I intend when I have time to reflect (some months away probably - maybe at the start of my sabbatical :) to respond to some of the negative comments and the suggestions reviewers have made. Some of these should lead to significant improvements in the conception of future volumes. That was one reason for sending out review copies of a work that was already available online, to get the academic "system" involved in improving the concept.
So, if you are a reviewer and I have not yet emailed you, expect some contact after the end of this year.
By the way the reviews I am currently aware of are:
- R.E. Clements in John Day (ed.), Society for Old Testament Study Book List 2007, London: Sage, 2007, 70.
- Joan Ferrer, Butlletí de l’Associació Bíblica de Catalunya 93: Sept 2006, 56.
- Knut Holter, BOTSA Electronic Forum [http://www.mhs.no/article_547.shtml] (2006).
- James R. Linville, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 69, 2007, 316-318.
- Ehud Ben Zvi, Review of Biblical Literature [http://www.bookreviews.org] (2007).
- International Review of Biblical Studies 52, 2005-2006, 162.
Labels: amos, peer-review
¶ 10:10 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
AKMA's post "Rice Univ. Press Has A Clue" points to an Inside Higher Ed article "New Model for University Presses". That succinctly outlines the problem from an academic's perspective:
The article refers to the Ithaca report “University Publishing in a Digital Age,” which has been sitting on my desktop for a few days gathering...press editors freely admit that they routinely review submissions that deserve to be books, but that can’t be, for financial reasons.
Basically Rice University Press is trying a "new model" Long Tail Press which will publish (electronically with print on demand for tyhose who demand it!) works that have passed the required peer review processes but cannot be "published" for economic reasons.
Now, why is this NEWS? I suppose because no one else had the courage to try it.
And, how will a Long Tail book, once PODed, be different from a "proper" monograph? Ah, yes money, real scholarship makes a profit, only second rate scholarship is true, clever, accurate, new but fails to make a profit!
Labels: not.funny, not.satire, peer-review, publish
¶ 9:20 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
No one else has had the courage to try it??? You're kidding, right? I've been railing about EXACTLY this for several years now and just the other day mentioned the fact that the University of Goettingen is doing precisely what you say Rice is now considering (not to mention that the school with which I am affiliated as an Adjunct has been using electronic and print on demand for three years!).
It is decidedly incorrect to laud Rice for doing what others have been doing as though they have just come up with it out of the blue. Rubbish.
By 
Jim, at
August 1, 2007 10:08 AM
Thanks, Jim, it's good to be corrected when one risks a small exaggeration! You are right, one or two people have begun to try such a model.
The points my hyperbole intended to make were that:
the "system" of academic publishing is in crisis,
the mix of electronic publication and PoD offers a simple, neat, easy and cheap solution.
So, why is someone trying it "news"?
By 
Tim, at
August 2, 2007 9:53 AM
Tim be sure to check out the latest sbl forum. they barely touch on the topic. but maybe, just maybe it's a start.
By Jim, at
August 4, 2007 2:44 AM
Today (well the 25th, but they are based in the USA which is nearly a day "behind" the real world ;-) if:book released CommentPress as a Wordpress plugin.
So... Maybe we could even use this to allow more public interaction and commenting on (at least some of) the papers for the "Media and Religious Authority" colloquium... all I need is someone to help me set up a Wordpress site with CommentPress installed and a nice theme...
Labels: blog, comment, peer-review
¶ 6:00 PM
[to Del.icio.us]
Hi Tim,
I can set up a WP site for you no worries. I can set it up on a subdirectory of mars-hill.co.nz, or a domain of your choosing if you've got a domain name and hosting.
Let me know by email.
By Craig (mars-hill), at
July 26, 2007 8:37 PM
I get an error message from your CommentPress link, "This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it."
WordPress is much nicer than blogger! But it is harder to set up. If Craig is offering, I would suggest you let him move SansBlogue for you. See here for some of my experiences and suggestions about making this move.
By Peter Kirk, at
July 26, 2007 10:55 PM
Craig, thanks! I've emailed you with details. It would be great if you would help me set up a blog for the colloquium.
Peter, I'd quite like to swap to WP for SansBlogue, but I really don't have the energy to do it for the small benefit I'd get! I had a quick look at the WP "import" feature, but it recognises no posts or comments, so is not going to work "out of the box". But for a new blog starting with WP seems to me to make sense, especially as the main reason for using blog software is to get the CommentPress paragraph level comments feature...
By Tim, at
July 27, 2007 5:11 PM
Thanks for fixing the link. CommentPress looks interesting, but I don't think I'll install it for the moment.
You may have hit the problem that for a time WordPress would not import from the new version of Blogger. But I understand that that problem has been fixed, although I haven't tested it. So you may need to get the latest version of WordPress. For me WordPress imported fine from the old Blogger "out of the box". If import from the new version is now as smooth, all your posts and comments should come across perfectly.
By Peter Kirk, at
July 27, 2007 11:02 PM
Craig,
When I email from tim@carey.ac.nz I get a bounce back, so I tried from tim@bible.gen.nz, I thought that had worked, I am about to go out, but will try later... or maybe if we are both awake at the same time Skype...
By Tim, at
July 28, 2007 8:43 AM
I seem to be getting heaps of bounce-backs from NZ at present. I don't think ISP's there like me for some reason.
I still haven't got an email from you, but I'll be on skype a bit over the next two weeks.
