May 6
Bad workplaces in broader social context is a theme in my social reading today.
I very much recommend reading Paige West’s essay “That person at your office.” (via @subliminaries c/o @professorisin)
I also recommend a piece that I read a while back that is back in the news because the labor leader at the center of the story was apparently fired today. The story is by Sarah Kendzior and it is called “The Minimum Wage Worker Strikes Back.” (via @sarahkendzior)
May 2
Many graduate and undergraduate students received keen awards at today’s Department of Folklore and Ethnomusicology Picnic. Congratulations everyone!
A couple of Fridays ago, all of the practicum students at the Mathers Museum of World Cultures made PechaKucha style (Ignite style, AFS Diamond style, etc.) presentations on the work that they have been doing throughout the museum. It was simply amazing! So inspiring. So well done. So impactful. This was our first semester hosting such an evening. The event will return in the fall. Learn more about MMWC practicum here: http://www.indiana.edu/~mathers/museumprac.html
Back in April, Art at IU featured the latest news from the MMWC Ostrom Project. The focus is on the exhibit Ojibwe Public Art, Ostrom Private Lives. Check it out http://viewpoints.iu.edu/art-at-iu/2014/04/14/ojibwe-art-collected-by-ostroms-on-display-now-at-mathers-museum/
One of that exhibition’s Co-Curators, School of Education Ph.D. student Sarah Clark has just launched a scholarly blog along with Dr. Adrea Lawrence of the University of Montana. The site is Education’s Histories. Its great. Check it out: http://www.educationshistories.org
I have not been able to keep up with all the good news from student rites of passage. Here is a catchup.
Teri Klassen is now Dr. Teri Klassen, after her successful Ph.D. dissertation defense. Her dissertation is titled: Quiltmaking and Social Order in the Tennessee Delta in the Middle 20th Century
Melissa Strickland and Meredith McGriff have earned their M.A. degrees in folklore.
Kelley Totten and Darlynn Dietrich have completed their Ph.D. qualifying exams and are now officially at work on their dissertations.
Sarah Gordon has her dissertation defense schedule for next week! Jon Kay has his scheduled for the first day of the fall semester!
Dr. Gabrielle Berlinger will return to Bloomington to join Dr. Klassen in this week’s graduate commencement ceremonies.
This is just a small sample of all the good stuff going on.
Update: I just saw that Dr. Candessa Tehee defended her dissertation today! So great.
May 1
Richard Poynder doesn’t miss a thing.
Indiana University: Library Committee of the Bloomington Faculty Council decides not to recommend active OA policy. http://t.co/kmMkWVaX4G
— Richard Poynder (@RickyPo) May 1, 2014
As reflected in Richard’s tweet and the Indiana Daily Student story that he pointed to, I–in my role as the chair of the Bloomington Faculty Council Library Committee–reported to the full council on Tuesday (April 29, 2014), summarizing the committee’s work deliberating during AY2013-2014 on two special charges relating to scholarly communications policy on Indiana University’s flagship Bloomington campus. This issues are complicated and understanding of them among faculty members remains low, motivating me to prepare formal remarks outlining the work of the committee and some of the contexts that motivated it. I also prepared a summary for circulation to the faculty via the regular reporting undertaken by the Council’s secretary. For those beyond Bloomington with an interest in the matter, I can report here a couple of points not raised in the IDS story. I will also present below my submitted summary text.
While the members of the Committee were divided on the desirability of continued efforts toward a Bloomington open access policy of the sort now in place at the University of California, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Trinity University, the University of Kansas, Oberlin College, Rollins College, Duke University, the University of Hawaii-Manoa, the University of North Texas, Lafayette College, Emory University, Princeton University, Bucknell University, Oregon State University, Utah State University, Rice University, Wellesley College, Amherst College, the College of Wooster, Rutgers, Drake University, Georgia Institute of Technology, California Institute of Technology, Bryn Mawr College, Connecticut College, and other institutions around the world, the Executive Committee of the Bloomington Faculty Council has announced that the matter will remain on the Council’s agenda in AY2014-2015. The Library Committee of the Indianapolis Faculty Council at IUPUI has recommended such a policy to its full campus council and the leadership groups on both campus intend to pursue educational and policy setting efforts around open access at the level of the university as a whole under the auspices of the University Faculty Council. Those watching open access policy work in Bloomington then should know that discussions on the issues are not concluded, despite the majority report of the Library Committee.
