About the Ranking!
The Research Engagement Rank (RER) is a pioneering initiative of IFPASA designed to evaluate and recognize universities and academic institutions based on the active involvement of their academic staff in the peer review process. As research becomes increasingly global and interdisciplinary, the quality of academic review has emerged as a critical factor in maintaining the integrity and advancement of scholarly work. The RER aims to highlight institutions that excel in fostering a robust culture of research review, ensuring that their faculty members contribute meaningfully to the academic community by engaging in the peer review process.
Benefits of the Research Engagement Rank
1. Recognition of Excellence:
– The RER provides a platform for universities to gain recognition for their commitment to academic excellence. Institutions with high RER scores are seen as leaders in the academic community, known for their rigorous standards in research evaluation and peer review.
2. Enhancement of Institutional Reputation:
– Being ranked on the RER enhances the global reputation of universities, making them more attractive to prospective students, faculty, and collaborators. It positions the institution as a key player in the global research landscape, dedicated to upholding and advancing scholarly standards.
3. Incentivizing Quality and Integrity:
– The RER encourages universities to invest in the quality and integrity of their research processes. By promoting engagement in peer review, the ranking helps institutions ensure that their research outputs are critically evaluated and held to the highest standards.
4. Supporting Research Funding and Collaboration:
– A strong RER score can boost an institution’s ability to secure research funding and form collaborations. Funding bodies and research partners often look for institutions that are actively engaged in the academic review process, viewing this as a marker of trustworthiness and scholarly influence.
5. Guidance for Academic Development:
– Universities can use the RER metrics as a benchmark to identify areas for improvement in their research review processes. The ranking provides actionable insights that institutions can leverage to enhance their academic support systems, faculty development programs, and international collaborations.
Outlook for the Research Engagement Rank
As the academic landscape continues to evolve, the importance of robust peer review processes will only increase. The RER is poised to become a key indicator of institutional quality and a benchmark for academic engagement worldwide. In the future, the ranking could expand to include additional metrics, such as the impact of reviews on policymaking and the role of digital tools in enhancing the review process.
The RER also holds the potential to influence how universities prioritize their investments in research infrastructure, faculty development, and international partnerships. As more institutions recognize the value of research engagement, the RER will serve as a critical tool for driving excellence and ensuring that academic contributions are not only prolific but also impactful and credible.
In summary, the Research Engagement Rank (RER) is more than just a ranking system; it is a catalyst for fostering a culture of rigorous and impactful scholarly review, ultimately contributing to the advancement of global knowledge and innovation.
The Research Engagement Rank (RER) is structured around a combination of qualitative and quantitative metrics that evaluate the level and quality of research review engagement by academic staff at universities.
Methodologies and Metrics
1. Peer Review Contributions Index (PRCI)
– This metric tracks the number of peer review contributions by a university’s academic staff as recorded on public platforms such as Publons or ORCID, or through mentions in journal acknowledgments.
– Publicly available records of peer reviews reported by academics on platforms such as Publons or ORCID.
2. Journal Editorial Board Membership Index (JEBMI)
– Metric: This metric evaluates the number of faculty members who serve on editorial boards of academic journals, based on publicly listed memberships.
– Public journal websites, editorials, and acknowledgments.
3. Reviewer Impact Quotient (RIQ)
– Metric: Measures the quality and influence of peer reviews by tracking the number of citations and mentions of reviews written by a university’s academic staff, particularly in highly ranked or indexed journals.
– Platforms like Google Scholar, CrossRef, and journal citation reports.
4. Review Transparency Score (RTS)
– Metric: Reflects the percentage of peer reviews made publicly available.
– Public data on open peer reviews accessible through research journals and databases.
5. Global Review Collaborations Index (GRCI)
– Metric: Evaluates the extent to which institutions collaborate globally on research reviews through cross-institutional and interdisciplinary review panels.
– Public records of institutional collaborations or mentions in joint publications, research conferences, and global events.
6. Reviewer Publication Visibility (RPV)
– Metric: Measures the visibility of faculty who actively participate in peer reviewing by looking at their public academic profiles and social media impact.
– Social media analytics, public academic profiles, and digital footprints.
7. University Peer Review Policy Transparency (UPRPT)
– Metric: Evaluates whether universities publicly publish their policies on supporting academic staff in conducting peer reviews.
– University websites, research guidelines, and public reports.
8. Digital Footprint and Research Engagement Index (DGREI)
– Metric: An aggregate metric measuring the overall digital footprint of the institution’s peer review activity by analyzing mentions in journal acknowledgments, contributions to academic discussions, and engagement in online scholarly platforms.
– Data scraping from journal websites, forums, and academic discussion platforms.
