Evaluating Faculty Publications in Accounting Ph.D. Programs: The Author Affiliation Index as an Alternative

We propose a new model, the Author Affiliation Index (AAI), for examining journal quality, explain how the AAI is calculated, and report the resulting scores for 35 accounting and accounting-related journals. Next, we compare AAI journal rankings with those from other published studies and examine the correlations between them to show how the AAI can be used to evaluate relatively new journals, such as Accounting and the Public Interest, that are not included in extant ranking lists. By explaining its flexibility, we demonstrate that the AAI model can serve as a valuable tool for measuring journal quality and for meeting AACSB accreditation requirements for faculty groups as well as individual faculty. The AAI is based on the principle that as the percentage of authors in a journal who are accounting faculty at doctoral-granting institutions increases, the perceived value of that journal in terms of quality to Ph.D.-granting accounting programs also increases. Although our illustrations focus on the construction of this measure for use by Ph.D.-granting institutions, we describe how it can be adapted for use by other faculty groups.

Toward the Equitable Distribution of Enriching Educational Experiences: Faculty Engagement with Racial Minority Students

Peña, Bensimon, and Colyar (2006) noted: “Not only do African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans have lower graduation rates than [do] Whites and Asian Americans, they also experience inequalities in just about every indicator of academic success – from earned grade point average to placement on the dean’s list to graduation rates in competitive majors” (p. 48). While these and other racialized outcomes disparities cannot be attributed to a narrow set of explanatory factors, one thing is known for sure: College students who are actively engaged inside and outside the classroom are considerably more likely than are their disengaged peers to persist through baccalaureate degree attainment. Furthermore, engaged students typically accrue the desired outcomes that are central to liberal education. This is especially true for engagement in what Kuh (2008) refers to as “high-impact” educational experiences – study abroad programs, learning communities, undergraduate research programs, service learning opportunities, and summer internships, to name a few. Unfortunately, racial minority undergraduates are considerably less likely than are their White peers to enjoy the educational benefits associated with these experiences.

Clinical research projects at a German medical faculty: follow-up from ethical approval to publication and citation by others

BACKGROUND: Only data of published study results are available to the scientific community for further use such as informing future research and synthesis of available evidence. If study results are reported selectively, reporting bias and distortion of summarised estimates of effect or harm of treatments can occur. The publication and citation of results of clinical research conducted in Germany was studied. METHODS: The protocols of clinical research projects submitted to the research ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (Germany) in 2000 were analysed. Published full articles in several databases were searched and investigators contacted. Data on study and publication characteristics were extracted from protocols and corresponding publications. RESULTS: 299 study protocols were included. The most frequent study design was randomised controlled trial (141; 47%), followed by uncontrolled studies (61; 20%), laboratory studies (30; 10%) and non-randomised studies (29; 10%). 182 (61%) were multicentre studies including 97 (53%) international collaborations. 152 of 299 (51%) had commercial (co-)funding and 46 (15%) non-commercial funding. 109 of the 225 completed protocols corresponded to at least one full publication (total 210 articles); the publication rate was 48%. 168 of 210 identified publications (80%) were cited in articles indexed in the ISI Web of Science. The median was 11 citations per publication (range 0-1151). CONCLUSIONS: Results of German clinical research projects conducted are largely underreported. Barriers to successful publication need to be identified and appropriate measures taken. Close monitoring of projects until publication and adequate support provided to investigators may help remedy the prevailing underreporting of research.