Foreword by Maryellen Weimer vii Preface to the Second Edition xi About the Author xxi 1 Using Writing to Promote Thinking: A Busy Professor s Guide to the Whole Book 1 PART 1 UNDERSTANDING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THINKING AND WRITING 2 How Writing Is Related to Critical Thinking 17 3 Helping Writers Think Rhetorically 39 4 Using a Range of Genres to Extend Critical Thinking and Deepen Learning 52 5 Dealing with Issues of Grammar and Correctness 66 PART 2 DESIGNING PROBLEM-BASED ASSIGNMENTS 6 Formal Writing Assignments 89 7 Informal, Exploratory Writing Activities 120 PART 3 COACHING STUDENTS AS LEARNERS, THINKERS, AND WRITERS 8 Designing Tasks to Promote Active Thinking and Learning 149 9 Helping Students Read Difficult Texts 161 10 Using Small Groups to Coach Thinking and Teach Disciplinary Argument 183 11 Bringing More Critical Thinking into Lectures and Discussions 202 12 Enhancing Learning and Critical Thinking in Essay Exams 211 13 Designing and Sequencing Assignments to Teach Undergraduate Research 224 PART 4 READING, COMMENTING ON, AND GRADING STUDENT WRITING 14 Using Rubrics to Develop and Apply Grading Criteria 267 15 Coaching the Writing Process and Handling the Paper Load 290 16 Writing Comments on Students Papers 317 References 337 Index 353

Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom

Increased efforts to diversify science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education in the United States have drastically increased the number of studies offering insight into the exp...

/pdf/the-status-of-women-in-stem-in-higher-education-a-review-of-r1ggtn50of.pdf

The Status of Women in STEM in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature 2007–2017

We aimed to develop an in-depth understanding of quality criteria for scholarly journals by analyzing journals and publishers indexed in blacklists of predatory journals and whitelists of legitimate journals and the lists' inclusion criteria. To quantify content overlaps between blacklists and whitelists, we employed the Jaro-Winkler string metric. To identify topics addressed by the lists' inclusion criteria and to derive their concepts, we conducted qualitative coding. We included two blacklists (Beall's and Cabells Scholarly Analytics') and two whitelists (the Directory of Open Access Journals' and Cabells Scholarly Analytics'). The number of journals per list ranged from 1,404 to 12,357, and the number of publishers ranged from 473 to 5,638. Seventy-two journals and 42 publishers were included in both a blacklist and a whitelist. Seven themes were identified in the inclusion criteria: (i) peer review; (ii) editorial services; (iii) policy; (iv) business practices; (v) publishing, archiving, and access; (vi) website; and (vii) indexing and metrics. Business practices accounted for almost half of the blacklists' criteria, whereas whitelists gave more emphasis to criteria related to policy. Criteria could be allocated to four concepts: (i) transparency, (ii) ethics, (iii) professional standards, and (iv) peer review and other services. Whitelists gave most weight to transparency. Blacklists focused on ethics and professional standards. Whitelist criteria were easier to verify than those used in blacklists. Both types gave little emphasis to quality of peer review. Overall, the results show that there is overlap of journals and publishers between blacklists and whitelists. Lists differ in their criteria for quality and the weight given to different dimensions of quality. Aspects that are central but difficult to verify receive little attention.IMPORTANCE Predatory journals are spurious scientific outlets that charge fees for editorial and publishing services that they do not provide. Their lack of quality assurance of published articles increases the risk that unreliable research is published and thus jeopardizes the integrity and credibility of research as a whole. There is increasing awareness of the risks associated with predatory publishing, but efforts to address this situation are hampered by the lack of a clear definition of predatory outlets. Blacklists of predatory journals and whitelists of legitimate journals have been developed but not comprehensively examined. By systematically analyzing these lists, this study provides insights into their utility and delineates the different notions of quality and legitimacy in scholarly publishing used. This study contributes to a better understanding of the relevant concepts and provides a starting point for the development of a robust definition of predatory journals.

Blacklists and Whitelists To Tackle Predatory Publishing: a Cross-Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis

Warnings against publishing in predatory journals are plentiful and so are the suggested solutions to the problem. The existing studies all confirm that authors of articles published in potential predatory journals are typically young, inexperienced and from Asia or Africa. To what extend we can consider the problem negligible is determined by the impact they are having on the scholarly communication in terms of publications and citations. The existing literature can provide more information about the former than the latter. This paper is an analysis of potential predatory journals as well as potential poor scientific standards journals. Citations to 124 potential predatory journals and poor scientific standards journals are looked up in Scopus and the citing authors analysed in regards to geographic location, publications and citations. The results show that the characteristics of the citing author indeed resemble those of the publishing author. Implications for recommendations and future research are discussed.

