Search

Introduction: Concerns about reproducibility and impact of research urge improvement initiatives. Current university ranking systems evaluate and compare universities on measures of academic and research performance. Although often useful for marketing purposes, the value of ranking systems when examining quality and outcomes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate usefulness of ranking systems and identify opportunities to support research quality and performance improvement. Methods: A systematic review of university ranking systems was conducted to investigate research performance and academic quality measures. Eligibility requirements included: inclusion of at least 100 doctoral granting institutions, be currently produced on an ongoing basis and include both global and US universities, publish rank calculation methodology in English and independently calculate ranks. Ranking systems must also include some measures of research outcomes. Indicators were abstracted and contrasted with basic quality improvement requirements. Exploration of aggregation methods, validity of research and academic quality indicators, and suitability for quality improvement within ranking systems were also conducted. Results: A total of 24 ranking systems were identified and 13 eligible ranking systems were evaluated. Six of the 13 rankings are 100% focused on research performance. For those reporting weighting, 76% of the total ranks are attributed to research indicators, with 24% attributed to academic or teaching quality. Seven systems rely on reputation surveys and/or faculty and alumni awards. Rankings influence academic choice yet research performance measures are the most weighted indicators. There are no generally accepted academic quality indicators in ranking systems. Discussion: No single ranking system provides a comprehensive evaluation of research and academic quality. Utilizing a combined approach of the Leiden, Thomson Reuters Most Innovative Universities, and the SCImago ranking systems may provide institutions with a more effective feedback for research improvement. Rankings which extensively rely on subjective reputation and “luxury” indicators, such as award winning faculty or alumni who are high ranking executives, are not well suited for academic or research performance improvement initiatives. Future efforts should better explore measurement of the university research performance through comprehensive and standardized indicators. This paper could serve as a general literature citation when one or more of university ranking systems are used in efforts to improve academic prominence and research performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses issues related to subjective powerlessness in the U.S. The paper focuses on changes since 1952 in citizen efficacy or feelings of control over government for various sub-groups in the U.S. population such as blacks, blue collar workers, Southerners, Jews, young and old people. As with most issues in the study of social change, there is widespread disagreement on trends in citizen efficacy for industrial societies such as the U.S. Most theory predicts trends in objective powerlessness, rather than subjective powerlessness, although it is possible that trends in objective powerlessness do not match trends in subjective powerlessness. Within the U.S. at each point of observation, powerlessness does not vary much by stratum, except when education and race are used as indicators. And within the white population, some of the differences are heavily explained by educational differentials. It therefore seems fair to conclude that white subordinate interest groups are not oriented toward government as a result of what would seem to be objective powerlessness but more on the basis of their educational achievement.

Background: Alcohol and marijuana are the two most abused substances in US colleges. However, research on the combined influence (cross sectional or longitudinal) of these substances on academic performance is currently scant. Methods: Data were derived from the longitudinal 2-year Brain and Alcohol Research in College Students (BARCS) study including 1142 freshman students who completed monthly marijuana use and alcohol consumption surveys. Subjects were classified into data-driven groups based on their alcohol and marijuana consumption. A linear mixed-model (LMM) was employed using this grouping factor to predict grade point average (GPA), adjusted for a variety of socio-demographic and clinical factors. Results: Three data-driven clusters emerged: 1) No/low users of both, 2) medium-high alcohol/no-low marijuana, and 3) medium-high users of both substances. Individual cluster derivations between consecutive semesters remained stable. No significant interaction between clusters and semester (time) was noted. Post-hoc analysis suggest that at the outset, compared to sober peers, students using moderate to high levels of alcohol and low marijuana demonstrate lower GPAs, but this difference becomes non-significant over time. In contrast, students consuming both substances at moderate-to-high levels score significantly lower at both the outset and across the 2-year investigation period. Our follow-up analysis also indicate that when students curtailed their substance use over time they had significantly higher academic GPA compared to those who remained stable in their substance use patterns over the two year period. Conclusions: Overall, our study validates and extends the current literature by providing important implications of concurrent alcohol and marijuana use on academic achievement in college. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an era of accountability focused primarily on academic outcomes, it may be useful to reconsider the other original aim of U.S. schools: citizenship development. Using longitudinal, nationally representative data (Adolescent Health and Academic Achievement Study [AHAA] and the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health [Add Health]), we employ multilevel models to investigate the effects of social science programs and other measures of school context on young adult voting and voter registration. Findings suggest that school social science context directly influences young adult electoral engagement to the extent that peers' social science performance can counteract an individual's low level of social connection to produce an active voter in young adulthood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this article is to explore the role of women in one's culture, in academia, in a few professions, and in the field of sociology. There are suggestions in some of the sociological literature that women are in a difficult and sometimes unspecified role. Age and Sex in the Social Structure of the United States, analyzes the various avenues of expression available to women domesticity; glamour; and good companion, as expressed in such pursuits as humanitarianism and club activities. Much literature, academic and otherwise, has been devoted to a survey of the opportunities and joys of the domestic role. The foregoing material can serve both as an indictment of, and a cause for, restricting the role of academic women, as well as an accounting of the reasons why women withdraw from the professions. To label the interplay of variables as discrimination is not wholly accurate, but neither can the material be taken as cause for maintaining the status quo. Research continue to be faced with the facts that good intellectual ability among women is being wasted as a social and national resource and that lack of clarity about the female role may be productive of personal unhappiness.

This article discusses the research about the trends in social education in the U.S. The February 1943 issue of this journal presented analyses of research bearing on this field. A mounting belief in the importance of direct participation in school and community living as planned phases of education for democratic citizenship continues to be reflected in educational literature. Chapters six and seven were planned to cover important lines of research in teaching the social studies. All of the studies reviewed might have been included in single, logically organized chapter, but for purposes of emphasis it seems better to treat separately research bearing on the topics included in the seventh chapter.