As you read do not forget to ask: How do you I know that? As you write remember to provide answers for your reader.Sometimes I even put it stronger with comments like:
... and if no answer is available be aware that you do NOT know "that"!And yet, scholarly articles and monographs regularly and habitually cite "authorities". And [To start a second sentence with a conjunction!] if peer review works "authorities" should be (at least somewhat) authoritative. And yet [See, now I've started I cannot resist!!] scholarship is surely about evidence and argument, not about authority!
We believe, however, that the goals of scholarship, teaching, and service are deeply intertwined, and that a reimagining of the scholarly press through the affordances of contemporary network technologies will enable us not simply to build a better publishing process but also to forge better relationships among colleagues, and between the academy and the public.So:
The various nodes in this network will support the publication and discussion of a wide variety of forms of scholarly writing.Since new media scholarship will involve rich media rather than just text:
The various nodes in this network will support the publication and discussion of a wide variety of forms of scholarly writing.Those nodes may include:
- electronic "monographsÂ" (Mackenzie Wark's GAM3R 7H30RY [an IF Book project] is a key model here), which will allow editors and authors to work together in the development of ideas that surface in blogs and other discussions, as well as in the design, production, publicizing, and review of individual and collaborative projects;One consequence of the envisaged approach is that "the process of scholarly work [will become] just as visible and valuable as its product".
- electronic "casebooks," which will bring together writing by many authors on a single subject - a single television program, for instance - along with pedagogical and other materials, allowing the casebooks to serve as continually evolving textbooks;
- electronic "journals," in which editors bring together article-length texts on a range of subjects that are somehow interrelated;
- electronic reference works, in which a community collectively produces, in a mode analogous to current wiki projects, authoritative resources for research in the field;
- electronic forums, including both threaded discussions and a wealth of blogs, through which a wide range of media scholars, practitioners, policy makers, and users are able to discuss media events and texts can be discussed in real time. These nodes will promote ongoing discourse and interconnection among readers and writers, and will allow for the germination and exploration of the ideas and arguments of more sustained pieces of scholarly writing.
will shift the purpose of such review from a gatekeeping function, determining whether or not a manuscript should be published, to one that instead determines how a text should be received.It will also be both public (with comments attributed to their authors) and flexible, authors can retrieve work from public review to adapt it in the light of comments, and of course two way, one may reply to reviewers and continue the interaction...
a system in conference rooms that calculated the meeting's total salary-cost. Attendees would login at the beginning of the meeting, software would access attendees' salaries, and a screen would display a running total of cumulated wages.Just imagine the reaction in some cash strapped tertiary institutions of there was such a clock ticking away the salary bill at every "meeting"... we'd soon have less!
SEARCH Tim's sites