/pdf/are-predatory-journals-undermining-the-credibility-of-12jwysnict.pdf

Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers

The changing world of scholarly communication and the emerging new wave of ‘Open Science’ or ‘Open Research’ has brought to light a number of controversial and hotly debated topics. Evidence-based rational debate is regularly drowned out by misinformed or exaggerated rhetoric, which does not benefit the evolving system of scholarly communication. This article aims to provide a baseline evidence framework for ten of the most contested topics, in order to help frame and move forward discussions, practices, and policies. We address issues around preprints and scooping, the practice of copyright transfer, the function of peer review, predatory publishers, and the legitimacy of ‘global’ databases. These arguments and data will be a powerful tool against misinformation across wider academic research, policy and practice, and will inform changes within the rapidly evolving scholarly publishing system.

/pdf/ten-hot-topics-around-scholarly-publishing-kpijjqf5kr.pdf

Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing

Jeffrey Beall’s blog listing of potential predatory journals and publishers, as well as his Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access (OA) Publishers are often looked at as tools to help researchers avoid publishing in predatory journals. While these Criteria has brought a greater awareness of OA predatory journals, these tools alone should not be used as the only source in determining the quality of a scholarly journal. Employing a three-person independent judgment making panel, this study demonstrates the subjective nature of Beall’s Criteria by applying his Criteria to both OA and non-OA Library and Information Science journals (LIS), to demonstrate that traditional peer-reviewed journals could be considered predatory. Many of these LIS journals are considered as top-tier publications in the field and used when evaluating researcher’s publication history for promotion and tenure.

/pdf/format-aside-applying-beall-s-criteria-to-assess-the-23q5s6iuhj.pdf

Format Aside: Applying Beall's Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals

This study identifies developments relevant to new academic librarians' perceptions of librarianship. Through use of the long interview and document analysis, the researchers developed a grounded theory consisting of six categories that weigh upon novice librarians' perceptions of the profession: (1) deciding upon a career, (2) experiencing graduate school, (3) continuing education, (4) defining the work, (5) evaluating the work, and (6) (re)imagining the future. The categories are analyzed to theorize how perceptions shift from the decision to pursue a new career through the first few years of professional work, and these processes' educational implications are considered.

New Academic Librarians and Their Perceptions of the Profession

Purpose – This qualitative study aims to analyse veteran academic librarians’ perceptions of librarianship to develop a grounded theory that models this group’s understandings of the profession. In addition, this study compares its findings to a previous grounded theory study that modelled novice academic librarians’ perceptions of the profession. Design/methodology/approach – Using the long interview technique, the analysts interviewed 15 veteran academic librarians, i.e. those with 10 or more years continuous experience as professional academic librarians, who work in Texas universities and four-year colleges. Qualitative analytical methods were used to develop a substantive grounded theory from the data. Findings – Two theoretical categories emerged that model academic librarian perceptions of the profession: orienting self (and others) to a shifting profession and driving change in the field. These categories depict academic librarianship as a profession focussed on change, and the theory valuates bot...

Professional identity: a grounded theory study of veteran academic librarians

Purpose – The Research Committee at Texas A&M University (TAMU) Libraries provides a model of tenure support that includes funding of research projects and an annual Research Forum. The purpose of this article is to review these support mechanisms and their outcomes. An argument for the benefit of such a model is presented.Design/methodology/approach – Tenure support provided by the Research Committee and the broader supportive environment in which it functions is described. Each supported project was reviewed to determine its outcome (publication or conference presentation).Findings – This model of support benefits tenure‐track librarians at Texas A&M University Libraries.Practical implications – This model of support would likely benefit other academic libraries that require librarians to engage in scholarly communication. Thus this paper should be of interest to academic librarians and to library managers seeking to enhance tenure support for their faculty librarians.Originality/value – Much of the lit...

/pdf/tenure-support-mechanisms-provided-by-the-faculty-research-5chdt8pukx.pdf

Laura Sare

Papers

Format Aside: Applying Beall's Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals

New Academic Librarians and Their Perceptions of the Profession

Professional identity: a grounded theory study of veteran academic librarians

Tenure support mechanisms provided by the Faculty Research Committee at Texas A&M University Libraries: A model for academic libraries

The use of departmental journal lists in promotion and tenure decisions at American research universities