Análisis sobre algunos factores como género, pertenencia institucional y discicplinaria y otros que incidirían sobre la productividad (publicaciones) de los investigadores académic.
Personal and Professional Factors Affect Researchers’ Productivity, Study FindsBy Audrey Williams June
The Chronicle of Higher Education, November 4, 2009
Why do some professors pile up articles in refereed journals or present their research at conferences more than their colleagues do?
According to a new study, faculty members’ gender, their marital status, and whether they have dependent children are among the factors that make a difference. A professor’s discipline and where he or she works affects research productivity, too.
A paper summarizing the study, to be presented on Thursday at the Association for the Study of Higher Education’s conference, in Vancouver, British Columbia, notes that productivity—especially in terms of research that plays a central role in tenure and promotion at many institutions—has long been a topic of heavy debate. But the recession has prompted college administrators and lawmakers to scrutinize more closely than ever how faculty members spend their time, one of the paper’s authors said.
“This is a really complex issue,” said Karen L. Webber, an associate professor of higher education in the University of Georgia’s Institute of Higher Education. She wrote the paper with Kangjoo Lee, a Ph.D. student in the institute.
“In many ways, I have even more questions now than when I started,” Ms. Webber said.
Unexpected Twist
The authors conducted their study by analyzing the most recent data from a national sample of college professors, the 2004 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty, to see how faculty members measured up in six types of research productivity over the preceding two years: refereed journal articles; nonrefereed journal articles; book reviews, chapters, and creative works; books, textbooks, and reports; presentations; and performances. The data (excluding that for non-tenure-track, part-time faculty members) were weighted to represent nearly 360,000 professors at 500 four-year colleges and universities.
Not surprisingly, faculty members whose primary activity was research were more productive, particularly in terms of publishing articles in refereed journals and presenting research at conferences—what the paper calls “traditionally rewarded scholarly work.” Professors at doctoral institutions reported more refereed journal articles, book reviews, and presentations than did professors at master’s and baccalaureate institutions, where teaching is more likely to take up a faculty member’s time.
In an unexpected twist from earlier research on the topic, being the parent of dependent children had a positive effect on research productivity. The paper called the finding “a hopeful sign that the unconscious ideologies and environmental support are enabling men to assume nontraditional duties and allow women to perform academically on par with men.”
Disparate Values Among Disciplines
Being female, however, had a negative effect on research productivity, as did being born in the United States, the paper says. U.S.-born professors reported publishing 22 percent fewer refereed articles and making 12 percent fewer presentations. The paper doesn’t speculate on why American professors would be less productive.
The study also underscored the disparate values that different disciplines place on various forms of scholarship. Faculty members in the physical and life sciences had 46 percent more refereed articles than did professors in the arts and humanities, and the scientists made 14 percent more presentations. However, arts and humanities faculty members reported 48 percent more book reviews, book chapters, and creative work than did professors in the physical and life sciences.
“Our findings of difference by discipline point to the need for models of research productivity that are not only comprehensive in the total set of activities included (such as teaching and service) but also … account for differences by discipline,” the paper says. “A one-size-fits-all model for productivity is not appropriate.”
Ms. Webber said it’s telling that although the study is based on newer data than much of the previous research related to faculty productivity, many of the results are similar to earlier findings—a signal that “the same issues are still going on.” Higher education, she said, needs to keep discussing the disparity in research productivity between women and men, for instance, and continue to develop policies that can help close the gap. In short, faculty research productivity is ripe for, well, more research.
“There are so many variables involved,” Ms. Webber said. “The way I look at it, none of us by ourselves are going to have the definitive answer.”