1. SUGUMARI.S MLIS-FINAL YEAR STUDENT GUIDE: DR.N.AMSAVENI ASSISTANT PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF LIS BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY TIRUCHIRAPPALLI ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY: MEASURING THROUGH SCIENTOMETRICS TECHNIQUES

2. INTRODUCTION  The present study attempts to assess the research performance of Bharathidasan University faculties and researchers from various department publication output. Evaluation of academic quality, productivity and performance has a key role on academic improvement of any academic unit such as an academician, group of academicians, department, institution or country.  The studies on academic quality evaluation have led to emergence of new fields and terminologies. Bibliometrics, Scientometrics and Informetrics have been started to take place in the literature and with the developments in web technologies web based metrics have also been introduced.

3. Scientometrics is a discipline which analyses scientific publications to explore the Structure and growth of science. The bibliometric / scientometric / informetric techniques used to analyze various quantitative or qualitative aspects of a publication. It is a scientific field that studies the evolution of science through some quantitative measures of scientific information, as the number of scientific articles published in a given period of time, their citation impact, etc. SCIENTOMETRICS

4. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The present study aims at analysing the research output performance of Bharathidasan University academic perspective. The last thirty years have observed an overwhelming quantity of publications addressing in various discipline. Due to scattered publications, the findings of this research have not been visible to the policy makers. In order to overcome this problem, this study attempts to convert the publications into a comprehensive database. This database covers information relating to the titles, authors, author affiliations, methodology adopted and the journals and highly referred articles coverage of the publications during the study periods of 1982 to 2011.

5. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY  To identify year wise growth rate of Bharathidasan university research output during 1982 to 2012.  To analyse the relative growth rate, doubling time and exponential growth rate  To find out the which type of communication channels are contributes bring out research literature  To identify the collaborative universities and states with Bharathidasan University research output  To apprehend and test the applicability of Bradford’s law of scattering of journals;  To find out the prolific authors contributes of research output on Bharathidasan University.

6. METHODOLOGY A sample of 2507 articles during 1982 to 2012 published from Bharathidasan University and indexed in Scopus database, a proprietary product of Elsevier is used for the study. The database was used during 23 rd March 2012 for study. In order to perform a quantitative analysis, this study considered published articles in Scopus database. Publications classified as articles, conference paper, editorial material, letter and note etc. were also considered for the study. So, at the time of searching the database the search option was selected to “Bharathidasan University” only. After searching, all the records were imported to MS Excel file, analyzed and tabulated for making observations. And to calculate the degree of author’s collaboration, the mathematical formula proposed by Subramanyam in 1983 is used.

7.  The researcher has adopted the random stratified sampling method literature from Bharathidasan University as a representative of the present study.  2507 articles were downloading from the scopus database during period of 1982 to 2012 on 23 rd March 2012.  For collection data used only the Scopus database during time span is 1982 to 2012 (thirty one years). The search string is “Bharathidasan University” was used for getting data. A total of 2507 records were downloaded and analyzed by using the Ms excel software application as per the objectives of the study. Sampling & Limitation

8. DATA COLLECTION This study has secondary sources are taken for analysis. The necessary data was collected from the Scopus data base. The study period 1982 to 2012 is selected as the database is available. The search string is “Bharathidasan university” was used for the year’s from 1982 to 2012 (totally thirty one years) download the records based the string. A total of 2507 records were downloaded and analyzed by using the Ms excel software application as per the objectives of the study. The author affiliations are examined and the credit to the publication is given to the affiliation of corresponding author are collected for all publications from SCOPUS database for the time span under study.

9. YEARWISE ANALYSIS S.NoYearNo of Recs.PercentageCum. Recs. Cum. percentage 11982 to 1986 37 1.48 94 3.76 2 1987 To 1991 45 1.8 30512.16 3 1992 To 1996 1505.9974929.87 4 1997 to 2001362 14.42 2717 108.38 5 2002 to 2006643 25.64 4364 174.07 6 2007 To 20121333 53.17 11378 453.85 TOTAL2507 100

10. Relative growth rate RGR values are the first decade 0.64 ; Second decade 0.27 and Third decade 0.29 And doubling time (Dt) value measured from this analysis is for first decade 5.13 years, Second decade value is 8.84 and Third decade value is 7.28 Overall mean relative growth rate value is 0.39 Overall mean doubling time value is 7.08 years.

