Skip to content
Guest Thinkers

Scholarship 2.0

As an untenured professor at a major research university, of necessity I

spend a lot of time thinking and talking about ‘writing’ and ‘publication.’ I’ve

blogged about some of this before

. I’m essentially caught between two

worlds: the dynamic, interactive, freewheeling, rough-and-tumble, unmoderated cosmos of Web

2.0 and the slower-moving, calmer, peer-reviewed realm of traditional academic

publishing. It’s often a difficult tension, particularly for those of us who are

using these new communication and collaboration tools but whose tenure decisions

are being made by peers that are not active technology users. Recently several

higher education organizations have explicitly noted the strain and advocated

for some reconsiderations of what it means to write, to publish, and to reach an


Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion

: Departments

and institutions should recognize the legitimacy of scholarship produced in new

media, whether by individuals or in collaboration, and create procedures for

evaluating these forms of scholarship

. (p. 5)

  • 2007 Horizon
  • Report

    : Academic review and faculty rewards are increasingly out of sync

    with new forms of scholarship. The trends toward digital expressions of

    scholarship and more interdisciplinary and collaborative work continue to move

    away from the standards of traditional peer-reviewed paper publication. New

    forms of peer review are emerging, but existing academic practices of

    specialization and long-honored notions of academic status are persistent

    barriers to the adoption of new approaches. Given the pace of change, the

    academy will grow more out of step with how scholarship is actually conducted

    until constraints imposed by traditional tenure and promotion processes are


    (p. 4) 



    has noted that

    The central filtering agent is no longer the teacher or institution. It’s

    the learner. Think about what that means to our education system as we know it

    today. It changes everything . . . . [A]s educators, we are not grasping (or prepared

    for) the depth of the change that is occurring under our feet. If it’s happened

    (breaking apart the center) in every other industry – movies, music, software,

    business – what makes us think that our educational structures are immune? And

    what does it mean to us? What should we be doing now to prepare our

    institutions? Ourselves? Our learners?

    He also notes that

    Information validity is increasingly determined by the views of many individuals, not the select domain of a few [e.g., Amazon book reviews or Digg or Technorati rankings] . . . . [E]xpert-bases systems have value, but their value diminishes simply

    because no single person can keep up with today’s information. A

    network, however, can.

    Of course this has major implications for the academic concept of peer review (which is under fire on some fronts). I wonder when the egg is going to crack in academia. Two years? Five? Ten? And how do we retain our hedgehog concepts of research and scholarship while simultaneously adapting to the realities of a new era?

    FYI, I highly recommend the Horizon Report, which

    highlights six technologies that will have major impacts on higher education in

    the next one to five years.


    Up Next
    Miguel challenged us to find new voices . Between now and February 17 I am profiling eight nine bloggers that I’ve found informative and intriguing. Most represent a leadership perspective […]