Unpacking research impact in agricultural education: Implications for role perception and career advancement

Everett M. Martin; Christopher M. Estepp; Will Doss; Donald M. Johnson

doi:10.37433/aad.v6i3.645

Authors

Everett M. Martin University of Arkansas, USA
Christopher M. Estepp University of Arkansas, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7268-9044
Will Doss Texas Tech University, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3163-7528
Donald M. Johnson University of Arkansas, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2592-654X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i3.645

Keywords:

Faculty Research Impact, Research Metrics, Professorial Rank, SDG 4: Quality Education

Abstract

This study investigates research impact and academic rank progression within agricultural education disciplines, employing metrics such as the h-index, i10 index, and total citations. Grounded in Vroom's expectancy theory, the research emphasizes the significance of role perception and instrumentality in motivating faculty toward research impact and career advancement. The study collected data from publicly available Google Scholar profiles of 126 AAAE members, spanning the ranks of assistant, associate, and full professors. Mean total citations were 120.81 (SD = 110.27) for assistant professors, 685.78 (SD = 682.10) for associate professors, and 1800.63 (SD = 1315.75) for professors. Mean h-index values were 5.00 (SD = 3.03), 11.72 (SD = 4.51), and 19.86 (SD = 6.81), respectively. Forward subset regression with leave-one-out cross-validation and forward subset logistic regression minimizing AIC were used to identify factors influencing research impact and academic rank transitions. Years since first publication (YSFP), faculty size, R1 status, and disciplinary focus predicted research impact. Logistic regression models showed YSFP was the only significant variable associated with both rank transitions. These results describe relationships between experience, institutional resources, and sub-disciplinary involvement in shaping research impact and career progression.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

American Association for Agricultural Education. (n.d.). Member directory. https://aaaeonline.org/directory

American Association for Agricultural Education. (2023). AAAE research values. https://aaaeonline.org/National-Research-Values

American Council on Education. (n.d.). 2021 basic classification. Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/2021-basic-classification

Alvarez, A. V., Jr. (2020). Learning from the problems and challenges in blended learning: Basis for faculty development and program enhancement. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 112–132. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4292631

Birkenholz, R. J., & Simonsen, J. C. (2011). Characteristics of distinguished programs of agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(3), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2011.03016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2011.03016

Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation, satisfaction. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Bland, C. J., Center, B. A., Finstad, D. A., Risbey, K. R., & Staples, J. G. (2005). A theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research productivity. Academic Medicine, 80(3), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200503000-00006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200503000-00006

Bonn, A., & Bouter, L. (2023). Research assessments should recognize responsible research practices: Narrative review of a lively debate and promising developments. In E. Valdés & J. A. Lecaros (Eds.), Handbook of bioethical decisions: Volume II (pp. 441–472). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29455-6_27 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29455-6_27

Burris, V. (2004). The academic caste system: Prestige hierarchies in PhD exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900205 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900205

Chen, Y., Gupta, A., & Hoshower, L. (2006). Factors that motivate business faculty to conduct research: An expectancy theory analysis. Journal of Education for Business, 81(4), 179–189. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.81.4.179-189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.81.4.179-189

Derksen, S., & Keselman, H. J. (1992). Backward, forward and stepwise automated subset selection algorithms: Frequency of obtaining authentic and noise variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45(2), 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1992.tb00992.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1992.tb00992.x

Draper, N., & Smith, H. (1966). Applied regression analysis. Wiley.

