Exploring the publishing process

At the beginning of the year I wrote a paper provisionally titled 'Is the revolution justified?'. My aim in the paper was to question the base assumption many of us have (myself included) that a technologically driven revolution is coming to higher education. It's an interesting journey and my conclusion was 'not really', but more importantly, framing the adoption of technology as an imperative to save us from the oncoming doom is the wrong way to view it. Rather we should look upon digital technology as an unprecedented opportunity.

Anyway, I submitted the artile to JIME, because it was relevant, and is open. We batted it around a while, and Doug suggested posting it simultaneously here and in the journal. We've decided to go one further and to see if publishing it here first can be made to count as the peer review process. Having a peer review process you can clearly indicate and track is one of the requirements for a journal to be counted as a proper journal for things like the RAE. I'm interested in exploring new ways of realising traditional requirements, so here is the plan:

  • I publish the article here (and a PDF version too).
  • After a set period I'll collate all the comments (yes all 1 of them!) and make ammendments as necessary.
  • This article with attached comments will be passed over to the journal (which is having a make-over so this may take some time).
  • We try and establish a repeatable process from this.

So, any comments on the article would be appreciated.

Leave a Reply

css.php