Open scholarship ranking of Chinese research universities
- 518 Downloads
Universities and the members of their faculties, by means of open access, open education, and social media engagement, contribute to many publicly accessible resources of academic values, i.e., open scholarship. To encourage universities to contribute even more to open scholarship, in a more focused and sustainable way, the methodology of Open Scholarship Ranking (OSR) was constructed after a thorough examination and several adjustments based on the Berlin Principles on Ranking of Higher Education Institutions (hereinafter referred to as “the Berlin Principles”). The OSR has met most of the Berlin Principles, and new adjustments helped to improve its quality. A significant correlation has been observed between the OSR results of Chinese research universities and the results from existing comprehensive university rankings. The OSR provides an evaluation framework for universities’ performance in open scholarship, and can be regarded as an acceptable way of ranking universities.
KeywordsOpen scholarship University ranking Open access Open education Social scholarship Digital scholarship
The authors wish to thank the two anonymous referees for their constructive and valuable comments. This paper is supported by Research Funds from the Ministry of Education for Humanities and Social Sciences (China, No. 12YJCZH038) and Fundamental Research Funds of the Central Universities (China).
- Anderson, T., & McConkey, B. (2009). Development of disruptive open access journals. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 39(3), 71–87.Google Scholar
- Ayers, E. L. (2013). Does digital scholarship have a future? Educause Review, 48(4), 24–34.Google Scholar
- Borgman, C. L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, N.J: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
- Boyer, E. L. (1996). The Scholarship of Engagement. Journal of Public Service & Outreach, 1(1), 11–20.Google Scholar
- Burton, G. (2009). The open scholar. Academic Evolution. http://www.academicevolution.com/2009/08/the-open-scholar.html. Accessed 1 Sep 2015.
- Chen, Z., Alcorn, B., Christensen, G., Eriksson, N., Koller, D., & Emanuel, E. J. (2015). Who’s Benefiting from MOOCs, and Why. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2015/09/whos-benefiting-from-moocs-and-why. Accessed 1 Sep 2015.
- Crow, R. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: A SPARC position paper. Washington, DC: The Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition. http://www.sparc.arl.org/sites/default/files/media_files/instrepo.pdf. Accessed 1 Sep 2015.
- Esposito, A. (2013). Neither digital or open. Just researchers: Views on digital/open scholarship practices in an Italian university. First Monday, 18(1). http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3881. Accessed 1 Sep 2015.
- Fan, W., & Liu, Q. (2014a). Web-influence evaluation research achievements of university from view of open access. Journal of Intelligence, 33(4), 35–40.Google Scholar
- Fan, W., & Liu, Q. (2014b). Evaluation of university teaching academic network influence. Information and Documentation Services, 6, 98–102.Google Scholar
- Fan, W., & Liu, Q. (2014c). On the academic effects of universities civic engagement in cyber space. Journal of Ningbo University (Educational Science Edition), 36(4), 43–48.Google Scholar
- Fan, W., Liu, Q., Lei, Q., & Zheng, X. (2015). Public oriented evaluation of web-influence of universities’ scholarship. China Higher Education Research, 5, 49–54.Google Scholar
- Getz, M. (2005). Open scholarship and research universities. http://ideas.repec.org/p/van/wpaper/0517.html. Accessed 1 Mar 2015.
- Greyson, D., Vezina, K., Morrison, H., Taylor, D., & Black, C. (2009). University supports for open access: A Canadian national survey. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 39(3), 1–32.Google Scholar
- Heap, T., & Minocha, S. (2012). An empirically grounded framework to guide blogging for digital scholarship. Research in Learning Technology, 20(suppl), 176–188.Google Scholar
- Hilton, J., & Wiley, D. (2011). Open-access textbooks and financial sustainability: A case study on flat world knowledge. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(5). http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/960/1860. Accessed 1 Mar 2015.
- Magnan, S. S. (2007). Commentary: The promise of digital scholarship in SLA research and language pedagogy. Language Learning & Technology, 11(3), 152–155.Google Scholar
- Marhl, M., & Pausita, A. (2011). Third mission indicators for new ranking methodologies. Evaluation in Higher Education, 5(1), 43–64.Google Scholar
- Niyazov, Y., Vogel, C., Price, R., Lund, B., Judd, D., Schwartzman, J., & Shron, M. (2015). Open access meets discoverability: Citations to articles posted to Academia.edu. https://www.academia.edu/12297791/Open_Access_Meets_Discoverability_Citations_to_Articles_Posted_to_Academia.edu. Accessed 1 Oct 2015.
- Pearce, N., Weller, M., Scanlon, E., & Kinsley, S. (2010). Digital scholarship considered: How new technologies could transform academic work. In education, 16(1). http://ineducation.ca/index.php/ineducation/article/view/44 Accessed 1 Oct 2015.
- Solomon, D. J. (2006). Strategies for developing sustainable open access scholarly journals. First Monday, 11(6). http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1335/1255. Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
- Suber, P. (2012). Open access. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2012a). Assumptions and challenges of open scholarship. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4, 166–189.Google Scholar
- Wiley, D. (2006). Open source, openness, and higher education. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3(1). http://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol3/iss1/1. Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
- Wiley, D., & Green, C. (2012). Why openness in education? In D. Oblinger (Ed.), Game changers: Education and information technologies (pp. 81–89). Louisville: Educause.Google Scholar