科学家在学术阶梯上更上一层楼时,是否会改变他们的研究生产力等级?

IF 2.2 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Innovative Higher Education Pub Date : 2024-08-28 DOI:10.1007/s10755-024-09735-3
Marek Kwiek, Wojciech Roszka
{"title":"科学家在学术阶梯上更上一层楼时,是否会改变他们的研究生产力等级?","authors":"Marek Kwiek, Wojciech Roszka","doi":"10.1007/s10755-024-09735-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We approach productivity in science in a longitudinal fashion: We track scientists’ careers over time, up to 40 years. We first allocate scientists to decile-based publishing productivity classes, from the bottom 10% to the top 10%. Then, we seek patterns of mobility between the classes in two career stages: assistant professorship and associate professorship. Our findings confirm that radically changing publishing productivity levels (upward or downward) almost never happens. Scientists with a very weak past track record in publications emerge as having marginal chances of becoming scientists with a very strong future track record across all science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) fields. Hence, our research shows a long-term character of careers in science, with one’s publishing productivity during the apprenticeship period of assistant professorship heavily influencing productivity during the more independent period of associate professorship. We use individual-level microdata on academic careers (from a national registry of scientists) and individual-level metadata on publications (from the Scopus raw dataset). Polish associate professors tend to be stuck in their productivity classes for years: High performers tend to remain high performers, and low performers tend to remain low performers over their careers. Logistic regression analysis powerfully supports our two-dimensional results. We examine all internationally visible Polish associate professors in five fields of science in STEMM fields (N = 4,165 with N<sub>art</sub> = 71,841 articles).</p>","PeriodicalId":47065,"journal":{"name":"Innovative Higher Education","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are Scientists Changing their Research Productivity Classes When They Move Up the Academic Ladder?\",\"authors\":\"Marek Kwiek, Wojciech Roszka\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10755-024-09735-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We approach productivity in science in a longitudinal fashion: We track scientists’ careers over time, up to 40 years. We first allocate scientists to decile-based publishing productivity classes, from the bottom 10% to the top 10%. Then, we seek patterns of mobility between the classes in two career stages: assistant professorship and associate professorship. Our findings confirm that radically changing publishing productivity levels (upward or downward) almost never happens. Scientists with a very weak past track record in publications emerge as having marginal chances of becoming scientists with a very strong future track record across all science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) fields. Hence, our research shows a long-term character of careers in science, with one’s publishing productivity during the apprenticeship period of assistant professorship heavily influencing productivity during the more independent period of associate professorship. We use individual-level microdata on academic careers (from a national registry of scientists) and individual-level metadata on publications (from the Scopus raw dataset). Polish associate professors tend to be stuck in their productivity classes for years: High performers tend to remain high performers, and low performers tend to remain low performers over their careers. Logistic regression analysis powerfully supports our two-dimensional results. We examine all internationally visible Polish associate professors in five fields of science in STEMM fields (N = 4,165 with N<sub>art</sub> = 71,841 articles).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovative Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovative Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09735-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovative Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09735-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们以纵向方式研究科学的生产力:我们追踪科学家长达 40 年的职业生涯。我们首先将科学家划分为十等分的出版生产力等级,从最低的 10%到最高的 10%。然后,我们在两个职业阶段--助理教授和副教授--寻找不同等级之间的流动模式。我们的研究结果证实,从根本上改变出版生产力水平(向上或向下)的情况几乎从未发生过。在所有科学、技术、工程、数学和医学(STEMM)领域,过去发表论文记录非常薄弱的科学家成为未来发表论文记录非常出色的科学家的机会微乎其微。因此,我们的研究表明,科学职业具有长期性,一个人在助理教授学徒期的发表论文效率会严重影响其在更独立的副教授期的发表论文效率。我们使用了个人层面的学术生涯微观数据(来自全国科学家登记处)和个人层面的论文元数据(来自 Scopus 原始数据集)。波兰的副教授往往在其生产力等级中停留多年:在他们的职业生涯中,高绩效者往往一直是高绩效者,而低绩效者往往一直是低绩效者。逻辑回归分析有力地支持了我们的二维结果。我们研究了波兰在 STEMM 领域五个科学领域的所有国际知名副教授(N=4,165,Nart=71,841 篇文章)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Are Scientists Changing their Research Productivity Classes When They Move Up the Academic Ladder?

We approach productivity in science in a longitudinal fashion: We track scientists’ careers over time, up to 40 years. We first allocate scientists to decile-based publishing productivity classes, from the bottom 10% to the top 10%. Then, we seek patterns of mobility between the classes in two career stages: assistant professorship and associate professorship. Our findings confirm that radically changing publishing productivity levels (upward or downward) almost never happens. Scientists with a very weak past track record in publications emerge as having marginal chances of becoming scientists with a very strong future track record across all science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) fields. Hence, our research shows a long-term character of careers in science, with one’s publishing productivity during the apprenticeship period of assistant professorship heavily influencing productivity during the more independent period of associate professorship. We use individual-level microdata on academic careers (from a national registry of scientists) and individual-level metadata on publications (from the Scopus raw dataset). Polish associate professors tend to be stuck in their productivity classes for years: High performers tend to remain high performers, and low performers tend to remain low performers over their careers. Logistic regression analysis powerfully supports our two-dimensional results. We examine all internationally visible Polish associate professors in five fields of science in STEMM fields (N = 4,165 with Nart = 71,841 articles).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Innovative Higher Education
Innovative Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Innovative Higher Education is a refereed scholarly journal that strives to package fresh ideas in higher education in a straightforward and readable fashion. The four main purposes of Innovative Higher Education are: (1) to present descriptions and evaluations of current innovations and provocative new ideas with relevance for action beyond the immediate context in higher education; (2) to focus on the effect of such innovations on teaching and students; (3) to be open to diverse forms of scholarship and research methods by maintaining flexibility in the selection of topics deemed appropriate for the journal; and (4) to strike a balance between practice and theory by presenting manuscripts in a readable and scholarly manner to both faculty and administrators in the academic community.
期刊最新文献
Investigating Belonging as a Mediator between Culturally Engaging Campus Environments and Satisfaction Improving Implementation of a Large-Scale Curriculum Redesign: An Innovative Approach to Balancing Fidelity and Agency Postdoctoral Scholars’ Emancipatory Strategies to Socialization through Agency Are Scientists Changing their Research Productivity Classes When They Move Up the Academic Ladder? Leading with Trust: How University Leaders can Foster Innovation with Educational Technology through Organizational Trust
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1