NEGOTIATING THE TRAJECTORY IN RESEARCH, PUBLICATION AND PROMOTION IN THE UNIVERSITY OF - PowerPoint Presentation

NEGOTIATING THE TRAJECTORY IN RESEARCH, PUBLICATION AND PROMOTION IN THE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA Pat Uche Okpoko M aiden Faculty of Arts Lecture Series October 9, 2018

Outline Introduction Background Doing Research in the Contemporary World Basic Qualitative Research Characteristics The Research Process Problem Formulation Research Design Validity and Reliability Coding Data Analysis Constructing Social Systems Model or Social Explanations Soft wares for Data Analysis … Understanding the Trajectory Publishing in Quality Journals Conclusion and Recommendations .

Introduction Every generation of academic staff has always complained about promotion. The Complaints Delay in the release of the outcome, particularly for the professorial cadre , Stringent provisions of the statutes, None payment of accruable arrears and so on, Thomson Reuters impact factor and its shadows. Questions Do the provisions of the statutes run counter to universally accepted standards? Are they objective , pragmatic and realizable.

Universal Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) Academics the world over perform two pronged duties - teaching and research. Both functions are believed to be complementary. research supports teaching in some ways, what is often researched upon is oftentimes inspired by teaching. Publication brings to the scientific community and the public the outcome of these experiences. These are the KPIs for academics globally. In some climes, the progression and remunerations are not uniform, but tied to individual contributions to knowledge epitomized by research and publication.

Background HistoryThe Yellow Book guides promotion of academic staff in the University of Nigeria. Review history The first review took place in April 1982, Followed closely by the second in 1984 due to the request of a Visitation Panel, The third edition in March 1994. Following the challenges posed by aspects of the Yellow Book, an addendum was added in 1997 to address them. On February 14, 2006, the 4th edition took effect, and Subsequently the 5th edition in March 2015.

Basic Features and Challenges The “pyramid structure”, in which the space available became narrower as one ascended the academic ladder. Each department was assigned slots according to its establishment. The establishment was so limited that many academics waited endlessly to be promoted. Progression depended less on one’s publications, and more on available establishment. One either waited for the person occupying the last available space to retire or die before one’s ascent. Some staff left out of frustration to the ministries and parastatals. Globalization of pyramid structure T he process was globalized along faculty lines in 1995. M any staff got their promotion after many endless years. T he scramble for the new openings, and the indifference to article publication occasioned by the pyramid structure, resulted in new challenges. self-publishing, with articles published in staff offices ; manipulation and/or manufacture of acceptance letters, weakening peer review mechanism occasioned by the gradual erosion of official secret policy underlining the process.

Impact Factor Regime without specified bodies Basic featuresThe quantitative measurement of the relative standing of publications and creative works, referred to as weighting factor enshrined in the recent edition. Improvement in the relative scores for double or multiple authors.No specified impact factor rating body was adopted by the 4th edition of the Yellow Book as prima facie for promotion of academics from senior lecturer to professor. ChallengesIts hurried introduction and the attendant poor level of awareness about its provisions, Faculties implemented it haphazardly as the interpretation of the contents of the new rule became a matter for regular debate amongst members of the appraisal committees. The classification of publications into international, national, local, reputable and the like also constituted its own problem. Indeed , the criteria for determining whether a journal was reputable or not also generated debate and varied interpretations. In some cases, members were completely out of tune with the new reality.

Impact Factor Regime with specified bodies, but without statutory backing From 2009, two impact factor rating bodies, namely Thomson Reuters and Scopus, were specified as the minimum benchmark for appraisal or promotion into the senior cadre. This was informed by the continued abuse of the promotion process by some recalcitrant staff. The process was so-abused, that all manner of impact factor rating bodies, including those that published articles overnight and without peer review, surfaced. Quality was jettisoned on the altar of number. Research with which the academia is associated was thrown overboard. Nonetheless, the contents of the 4th edition of the Yellow Book were not modified to reflect the specified impact factor bodies. The two bodies were merely adopted in principle and used at the whims and caprices of the administration. It was therefore subject to abuse.

Impact factor Regime with specified bodies and statutory backingRetained Thomson Reuters and Scopus or Scimago or SNIP impact factors as the benchmarks for promotion of senior academics. Specified the number of articles that must be published before aspiring for promotion to different cadres. Specified the minimum number of articles that must be published either as first-named or corresponding authors. Assigned minimum points to conference attendance, and Removed dichotomy among the above impact factors for the promotion to senior lectureship cadre only. Provided an additional option for staff specializing in Nigerian languages. Challenges the snail speed with which some journals with the above impact factors publish the exorbitant fees charged per article, the paucity of such journals for researchers in the humanities, law and education, Thomson Reuters and its shadows have become a nightmare for scholars in these parts. The minimum conference attendance provision has inadvertently elongated the statutory waiting period from three years to five years particularly for those that gained employment as lecturer 1.

