Hello,
There were two ideas that strike me as particularly relevant concerning
publishing by Ph.D. Candidates or those who have finished. While I'm really
sympathetic toward Terry's concerns over the practical realities of
maintaining what have come to be common standards in research universities,
I suppose it is the common standard that I find troubling.
The first comes from Chris.
<snip>Instead we should only publish in a journal when we have something to
say that feels both substantial and of interest to our peers.<snip>
There seems to be so much anxiety around getting enough published, that
there is less and less chance that our work will be found and used.
Recently, I attended a dinner with someone with a stellar reputation in the
humanities who said that he never reads journals anymore unless someone
recommends a specific article. He has come to believe that most journal
articles are only vehicles for getting tenure.
So, I like Chris's idea of what I would call work with reflection.
The second comes from Ken and Karel.
<snip>One thing that did not come up is the extraordinary suggest that
Karel offers -- get research students involved in processes that will
help them to learn the ropes and master the skills of publishing so
that they will be ready to participate in the process as authors.<snip>
The master/apprentice situation is something that I think we excel at. And
that approach doesn't water down the work.
Best wishes,
Susan
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Susan M. Hagan Ph.D., MDes
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
|