Academic Mobility Assessment: the Strengths and Limitations of Different Approaches
https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2020.04.040
Abstract
The article discusses methodological approaches to measuring academic mobility when a researcher changes his place of work within the academic environment. Researchers’ academic mobility is a factor of their productivity, it provides knowledge transfer, renews scientific ideas, and in general contributes to the active development of higher education and science. However, in Russia the phenomenon of academic mobility is not studied sufficiently and demands an estimation of both mobility as a whole, and its factors, and its consequences. There are not many data sources on mobility, and getting corresponding information is often problematic – these factors make it difficult to empirically measure researchers’ academic mobility. This review might be the first step towards filling the gap in empirical research on academic mobility in Russia. The author suggests a detailed analysis of academic mobility assessment methodologies, including surveys, CVs, bibliometric and combined approaches. The article summarizes the experience of practical approaches application, identifies advantages and disadvantages of each of them, and provides their comparative analysis. The author comes to the conclusion that in the absence of a unique approach to measuring the academic mobility, the bibliometric approach, which provides large representative samplings, research results reproducibility, and greater possibilities of mobility factors assessment, best meets the goals of modern research on causality of academic mobility. This paper should help those who study science and higher education in selecting the most suitable approach to academic mobility measurement and in considering a number of nuances of each approach as practically applied in the research planning process.
Supporting agencies: The article was prepared within the framework of the Basic Research Program at HSE University.
About the Author
V. I. Kryachko
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Victoria I. Kryachko – PhD Student, Faculty of Economic Science; Junior Research Fellow, Center for Institutional Studies
20 Myasnitskaya str, Moscow, 101000
+7 495 772-95-90 ext. 126-63
References
1. Teichler U. Academic Mobility and Migration: What We Know and What We Do Not Know. European Review, 2015, vol. 23, pp. 6–37. doi 10.1017/S1062798714000787. (In Eng.).
2. Ackers L. Moving People and Knowledge: Scientific Mobility in the European Union. International Migration, 2005, vol. 43, nr 5, pp. 99–131. doi 10.1111/j.1468-2435.2005.00343.x. (In Eng.).
3. Bolli T., Schlapfer J. Job Mobility, Peer Effects, and Research Productivity in Economics. Scientometrics, 2015, vol. 104, nr 3, pp. 629–650. doi 10.1007/s11192-015-1625-3. (In Eng.).
4. Czaika M., Orazbayev S. The Globalisation of Scientific Mobility, 1970–2014. Applied Geography, 2018, vol. 96, pp. 1–10. doi 10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.04.017. (In Eng.).
5. Ejermo O., Fassio C., Kallstrom J. Does Mobility across Universities Raise Scientific Productivity? Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 2020, vol. 82, nr 3, pp. 603–624. doi 10.1111/obes.12346. (In Eng.).
6. Greek M., Jonsmoen K. M. Transnational Academic Mobility in Universities: the Impact on a Departmental and an Interpersonal Level. Higher Education, 2021, nr 81, pp. 591–606. doi 10.1007/s10734-020-00558-7. (In Eng.).
7. Morano-Foadi S. Scientific Mobility, Career Progression, and Excellence in the European Research Area. International Migration, 2005, vol. 43, nr 5, pp. 133–162. doi 10.1111/j.1468-2435.2005.00344.x. (In Eng.).
8. Horta H., Yudkevich M. The Role of Academic Inbreeding in Developing Higher Education Systems: Challenges and Possible Solutions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016, vol. 113, pp. 363–372. doi 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.06.039. (In Eng.).
9. Gorelova O. Mezhvuzovskaya mobil’nost’ prepodavatelei rossiiskikh vuzov [Cross-University Mobility of University Teaching Staff in Russia]. Voprosy obrazovaniya [Educational Studies], 2016, nr 2, pp. 229–258. doi 10.17323/1814-9545-2016-2-229-258. (In Russ.).
10. Heitor M., Horta H., Mendonfa J. Developing Human Capital and Research Capacity: Science Policies Promoting Brain Gain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2014, vol. 82, nr 1, pp. 6–22. doi 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.008. (In Eng.).
11. Yudkevich M., Altbach P., Rumbley L. International Faculty in Higher Education, New York, Routledge, 2017, 310 p. doi 10.4324/9781315543437. (In Eng.).
12. Meyer J. B, Kaplan D., Charum J. Scientific Nomadism and the New Geopolitics of Knowledge. International Social Science Journal, 2001, vol. 53, iss. 168, pp. 309–321. doi 10.1111/1468-2451.00317. (In Eng.).
