Most of my posts on this blog in the past year or so have been about teaching. But this one is about research and concerns us all.
This article wonders if the traditional peer-reviewed journal article process is bogging down the information flow that is now possible with new technology. So, the author of this piece wonders, should we continue to publish peer-reviewed journal articles – in print – or should they be blog entries?
I certainly would advocate for the peer-reviewed part. That is certainly something important to the disciplines. But the art history process sometimes takes YEARS to work out. I once had an article at a prestigious journal under initial review for OVER a year and a half. That was a year and a half without my ideas in circulation. I certainly do not think the world came close to stopping its turning on its axis because my ideas were held up – but it was certainly frustrating and slowed down the sharing of my ideas. My previous blog post was about tweeting during conferences. Is that the way to engage more scholars in work, and get it out there faster?
That leads me to another suggestion: what about peer-reviewed publishing ON blogs? I am part of such a venture: Open Inquiry Archive. It’s a blog. But we have a peers that have been vetted that review scholarly work before they are “published” to the blog. Some are rejected. We’d like more readers for OIA and we certainly would love more works for review. It’s peer review. And it’s a blog.
What thoughts do you have on this issue?