Notable Slogans and Quotes “Publish or perish”“Walk like a professor…”“The tortuous pyramid”“The fear of Thomson Reuters is the beginning of academic wisdom”“A new generation of Igbo torture”“Put my name”

Doing Research in the Contemporary World Research is essentially a systematic way of gathering and analyzing data. It is an attempt to solve societal problems or fill gaps in knowledge identified in one’s field. In the contemporary world, such work, be it quantitative or qualitative, must be done systematically, otherwise it will attract negative reactions from reviewers and therefore will not be published. Variants of qualitative research participant observation, indepth interviews, documentary research, focus group discussion, case study and participatory approaches of which rapid rural appraisal and participatory rural appraisal are more commonly used .

Basic Qualitative Research Characteristics1. Design is generally based on a social construct. 2. Sample sizes are generally small and can be as small as one. 3. Its focus is broad and holistic, with emphasis laid on details.4. Research questions guide the process. 5. Data collection involves interview, observation, and/or archival (contents) data. 6. Interpretation is based on a combination of researcher perspective and data collected. 7. It uses dialectic and inductive reasoning and the basic elements of analysis are words.

Problem Formulation (i) Choice of research topic, (ii) Clear statement of the problem,(iii) Formulation of research questions,(iv) Specification of research objectives, (v)Outlining the significance or anticipated contributions, and (vi) A review of related literature.

Research Design Qualitative research designs are not as rooted and structured as in quantitative research, They are a continuous process which requires that the researcher continually thinks through the strategy to be adopted, the instruments to be used, access and sampling frame, method of analysis and how these answer the research questions. Guiding Principles:Design: It is necessary to explain how the data is to be collected, the instrument to be used, how it will be used and the means for analyzing the data collected.Sampling and Access: This relates to the number of people to be interviewed or incidents to be observed, the number of institutions to be visited, the number of locations to be studied, and why, how to gain access, what guides the choice of number of people and institutions, why this particular number, and how the sample will be stratified. Handling and Analyzing Data: This deals with the kind of information you wish to present and how, the analytical principle(s) that will be adopted, how these relate to the sample strategy and method ( Mason, 2002 ).

Validity and Reliability Validity is concerned with the “truth” or “falsity” of an observation with respect to an external reality”. A research is adjudged valid and reliable:if the data is representative of the various segments of the research subjects; if each interviewee, asked the same questions by a different researcher, would…repeat the same answers; and if the data is applicable beyond the bounds of a given report (Clarke et al 1998 in Walder, 2000: 3).

Coding Coding is a process of organizing data by topics, themes or cases. It is both a categorizing and an analysing process, which sets out to group and regroup data in ordered categories using defined criteria. Steps in Qualitative Coding (a) Spell out the objectives and important research questions to be answered and issues to be resolved. (b) Decide on the way of organizing, or classifying the subject matter that best suits the research objectives.(c) Set up or develop appropriate classes, categories or units for grouping the contents of the materials. (d) Identify other alternative words and phrases that serve as indicators , pointers or cues to the various established categories. (e) Allocate the contents to the categories.

Data Analysis The analysis of data is a continuous process. It starts during the data collection stage.Stages (1) The creation of files and coding of field notes; (2) Formulating hypothesis and noting of important themes throughout the study; (3) Coding the data into separate incidents; (4) Summarizing for each incident, a record of the observed behavior; (5) Correlating the information obtained during the various processes, and (6) Reporting and analysing them in relation to the research questions and in the light of existing literature using words.

Constructing Social Systems Model or Social Explanations Qualitative research is about producing social explanations, or addressing intellectual puzzles.It entails engaging the data and those to whom the arguments are directed in some kind of discourse as follows:How social process, social phenomena and social relationships and so on have developed;How social phenomena and processes operate or are constituted;How social phenomena compare in time and space;The causal and predictive relationships between one social phenomenon and another (Mason, 2002).

Soft wares for Data Analysis Nvivo: This is a computer software designed to sort, classify, examine relationships, structure and develop models for analyzing non-numerical data. ATLAS ti: This is a computer programme that can be used for coding and analyzing transcripts and field notes in qualitative research. It is also invaluable in literature review, data management, creation of network diagrams and so on. CDC Ez-text: This software is designed to create, manage and analyze semi-structured qualitative data.LEXIMANCER: This is a tool used for analyzing textual collections and documents. ENDNOTE : This is a software that makes references and bibliographies seamless to produce when writing articles.