13. Appelt S., Beuzekom B., Galindo-Rueda F., Pinho R. Which Factors Influence the International Mobility of Research Scientists? In: A. Geuna (ed.), Global Mobility of Research Scientists, Academic Press, 2015, pp. 177–213. doi 10.1016/b978-0-12-801396-0.00007-7. (In Eng.).
14. Liu J., Yin Z., Lyu W., Lin S. Does Money Accelerate Faculty Mobility? Survey Findings from 11 Research Universities in China. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2019, vol. 11, nr 24, pp. 1–15. doi 10.3390/SU11246925. (In Eng.).
15. Marwell G., Rosenfeld R., Spilerman S. Geographic Constraints on Women’s Careers in Academia. Science, 1979, vol. 205, pp. 1225–1231. doi 10.1126/science.472739. (In Eng.).
16. Leemann R. J. Gender Inequalities in Transnational Academic Mobility and the Ideal Type of Academic Entrepreneur. Discourse, 2010, vol. 31, nr 5, pp. 605–625. doi 10.1080/01596306.2010.516942. (In Eng.).
17. Ryazanova O., McNamara P. Choices and Consequences: Impact of Mobility on Research-Career Capital and Promotion in Business Schools. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2019, vol. 18, nr 2, pp. 186–212. doi 10.5465/amle.2017.0389. (In Eng.).
18. Van Heeringen A., Dijkwel P. A. The Relationships Between Age, Mobility and Scientific Productivity. Part II: Effect of Age on Productivity. Scientometrics, 1987, vol. 11, nr 5, pp. 281–293. doi 10.1007/BF02279350. (In Eng.).
19. Fernandez-Zubieta A., Geuna A., Lawson C. Researchers’ Mobility and its Impact on Scientific Productivity. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2244760 (accessed 08.05.2020). doi 10.2139/ssrn.2244760. (In Eng.).
20. Van Noorden R. Global Mobility: Science on the Move. Nature, 2012, vol. 490, nr 7420, pp. 326–329. doi 10.1038/490326a. (In Eng.).
21. Sugimoto C. R., Robinson-Garcia N., Murray D. S. et al. Scientists Have Most Impact When They’re Free to Move. Nature, 2017, vol. 550, pp. 29–31. doi 10.1038/550029a. (In Eng.).
22. Dutton J. K. The Impact of Inbreeding and Immobility on the Professional Role and Scholarity Performance of Academic Scientists. Available at: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED196714 (accessed 12.04.2020). (In Eng.).
23. Hargens L. L. Patterns of Mobility of New Ph.D.’s Among American Academic Institutions. Sociology of Education, 1969, vol. 42, nr 1, pp. 18–37. doi 10.2307/2111806. (In Eng.).
24. Sandstrom U. Combining Curriculum Vitae and Bibliometric Analysis: Mobility, Gender and Research Performance. Research Evaluation, 2009, vol. 18, nr 2, pp. 135–142. doi 10.3152/095820209X441790. (In Eng.).
25. Mahroum S. Global Magnets: Science and Technology Disciplines and Departments in United Kingdom. Minerva, 1999, vol. 37, pp. 379–390. doi 10.1023/A:1004749905956. (In Eng.).
26. Yamashita Y., Yoshinaga D. Influence of Researchers’ International Mobilities on Publication: a Comparison of Highly Cited and Uncited Papers. Scientometrics, 2014, vol. 101, nr 2, pp. 1475–1489. doi 10.1007/s11192-014-1384-6. (In Eng.).
27. Laudel G. Studying the Brain Drain: Can Bibliometric Methods Help? Scientometrics, 2003, vol. 57, nr 2, pp. 215–237. doi 10.1023/A:1024137718393. (In Eng.).
28. Deville P., Wang D., Sinatra R. et al. Career on the Move: Geography, Stratification, and Scientific Impact. Scientific Reports, 2014, nr 4, pp. 1–7. doi 10.1038/srep04770. (In Eng.).
29. Robinson-Garda N., Sugimoto C. R., Murray D. et al. Scientific Mobility Indicators in Practice: International Mobility Profiles at the Country Level. El profesional de la information, 2018, vol. 27, nr 3, pp. 511–520. doi 10.3145/epi.2018.may.05. (In Eng.).
30. Ganguli I. Scientific Brain Drain and Human Capital Formation after the End of the Soviet Union. International Migration, 2014, vol. 52, nr 5, pp. 95–110. doi 10.1111/imig.12165. (In Eng.).
