Impact: Will We Ever Have A Chance?

Abstract

As noted by other scholars (i.e., Fernando & Minton, 2011; Hunter et al., 2018), journal-level impact (often referred to as impact factor) is a complex subject and has important meaning for different stakeholders. Journal level impact has been used by different colleges and universities to help inform how they evaluate faculty for formative and summative evaluation processes (Barrio Minton & Fernando, 2011), which can have a tremendous impact on faculty members’ academic careers. Fernando and Barrio Minton have criticized the bias and lack of fairness surrounding this system; however, this might inform the decision where scholars may seek to publish their academic work, either within a certain journal or other, or within a journal within a certain field or not (Hunter et al., 2018). Hunter and colleagues have expressed the potential consequences to professional identity and its relationship to program accreditation, as there is an implied obligation within Council for Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) accreditation guides to have Counselor Educators from CACREP-accredited program publish in Counselor Education-related journals. Further, some scholars have used journal metrics as a proxy to explain field differences, arguing the quality of one field in comparison to another based around impact factor differences found for their journals; others have discussed journal-based differences in fields due to number of issues and page counts across different journals (Hunter et al., 2018). Following this line of thinking, Hunter and colleagues have suggested that our field and journals need to consider alternative forms of impact. The politics surrounding journal-level impact is not something that we wish to explore in within this editorial; however, as I (KMG) move toward the end of my term as editor of JSGW, the issues surrounding impact, especially impact as it relates to our own journal (and other journals within our field of Counselor Education) is something that I believe needs further evaluation. Working in tandem with a doctoral student (DJVH), we wish to present a counter-narrative to what has been previously discussed within the field as a rationale for why many of our journals may have not yet received formal impact factors. As two individuals who were both trained in CACREP-accredited masters programs, and who have or are seeking doctoral degrees in CACREP-accredited doctoral programs, we come from within the field and seek a call for attention that we hope will lead to a call to action as we continue our important work in Counselor Education. It is ultimately our argument that the size of journals, the number of pages, or issues within journal volumes do not alone explain the lack of journal-level impact for many of the journals within our fields, as argued by others. Instead, it is our belief that there are actions that we could, and should, take as a field that would not only support us in moving our journals toward formal impact factors; they may also help us in ensuring that the scholarship from our field reflects the rigor and forms of impact that we wish to sustain for the long-term future of our field.