Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRisam, Roopika
dc.creatorRisam, Roopika
dc.date2021-11-24T14:05:36.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-29T11:25:43Z
dc.date.available2021-11-29T11:25:43Z
dc.date.issued2014-01-01
dc.date.submitted2016-07-22T11:57:07-07:00
dc.identifierenglish_facpub/3
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13013/417
dc.description.abstractFor academics, double-blind peer review processes remain the gold standard for validating scholarly work. The value accrued by scholarship has traditionally flowed mono-directionally from peer review. In the hierarchies that govern academic hiring and tenure and promotion practices, the single-authored monograph from the distinguished scholarly press sent out for review upon completion occupies a position of prominence. Among shorter forms, the prestigious academic journal provides readily legible markers of academic quality. Yet, for scholars working in digital formats or within digital humanities, conventions governing the gatekeeping of “scholarly” work feel increasingly mismatched to the digital milieu. Therefore, digital scholarship requires consideration of the factors distinguishing it from print scholarship, along with a new approach to validating scholarship that emerges from and respects the specificities of digital work.
dc.titleRethinking Peer Review in the Age of Digital Humanities
dc.typearticle
dc.legacy.embargo2016-07-22T00:00:00-07:00
dc.legacy.pubstatuspublished
dc.source.titleAda: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, Number 4
dc.legacy.pubtitleEnglish Faculty Publications
dc.legacy.identifierhttps://digitalcommons.salemstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=english_facpub&unstamped=1
dc.legacy.identifieritemhttps://digitalcommons.salemstate.edu/english_facpub/3


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Rethinking_Peer_Review_in_the_ ...
Size:
572.2Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record