Watch this space – we may be able to put up a link to the actual talk at some point. This version is being presented online, to librarians and faculty members from Seattle-area community colleges.
Michael Gorman (Britannica Blog) Jabberwiki: The Educational Response, parts one and two
Shifting perspective – why journals?
Ann Schaffner (1994). The Future of Scientific Journals: A View from the Past (ERIC)
Archive of knowledge
(Skulls in the Stars), Classic Science Papers: The 2008 “Challenge” !
(Female Science Professor) Everyone knows that already
Sisyphus (Academic Cog), MMAP Update April 13: Publishing Advice from the Professionals
(Historiann), Peer review: Editors versus authors smackdown edition
Clickstream Data Yields High Resolution Maps of Science (PLoS ONE)
BBC TV and Radio Follow-Up: The Dark Secret of Henrik Schon
Bell Labs, press release. Bell Labs announces results of inquiry into research misconduct.
Fiona Godlee, et al. Effect on the Quality of Peer Review of Blinding Reviewers and Asking them to Sign their Reports (paywall)
Willy Aspinall (Nature Blogs: Peer-to-Peer), A metric for measuring peer-review performance
(Lounge of the Lab Lemming), What to do when you review?
Undine (Not of General Interest), From the Chronicle, Are Senior Scholars Abandoning Journal Publication (also includes a link to the original article behind the Chronicle’s paywall)
(PhD Comics) How professors spend their time
Report of the MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure
Openness – access
Directory of Open Access Journals
Openness – scope
Fill His Head First with a Thousand Questions blog
Landes Bioscience Journals, RNA Biology: Guidelines for Authors (requires authors to submit a Wikipedia article)
(Crooked Timber) Seminar on Steve Teles’ The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement
Henry (Crooked Timber), Are blogs ruining economic debate ?
WikiBooks – Human Physiology
Stevan Harnad. Creative Disagreement: Open Peer Commentary Adds a Vital Dimension to Review Procedures.
(Peer-to-Peer) Nature Precedings and Open Peer Review, One Year On
Sara Kearns (Talking in the Library), Mind the Gap: Peer Review Opens Up
The awesome font we used on the slides is available for free from Typographia:
Photo credit (because it is tiny here) — Surprise. flickr user Jeremy Brooks. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeremybrooks/3330306480/
2 thoughts on “Peer Review 2.0, revised and updated”
What was the college you mentioned that had guidelines about new media and scholarship in the tenure process?
actually big college, not small college, in Maine – http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2009/04/17/new-criteria-for-new-media/