Group items tagged

Doing academia in public view is both a powerful tool and a potentially powerful weapon.

There is no buffer in public writing.

And for many readers the allure of attacking the writer instead of the work is too seductive to deny. That can be a shock when you are accustomed to the civil discourse, no matter how thin or banal, that governs academic critique.

"Make sure that someone's got your back, but do the risky thing."

Sidonie Smith, is leading an investigation of future forms of the dissertation, and whose Committee on Information Technology is working on issues surrounding the review of digital scholarship for tenure and promotion.

Real innovation requires risk

The purpose of this study is to examine how uncivil online interpersonal discussion may contribute to polarization of perceptions about an issue.

Uncivil discourse is a growing concern in American rhetoric, and this trend has expanded beyond traditional media to online sources, such as audience comments. Using an experiment given to a sample representative of the U.S. population, we examine the effects online incivility on perceptions toward a particular issue—namely, an emerging technology, nanotechnology. We found that exposure to uncivil blog comments can polarize risk perceptions of nanotechnology along the lines of religiosity and issue support.

One of the forms of open access . . . consists in the creation and use of repositories for research writing: databases, typically run by university libraries, into which ‘pre-prints’ (basically, manuscripts) of journal articles may be uploaded for free download by anyone with access to the internet. This has recently become known as ‘green’ open access

gold’ open access, which keeps journals open by moving the burden of payment from the reader to the writer

Acceptance was the norm, not the exception

accepted by journals hosted by industry titans Sage and Elsevier

by journals published by prestigious academic institutions such as Kobe University in Japan.

Staff Values People and Community: We value and respect each person, both as an individual and as an integral part of this and other communities. Excellence and Responsibility: We hold ourselves to high standards of quality, responsibility, and accountability in our work. Collaboration: As an ensemble, we value mutuality, group process, shared decision-making and open communication. Diversity: We believe in the importance and complexity of honoring and learning from diversity. Honesty and Integrity: We aim to be straightforward and sincere in our communications and interactions with others. Learning: We hope to nurture individual and organizational growth that is rooted in experience, intentional reflection and multiple ways of knowing. Commitment to a Shared Vision: We derive continual inspiration from our mission and sense of common purpose. Celebration: We take time to acknowledge and appreciate one another and our accomplishments. Creativity: The dynamic context of our work requires a commitment to thoughtful exploration and a willingness to take risks. Advancement of Social Equity: Social justice and civic values are core values for each of us, as well as at the heart of our mission as a center.

At the same time, I want to hold Robin accountable to his desire for a “materialist analysis of the relationship between politics, economics, and culture.”

I think he wrongly characterizes the conditions under which many of these young academics are writing

The risk of being a public intellectual, he posits, comes from the fact that these scholars are taking time away from their academic writing