Search results

Implementation of research evaluation policies based on neoliberal orientations of performativity has transformed higher education institutions globally, reshaping academic work and the academic profession. Most lately, the mantra of “publish or no degree” has become the norm in many contexts. There has been little empirical research into the unintended consequences of this neoliberal academic performativity for inexperienced researchers. This article focuses on the role institutional research evaluation policies play on doctoral students and early-career doctoral graduates’ publication practices and on their decision to sometimes publish in journals with ethically “questionable” publishing standards in particular through the concept of figured worlds.

The study was conducted in a higher education setting employing a variety of research incentive schemes to boost research productivity where “publish or no degree” policy is the norm. It employs qualitative approach and involves in-depth interviews with nine doctoral students and seven early career academics who have been working part-time or full-time for five years following PhD completion.

Findings demonstrate publishing in journals with ethically “questionable” publishing standards is not always simply the result of naivety or inexperience. Some authors choose these journals in order to retain a sense of self-efficacy in the face of rejection by more highly ranked journals. Under institutional pressure to publish, they are socialized into this “shadow academia” through (existing) academic networks, conferences and journal special issues.

It is often assumed that scholars are trapped into “questionable” journals through the use of unsolicited emails. This paper challenges this assumption by demonstrating the crucial role research evaluation policies based on neoliberal orientations of performativity and contextual dynamics play on the publication practices of doctoral students and early-career doctoral graduates on their decision to submit to journals with “questionable” publication practices. It introduces the concept of unethical publication brokering, an informal network of ties promising fast and easy publication in outlets that “count”.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the English for publication purpose practices of doctoral students in Iran. The overall objective was to explore their motives, hurdles and strategies in academic writing.

This case study draws on a narrative inquiry to explore nine science and engineering doctoral students’ perceptions of academic publication. The data were analyzed through a hybrid process of inductive and deductive thematic analysis.

The qualitative results showed three dominant themes, namely: motives for publication, hurdles to publication and strategies for dealing with these challenges were extracted. The main sources of motives were students’ desire to publish their works for their graduation, improve their resume, satiate the universities’ evaluation system, and finally share their knowledge worldwide. Their hurdles included: political reasons, language-related problems, center-periphery priorities and the lack of academic writing instruction. In order to overcome these hurdles, the participants employed some strategies in academic writing.

Due to qualitative nature of this study, only nine PhD students were recruited and therefore the research results are not intended to render generalizability. Besides, only narratives were employed to collect the required data. Future researchers can use surveys to collect more data.

The findings are discussed within English for academic purposes discourse and some recommendations are provided to alleviate the plights of non-native-English-speaking academic writers.

The methodology and the higher education context in which this paper was conducted are new to the literature.

Each year, hundreds of accounting doctoral students attend doctoral consortia (DC) sponsored by universities and academic organizations. This chapter reports results of a survey of consortium attendees and analysis of related consortium programs. The authors seek a better understanding of the benefits attendees perceive from these consortia, the content attendees found most valuable, and whether these consortia appear to achieve the goals of the sponsoring organizations.

Survey results show that participants perceive significant benefits from consortium activities related to research, networking, and career management. Respondents did not find their consortium experience helpful on teaching-related dimensions; however, their comments suggest a desire for additional teaching coverage. The authors make recommendations to planners of accounting DC and leadership of the American Accounting Association (AAA), a major consortium sponsor, intended first to address respondents’ desire for additional teaching coverage. Second, the authors highlight opportunities to link doctoral education to AAA’s strategic initiatives and its vision to provide global thought leadership in accounting.

This study aims to analyse the attempts of taught master course students' publications from actor-network theoretic (ANT) perspectives based on the authors' experiences.

In this study, self-study was chosen as the research method. Self-study is a qualitative research approach based on autobiography, available materials, narratives or memory-work for researchers to investigate their own practice from professional and personal experiences and work with critical friends. In this study, self-study was conducted based on the reflective narratives of three authors (the students, Authors 1 and 2, and the lecturer, Author 3), which aims to examine the meanings and explanations of the authors' ordinary experiences and investigate a variety of their emotional memories.

By drawing on ANT, this study explored how the authors translated the assignment tasks into publications by negotiating and interacting with various human and non-human actors – academic journals. The journal articles, however, were not solely the outcome of the academic endevours of the authors. Instead, the journals played a role in helping the authors learn about the academic rigour and gain confidence in their own capabilities. Further, the journals also reinforced the academic partnerships between the authors through collaboration on drafting and revising their manuscripts.

Firstly, this process of helping students publish their papers should focus on their learning and experience rather than merely promoting competition. Additionally, the importance of reaching an agreement on role division and collaborative work ethics needs to be emphasised.

As publications have become increasingly important for graduate students, this study sheds light on the experience of taught master's course students (TMCSs) and their lecturer in jointly publishing papers. While doctoral student publications have received significant attention, TMCSs' publications have not been extensively studied, making this research valuable and original.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a comprehensive model of personal and institutional input variables, composed of elements describing status‐based antecedents, job/organizational context antecedents, and individual level antecedents, which may contribute to the production of significant (top‐tier) research outputs in the management discipline.

The development and empirical examination of this model were done with two main goals in mind. First, the nature and degree to which certain factors lead to the production of top‐tier research productivity in the management discipline were explored. Second, it is hoped that information about these relationships could then be used by institutions and individuals so that they could better understand what it takes to adequately prepare faculty members to achieve increased productivity or, alternatively, to decide whether the goal of top‐tier research production is consistent with individual and institutional resources. As such, the results of this investigation should have interesting and potentially important implications for both academic status attainment and career success.