Those who know me and my commitments on these issues should know that I continue to believe what I have said that I believe on them and that my obligations as chair of the Library Committee were distinct from my commitments as a publisher, scholar, and public interest advocate.
The Summary
For AY2013-2014, the Bloomington Faculty Council (BFC) Library Committee was charged with deliberating on two specific issues [in addition to its standing obligations]. The BFC Executive Committee asked it to weigh a permanent change in committee charge to encompass work monitoring and formulating policy on scholarly publishing and scholarly communications issues. The committee was also asked to weigh options and to recommend (or not recommend) a specific proactive campus open access policy that could be considered and acted upon (after suitable campus consultation) by the Council. In response to the question of recommending a change in the committee’s standing charge, the committee recommended not making this change, instead recommending a mechanism by which the BFC Executive Committee would partner with the Provost in staffing the Faculty Advisory Committee of the Office of Scholarly Publishing. In response to the question of a normative open access policy for members of the Bloomington faculty, the committee recommended not pursuing such a policy, despite the growth of such policies at peer institutions. The committee’s motivations for adopting these positions are complex and different committee members arrived at different positions for varied reasons. Central to the recommendation to not expand or change the committee charge was concern that the committee as already inadequately addressing its ambitious existing charge, something than an expanded charge on a different set of issues would not ameliorate. Factors motivating member reservations about a campus open access policy defy categorization and are sometimes contradictory. A highly abstract summation of them is concern that such a policy could have various unintended negative consequences either as an outgrowth of achieving the stated goals of such a policy or in failing to do so.
Coda
My work as a member of the Bloomington Faculty Council ends officially at the end of the university fiscal year, but is effectively concluded now. I appreciated the opportunity to serve on, and learn as a member of, the Council. I have served as a member of the Library Committee on several occasions, including as its chair on multiple occasions. I am thankful for that opportunity. Outside of these roles in the years ahead, I look forward to new work advocating for progressive scholarly communications policies at Indiana University.
Circulated on behalf of a colleague…
A new UC Davis initiative on “Innovating the Communication in Scholarship” (http://icis.ucdavis.edu/) is hiring a 2 year postdoctoral fellow, starting July 1, 2014. This is a cross-disciplinary project to study the future of academic publishing, involving faculty from the Center for Science and Innovation Studies, the Library, the Genome Center, and the School of Law (with additional collaborators in Computer Science, English, Philosophy, and the Graduate School of Management). Research topics include open access models, peer review, new forms of quality metrics, data publication, use of social media, and new forms of academic misconduct.
The successful candidate will conduct research, collaborate on or lead organization of conferences, workshops, participate in pedagogical activities, and assist in grant writing. A Ph.D. or equivalent degree is required in Science and Technology Studies, Library and Information Sciences, Communication, Law, Science, or Literature. Other disciplines will be considered depending on the specific focus of the candidate’s research and other experience. Qualified applicants will have experience working successfully in teams and managing multi-year projects. He or she will possess excellent written and oral communication and administrative skills.
We encourage applicants from historically under-represented groups, as well as individuals who can contribute to the diversity and excellence of the academic community through their research, teaching, and/or service.
Salary is based on experience and qualifications according to UC Davis guidelines.
To apply: E-mail a PDF file containing your CV, short description of your research experience relevant to this position, and contact details for three references to Mario Biagioli (mbiagioli@ucdavis.edu), MacKenzie Smith (macsmith@ucdavis.edu), Jonathan Eisen (jaeisen@ucdavis.edu).
Applications are due by April 15, 2014.
I really enjoyed listening to the new Anthropod podcast on open access in anthropology. Focusing on the move of Cultural Anthropology to an open access model, hosts Bascom Guffin and Jonah S Rubin have done a great job with the podcast. I urge everyone to check out their well produced conversations with Sean Dowdy (of Hau), Alex Golub (of Savage Minds and many OA discussions), Brad Weiss (past SCA President), and Timothy Elfenbein (Cultural Anthropology Managing Editor).
Find it in context here: http://www.culanth.org/fieldsights/492-8-can-scholarship-be-free-to-read-cultural-anthropology-goes-open-access
From a call for applicants being circulated by the Committee on Degrees in Folklore and Mythology, Harvard University…
The Undergraduate Degree Program in Folklore and Mythology is seeking applications for a College Fellow to teach three undergraduate courses in the field during the 2014-15 academic year. The remaining 25% of the appointment will be reserved for the Fellow’s research program. The Fellow may also be asked to advise one senior thesis and to evaluate senior theses. Applicants must have a doctorate in hand by the start of academic year 2014-15. The appointment is for one year, with the possibility of renewal for a second year. Please submit a cover letter and curriculum vitae, along with a list of proposed courses, by March 15, 2014. We encourage applications from candidates in Departments including but not limited to Folklore and Anthropology, as well as in Departments of Languages and Literatures, and in Area Studies.
