Abstract
The suffusion of electronic media through academia is patent. Most professors use these media as means to long-standing ends, for example, the production of traditional research, the dissemination of information, the coordination of activities, grading, and the submission of reports and applications. Besides subtending traditional research production, however, electronic media offer alternatives to and novel venues and forms for work that is indistinguishable from, similar to, or of uncertain relation to the traditional print products of research. The flood of new possibilities raises issues about the tenure and promotion process that departments, colleges, and universities are beginning to ponder.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boyer EL (1990) Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
Drucker, J. (2009, April 3). Blind spots. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Blind-Spots/9348
Guidelines for evaluating work with digital media in the modern languages. (2000, May 19-20). Retrieved from http://www.mla.org/guidelines_evaluation_digital/
Jessop M (2008) Digital visualization as a scholarly activity. Literary and Linguistic Computing 23(3):281–93
Kelly, M. Making digital scholarship count. Retrieved from http://edwired.org/?p=313
New Media Department at the University of Maine. (2007, January). Promotion and tenure guidelines addendum: rationale for redefined criteria. Version 2.2.1. Retrieved from http://newmedia. umaine.edu/interarchive/new_criteria_for_new_media.html
New Media Department, University of Maine. (2009, April 20). Promotion and tenure guidelines addendum: criteria by category. Version 3.0. Scholarship 2.0. Retrieved from http://scholarship20.blogspot.com/2009/04/university-of-maine-promotion-and.html
Olson, G. (2008, June 6). Certifying Online Research. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Poschl U (2004) Interactive journal concept for improved scientific publishing and quality assurance. Learned Publishing 17(2)
Rockwell, G. (n.d.). Short guide to evaluation of digital work. Retrieved from http://www.philosophi.ca/pmwiki.php/Main/ShortGuideToEvaluationOfDigitalWork
University of Nebraska-Lincoln Center for Digital Research in the Humanities, (n.d.). Promotion and tenure criteria for assessing digital research in the humanities. Retrieved from http://cdrh.unl. edu/articles/promotion_and_tenure.php
The University’s role in dissemination of research and scholarship. (2009, February). Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/bm%7Edoc/disseminating-research-feb09.pdf
Van de Sompel H et al (2004) Rethinking scholarly communication. D-Lib Magazine 10(9)
Wardrip-Fruin, N. (2009, May 12). Blog-based peer review: Four surprises. Retrieved from http://grandtextauto.org/2009/05/12/blog-based-peer-review-four-surprises/
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schatzki, T.R. (2012). Digital Research and Tenure and Promotion in Colleges of Arts and Sciences. In: Luke, T.W., Hunsinger, J. (eds) Putting Knowledge to Work and Letting Information Play. Transdisciplinary Studies, vol 4. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-728-8_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-728-8_17
Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam
Online ISBN: 978-94-6091-728-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)