Hadjinicola, G. C., & Soteriou, A. C. (2006). Factors affecting research productivity of production and operations management groups: An empirical study. Journal of Applied Mathematics & Decision Sciences, 2006(2). https://emis.dsd.sztaki.hu/journals/HOA/JAMDS/Volume2006/96542.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/JAMDS/2006/96542

Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009). The elements of statistical learning: Data mining, inference, and prediction (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7

Heng, K., Hamid, M., & Khan, A. (2020). Factors influencing academics' research engagement and productivity: A developing countries perspective. Issues in Educational Research, 30(3), 965–987. https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.465283943914964

Hind, R. R., Dornbusch, S. M., & Scott, W. R. (1974). A theory of evaluation applied to a university faculty. Sociology of Education, 114-128. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2112169

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102

Jackson, J. K., Latimer, M., & Stoiko, R. (2017). The dynamic between knowledge production and faculty evaluation: Perceptions of the promotion and tenure process across disciplines. Innovative Higher Education, 42, 193-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9378-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9378-3

Jamali, H. R., Nicholas, D., & Herman, E. (2016). Scholarly reputation in the digital age and the role of emerging platforms and mechanisms. Research Evaluation, 25(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv032

James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2013). An introduction to statistical learning (Vol. 112). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7138-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7138-7

John, A. M., Gupta, A. B., John, E. S., Lopez, S. A., & Lambert, W. C. (2016). A gender-based comparison of promotion and research productivity in academic dermatology. Dermatology Online Journal, 22(4). https://doi.org/10.5070/D3224030651 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/D3224030651

Kotrlik, J. W., Bartlett, J. E., Higgins, C. C., & Williams, H. A. (2002). Factors associated with research productivity of agricultural education faculty. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2002.03001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2002.03001

Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359

Lindner, J. R., Harder, A., & Roberts, T. G. (2020). Elevating the Impacts of Research in Agricultural Education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 61(2), 249-262. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02249

Liu, H., & Motoda, H. (Eds.). (2007). Computational methods of feature selection. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781584888796 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781584888796

López-Cózar, E. D., Robinson-García, N., & Torres-Salinas, D. (2014). The Google Scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23056 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23056

Love, H. B., Stephens, A., Fosdick, B. K., Tofany, E., & Fisher, E. R. (2022). The impact of gender diversity on scientific research teams: A need to broaden and accelerate future research. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01389-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01389-w

McGill, M. M., & Settle, A. (2012). Identifying effects of institutional resources and support on computing faculty research productivity, tenure, and promotion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 167–198. https://doi.org/10.28945/1581 DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/1581

Moher, D., Naudet, F., Cristea, I. A., Miedema, F., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Goodman, S. N. (2018). Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLOS Biology, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089

Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Irwin Dorsey.

Ramirez-Montoya, M. S., Ceballos, H. G., Martínez-Pérez, S., & Romero-Rodríguez, L. M. (2023). Impact of Teaching Workload on Scientific Productivity: Multidimensional Analysis in the Complexity of a Mexican Private University. Publications, 11(2), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11020027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11020027

Sauvayre R. (2022). Types of errors hiding in Google Scholar data. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(5), e28354. https://doi.org/10.2196/28354 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/28354

Schimanski, L. A., & Alperin, J. P. (2018). The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research, 7, 1605. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.16493.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.16493.1

Schreiber, M. (2008). An empirical investigation of the g-index for 26 physicists in comparison with the h-Index, the A-index, and the R-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(9), 1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20856 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20856

Sinclair, J., Cuthbert, D., & Barnacle, R. (2014). The entrepreneurial subjectivity of successful researchers. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(5), 1007–1019. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.890574 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.890574

Singh, P., Singh, N., Singh, K. K., & Singh, A. (2021). Diagnosing of disease using machine learning. In Machine learning and the internet of medical things in healthcare (pp. 89–111). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821229-5.00003-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821229-5.00003-3

Sorcinelli, M. D. (2007). Faculty development: The challenge going forward. Peer Review, 9(4), 4–8. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/faculty-development-challenge-going-forward/docview/216587063/se-2

Stein, M. (2023). The end of faculty tenure and the transformation of higher education. American Association of University Professors. https://www.aaup.org/article/end-faculty-tenure-and-transformation-higher-education

Tien, F. F., & Blackburn, R. T. (1996). Faculty rank system, research motivation, and faculty research productivity: Measure refinement and theory testing. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(1), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780246 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780246

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley and Sons.

Williamson, I. O., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Predicting early career research productivity: The case of management faculty. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.178

Wilsdon, J. (2015). The metric tide. SAGE Publications Ltd.