Developing and Leading the Quality Enhancement Planning Committee
Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, Vol: 7, Issue: 1
2009
- 71Usage
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage71
- Downloads54
- Abstract Views17
Article Description
Quality enhancement in higher education is rapidly emerging as a major national and international issue. Rahman (2005) identifies an international movement to promote quality enhancement through “accreditation councils, degree program standardization, quality enhancement cells, quality faculty, and curriculum review.” According to Rahman, the movement is intended to develop “a vision for the higher education system with quality, equity, and efficiency.” Rahman also points out that the United States faces the need to evaluate the validity and quality of accreditation processes in light of the increase in dot-com universities and diploma mills. El-Khawas (1998) indicates that world-wide attention has shifted to an expanded focus on quality improvement in both undergraduate and graduate level programs. In the United States federal and state funding have become the rewards for attainment of recognized accreditations. In 1998, the Commission on Higher Education (CHE) shifted the oversight of the reporting process to programmatic, national, and regional accrediting agencies.
Bibliographic Details
Fort Hays State University
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know