Roberts Kay, Turnbull Beverley J
School of Health Sciences, Charles Darwin University, Sidney, BC, Canada.
Contemp Nurse. 2005 Jul-Aug;19(1-2):52-62. doi: 10.5172/conu.19.1-2.52.
The benchmark against which nurse-academics are primarily judged remains scholarly productivity. This study sought to examine levels of scholarly productivity amongst Australian nurse academics: where they are putting their emphasis, and what progress they are making. This quantitative study used a questionnaire survey technique that identified individual items of scholarship over a two-year period. The use of two author-developed rating scales, the General Scholarship Index (GSI) and the DEST Scholarship Index (DSI) enabled a comparison of nurse academics with other academic disciplines. Findings from the study underscore the positive association between academic rank, qualifications and scholarly productivity. To facilitate increasing the latter to a level comparable with other disciplines, nurse academics may need to refocus their energies on DEST approved activities. A work climate more conducive to fostering the ethos and skills of academic scholarly productivity is needed.
对护士学者进行主要评判的标准仍然是学术产出。本研究旨在考察澳大利亚护士学者的学术产出水平:他们的重点所在,以及取得了哪些进展。这项定量研究采用问卷调查技术,确定了两年期间的各项学术成果。使用作者开发的两个评分量表,即综合学术指数(GSI)和澳大利亚教育、科学与培训部学术指数(DSI),能够将护士学者与其他学科进行比较。研究结果强调了学术职级、资格与学术产出之间的正相关关系。为了便于将后者提高到与其他学科相当的水平,护士学者可能需要将精力重新集中在经澳大利亚教育、科学与培训部批准的活动上。需要营造一种更有利于培育学术产出的风气和技能的工作氛围。