Good thinking Carol. I agree. The AACSB forms make these distinctions, too, and I believe they expect the schools to create their own metrics for weighing various types of publications. That, of course, would be a systematic way of shaping faculty members' choice of outlets, but at least it produces a metric unique to each school -- so a school that identifies itself as having a strong teaching mission and less of a research mission can weigh publication outlets accordingly. In a sense it forces a school to define its mission and demonstrate how academic contribution aligns with the mission.
But it is crude and black boxish, measuring value only by what can be entered numerically in Excel spreadsheets. Yesterday, when I filled out the form, I found I had more than doubled my "academic qualifications" in just one year. Yet, I did not feel any more academically qualified this year than I did last year.
Ginny
________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk on behalf of Miller, Carol J
Sent: Wed 5/6/2009 2:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ALSB response to journal rankings issue
If journals are to be ranked, there need to be three distinct categories. We had to mark these categories when filling out information for AACSB a couple of years ago. This tricotomy should make sense for other disciplines as well.
1. Academic scholarly journals
ex: law reviews
2. Practitioner journals
ex: bar journals
specialized journals (ex: Advertising Compliance Service)
3. Pedagogical journals
ex: Journal of Legal Studies Education
Each category above serves a useful purpose to our discipline and needs to be recognized as doing so. It is improper to lump pedagogical journals with law reviews. They are apples and oranges. Practitioner journals and law schools have little appreciation, understanding or interest in undergraduate pedagogy -- so of course they would not rank it high in any poll that compares them to law reviews. That is the wrong interest group to rank that type of journal! The discipline benefiting from the analysis (business law teachers) would say that JLSE is the premier teaching /pedagogical journal and there is no close second for undergraduate/MBA business law.
If part of the point of journal publications is to raise the awareness and appreciation of the expertise or scholarly ability of one's faculty, there is greater professional exposure in the practitioner journals. More attorneys actually read the bar journal articles. If the other disciplines get credit for their practitioner journals, so should we.
For that matter, an "invitation" to publish demonstrates a positive reputation. Why does that receive such a low value in most rankings? Sometimes the "blind" referee process yields an unbiased assessment of the quality of work. Often the "blind" refereed approach is often not very blind, when others in the field can recognize each other's work without the name attached. An editorial board that does not know the author (but has the author's name) seems to be as unbiased (or more so) than referees who can readily guess who the author is.
Carol Miller
Missouri State University
________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk on behalf of Steve Salbu
Sent: Tue 5/5/2009 2:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ALSB response to journal rankings issue
Thanks, Connie. I like the idea a lot, and would be glad to participate if there's room for me.
I can tell you these journal lists aren't liked by many people in other disciplines in business either, and there was widespread relief at Georgia Tech when we put an end to The List. (I use caps because I like the dramatic effect.)
Lists are an especially bad fit for us in legal environment of business. For example, international law articles aren't likely to get into the mainstream law reviews at the many top law schools that have international law journals, so a list of 4-5 "A" journals doesn't work even in theory.
On top of that, the review process in law school law reviews makes the lists especially pernicious. This is a delicate matter, though, because it evokes the whole issue of law review processes, which themselves create unique opportunities and challenges for us, and are easily misunderstood and suspected.
This question affects everything from merit raises (assuming we ever see those again) to tenure and promotion. It is too important for our organization to ignore, and if we were able to come to consensus and develop a position, it could help innumerable ALSB people.
A session in Denver could be a great first start, to see if consensus and a position is possible.
Steve
Steve Salbu
Dean and Stephen P. Zelnak Chair
College of Management
Georgia Institute of Technology
--- On Tue, 5/5/09, Bagley, Connie <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Bagley, Connie <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: ALSB response to journal rankings issue
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 1:20 PM
I think that having such a roundtable would be a good idea, esp. if we could get our ALSB deans, Steve Salbu and Caryn Beck-Dudley, and AASCB rep Ginny Maurer to participate. Connie
Constance E. Bagley
Professor in the Practice of Law and Management
YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
135 Prospect Street
P.O. Box 208200
New Haven, CT 06520-8200
203.432.8398 (voice)
203.432.9994 (fax)
[log in to unmask]
Physical Office: 56 Hillhouse, Room 306
New Haven CT 06511
Assistant: Kaela Heaslip
203.432.7514
[log in to unmask]
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Daniel Herron
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ALSB response to journal rankings issue
Lucien has suggested to the Exec Comm that he chair a roundatable discussion in Denver on this issue of journal rankings. The title would be "Resolved: The ALSB Should Establish Legal Research Standards."
Comments? Suggestions? Ideas?
Dan Herron
ALSB Exec. Secr'y
________________________________
HotmailŪ has ever-growing storage! Don't worry about storage limits. Check it out. <http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage1_052009>
|
