several research projects over the next year, examining the Perspective of AUTHOR tenure portfolio interviewing authors of new media work Want your feedback… -- multiple heuristics and taxonomies for defining that work
Heuristic for READER to use to understand NM Where I started, but not really meant for Digital scholarship Since then….
Heuristic for authors to use when designing and/or explaining DS -- based on NAVIGATION
Heuristic for authors based on GENRES (these are what IML students produce -- “DS across the Curriculum”,they call “Multimedia in the Core” OTHERS… Experiential Encyclopedic Multi-perspectival Multi-layered Comparative Interactive Networked Mobile Visualization Annotation Open Architecture
Heuristic based on DIGITAL SCHOLARSHIP
Heuristic based on PEER_REVIEW CRITERIA of MANIFESTO WEBTEXTS, based on call and checked against submissions: Readership: Is the manifesto timely and relevant to the readership of Kairos? Could the manifesto bring a new readership to Kairos? Form: Does the author understand “manifesto” as a text form? Does it call to action? Media: Is the medium in which webtext is produced appropriate for Kairos? Does the chosen medium make sense in terms of the piece’s argument? Respnose: Is the webtext provocative? Info not usually made available.
Heuristic based on bridging PRINT and DIGITAL SCHOLARSHIP Content arrangement documentation tone Web-Based Allowances form/content relationship navigation design multimedia incorporation Emerging conventions navigation instructions design rationale
Council of Editors of Learned Journals Heuristic for ADMINISTRATORS and EDITORS to affirm the standards and legitimacy of online journals (Only useful for authors to ask themselves which online journals they might want to publish in…)
Heuristic for TENURE stakeholders. Categories in which digital scholarship can more easily fit YET: individuals and institutions….
SUCH AS!!! (from co-presenter’s talk today)
How I ended up with this graphic….still uncertain it does what it needs to do (problem of junior faculty who do DS) -- Where are publication venues placed on this semantic map? -- How does their placement (of venue) relate to the kinds of work published in that venue? -- Where are individual texts placed on the map? -- Where do readers position their expertise on the map? -- What is the distance between a reader (of the text, the journal, or a T&P member) as audience and a particular text?-- What strategies can authors use to shorten the distance between reader and text? -- Should authors be the sole ones responsible for this bridge? CONTEXT!!!!
If the heuristics seem confusing and multitudenous, it’s because they are. DO WE KNOW WHAT OUR DEPT”s CRITERIA IS??? So what can we do to prepare ourselves (and help others prepare for making their DS “count”?) Consider these strategies…. But, still, individual contexts of institutions will always be the end-most factor/limitation in what strategies should be used -- or *whether*-- DS will be valued.
0 comments
Post a comment