Social Sciences and Humanities Faculty in a large provincial university. It utilises three perspectives taken from organisation theory-instrumental, cultural and myth perspectives. The main results show instrumental problems of hierarchical authority and horizontal coordination, lack of expertise to implement, cultural compatibility problems through active resistance from some groups and active use of symbols to modify the impression of a challenging reform implementations. Summing up, this is a Western-inspired reform that meet challenging conditions in Pakistan, making is rather less successful.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rewarding academics: Experiences of the Tenure Track System in Pakistan

Khan

Jabeen

Christensen

2022

Higher Education Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We witnessed the benefits of using this method in higher education, although further evidence may be needed to demonstrate clearly the qualitative change that it generated. Otherwise, some people might object that the method is not 'cost-effective' because too many teachers work with too few students (Niemczyk & Rónay, 2022).…”

Section: Benefits Of the Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Participatory Instructors in Hungarian Higher Education

Sándor

Cserti-Szauer

Katona

2023

IJDSJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disabled people are often prevented from participating in the creation of academic knowledge that has direct impact on their lives via professional support. Such barriers to co-production of knowledge erode disabled people’s self-determination and opportunities for independent living. They are particularly consequential in special needs teacher education, as special needs teachers have a strong influence on disabled people’s dis/empowerment through their work in special and inclusive schools. This paper explores the ‘We teach together!’ method for participatory instruction, developed and piloted by the authors in Eötvös Loránd University to redress the non-participation of disabled people in teaching. The method complements the learned knowledge of the academic instructors with the experiential knowledge of disabled co-instructors. It also enables university students to work in partnership with disabled people. Most importantly, disabled people’s active participation in the academic work strengthens their self-determination and their role in their communities. The paper presents the findings of a qualitative research that explores the application of the ‘We teach together!’ method. We identify the benefits and challenges of the method, as well as the roles of the instructors in an inclusive team. We also provide recommendations for further research and policy engagement.

show abstract

“…Thus, to publish in a journal with a certain rank, authors should realistically view the simplicity or complexity of submissionrelated processes, the level of difficulty encountered during peer review (based on prior experience or word of mouth), and the journal's acceptance or rejection rates [3]. Ultimately, the amount of autonomy an author has [4] to select a target journal for submission may determine whether they decide to submit to unknown, low-quality, unscholarly, or predatory publishing venues, rather than selecting journals with an established status [5].…”

Section: How Do Authors Select a Target Journal?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Caution with Journal Selection: Spam, Copycat Journals, and Predatory Publishing

Teixeira da Silva

2024

BioSci Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The modern scholarly journal is currently faced with the challenge of upholding its principles in order to attract a continuous stream of authors to maintain its publishing status. Further, it also needs to be weary of unscrupulous players (including competitors) lurking in the global knowledge stream that pose an existential threat by diverting academics away from legitimate journals using underhanded or unfair practices, such as the use of spam or journals that employ copycat names. It is not always easy to distinguish predatory from exploitative journals, or underhanded from unfair practices, and even the use of or reliance on publishing blacklists does not offer potential authors a safe selection of journals to publish in. Authors and journals thus live in a volatile publishing environment in which they are confronted with constant threats. In biomedicine, these can translate into reputational damage to the journal and publisher if fake science or pseudoscience is published, since it puts at stake the journal’s reliability for biomedical information. For authors, particularly younger or less experienced ones whose careers depend on publishing advances, a mistake such as making a submission to a hijacked or copycat journal that impersonates the original journal may carry long-term negative reputational consequences. So, such a decision can be career altering.

show abstract

Roles, requirements and autonomy of academic researchers

Cited by 14 publications

References 51 publications

Rewarding academics: Experiences of the Tenure Track System in Pakistan

Rewarding academics: Experiences of the Tenure Track System in Pakistan

The Role of Participatory Instructors in Hungarian Higher Education

Caution with Journal Selection: Spam, Copycat Journals, and Predatory Publishing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About