Advertisement

Higher Education

, Volume 54, Issue 2, pp 307–332 | Cite as

Academics’ views on publishing refereed works: A content analysis

  • Brian C. HemmingsEmail author
  • Peter Rushbrook
  • Erica Smith
Article

Abstract

Survey research was carried out with academics (N=205), from a large regional Australian university, to explore their views about publishing or not publishing in refereed sources and their perceived worth of this activity. Several open-ended questions were included in the survey to elicit information about the factors that either encourage or discourage these academics from publishing. Additionally, questions were posed to allow the respondents to discuss ways that the University could further support them in their endeavour to produce at least some or more scholarly publications. The responses to these questions were content analysed to discover key categories and frequencies were calculated on the most salient categories. The results of this analysis are reported and comparisons are made on the responses of male and female academics. The implications of the results for higher educational practice are considered.

Keywords

academic output gender peer review publish or perish issues publishing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Austin, A.E. and Gamson, Z.F. (1983). Academic Workplace: New Demands, Heightened Tensions (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report No. 10). Washington, DC: National Institute of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 243 397)Google Scholar
  2. Bandura A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York Google Scholar
  3. Bazeley P. (2003). Defining early career in research. Higher Education 45(3): 257–279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becher T. and Trowler P.R. (2001). Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Inquiry and the Culture of Disciplines. The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press, Buckingham, UK Google Scholar
  5. Blackburn R.T. and Lawrence J.H. (1995). Faculty at Work: Motivation, Expectation, Satisfaction. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore Google Scholar
  6. Brown J. and Wright D. (1999). The impact of person–environment interaction on African-American retention. National Association of Student Affairs Professional Journal 2(1): 5–15 Google Scholar
  7. Brown, G. (2004). Interview conducted for The Australian reported in June 16, p. 37Google Scholar
  8. Budd J.M. (1995). Faculty publishing productivity: An institutional analysis and comparison with library and other measures. College & Research Libraries 56(6): 547–554 Google Scholar
  9. Clark B.R. (1987). The Academic Life: Small Worlds, Different Worlds. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton, NJ Google Scholar
  10. Creamer, E.G. (1998). Assessing Faculty Publication Productivity: Issues of Equity (Report No. BBB32577). Washington, DC: George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 420 242)Google Scholar
  11. Creswell J.W. (2002). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ Google Scholar
  12. Csizmadia, T. and Westerheijden, D. (2003). Quality Management in Higher Education. Retrieved 30 November, 2004, from www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/susu2003/csizmadia.pdfGoogle Scholar
  13. (2002). Surveys in Social Research. Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW Google Scholar
  14. Diamond R.M. (1993). Changing priorities in the faculty reward system. In: Diamond, R.M. and Adam, B.E. (eds) Recognizing Faculty Work: Reward Systems for the Year 2000, pp 5–12. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA Google Scholar
  15. Finnegan D.E. (1993). Segmentation in the academic labor market: Hiring cohorts in comprehensive universities. Journal of Higher Education 64(6): 621–656 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Finnegan D.E. and Gamson Z.F. (1996). Disciplinary adaptations to research culture in comprehensive institutions. The Review of Higher Education 19(2): 141–177 Google Scholar
  17. Francis R., Hemmings B., Hill D., Quinn P. and Wolfe T. (2000). Profiling the development of tertiary-educated agriculturalists. Agricultural Science 13(3): 31–35 Google Scholar
  18. Gardiner H. (2000). Cultures in higher education. In: King, R., Hill, R. and Hemmings, B. (eds) University and Diversity: Changing Perspectives, Policies and Practices in Australia, pp 9–29. KEON Publications, Wagga Wagga Google Scholar
  19. Grbich C. (1998). The academic researcher: Socialisation in settings previously dominated by teaching. Higher Education 36(1): 67–85 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Green R.G. (1998). Faculty rank, effort and success: A study of publication in professional journals. Journal of Social Work Education 34(3): 415–426 Google Scholar
  21. Greenwood C. (1998). Publish or perish: The ethics of publishing in peer-reviewed journals. Media Information Australia 68: 29–35 Google Scholar
  22. Hayden M. and Carpenter P. (1990). From school to higher education. Higher Education 20(2): 175–196 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Higher Education Funding Council For England (2004). Research Assessment Exercise, viewed April 14 2005 <http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/assessment/>Google Scholar
