Disembodying academic (re-)production?

A self-reflexive Game

           

Prior to posting some more theoretic reflections on why Open Science and regimes of individual qualification and evaluation are by large incompatible I would like to propose to you an Open Experiment or Game on the ways in which we make use of the embodiement of scientific output. 

Open Research Data?

This Blogpost, aiming at compiling a definition of Open Research Data, highlighting the implactions Open Notebook Science has on scientific practices and discussing the issues on how reputation regimes in academia for the moment are unable to keep track with developments in research practices, has been started in the context of the University of Seminar Open Science, the better science? with Katja Mayer. As such one of the characteristics of the text is the fulfillment of the formal and contentual requirements of the course. Second the text also aims at being an experiment in synchronous reviewing. Thus it has initially been published in an early stage of process and will be completed and edited. This is why I would like to invite you to openly comment on the text and start an open synchronous review experiment here.

Open Peer Review

AJC ajcann.wordpress.com

Tomorrow we are going to experiment with open peer review practices in class. However, before we learn how authors, reviewers, and editors feel in the process of peer review, we need to clarify the terminology.

Peer review has been established as basis for decisions about publication in journals, awarding of grants, and academic promotion. Besides the growing use of scientometric methods to quantify scientific performance and impact, peer review is still trusted as foundation to assess the quality of scientific work. Peer-reviewed papers or grant proposals are not essentially right in the sense of a universal truth, but they are accepted because meeting the standards of science. They are trusted and could become part of what is regarded conventionally as body of scientific knowledge.