Search This Blog

Sunday, 15 April 2012

Google starts ranking journals


Google Scholar 
In a blog posted on April Fool's Day, Google announced a new feature to its Scholar service. This was no prank. It was the genuine debut of a new tool called Google Scholar Metrics. The service follows the same principle that has made Google's web search engine so successful - when you are unsure what a user is looking for, give them a list of options ranked by a metric of popularity. In this instance, the users are academics ready to submit their next breakthrough but are uncertain which journal to choose. The solution Scholar Metrics offers is a database summarizing the sway of the distributors of scholarship "to help authors as they consider where to publish their new research".
Here's how it works. Google creates a list of all the articles a journal has published in a specified period of time. The citations to each article are counted in order to determine the publication's h-index, which is the largest number "h" such that each of the set of "h" articles were cited "h" or more times. As an example of how the h-index is calculated, consider a publication that has had six total articles having 2, 18, 11, 3, 22, and 9 citations, respectively. This gives the journal an h-index of four. Articles meeting the h-index criterion constitute the h-core. In the example, the core is the articles with 18, 11, 22 and 9 citations. Within the h-core, the median of the citation counts is used to assess the typical influence among the most highly cited set and is reported as the h-median. In the example, the h-median is 14.5.
You might think the "h" of the h-measures was for Helder Suzuki, the Google software engineer who made the blog post unveiling Scholar Metrics. Actually, the "h" refers to Professor Jorge E. Hirsch, a physicist at the University of California, San Diego. Professor Hirsch originally proposed the h-index in 2005 as a means for individual scientists - theoretical physicists, say - to gauge the quality of their work. Hirsch thought total publications, the standard evaluation measure at the time, was a flawed yardstick of a scientist's contributions. In his view, one had to also consider the distribution of citations resulting from a researcher's papers to really know whether that scientist's output was influencing his or her field. And now Scholar Metrics is applying the same idea to the scientific journal.
Scholar Metrics isn't the first tool for evaluating the influence of scholarly publications. In January 2009 Thomas Reuters introduced the impact factor. It is calculated by taking the total number of citations a journal has received in the past year and dividing by the total number of articles it has published in the previous two years. Impact factors are released as part of the annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Unlike Scholar Metrics, the JCR is a proprietary service.
So which is the better measure of a publication's influence, h-index or impact factor? If we look at the top ten distributors by each measure, we find Nature, The New England Journal of Medicine, and Science, the major players we would expect to be at the top of the list, taking the 1, 2, and 3 positions by h-index (Figure below). Not so for 5-year impact factor, which doesn't even include Science in its top 10 or PNAS in its top 100. In their place are a number of publications specializing in reviews, which makes the impact factor seem peculiarly out of touch. Review articles, although much read and frequently cited, are not the papers that shape their fields, and these specialty journals wouldn't even be considered by authors debating where to report their next breakthrough.
Leading journals by five-year h-index and impact factor
Further details read source webpage:-http://www.significancemagazine.org/details/webexclusive/1788885/Google-starts-ranking-journals.html

Wednesday, 21 March 2012

Library Quality Criteria for NBA Accreditation


The National Board of Accreditation as an autonomous body of All India Council for Technical Education New Delhi (AICTE), has been entrusted with the responsibility of Accreditation of Technical Institutions in India.

The Prime agenda of NBA is to assess and accredit Technical Institutions with the objective of enable them to work continuously to improve the quality of education by maximizing their resources opportunities and capabilities.

The Objectives of NBA 
  1.  To encourage the institutions to continually strive towards the attainment of excellence. 
  2. To identify the strength and weakness of their programmes
  3. To assist the institutions in improving the quality and effectiveness of their programmes.
Why Accreditation Required
If the institution and its programmes are accredited by NBA then Institution will be able to identify its programmes with
1.      Excellence in technical education. 
2.      Bench marks of global requirements 
3.      A national platform to attract better student intake. 
4.      Appraise yourself of your own facilities
5.      Vendor of human capital to world-class employers

Eight Quality Criteria /Weightage for NBA Accreditation.

  1. Organization and governance [80]
  2. Financial resources, allocation &utilization [70]
  3. Physical resources (central facilities) [50]
  4. Human resources (faculty & staff) [200]
  5. Human resources (students) [100]                 
  6. Teaching-learning processes [350]                 
  7. Supplementary processes [50]            
  8. R&D and interaction efforts [100]
                                                TOTAL = 1000

In Teaching –Learning Processes Library having 20 Marks

How to score maximum Marks in library facility
1 
  1. Library Budget Allocation and Utilization of funds. (Latest 3 years data)
  2. Library space, Reading area, Seating capacity and Good Infrastructure (Follow the AICTE Norms).
  3. Number of Users (Maintain Gate Registers/Thumb impressions /Barcode scanning to record users.(Maintain Statistics)
  4. Library Timings (Working days, Weekends and Sundays, Late hours for hostelers.)
  5. Number of Library staff, Their Qualifications, Designations and Experience.
  6. Library automation with standard software, web OPAC, Bar-code facility and reports generation.
  7. Library services through Internet and Intra net, blogs, social networks and web sites, email alerts SMS alerts
  8. INDEST or Other similar bodies Memberships
  9. Archival of rare materials books and publications
  10. Latest Titles and Volumes available in the library according to syllabus (Follow the AICTE Norms for Number of titles and volumes)
  11. National and International Journals Subscriptions (Follow AICTE Norms)
  12. Back volumes of journals, Project Reports, Question Banks, Syllabus sets
  13. Digital library exclusive Space, Server, number ofMulti media systems, Internet bandwidth and speed, Access to online databases. (Usage of Digital library maintain a  record)  
  14. NPTEL and other Video lectures, Audio Video Rooms
  15. Good collection development for Soft skills, Personality Development  Higher Education and Placements
  16. Reprography and Scanners facility
  17. Library Classification and Cataloging in standard Classification format.
  18. Open Access of arrangement of print and non book materials.
  19. Library bay guides to locate the materials easily.
  20. Stock verification reports
  21. Library Advisory committee meetings minutes implementations
  22. Well Maintain Library Registers and Files
  23. Display of New Arrivals
  24. Display boards of library data and services
  25. Library Orientation Programs. seminars
  26. Power back up (UPS)
  27. Drinking water  facility
  28. Book exhibitions
  29. Organizing book talks
  30. Question papers Syllabus
  31. News Papers clippings.
  32. Fire safety measures