Peer evaluation of scholarly publications and faculty research agendas is an important responsibility of kinesiology faculty and administrators. These expert disciplinary judgments can be supplemented by the careful use of relevant publication- and scholar-specific bibliometric data. This paper summarizes the misuse of journal-level bibliometrics and the research on more relevant publication- or scholar-specific bibliometrics. Recommendations and examples are presented for use of publication- and scholar-specific metrics as supplementary data for peer evaluation of research in kinesiology. Faculty who are knowledgeable about the meaning and limitations of bibliometrics may effectively use these tools to support judgments and check for potential bias in peer evaluations of research for appointment, tenure, promotion, and awards.
Judicious Use of Bibliometrics to Supplement Peer Evaluations of Research in Kinesiology
A Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) Primer for Kinesiology Leaders
Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) codes were designed to report outcomes in higher education by specific disciplines and professions, however, universities, states, and accreditation bodies also use these codes in other ways. This paper describes CIP-2010 usage in higher education and how these codes are used in funding public universities in Texas, and summarizes the American Kinesiology Association/National Academy of Kinesiology recommendations to the National Center for Education Statistics on updating kinesiology-related CIP codes. Kinesiology leaders should be knowledgeable about how CIP codes are often used behind the scenes in a variety of ways that affect our faculty, programs, and the field. Greater use of the term kinesiology in many future CIP codes would benefit the field and individual departments seeking alignment with institutional priorities.
Measuring Learning and Promoting Academic Integrity in Online Instruction
Duane Knudson and Melissa Bopp
The COVID-19 pandemic shifted kinesiology courses into more hybrid and online delivery, creating new challenges and opportunities for evaluating learning and online testing. Research using the Biomechanics Concept Inventory indicates that both high-tech and low-tech active learning experiences implemented in hybrid and online formats in biomechanics courses improve student learning above levels for lecture alone. However, online pre- and posttesting using concept inventories or major exams are vulnerable to cheating. Experience and research on proctoring online testing indicate only partial success in detecting cheating absent substantial faculty commitment to investigate suspicious behavior. These difficulties with online testing provide an opportunity for kinesiology faculty to implement more authentic, holistic assessments that are less vulnerable to violations of academic integrity. The importance of well-designed, rigorous assessment methods that uphold academic integrity standards will continue to evolve as kinesiology departments expand online learning.
Promoting Active-Learning Instruction and Research (PALIR) in Kinesiology Departments
Duane Knudson and Karen Meaney
This article describes the implementation and evaluation of an initiative to promote active learning through facility renovation and faculty training. Twenty faculty representing a variety of academic areas from 2 departments participated in a 3-part active-learning professional development workshop series. Department of Health and Human Performance faculty (N = 14) teaching 19 courses and 416 of the students in the new active classroom were surveyed on their attitudes on the facilities, room design, professional development, and active-learning instruction. Consistent with previous active-learning research, there were subtle differences between student and faculty perceptions of the importance of renovation features, active-learning exercises, and philosophy of the learning process. The initiative was effective in helping predisposed faculty to implement active-learning experiences in their classes and engaging in more scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as enhancing the visibility of the department as a leader in active learning and the scholarship of teaching and learning at the university.
Kinesiology Review’s Scholarly Influence: An Audit of Its First Decade
This study documented the scholarly influence of the first 10 years (2012–2021) of Kinesiology Review (KR). Publication, indexing, and citation data were collected from Google Scholar, the KR editor and website, and two open services using Scopus bibliometric data. KR published 356 articles with recent acceptance rates and median initial review times of 30%–55% and 63–85 days, respectively. KR is indexed in five databases, with searches of Google Scholar indicating 92% have received citations by April 5, 2023. The top 36 (10%) cited articles received a total of 2,533 Google Scholar citations. Top cited KR articles had medians of 50 citations and eight citations/per year over 8 years since their publication, as well as 2021 SCImago Journal Rank and SNIP (source-normalized impact per paper) values similar to many kinesiology journals. There was broad subdisciplinary representation with top cited articles from Behavioral/Social Sciences, Biomedical Sciences, Interdisciplinary/Other, and Humanities. KR makes influential contributions synthesizing kinesiology’s interdisciplinarity knowledge.
Citation of Evidence for Research and Application in Kinesiology
Duane Knudson, Bruce Elliott, and Tim Ackland
Applied research in kinesiology that can truly inform professional practice places high demands on researchers. Clear citation of research evidence is required to design meaningful research and is particularly important in the interpretation of evidence in proposing how the new results may be applied in sport, exercise, or physical activity. This paper summarizes principles for accurate citation of research evidence in justifying and designing applied research in kinesiology; it also proposes an evidence-based practice approach for interpreting the strength of evidence for the application potential of research results. Improved application of kinesiology research is important to advance recognition of the field and support for kinesiology professions.
The Intersection of Physical Activity and Public Health: Opportunities for Kinesiology
Gregory J. Welk and Duane Knudson
Mentoring Tenure-Track Faculty in Kinesiology
Duane Knudson, Ting Liu, Dan Schmidt, and Heather Van Mullem
The scarcity of tenure-track lines in most kinesiology departments supports the need for the implementation of faculty mentoring programs. This article summarizes key elements of mentoring programs for tenure-track kinesiology faculty at 3 kinds of state universities. Mentoring at a bachelor’s college or university might emphasize support to enhance a new faculty member’s teaching effectiveness and student advising strategies and assist new faculty with a positive integration into the campus community. A comprehensive university mentoring approach may place equal emphasis on both formal (e.g., orientation and mentoring committee) and informal (e.g., collegial and self-selected mentoring) interactions. Helping new faculty members understand their role as an important part of the departmental team and organizational mission is a consistent theme. Mentoring at a research-intensive university might emphasize clarifying scholarship, tenure, and promotion expectations relative to support; guidance in portfolio presentation; retention, tenure, and promotion evaluation; and strong communication that promotes mutual professional development and improves or sustains faculty retention.
The National Academy of Kinesiology 2023 Evaluation of Doctoral Programs in Kinesiology
Duane Knudson, Matthew Mahar, and Nicholas D. Myers
This report documents the fifth National Academy of Kinesiology Doctoral Program Evaluation (DPE) for U.S. doctoral programs in kinesiology. Three years (2020–2022) of data were collected and analyzed from doctoral programs at 35 institutions. Eleven faculty indices and six student indices were used to rank doctoral programs. Total T-scores (unadjusted and adjusted for both faculty size and outlying scores) were calculated to create two rankings. Correlations of indices’ T-scores with total T-score were calculated to inform potential refinement of the National Academy of Kinesiology DPE. Participating programs varied widely in title, disciplinary emphasis/Classification of Instructional Program code, and number (5–37) of faculty. The mean number of doctoral faculty and students increased from the fourth DPE cycle. The correlations of most indices with total program T-score had values similar to those reported in the previous DPE cycles. Demographic data are reported and discussed for ranked and some unranked indices for program benchmarking and consideration for refinement of future DPE cycles.