31. Subbotin A., Aref S. Brain Drain and Brain Gain in Russia: Analyzing International Migration of Researchers by Discipline using Scopus Bibliometric Data 1996–2020. Available at: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/papers/working/wp-2020–025.pdf (accessed 25.12.2020). doi 10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2020-025. (In Eng.).
32. Sudakova A. E. Migratsiya uchenykh: tsifrovoi sled i naukometriya [Migration of scientists: digital trail and scienometrics]. Perspectivy nauki i obrazovaniya [Perspectives of Sciences and Education], 2020, nr 3 (45), pp. 544–557. doi 10.32744/pse.2020.3.39. (In Russ.).
33. Gureyev V. N., Mazov N. A., Kosyakov D. V., Guskov A. E. Review and Analysis of Publications on Scientific Mobility: Assessment of Influence, Motivation, and Trends. Scientometrics, 2020, vol. 124, pp. 1599–1630. doi 10.1007/s11192-020-03515-4. (In Eng.).
34. Gureyev V. N., Mazov N. A., Guskov A. E. Fenomen nauchnoi mobil’nosti v informetricheskikh issledovaniyakh [The Phenomenon of Scientific Mobility in Informetric Studies]. Nauchnye i tekhnicheskie biblioteki [Scientific and Technical Libraries], 2019, nr 10, pp. 40–55. doi 10.33186/1027-3689-2019-10-40-55. (In Russ.).
35. Fernandez-Zubieta A., Geuna A., Lawson C. What Do We Know of the Mobility of Research Scientists and Impact on Scientific Production. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/uto/labeco/201508.html (accessed 07.02.2020). doi 10.1016/b978-0-12-801396-0.00001-6. (In Eng.).
36. Passaretta G., Trivellato P., Triventi M. Between Academia and Labour Market – the Occupational Outcomes of PhD Graduates in a Period of Academic Reforms and Economic Crisis. Higher Education, 2019, vol. 77, nr 3, pp. 541–559. doi 10.1007/s10734-018-0288-4. (In Eng.).
37. Børing P., Flanagan K., Gagliardi D., Kaloudis A. International Mobility: Findings from a Survey of Researchers in the EU. Science and Public Policy, 2015, vol. 42, nr 6, pp. 811–826. doi 10.1093/scipol/scv006. (In Eng.).
38. Baker A. Non-Tenured Post-Doctoral Researchers’ Job Mobility and Research Output: An Analysis of the Role of Research Discipline, Department Size, and Coauthors. Research Policy, 2015, vol. 44, nr 3, pp. 634–650. doi 10.1016/j.respol.2014.12.012. (In Eng.).
39. Bezrukov A., Ziyatdinova J., Sanger P. et al. Inbound International Faculty Mobility Programs in Russia: Best Practices. Teaching and Learning in a Digital World. ICL 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 2017, vol. 715, pp. 260–265. doi 10.1007/978-3-319-73210-7_31. (In Eng.).
40. Patricio M. T., Santos P., Loureiro P. M., Horta H. Faculty-Exchange Programs Promoting Change: Motivations, Experiences, and Influence of Participants in the Carnegie Mellon University – Portugal Faculty Exchange Program. Tertiary Education and Management, 2018, vol. 24, nr 1, pp. 1–18. doi 10.1080/13583883.2017.1305440. (In Eng.).
41. Cañibano C., Vértesy D., Vezzulli A. An Inquiry into the Return Mobility of Scientific Researchers in Europe, Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2017, 64 p. doi 10.2760/54633. (In Eng.).
42. Franzoni C., Scellato G., Stephan P. Foreign-Born Scientists: Mobility Patterns for 16 Countries. Nature Biotechnology, 2012, vol. 30, nr 12, pp. 1250–1253. DOI 10.1038/nbt.2449. (In Eng.).
43. Stephan P. E., Levin S. G. Exceptional Contributions to US Science by the Foreign-Born and Foreign-Educated. Population Research and Policy Review, 2001, vol. 20, nr 1/2, pp. 59–79. doi 10.1023/A:1010682017950. (In Eng.).
44. Ueno S., Yamashita Y., Tomizawa H., Kondo M. The Production of Scientific Papers in China and Japan-China Relationship in Coauthored Papers. The Journal of Science Policy and Research Management, 2006, vol. 21, pp. 70–87. doi 10.1241/johokanri.48.775. (In Eng.).
45. Furukawa T., Shirakawa N., Okuwada K., Sasaki K. Quantitative Analysis of International Mobility of Robotics Researchers and Characteristics of Domestic Robotics Research. Scientometrics, 2011, vol. 87, pp. 451–466. doi 10.1007/s11192-011-0360-7. (In Eng.).
