Evaluation by means of citation patterns can be successful only insofar as published papers and their bibliographies reflect scientific activity and nothing else. Such an innocent descrip tion is becoming less and less tenable. The present scientific explosion gave rise to more than a proportional pub lication explosion, which not only re flects the scientific explosion but has its own dynamics and vicious circles. Publication of results is probably the main means of accomplishing the al most impossible task of accounting for time and money spent on research. Inevitably, this puts a premium on quantity at the expense of quality, and, as with any other type of inflation, the problem worsens: the more papers are written, the less they count for and the greater is the pressure to publish more. What makes matters worse is the fact that the sheer volume of the"litera ture" makes it increasingly difficult to separate what is worthwhile from the rest. Critical reviews have become somewhat of a rarity, and editorial judgment is usually relegated to ref erees, who are contemporaries and, per haps, competitors of the authors-a situation which has its own undesirable implications (11, 18). It requires little imagination to discover other vicious circles, all arising from distortion of the primary reasons for publishing the results of scientific inquiry. There are, it is true, signs of ad justment to this crisis, partly due to some easing of the pressure to pub lish at all costs, and partly due to the readers' changing attitudes toward the flood of publications. An increasing amount of research is now being car ried out in the form of collective proj ects in large institutions where publica tion is no longer the standard method of accounting for individual work. At the same time there is apparent an in creasing tendency for scientific journals to polarize into the relatively few leading ones which carry important informa tion and the many subsidiary journals which serve as vehicles for interim lo cal accounting and, in a way, sub stitute for detailed intradepartmental re ports. This division is a result not of some arbitrary decree but of normal competition between journals, as a re sult of which, however, the strong usual ly get stronger and the weak get weaker. Were it not for these changes and also for a striking improvement in abstracting, indexing, and alerting serv ices, most research workers would have found long ago that, even in their own specialized fields, new information is accumulating faster than it can be sorted out. These developments can pro vide only a temporary reprieve, so long as there remains a strong incentive to publish the greatest possible number of papers. A new scale of values based on citations is by no means infallible or, in many cases, even fair, but at least it provides an alternative to the existing one, which is at the root of the crisis. It might, of course, be asked whether wide acceptance of such new stand ards would not lead to deliberate abuses. A little reflection shows that the syste...
Attrition issues with undergraduate engineering students, while concerning, are well documented. However, little research has explored post-graduation attrition. U.S. Department of Labor statistics suggest that as many as 45 percent of workers with engineering degrees are not employed in engineering jobs. As China and India increasingly compete with the U.S. in the production of engineers and enrollment in U.S. engineering programs continues to lag behind other four-year degrees, training a consistent number of quality engineers is a critical issue for the American workforce. Anecdotal evidence of problematic post-graduation attrition—that is, attrition related to controllable factors in students’ educational experiences that push them away from engineering careers, as opposed to attrition of students who wish to creatively apply their skills in other occupations—coupled with the need for engineers in the workforce motivated this research. This study investigated the post-graduation plans of senior level mechanical engineering students at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Over the course of one year, two surveys were administered to 169 students, a mix of graduating seniors and students in a Senior Capstone Project course. Students were classified into four groups based on their post-graduation plans: 1. Pursuers (35% of total sample): students pursuing an engineering career immediately after graduation without reservations or plans to leave the field in the future. 2. Returners (22% of total sample): students not pursuing an engineering career immediately after graduation but with plans for an engineering career in the future. 3. Pursuers with Reservations (34% of total sample): students pursuing an engineering career immediately after graduation who currently had reservations about their career choice and/or planned to leave the field in the future. 4. Leavers (9% of total sample): students not pursuing an engineering career immediately after graduation with no plans for an engineering career in the future. The results indicated that 65% of the sample had, at least, some reservations about pursuing an engineering career. Results also suggested five factors that may influence post-graduation attrition: 1. Feeling prepared to pursue an engineering career, 2. Internship experiences, 3. Senior Capstone Project course experiences, 4. Satisfaction with the quality of instruction in the engineering program, and 5. Career values related to financial rewards and enjoying co-workers.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.