Monday, April 6, 2015
Carissa Byrne Hessick (Utah), Contemplating Academic Analytics for Law Schools:
There is a recent trend in higher education to standardize assessment of faculty’s academic achievement across disciplines. For example, a company called Academic Analytics markets itself as providing university administrators “with objective data that administrators can use . . . as a method for benchmarking in comparison to other institutions.” As its website explains, it measures productivity and excellence by quantifying:
- the publication of scholarly work as books and journal articles
- citations to published journal articles
- research funding by federal agencies
- honorific awards bestowed upon faculty members
Because it is seeking to assess academics generally, the metrics that Academic Analytics uses are not necessarily well suited to assessing law faculty. ... Looking at the academic analytic metrics, I’m contemplating how it is that one might attempt to construct an instrument that would assess law faculty productivity and excellence. ... I’ll share some preliminary thoughts about what those metrics might look like in a future post.
For my perspective, see:
See also Patrick Arthur Woods, Stop Counting (Or At Least Count Better):
For American legal scholarship to fulfill its purpose, it must have an impact on the development of the actual law as it is enacted and interpreted in the United States. However, legal scholarship broadly — and law review articles in particular — has become less influential on judges and members of the practicing bar over time. This short essay argues that the decline is partly attributable to the open reliance on metrics that primarily represent influence within the legal academy when measuring the value of a scholar’s work. In particular, I argue that a focus on metrics with only a tenuous connection to non-academic usage of a new scholar’s work, such as download counts, law journal citation count-based rankings methodologies, and article placement, incentivizes new legal writers to write for other academics rather than for judges, attorneys in practice, or policy-makers.