  24. Hourcade J.J. and Anderson H. (1998). Writing for publication. In: Malone, J.A., Atweh, B. and Northfield, J.R. (eds) Research and Supervision in Mathematics and Science Education, pp 277–298. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ Google Scholar
  25. Hughes C. (1999). Faculty publishing productivity: The emerging role of network connectivity. Campus-Wide Information Systems 16: 30–38 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Illing, D. (2004). Uni staff fail on research output. June 16, The Australian p. 37Google Scholar
  27. Karmel P. (2003). Higher education at the crossroads: Response to an Australian ministerial discussion paper. Higher Education 45(1): 1–18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kim S. (2003). The impact of research productivity on early retirement of university professors. Industrial Relations 42(1): 106–125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Knowles J.G., Cole A.L. and Sumsion J. (2000). Modifying conditions of researching in teacher education institutions. Teacher Education Quarterly 27(2): 7–13 Google Scholar
  30. Krippendorff K. (1980). Content Analysis. Sage, Newbury Park, CA Google Scholar
  31. Lin H., Silvern S.B. and Gorrell J. (1999). Early childhood pre-service teachers’ beliefs in Taiwan. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 1(2): 163–186 Google Scholar
  32. Long J.S. and Fox M.F. (1995). Scientific careers: Universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology 21: 45–71 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marginson, S. (2002). ‘Nation-building universities in a global environment: The case of Australia’, Higher Education 43(3), 409–428Google Scholar
  34. Mruck K. and Mey G. (2002). Between printed past and digital future. Research in Science Education 32(2): 257–268 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Keefe, B. (2005). Arts at risk in research overhaul. March 23, The Australian p. 35Google Scholar
  36. Pajares F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research 66(4): 543–578 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Park, S.M. (1996). Research, teaching, and service: Why shouldn't women's work count? The Journal of Higher Education 67(1), 46–84Google Scholar
  38. Pratt M., Margaritas D. and Coy D. (1999). Developing a research culture in a university faculty. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 21(1): 43–55 Google Scholar
  39. Print M. and Hattie J. (1997). Measuring quality in universities: An approach to weighting research productivity. Higher Education 33(4): 453–469 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Research Corporation (2001). Determining Research Productivity and Grant Activity Among Science Faculty at Surveyed Institutions (Report No. BBB26706). Tucson, AZ (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 469 492)Google Scholar
  41. Roth W.M. (2002). Editorial power/authorial suffering. Research in Science Education 32(2): 215–240 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sarantakos S. (1993). Social Research. Macmillan, South Melbourne Google Scholar
  43. Seyed, F.J., Al-Haji Umar, Y. and Al-Hajji, M. (2004). ‘Determinants of business faculty research productivity in the Middle East’, Paper Presented at the Academy of World Business, Marketing and Management Development Conference, Gold Coast, Qld, JulyGoogle Scholar
  44. Schneider A. (1998). Why women don’t publish as much as men. Chronicle of Higher Education 45(3): A14–A16 Google Scholar
  45. Skolnik M. (2000). Does counting publications provide any useful information about academic performance. Teacher Education Quarterly 27(2): 15–25 Google Scholar
  46. Snelson, C. (2002). ‘Online mathematics instruction: An analysis of content’, Paper Delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Northern Rocky Mountain Educational Research Association, Estes Park, CO, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  47. Stack S. (2004). Gender, children and research productivity. Research in Higher Education 45(8): 891–920 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stemler, S. (2001). An Introduction to Content Analysis (Report No. EDO TM 01 06). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 458 218)Google Scholar
  49. Sullivan S. (1996). Scholarly publishing: Trash or treasure. Australian Academic and Research Libraries 27(1): 40–46 Google Scholar
  50. Tien F.F. (2000). To what degree does the desire for promotion motivate faculty to perform research? Testing the expectancy theory. Research in Higher Education 41(6): 723–752 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tierney W. and Bensimon E.M. (1996). Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. State University of New York Press, New York Google Scholar
  52. Tschannen-Moran M. and Hoy A.W. (2002). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education 17: 783–805 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Waddell J. (2002). Peer review. Canadian Journal of Surgery 1: 1–4 Google Scholar
  54. Weber R.P. (1990). Basic Content Analysis. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian C. Hemmings
    • 1
    Email author
  • Peter Rushbrook
    • 1
  • Erica Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationCharles Sturt UniversityWagga WaggaAustralia

Personalised recommendations