Quantitative and Qualitative Assessments of Consensus Within Pharmacy's Academic Subdisciplines

References

• Conant JB. Science and common sense. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1951.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz JR. Scientific knowledge and its social problems. New York: Oxford University Press; 1971.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1970.
   Google Scholar
• Biglan A. The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. J Appl Psychol. 1973; 57:195–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaston J. The reward system in British and American science. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Weinstein D. Fraud in science. Soc Sci Q. 1979; 59:639–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron KS, Bilamoria D. Assessing effectiveness in higher education. Rev Higher Educ. 1985; 9:101–18.
   Google Scholar
• Ladd EC, Lipset SM. Politics of academic natural scientists and engineers. Sci-ence. 1972; 176:1091–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoecker JL. The BigIan classification revisited. Res Higher Educ. 1993; 34:451–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becher T. The disciplinary shaping of the profession. In: The academic profes-sion: National, disciplinary, and institutional settings. Clark BR, ed. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1989:271–303.
   Google Scholar
• Bazerman C. Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experi-mental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Hargens LL. Scholarly consensus and journal rejection rates. Am Sociol Rev. 1988; 53:139–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J, Leong A, Strehl K. Paradigm development and particularism: Journal publication in three scientific disciplines. Soc Forces. 1977; 55:938–51.
   Google Scholar
• Hargens LL. Relations between work habits, research technologies, and emi-nence in science. Sociol Work Occupations. 1978; 5:97–112.
   Google Scholar
• Hargens LL, Kelly-Wilson. Determinants of disciplinary discontent. Soc Forces. 1994; 72:1177–95.
   Google Scholar
• Lodahl JB, Gordon G. Funding the sciences in university departments. Educ Re-cord. 1973; 54:74–82.
   Google Scholar
• Stark JS, Lowther MA, Bentley RJ, Martens GG. Disciplinary differences in course planning. Rev Higher Educ. 1990; 13:141–65.
   Google Scholar
• Gaff JG, Wilson RC. Faculty cultures and interdisciplinary studies. J Higher Educ. 1971; 42:186–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braxton JM, Nordvall RC. Quality of graduate department origin of faculty and its relationship to undergraduate course examination questions. Res Higher Educ. 1988; 28:145–59.
   Google Scholar
• Braxton TM. Teaching as performance of scholarly-based course activities: A perspective on the relationship between teaching and research. Rev Higher Educ. 1983; 7:21–33.
   Google Scholar
• Centra JA. Research productivity and teaching effectiveness. Res Higher Educ. 1983; 18:379–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann Y, Neumann L. Characteristics of academic areas and student's eval-uation of instruction. Res Higher Educ. 1983; 19:323–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox MF. Research, teaching, and publication productivity: mutuality versus competition in academia. Sociol Educ. 1992; 65:293–305.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman KA. Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Res Higher Educ. 1987; 26:227–98.
   Google Scholar
• Desselle SP, Collins CC, Harrold MW, Kalis MM, Quattrocchi EJ. Consensus within five academic subdisciplines of pharmacy: Progress toward establishing their scientific paradigms. J Pharm Teach. 2002; 9(2):27–46.
   Google Scholar
• Hepler CD. The third wave in pharmaceutical education: The clinical move-ment. Am J Pharm Educ. 1987; 51(4):369–85.
   Google Scholar
• On JE. Reflections and perceptions of pharmacy education. Am J Pharm Educ. 1986; 50(2):184–6.
   Google Scholar
• Mount JE. Contributions of the social sciences. In: Pharmacy practice: Social and behavioral aspects. Wertheimer AT, Smith MC, eds. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1989:1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Plein JB. Pharmacy's paradigm: Welcoming the challenges and realizing the opportunities. Am J Pharm Educ. 1992; 56:283–7.
   Google Scholar
• Zito SW. Wouldn't it be nice? Am J Pharm Educ. 1998; 62:473-4.
   Google Scholar
• Salancik GR, Staw BM, Pondy LR. Administrative turnover as a response to unmanaged organizational independence. Acad Manage J. 1980; 23:422–37.
   Google Scholar
• AACP. Roster of faculty and professional staff 1999–2000. Alexandria, VA: American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Lodahl JB, Gordon G. The structure of scientific fields and the functioning of university graduate departments. Am Sociol Rev. 1972; 37:57–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braxton JM, Hargens LL. Variation among academic disciplines: Analytical frameworks and research. In: Higher education: Handbook of theory and research Smart JC, ed. New York: Agathon; 1996:Vol. 11, 1–46.
   Google Scholar
• SPSS Base 10.0 user's guide. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Churchill GA. Marketing research: Methodological foundations. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• AACP. Institutional Research Series-1999-2000 profile of pharmacy faculty. Alexandria, VA: American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Schuster JH. Foreword (Four trends in the changing academic workplace). In: Faculty in new jobs. Menges RJ. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1999:xi-xv.
   Google Scholar
• Braxton JM, Berger JB. How disciplinary consensus affects faculty. In: Faculty in new jobs. Menges RJ. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1999:243–67.
   Google Scholar