Plagiarism TrackersThere are also soft wares to check plagiarism so as to protect the copyrights of scholars and creative artists.some error margins of 15 to 20% are acceptable. Grammarly KeyboardThis is a computer application that uses online facilitation to check grammatical errors, contextual spellings, vocabulary use and punctuation marks so as to ensure an error-free and seamless writing. The app enhances the quality of our works, improves our skills and helps understand avoidable mistakes in subsequent works.However, since this app works effortlessly with other apps, its critics wonder if it will not compromise sensitive passwords.

Understanding the Trajectory We need to engage ourselves in three kinds of dialogue to understand the trajectory: the complementarity of teaching and research, the intrinsic linkage of the duo to publication andthe convergence of the trio. There is need to understand the interaction amongst the three variables and how they connect and translate to promotion. The trio can be said to be interdependent and contingent on the action of each other. This interconnectedness is expressed in the model below.

Teaching and publication have their weightings in the Yellow Book, but research is the hub around which they revolve. Research is therefore fundamental to our success in this endeavour as no meaningful teaching takes place without research, neither can any article be meaningful for publication without research. Publication in itself can also enhance our skills in research since the review processes and continued efforts back and forth by authors help to shape and sharpen them as they proceed. Criteria for promotion of academic staff(1) Academic Qualifications(2) Publications and creative works(3) Teaching and professional experience(4) Conferences(5) Administrative experience and other contribution

Publishing in Quality Journals grammatical considerationsconceptualization of the research, the audience to which an article or research appeals to,the findings must have policy or practical implications that are meaningful beyond the immediate context of the research, Can the findings be generalized, replicated and used to address global or regional problems or both? The method employed to execute the research must also be well stated, and in clear and unambiguous terms. P-J Eze (2014) outlined the reasons for rejection of articles by editors as follows: poor conceptualizations, in terms of the building blocks, assumptions or theories, ( 2) methodological weakness, which has to do with the rigour , clarity and appropriateness of the methods employed to achieve stated objectives, ( 3) inappropriate bibliographical protocol, in terms of the journals referencing styles and preferences, and ( 4) poor use of language, which considers whether the message has effectively been communicated in grammatical terms and the packaging of the write up.

Proposed structure or guide Abstract, which must be shown to have a problem statement, research objective, methods employed and findings. Some recommendations can also be presented here.Introduction: This encapsulates the problem and objectives or research questions.Literature review: This can stand alone or be included in the introduction. Strive to minimize the definition of concepts, but give meaning to your work using empirical or case study reports.Materials and Methods: Here the study domain and approach adopted should be explicitly stated. In this case, you are not expected to regurgitate what you read in literatures, instead effort is made to state what you wish to do and how you intend to proceed. The study domain or area can also be treated separately. Presentation of Data or Results: This represents an account of what you found in the field without being judgmental. Discussion: This is an attempt to support the findings with literary works by making reference to the literatures reviewed. Theoretical suppositions can be used to buttress the discussion. All this must be done in line with the research objectives.Conclusion: Must be drawn from the work and not your general notion on the subject. Recommendations should also be derived from the research.

Conclusion A number of considerations informed the decision to review the Yellow Book through time. to introduce more objective criteria for the assessment of academic staff. to ameliorate its stringent conditions as typified by the globalization of the pyramid structure and removal of the dichotomy between impact factor rating bodies while establishing prima facie for senior lecturers. to block the loopholes exploited by recalcitrant staff to circumvent the promotion process. Nevertheless, while we recommend that the university administration promotes global best practices and national appeal in both the contents and processes of promotion, we must remind ourselves that we need to play by the rules always. The current “put my name syndrome”, in which staff contribute little or no idea to publications they purportedly co-authored, must stop. Each author must be seen to have made an input in each article published even when two authors or more agree to work individually and produce more papers.

Recommendations Mentorship and capacity building programmes at regular intervals. Collaborative research with supervisors, colleagues and other specialists.Revitalization of faculty research groups along with the establishment of new ones with purposeful and pragmatic contents. Linkage of the university library with other university data bases across the globe to make research materials readily available and make research seamless. Strengthening of local journals to make them competitive and in addition have the required impact factors . Funding of researches and conferences through a seamless and responsible process. Attraction of funds by professors to support budding researchers in their various fields. Removal of the dichotomy between Thomson Reuters and other impact factor rating bodies for all cadres.

Thank You