Digital Scholarship: Recognizing New Practices in Academia

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_259-1

Introduction

More often than not, novelty is met with suspicion. The status of “newness” is very rarely given a particularly high value not only because of the unfamiliarity it carries but also because of the threat it poses to established norms. Digital technologies in the context of a global knowledge society may no longer be news, but the transformation of scholarly practices with the support of the web still is.

Digital scholarship practices encompass a wide range of knowledge activities and approaches online which ultimately encourage practices that diverge from established academic norms. More precisely, through the affordances provided by the web, agents are slowly challenging the canons of knowledge production and distribution with practices of open content, self-publication, and public discussion. Although the adoption of digital scholarship practices by academics is increasing, its acknowledgment as a legitimate academic contribution is still minimal.

The lack of support and...

Keywords

Digital scholarship Recognition Academy Web Bourdieu Honneth 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1999). The weight of the world: Social suffering in contemporary society. Standford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Costa, C. (2013). The participatory web in the context of academic research: Landscapes of change and conflict. Ph.D., University of Salford. Retrieved from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/28369/
  5. Costa, C. (2014a). Double gamers: Academics between fields. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 1–21. doi:10.1080/01425692.2014.982861.Google Scholar
  6. Costa, C. (2014b). The habitus of digital scholars. Research in Learning Technology, 21, 1–17. doi:10.3402/rlt.v21.21274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Costa, C. (2015). Outcasts on the inside: Academics reinventing themselves online. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(2), 194–210. doi:10.1080/02601370.2014.985752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dennis, A., & Martin, P. (2005). Symbolic interactionism and the concept of power. British Journal of Sociology, 56(2), 191–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elam, A. (2008). Gender and entrepreneurship: A multilevel theory and analysis. Chelthenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Honneth, A. (2007). Disrespect: The normative foundations of critical theory (1st ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  12. Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21 century. Program, 21(1), 72.Google Scholar
  13. Murphy, M. (2011). The ties that bind: Distinction, recognition and the relational. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 5(10), 103–116.Google Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of StrathclydeGlasgowScotland, UK
  2. 2.University of GlasgowGlasgowScotland, UK