On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Simon P J Batterbury
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I think the point is that since they lack peer review, blog post, email
> exchanges, wikipedia entries, and so-on are never going to be
> professionally recognised in academia, or fully accepted in evidence-based
> situations where the stakes are very high (courts, scientific inquiries,
> planning and transport inquiries etc.). I cannot see this changing anytime
> soon.
So in all seriousness, how about a peer-reviewed blog?
You raise a good point. But I could see over time (decades?) that what
constitutes "peer review" may change. The double-blind, send the
manuscript to pre-selected reviewers, etc. approach is surely not the
only solution the problem of quality assurance in academic work.
Bruce
|