46. Gomez C. J., Herman A. C., Parigi P. Moving More, but Closer: Mapping the Growing Regionalization of Global Scientific Mobility using ORCID. Journal of Informetrics, 2020, vol. 14, nr 3, pp. 1–16. doi 10.1016/j.joi.2020.101044. (In Eng.).
47. Yan E., Zhu Y., He J. Analyzing Academic Mobility of US Professors based on ORCID Data and the Carnegie Classification. Quantitative Science Studies, 2020, vol. 1, nr 4, pp. 1451–1467. doi 10.1162/qss_a_00088. (In Eng.).
48. Rosenfeld R. A. Academic Men and Women’s Career Mobility. Social Science Research, 1981, vol. 10, nr 4, pp. 337–363. doi 10.1016/0049-089X(81)90010-7. (In Eng.).
49. Yuret T. Tenure and Turnover of Academics in Six Undergraduate Programs in the United States. Scientometrics, 2018. vol. 116, nr 1, pp. 101–124. doi 10.1007/s11192-018-2742-6. (In Eng.).
50. Honeyman D. S., Summers S. R. Faculty Turnover: An Analysis by Rank, Gender, Ethnicity and Reason. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED390455 (accessed 29.05.2020). (In Eng.).
51. López-Cózar E. D., Orduña-Malea E., Martín-Martín A. Google Scholar as a Data Source for Research Assessment. In: W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, M. Thelwall (eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators, Springer, 2019, pp. 95–127. doi 10.31235/osf.io/pqr53. (In Eng.).
52. Harzing A. W., Alakangas S. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A Longitudinal and Cross-Disciplinary Comparison. Scientometrics, 2016, vol. 106, nr 2, pp. 787–804. doi 10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9. (In Eng.).
53. Conchi S., Michels C. Scientific Mobility: An Analysis of Germany, Austria, France and Great Britain. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fisidp/41.html (accessed 02.03.2020). (In Eng.).
54. Aman V. Does the Scopus Author ID Suffice to Track Scientific International Mobility? A Case Study based on Leibniz Laureates. Scientometrics, 2018, vol. 117, nr 2, pp. 705–720. doi 10.1007/s11192-018-2895-3. (In Eng.).
55. Moed H. F., Halevi G. A Bibliometric Approach to Tracking International Scientific Migration. Scientometrics, 2014, vol. 101, nr 3, pp. 1987–2001. doi 10.1007/s11192-014-1307-6. (In Eng.).
56. Halevi G., Moed H. F., Bar-Ilan J. Researchers’ Mobility, Productivity and Impact: Case of Top Producing Authors in Seven Disciplines. Publishing Research Quarterly, 2016, vol. 32, nr 1, pp. 22–37. doi 10.1007/s12109-015-9437-0. (In Eng.).
57. Kosyakov D., Guskov A. Impact of National Science Policy on Academic Migration and Research Productivity in Russia. Procedia Computer Science, 2019, vol. 146, pp. 60–71. doi 10.1016/j.procs.2019.01.080. (In Eng.).
58. Vaccario G., Verginer L., Schweitzer F. The Mobility Network of Scientists: Analyzing Temporal Correlations in Scientific Careers. Applied Network Science, 2020, vol. 5, nr 1, pp. 1–14. doi 10.1007/s41109-020-00279-x. (In Eng.).
59. Jonkers K., Tijssen R. Chinese Researchers Returning Home: Impacts of International Mobility on Research Collaboration and Scientific Productivity. Scientometrics, 2008, vol. 77, nr 2, pp. 309–333. doi 10.1007/s11192-007-1971-x. (In Eng.).
60. Jonkers K., Cruz-Castro L. Research upon Return: The Effect of International Mobility on Scientific Ties, Production and Impact. Research Policy, 2013, vol. 42, nr 8, pp. 1366–1377. doi 10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.005. (In Eng.).
61. Aksnes D. W., Rørstad K., Piro F. N., Sivertsen G. Are Mobile Researchers More Productive and Cited than NonMobile Researchers? A Large-Scale Study of Norwegian Scientists. Research Evaluation, 2013, vol. 22, nr 4, pp. 215–223. doi 10.1093/reseval/rvt012. (In Eng.).
Review
For citations:
Kryachko V.I. Academic Mobility Assessment: the Strengths and Limitations of Different Approaches. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2020;24(4):130-145. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2020.04.040
Views:
881
Email this article 