Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
MetadataShow full item record
CitationAssessment and Development Matters
DescriptionPractitioner based research report.
SponsorsUniversity of Worcester
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Development and validation of the career competencies indicator (CCI)Francis-Smyth, J., ;Hasse, S., E.,; Thomas,; Steele, C; Haase, S.; Thomas, E.; Steele, C. (Sage, 2013-01-03)This article describes the development and validation of the Career Competencies Indicator (CCI); a 43-item measure to assess career competencies (CCs). Following an extensive literature review, a comprehensive item generation process involving consultation with subject matter experts, a pilot study and a factor analytic study on a large sample yielded a seven-factor structure; goal setting and career planning, self-knowledge, job performance, career-related skills, knowledge of (office) politics, career guidance and networking, and feedback seeking and self-presentation. Coefficient α reliabilities of the seven dimensions ranged from .93 to .81. Convergent validity was established by showing that all 7-CCs loaded substantially onto a single second-order factor representing the general CC construct. Discriminant validity was established by showing less than chance similarity between the 7-CCI subscales and the Big Five personality scales. The results also suggested criterion-related validity of the CCI, since CCs were found to jointly predict objective and subjective career success.
Greater female first author citation advantages do not associate with reduced or reducing gender disparities in academiaThelwall, Michael; Sud, Pardeep (MIT Press, 2020-09-04)Ongoing problems attracting women into many Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects have many potential explanations. This article investigates whether possible under-citation of women associates with lower proportions of, or increases in, women in a subject. It uses six million articles published 1996-2012 across up to 331 fields in six mainly English-speaking countries: Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, UK and USA. The proportion of female first and last authored articles in each year was calculated and 4968 regressions were run to detect first author gender advantages in field normalised article citations. The proportion of female first authors in each field correlated highly between countries and the female first author citation advantages derived from the regressions correlated moderately to strongly between countries, so both are relatively field-specific. There was a weak tendency in the USA and New Zealand for female citation advantages to be stronger in fields with fewer women, after excluding small fields, but no other association evidence. There was no evidence of female citation advantages or disadvantages to be a cause or effect of changes in the proportions of women in a field for any country. Inappropriate uses of career-level citations are a likelier source of gender inequities.
Mid-career field switches reduce gender disparities in academic publishingThelwall, Mike (Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2020-05-06)The continuing low proportions of women in most STEM fields in many countries is an ongoing concern, with no agreement about the fundamental causes or effective remedial actions. One previous study has found that professional women are more likely to switch from a (not necessarily academic) STEM career than professional women in comparable non-STEM jobs, reducing the overall numbers of STEM women. This study investigates whether the same is true for long term academics, and hence could partly account for current gender disparities. Based on the Scopus subject categories of the first and last five publications 2001–2018 of people in 31 countries with publishing careers starting after 2000, female researchers switching fields mid-career tend to move to fields with fewer women, relative to men switching fields mid-career. Thus, mid-career field changes within academia do not help to explain continuing gender disparities in publishing and other explanations must be sought.