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.

Professor John Unsworth summarizes an academic approach by outlining the schamatics of defining this study. The site inherits an authorial presence and gives the content credibility. the site is explained in a manner for a broad audience to view and understand with examples and practice explanation.

This article discusses the economic nature of publishing from the viewpoint of an author and editor of the works of others. The author explains the legitimacy of publishing companies' practices in the past, but calls into question those of modern for-profit publishers. He rejects the current model, in which his readers would pay more for a day's use of his article than for either of his books, and supports a billable-hours system like that of lawyers or psychiatrists.

The Digital Humanities Summer Institute represents an opportunity for various people involved in the digital humanities to take week long courses covering various kinds of topics, broken into three rough categories: introductory, intermediate, advanced. Referred to as a "grown up nerd camp," the DHSI represents an opportunity for scholars to expand their toolset and learn more about the Digital Humanities. When the article was posted, DHSI has been running for ten years, and continues to run today.

Tim Hitchcock begins this article by stating that books are dead. He goes on to explain his statement, qualifying that the process of creating a 'book' is lengthy and redundant, especially in the digital age. In our current state, we still think of data in reference to standard book form (book, chapter, page, line). He also criticizes modern humanists' approach/integration of scholarship and technology. Hitchcock believes that many utilize technical shortcuts (such as Google Books), but refuse to recognize it. Or they reference an article that they found online, but cite the paper version. His greatest criticism is the path that he believes digital humanities is going. He beleves that it is following the progress of the book too closely and that in an attempt to make things accessible, they have not utilized the versatility of digital publishing. He notes that how we currently view books depends on how digital humanities progresses. At the end of the article, Hitchcock describes his original tone and intention of the article. He also describes the editing and peer-review process.

This website, ThinkingCulture, aims to exercise the cultural imagination. Figure/Ground conducts a series of interviews for the website, continued here with Miriam Posner. Miriam Posner teaches Digital Humanities at UCLA. The interview with Posner focuses on the her path into her academic post. Posner explains her struggles with tenure and her early career in academics. The interview continues on to discuss Posner's teaching, digital humanities work and her writing plans.

This article is an announcement of, and response to statements issued by the AHA on two separate occasions. The author discusses the stagnant nature of attempts to deal with open access with an economic regard to academic journals. He supports a consortium model, and calls for general support for fledgling open access journals from the AHA.

In a 21st Century Media class an instructor conducted an experiment that allowed the students and professor to live tweet their class session, which she deemed a success. The students had an assigned reading that they were to find a method and be able to prepare it to the class. She informed them what a meaningful tweet would be that would be able to add to the online discussion. The purpose of this assignment was to show how twitter can be used academically. Students in the class were able to multitask by discussing online with each other and also in the classroom setting.

This article about the 2011 Digital Humanities meeting highlights three big project announcements from that meeting. The first of these was a then new grant program: Digital Humanities Implementation Grants, a follow up to the Digital Humanities Start-Up Grant program. The second of these was a collection of alternative academic careers for humanities scholars titled #alt-academy. The last of these was the introduction of Press Forward, an initiative aiming to fuse traditional scholarly review with open-web filters.

This Dan Cohen blog discusses the weird relationship between the databases purchased by organizations and libraries and how they are utilized in the academic world. Many of these purchases are unwarranted. These buyers are over buying accumulating multiple software programs for more than one 'category". The main problem discussed is that since the buyer is not the user, ignored functional issues arise.

In this article, Stanley Fish is trying to explain what he believes it means to be in the digital humanities field. There seems to be an undercover snobbery situation when it comes to individuals in the academic world placing a title on themselves. For example, one may prefer to be known as a philosopher rather than a humanist. Not knowing what exactly falls into the term "humanities" is not new.

The author explores a potential new solution to peer review in the the work of scientific journal publisher Elsevier. The director of this project argues that it encourages quality reviews while acknowledging the reviewer's contribution by allowing them to choose whether or not to remain anonymous.

As a program offered by the city of university of new york, who set to showcase the definition and experience of learning of this topic through their incetive, Digital humanities is explained in an open access for an a more specific audience rather than the entire population that the web offers.

Sally Chambers, a librarian, put together this powerpoint presentation to talk about digital humanities and research infrastructure in the context of libraries. She begins by defining humanities, digital humanities, infrastructure, and research infrastructure. Along the way, she presents several useful and informational websites for those interested in learning more about the digital humanities. She also specifically talks about DARIAH (Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities) and its establishment as a European Research Infrastructure Consortium. As the presentation goes on, she shares its role with libraries as well as academics.

This article contains three main reasons why Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs) should have Digital Humanities Projects. The three main reasons listed in this article are that Universities without Digital Humanity Centers (or cultures) can share resources, some of the research is bound to be cool, and humanities research builds connections. Each assertion is backed up with some research from Digital Humanities projects and is a very persuasive argument for the digital humanities programs and research.

Dan Cohen opens his blog with the announcement that several of his colleagues "taken democratic ownership" and they now have a new interface and editing process. He also provides several screen shots (from his ipad) of the journal to give his readers an idea of the articles and layout. He also notes that they do not use the typical process of publishing in an academic journal; he calls their approach the "catching the good."

arXiv is another open access collection/publication (?) maintained by Cornell University. The publications are based primarily in any field of science and mathematics (such as work on K-Theory and quantitative biology). It does not state if the articles are peer reviewed, but it does say that "Submissions...must conform of Cornell University academic standards." I don't know if this means that all of the work in the collection is by students and teachers, or if the were able to scan in articles from the library.

Cohen blogs about the emergence of several new ways of publishing within the scientific field that is still considered scholarly and many times peer reviewed. Some of the websites mentioned offer to publish a writer's work for a lifetime, for a few dollars. The emergence of these self-publishing, academic, scientific sites also shows a slight shift in philosophy. By restricting the publication through certain channels, the publishing companies and universities were choosing what will be the topic "of next year." Some times they were right, sometimes they were wrong, but either way, great and important papers were lost because they were not considered "the next big thing" or they are too "normal."