Google Scholar,Web of Science,and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories

Despite citation counts from Google Scholar (GS), Web of Science (WoS), and Scopus being widely consulted by researchers and sometimes used in research evaluations, there is no recent or systematic evidence about the differences between them. In response, this paper investigates 2,448,055 citations to 2299 English-language highly-cited documents from 252 GS subject categories published in 2006, comparing GS, the WoS Core Collection, and Scopus. GS consistently found the largest percentage of citations across all areas (93%–96%), far ahead of Scopus (35%–77%) and WoS (27%–73%). GS found nearly all the WoS (95%) and Scopus (92%) citations. Most citations found only by GS were from non-journal sources (48%–65%), including theses, books, conference papers, and unpublished materials. Many were non-English (19%–38%), and they tended to be much less cited than citing sources that were also in Scopus or WoS. Despite the many unique GS citing sources, Spearman correlations between citation counts in GS and WoS or Scopus are high (0.78-0.99). They are lower in the Humanities, and lower between GS and WoS than between GS and Scopus. The results suggest that in all areas GS citation data is essentially a superset of WoS and Scopus, with substantial extra coverage.     

Leadership development,wicked problems and action learning: provocations to a debate

The paper examines whether, if leadership is defined by the willingness to tackle wicked issues, and if action learning is employed for leadership development purposes, do the action learning participants on leadership development programmes address such wicked issues? It adopts a version of dialogical sense-making to consider this and describes an attempted literature review which led to a series of questions on academic motivations, puzzles and problems, when exactly a problem is wicked, the possible difference between private and public problems, leader development and leaderful practice. It failed to identify such evidence and it is postulated that this is due to the individual-focused nature of leader development.     

Beyond internationalisation and isomorphism – the construction of a global higher education regime

ABSTRACT

National higher education systems are undergoing profound changes, discussed in many but unrelated studies as outcomes of internationalisation dynamics and institutional isomorphism pressures. We propose to link these studies by emphasising the influence of both internationalisation and isomorphism on the formation of a global educational regime. Through a broad range of indicators, we describe the growth of the discursive, normative, and regulatory dimensions of such a global higher education regime. We find evidence of the following developments: (1) a rapidly growing network of international organisations focused on conferences, initiatives, and programmes supporting a global higher education agenda; (2) a striking increase in the number of international and national accreditation agencies, their mutual cross-national recognition as well as the number of universities that are nationally and internationally accredited; and lastly, (3) parallel increases in regional qualification frameworks and in the implementation of national qualification frameworks. These developments create integration pressures manifest in the mutual recognition of higher education degrees, for which a new generation of regional conventions has emerged worldwide in the past two decades. We discuss these processes and their implications for understanding ‘national’ higher education as well as the threats and limits to the burgeoning higher education regime.     

Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies

The commercialization of university research has become an increasingly important issue, given concerns regarding licensing and the university's desire to maximize the returns to intellectual property (IP). In this paper, we assess the impact of university resources and routines/capabilities on the creation of spin-out companies. We find that both the number of spin-out companies created and the number of spin-out companies created with equity investment are significantly positively associated with expenditure on intellectual property protection, the business development capabilities of technology transfer offices and the royalty regime of the university. These results highlight the importance not just of resource stocks, but also of developing appropriate capabilities of technology transfer officers in spinning-out companies. The results suggest that universities and policy-makers need to devote attention to the training and recruitment of technology officers with the broad base of commercial skills.     

移动技术支持的学习新进展

整个世界似乎都在移动,电话、电脑以及媒体设备是如此地轻便和便携.通过这些技术,不仅可以获取丰富的信息资源,而且还可以使沟通无处不在.我们对如何发挥这些技术的教育价值给予了极大关注.在本综述中,主要考虑个人便携技术,重点关注包括PDA和手机等手持设备.本研究采用以活动为中心的视角来审视移动技术的教育应用,重点论述与这些活动相关的学习范式、理论;通过对文献中的案例进行分析阐明教学实践的分类;考虑了对政策及教育实践的含义;最后,基于目前移动技术支持的学习研究的新进展,我们对移动技术支持的学习的未来进行了展望,并探究其对教育者和技术开发者的启示.     

Book editors in the social sciences and humanities: an analysis of publication and collaboration patterns of established researchers in Flanders

Book editors in the social sciences and humanities play an important role in their fields but little is known about their typical publication and collaboration patterns. To partially fill this gap, we compare Flemish editors and other researchers, in terms of career stage, productivity, publication types, publications with domestic and international collaboration as well as the number of (international or all) unique co‐authors, co‐editors and associated book chapter authors. The results show that editors are mostly established researchers, especially in the social sciences, produce more book chapters and monographs than do other researchers, and are more productive. Nevertheless, editors collaborate less than do other researchers, both in terms of publications and in number of co‐authors. Including book chapter authors in the editors' collaboration networks makes those networks substantially larger, demonstrating that editors do not mainly call upon authors from their existing collaboration network when choosing book chapter authors in the edited books. Finally, editors seem to co‐author with their book chapter authors slightly more often after the publication of the edited book than before.