Group items tagged

It is in this article that the authors Shao Jufang and Shew Huiyan try to find out the outflow of excellent papers and then take measures to stem this flow. They illuminate the academic reward structure in place in China and its most interesting details. While Shao and Shen do not report the salary ranges of Chinese scientists they do describe how the payments work as incentives for publishing. The Shao and Shen article helps Phil Davis the author of Does the Chinese model make sense build his counter argument. This is why this article can also be referenced throughout Davis article.

In China scientist are rewarded with cash for publishing an article in a prestigious general. The more prestigious the journal, the larger the sum. So because of the limited international circulation of Chinese journals, there is a real push to have one's work appear in an international index, such as the science citation index, Engineering index, or the index to scientific & technical proceedings. The author of this article Does the Chinese Model Make Sense, Phil Davis, questions wither or not this model is authentic. He believes that the need for money will eventually exceed the need to produce valid, and original work. Davis is able to justify is argument by mentioning previous works that were written by the chinese that had an extreme amount of plagerism and unoriginal work. From this evidence he was able to persuade readers that the Chinese Model did not make sense nor did it have any valid points. His commentary was a critque of the article The outflow of academic papers from China: Why it happening and can it be stemmed, written by Shao Jufang and Shen Huiyun.

This article written by Rebecca Frost Davis discusses the use of crowdsourcing in order to create a stronger integration with digital humanities and undergraduate curriculum. Having students work on large scale collaborations allows for professors and scholars teach them knowledge in a more creative way. While crowdsource projects may not cause students to take on professional work in the digital humanities field, it will nonetheless cause them to be more aware of how to use digital humanities in their real lives. Frost confronts the problems of such projects, such as the issue of what kind of project best fits into each class and the time constraints encountered. Moreover, whether the students each have access to computers inside and outside of class. With matters such as these properly organized, Frost encourages crowdsourcing projects for undergraduate students.

Phil Davis, the writer of this impact entry, questions the sustainability of, what he calls, AO Mega Journals. AO Megas are journals that have no real content area to focus on, are generally open access, and prove an alternative to traditional publication. He believes that the impact factors and decline in citations of the site may cause concern for people looking to publish their work. He also addresses the issue of smaller, more meticulous, and content focused journals. This article was written in 2010, and although PLoS One didn't experience the slow deflation of the "citation bubble," (it is still considered the larges scholarly journal), he makes good points on the adavantages and disadvantages of using the "large blob."