11. Exponential growth trend of BDU research output

12. Document wise Distribution of Publications  1 – Article-2229(88.9)  2 - conference paper-106(4.22)  3 - Article in press-53(2.1)  4 – Review -47(1.9)  5 – Letter-28(1.1)  6 – Note-17(0.7)  7 – Erratum-13(0.5)  8 –Editorial-9(0.4)  9 - Short survey-2(0.08)  10 - Undefined-3 (0.1) The analysis to preference channels of communication by the productive scientists for publication output is an essential aspect of bibliometric and scientometric analysis. Scientists have communicated their publications through a variety of communications channels. The ten (10) document types have brought o­ut this research output.

13. Most Dominant authors of Bharathidasan University Among the 9,069 authors, “Lakshmanan, M” has published 164 (6.54%) of articles and it is the highest publications. The author of “Muthiah, P.T” has published the highest number of articles have been 102 (4.07 %) of research output and he stood in the second place of publication output. The author “Palaniandavar, M.” has published 97 articles (3.87 %) and he stood at third place. The author “Ramamurthi, K” has published 84 (3.35 %) and the author stood in fourth position to the productivity. The author “Balasundaram, C.” has published 82 (3.27 %) and he stood in fifth position to the productivity. And the authors Parthasarathi, V, Akbarsha, M.A are stood in the sixth position of their productivity level.

14. Research team distribution of BDU output solo research output on BDUSmall Team Research output on BDU Medium Team Research output on BDU Large Team Research output on BDU

15. Degree of collaboration on BDU research output Year Single authored (Ns) Multi authored (Nm) Total no. of article (Ns+Nm) Total no. authors CIDC 1982to1986 3 34 377910.384.59 1987to1991 2 43 459810.824.71 1992to1996 3 147 15036712.924.96 1997to2001 4 290 29986814.684.85 2002to2006 17 623 643233817.984.82 2007 to 2012 30 1303 1333528923.295.84 Total 67 2440 250790693.620.97 In this analytical period, 9069 scientists have produced 2507 paper contributions scattered over 719 journals. In accordance to this the researcher has given the ranks according to their highest publication output of Bharathidasan University at up to till 21 st rank for top 50 publication sources. The first 50 authors are identified the highest contributors of Bharathidasan university research output. SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS

16. Research output under various subjects The BDU publications further grouped based on subject wise are identified Highest number of publications (more than 500) contributed to 3 domains: Physics and Astronomy (761), Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (731) and Chemistry (613). The top three subject fields receive more than 80 percents of publications. Followed by Agricultural and Biological Sciences (418), Mathematics (276), Materials Science (246), Environmental Science and Medicine (168), Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (151), Chemical Engineering (138), Immunology and Microbiology (135), Engineering (129) and Computer Science has 103 publications. The remaining departments are having below 100 publications. Hence, most of the publication applications can be seen in Physics, Molecular Biology and Chemistry. The application has also spread into other disciplines too. In the near future Nanotechnology will exist has separate subject.

17. Zone wise analysis of BDU research output ZoneNo. of journalsNo. of recordsMultiplier factor 1 (most productive)27 (3.77)743 (33.33)- 2 (moderate productive)138 (19.19)752 (33.74)1.01 3 (least productive)553 (76.91)728 (32.66)0.97 71922291.98 (0.99)

18. Collaborative Institutions S.NoInstitution (Collaboration Research)Pubs. 1 Bharathidasan University (TN)2402 2 Cheju National University (Kerala)53 3 Anna University (TN)52 4Annamalai University (TN)37 5Indian Institute of Science (Karnataka)36 6Universität Zürich (IN)35 7Istituto dei Materiali per l'Elettronica ed il Magnetismo (IN)35 8University of Madras (TN)32 9Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute31 10Joseph Eye Hospital India (TN)31

19. H-index of Bharathidasan University

20. CONCLUSION  Due to technological importance and expected academic performance activity, BDU faculty research output has been intensively investigated by scientometric methods.  In this study, the current status has been presented.  Initially occurrence and percentile method have been evolved chronologically.  The progress has further been measured using growth rate and Dt.  In the present decade (2002 to 2012) the Dt of BDU literature RGR is 0.29 and doubling value is 7.28 years.  Collaborative measured showed that the multi-authored contribution is high.  It is even unsafe, because it strengthens the opinion of administrators and politicians that scientific performance can be expressed simply by one note.  Hence we always stress that a reliable set of several indicators is necessary, in order to explicate different aspects of performance.  Thus to evaluate the author collaboration, Collaborative Index and Degrees of Collaboration were employed to prove that the more than 97 % of the research outputs are of collaborative in nature.