Nul points for top ten journal idea 3

February 4, 2005

Groundbreaking paradigm-shift research that challenges existing orthodoxies and moves disciplines in new directions is surely desirable.

But such work does not necessarily find a welcome in distinguished journals of the day that seek to reflect received wisdom. The creation of a top ten thereby risks ossifying the discipline and stifling innovation. Any academic engaging with this initiative should first be encouraged to list the top ten journals of 50 years ago and be required to comment on why the two lists differ.

Alan Hallsworth
Surrey University

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October


Featured jobs