Archive for 'Peer Review'
Faculty Blog Round-Up: The Publishing Cycle
Over at Edge of the American West, UC Irvine English professor Scott Eric Kaufman has a bit of a rant about both the delay and format of the January issue of the journal of the Modern Language Association.
Cheer up, SEK; it could be worse. The anonymous Lumpenprofessoriat tells a tale of woe, with an eventual [...]
Posted by Laura Wimberley on May 23rd, 2009 under Faculty, Peer Review, Scholarly Communications.
Comments: none
Peer (to Peer) Review?
Gary Olsen raises an interesting issue in the Chron - as more scholars put their efforts into online scholarship, how can it factor into promotion and tenure decisions? His answer - devise a system whereby scholarly societies certify sites that are submitted for peer review, maintain a registry of certified sites, and check back often [...]
Posted by Barbara Fister on June 6th, 2008 under Peer Review, Scholarly Communications.
Comments: 5
Web 2.0 and Open Science
Drexel University Libraries’ annual Scholarly Communication Symposium focused on web 2.0 in general and open science in particular. This is fast becoming my favorite conference: I can walk there; it’s free; it’s well organized; everyone there is smart, friendly and from diverse backgrounds; you get to eat a great lunch and it’s all over by [...]
Posted by Marc Meola on April 18th, 2008 under Conference Blogging, Faculty, Peer Review, Scholarly Communications, Technology Issues.
Comments: 3
ts;db
I’ve noticed that several of my favorite writers have resolved to post more frequently in 2008. Dear favorite writers: at the risk of sounding ungrateful, would you be terribly offended if I begged you not to follow through on this resolution? The odds are, I like your writing because:
You publish relatively infrequently. I think you’re [...]
Posted by Brett Bonfield on January 10th, 2008 under Faculty, Open Access, Peer Review, Scholarly Communications.
Comments: 5
Peer Review Problems In Medicine
For all the commercial publishers’ (fake) crowing about peer review, turns out the peer review process in medicine is not working so well lately. At least that’s the conclusion one comes to after reading Robert Lee Hotz’s interesting article in today’s Wall Street Journal, “Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted.”
Hotz references John P. [...]
Posted by Marc Meola on September 14th, 2007 under Authority, Peer Review, Scholarly Communications.
Comments: 3