Hierarchical moderated regression analyses of 440 faculty records revealed that the status of current affiliation of the faculty member, editorial board membership, faculty rank, and the availability of doctoral students were related to top‐tier research productivity.

The findings from this study have important implications for the careers of management faculty at AACSB‐accredited business schools. Faculty at higher status institutions appear to enjoy a number of cumulative advantages due to increased social, human and cultural capital that support the production of top‐tier research. Additionally, faculty with doctoral student support and those with memberships on editorial boards seem to possess the resources and connections necessary to produce top‐tier research on a consistent basis. Future research should investigate institution‐specific inducements to research productivity (e.g. research support and remuneration) and the exact causal nature of the editorial board/productivity relationship.

Prior research has investigated status effects using broad categories as predictors, whereas this research uses interval values representing research‐based assessments of institution status rankings. Additionally, this research creates and tests a comprehensive causal model of research productivity antecedents.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the perceptions of graduate students about the need for a multicultural education course at doctoral level in a mid-sized higher education public institution in Southwest Florida.

A qualitative case study method was applied with multiple sources of data collected, including semi-structured interviews, observations and students’ written papers, online discussions and assignments that aimed to prepare educators to teach culturally diverse students and challenge their own perceptions about culture, race and other multicultural education-related topics.

The findings indicate that, even though the multicultural education course promoted an eye-opening transformational experience for students through their interactions and learning from each other, the students still need further training in multicultural education because of their limited culturally responsive teaching skills.

Limitations of the study are that both the researchers were deeply involved with the material and the class, as the class professor and one of the students, which might have affected the authors’ perception about the students’ journey in learning about multicultural education. The researchers’ dual-role (as researchers and course professor and graduate assistant) might have influenced the participants’ responses, as they knew they were part of a research project. Thus, the participants’ spontaneity in sharing their opinions and beliefs about multicultural education may have been hampered, perhaps responding what the researchers expected rather than with their authentic perspectives on the topics.

The implications of this study to teachers, educators and practitioners are that it invites the readers to reflect on their academic preparedness to work with culturally diverse students. For policymakers, the study indicates the need for creating standards that aim to examine in-service graduate student teachers about their self-efficacy, readiness and dispositions to work with culturally diverse students.

Because of the limited publications on doctoral students learning multicultural education, the authors’ study offers an important insight into the transformational experience of doctoral students learning multicultural education and the implications for improving graduate courses in multicultural education.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the profiles of Australian, New Zealand and South African accounting faculty members. Additionally, the study investigates whether there are any differences in research productivity of the accounting faculty between countries as measured by peer-reviewed academic journal output.

This archival study uses details obtained from webpages of Departments of Accounting in the three countries to construct a profile of accounting academics.

Significant differences in the profiles of accounting academics were found that can be attributed to the institutional factors that exist in each country. Staffs at the junior lecturer and lecturer levels are more likely to be female, while senior lecturers and professors in all three countries were more likely to be male. While Australia and New Zealand had a similar percentage of staff holding PhD or equivalent academic qualifications, only a small proportion of the South African faculty held PhD or equivalent qualifications. A greater proportion of the South African faculty was professionally qualified compared to their Australian and New Zealand counterparts. New Zealand accounting faculty was more productive than their Australian colleagues, with South African academics being the least productive. Academics holding a doctoral qualification or equivalent were more productive than those that did not.

The research limitations relate to the use of websites as the primary data source. Incompleteness of information, inconsistencies in the type of information presented and a lack of comparability of information across institutions and countries may have led to some errors and omissions. However, given the relatively large sample size of 2,049 academics, this was not deemed to materially affect the final analysis.

The paper provides an important contribution to the literature on accounting academics. It is the first of its kind to present a comprehensive “snapshot” of the profiles of accounting academics at the universities in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.

This paper aims to investigate doctoral students’ perceptions of and satisfaction with their doctor of education program, specifically related to dissertation writing preparation. The results offer a complex picture that has implications for the design of doctoral education programs that aim to help students prepare for culminating academic writing products such as dissertations.

Qualitative data, by means of an anonymous online survey with open-ended questions, were used to ascertain 115 doctoral students’ writing experiences in a doctoral program at one university in the USA.

The findings of this study suggest the importance of intrapersonal factors, specifically the ability to engage in self-directed learning; interpersonal factors, such as peer and faculty support; and institutional factors, namely, faculty’s writing-based pedagogical practices, in supporting doctoral students’ academic writing.

This study suggests in addition to selecting and nurturing students’ ability to engage in self-directed learning, there are a number of specific strategies and practices doctoral faculty can engage in and use to prepare students for successful dissertation writing.

This study provides the perspective of former and existing doctoral students to illuminate the needs they perceive as they engage in dissertation writing. The study provides practical strategies based on common themes in student responses.

The most significant event for the School has been the announcement of the creation of the National Centre for Management Research and Development. The Centre is due to open in 1986 and will provide research facilities for up to 20 major projects designed to improve the competitiveness of Canadian business practices.

I got a phone call. A call on a Sunday morning! It was just like any other Sunday when my family and I had gotten ready for Sunday church service until I received this phone call from Dr. Cavusgil two days after my brief visit to the Michigan State University (MSU) campus, meeting a few faculty members. The phone call was to offer an admission to the doctoral program. It was the pivotal moment that turned my career route from a salary man to a scholar that I never thought would be what it turned out to be later.