Authors also extend to the editors the right to redistribute their articles via other scholarly resources and bibliographic databases at their discretion. The copyright for articles in this journal are retained by the author(s), while first publication rights are granted to the journal.īy virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to be used with proper attribution in educational and other settings. The JCSW was founded in 2006 and is currently hosted by the University of Stavanger, in cooperation with the University of Agder and the University of Nordland.įrom 2010 onwards, it has been published biannually, in April and November.Īll works in this journal are licensed under the Creative Commons License: an Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. We also welcome essays discussing/reflecting relevant subjects from an individual point of view, and at least two members of our editorial board will review such papers (maximum of 3,000 words). Single site studies that also generate insight and knowledge in various geographical/cultural and national settings.This journal publishes two types of peer-reviewed scientific articles on subjects of importance for social work, with a special emphasis on comparative research on different aspects. The journal aims to support practitioners and academics alike through its discussions of matters relevant to Social Work Practice. Comparative social work emphasizes comparative studies of social work between different countries, cultures and contexts. In order to appropriately cater to the needs of the people they serve, the practices, aims and values of Social Workers must reflect the cultural and social norms of the society in which they operate. However, its broad aim is to assess and meet people's social needs by providing services that enable them to live in safety, independence and dignity. Accordingly, the nature of social work can vary widely. Social Work is a line of work carried out by trained professionals, or "Social Workers", in many different countries. Results also raise questions about the utility of relying upon IFs in assessments of journal quality.This journal promotes contributions, discussions and an exchange of knowledge on Social Work issues. ![]() For instance, the relative stability of faculty perceptions enables scholars to have some confidence that journals that are currently perceived as top-tier will remain so in the future. Conclusions: The results provide some guidance to disciplinary stakeholders making assessments about top-tier journals. 81), and the 2017 IFs had the lowest correlation ( r s =. Among the citation-based approaches, the 2010 Google Scholar h-index values exhibited the strongest correlation with current faculty perceptions ( r s =. 76), suggesting that faculty perceptions regarding journal quality are relatively stable across decades. Results: Faculty perceptions of quality exhibited a relatively strong correlation with faculty perceptions in 2000 ( r s =. ( 2004), h-index values from Hodge and Lacasse ( 2011), and 20 IFs from Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science portal. We obtained prior faculty perceptions of quality and prestige from Sellers et al. Method: To create a current, reputation-based ranking of disciplinarily periodicals, a national sample of tenure-track faculty ( N = 307) evaluated the overall quality and prestige of social work periodicals ( N = 64). More specifically, we compare faculty perceptions of social work journals in 2019 with faculty perceptions in 2000, Google Scholar h-index rankings from 2010, and Clarivate Analytics’ IFs from 20. To better understand the utility of various methods for determining journal quality, we compare three basic approaches to ranking disciplinary journals: reputation, h-index values, and impact factors (IFs). Yet, the process through which journals are classified as top-tier is largely unexamined in the social work literature. ![]() Objective: Publishing in highly ranked disciplinary journals plays a critical role in career advancement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |