Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Scholars in the Open: Networked Identities vs. Institutional Identities
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Scholars in the Open: Networked Identities vs. Institutional Identities

1,863

Published on

The public presentation of self is identity work, but the networked practices by which scholars build a name and reputation for their work differ from the practices and strategies used - and …

The public presentation of self is identity work, but the networked practices by which scholars build a name and reputation for their work differ from the practices and strategies used - and recognized - within the academy. This presentation explores Bonnie Stewart's dissertation research into how networked scholars circulate identity and reputation in networked publics.

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,863
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Networked identities vs. institutional identities @bonstewart University of Prince Edward Island Social Media & Society 2013 Scholars in the Open:
  • 2. Higher education: multiple axes of change knowledge scarcity knowledge abundance open practices public funding marketization closed practices
  • 3. False binary – both are reputational economies Networked scholarly practices institutional scholarly practices
  • 4. Academic Reputation Those who work within the academy become very skilled at judging the stuff of reputations. Where has the person’s work been published, what claims of priority in discovery have they established, how often have they been cited, how and where reviewed, what prizes won, what institutional ties earned, what organizations led? (Willinsky, 2010, p. 297).
  • 5. What counts?
  • 6. Not just new tools, but new literacies h"p://www.flickr.com/photos/rofi/2647699204/    
  • 7. Participatory culture = new ethos “Paradigm cases of new literacies have both new “technical stuff” (digitality) and new “ethos stuff”…what is central to new literacies is not the fact that we can now “look up information online” or write essays using a word processor rather than a pen… but rather, that they mobilize very different kinds of values and priorities and sensibilities.” - Knobel & Lankshear (2007)
  • 8. Identities for a new ethos: open, public learner/educators
  • 9. Differing sensibilities & legitimacy practices Institutions Networks product-focused process-focused mastery participation bounded by time/space always accessible hierarchical ties peer-to-peer ties plagiarism crowdsourcing authority in role authority in reputation audience = scholars audience = world                      
  • 10. Differing/conflicting credibility strategies
  • 11. “Me, Inc.” http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikebaird/4880623547
  • 12. Networked Publics •  Multiple, overlapping, global networks •  Always public, always accessible •  Different audiences all in plain sight •  Identities are persistent, replicable, scalable & searchable
  • 13. …that awkward moment when you realize that your students – or your VP, or the person whose article you just trashed – follow you on Twitter. Context Collapse
  • 14. •  How are status and reputations developed, circulated, and understood among participants in scholarly networked publics? •  What practices and cues do networked scholars utilize to build and ‘read’ reputations for open, public scholarly work? Research Focus
  • 15. Thank you. @bonstewart

×