Harvard is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. Applications from women and minorities are strongly encouraged.
Instructions on how to apply may be found here:
http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k15149&tabgroupid=icb.tabgroup153721
[The letter in which I first saw this opening explained that the due date had changed to the March 15, 2014 date shown above. Applicants will wish to get to the bottom of the question of due date.]
I would like to share news of the formation of an interest group in an area of interest that I know I share with many Shreds and Patches readers. The group is known as the “Digital Practices in History and Ethnography” Interest Group and it is a constituent interest group within the Research Data Alliance (RDA), an international initiative to facilitate the development of effective data practices, standards and infrastructure in particular research areas, and across research areas. The RDA aims to enhance capacity to archive, preserve, analyze and share data, and to foster collaboration across research communities. My DPHE colleagues and I invite you to join this interest group, and to participate in its online discussions. Biannual RDA meetings are an opportunity to meet face-to-face with others in our area, and with researchers in other areas.
The RDA website describes RDA’s full array of interest and working groups, and the mission, structure and process of the RDA. You can join the DPHE interest group at no cost by following these steps:
1. Navigate to the RDA website. https://rd-alliance.org/
2. Register in the top right hand corner of the site.
3. Once you’ve finished your registration and are logged in, navigate here: https://www.rd-alliance.org/internal-groups/digital-practices-history-and-ethnography-ig.html
4. In the middle of the page, click Request Group Membership
5. Answer the form question with a yes, and then you should be subscribed.
The second RDA Plenary was held in Washington D.C. September 16-18, 2013. Our group discussed its mission and plan at a session on Wednesday afternoon, and circulated a list of discussion questions for on-going consideration by the group.
We’ve now started a discussion thread about metadata in historical and ethnographic research.
We’ve also scheduled held several project review sessions and plan to continue holding these events online in coming months. Early sessions in our series have looked at the
Perseids project (A Collaborative Editing Platform for Source Documents in Classics) http://sites.tufts.edu/perseids/
and the
Nunaliit Atlas Framework http://nunaliit.org/
As detailed here, Garett Montanez and I will present tomorrow (2/13) at a project share (1 pm, eastern time) event focused on the Open Folklore project. The presentation will be online and is free and open to anyone interested.
The DPHE group will be pursuing additional project-focused presentations, as well as open discussions of common interests and concerns.
My fellow DPHE IG co-chairs Mike and Kim Fortun (RPI) and I look forward to your participation. Please let us know if you have
“The Department of Folklore and Ethnomusicology at Indiana University invites applications for two one year positions as Visiting Lecturers to begin Fall 2014. We seek candidates with graduate training in folklore as well as experience in the teaching of introductory folklore classes and readiness to teach in one or more of the fields of narrative, belief, folklore of the United States, material culture and ethnographic methods.” Find more detail on the AFS website.
“Staten Island Arts, an arts service organization and presenter, seeks a Staff Folklorist to run a year-round Folk & Traditional Arts Program. Reporting to the Executive Director, Staten Island Folklife works directly with traditional artists and their communities to present, document, and safeguard the traditional cultural resources found throughout the borough. Over the past four years, Staten Island Arts Folklife has been under the direction of a single folklorist, and has established itself as a source of innovation, in the field of public sector folklore.” Find more details on the AFS website.
From the end of Matthew Pratt Guterl’s essay “Debt“:
There are many major issues with higher education, but the solutions to most of them are well beyond the reach of tenure-stream faculty. Chairs and department members can’t generally compel deans to do much of anything, because decisions about financial reallocation aren’t usually made by deans – they get made by Provosts and Presidents, by big donors, by trustees, and by students, who can always take their precious credit hours elsewhere.
There is, though, a metaphorical debt to be paid here. We owe graduate students a clear shot at a degree without an interest rate on the back end (so, a reasonable stipend, workshop space, and research support, but also financial counseling and informal support mechanisms). We owe them some very straight talk early in their coursework about an exit strategy if they aren’t going to make it. We owe them a direct path to the degree, and structures and cultures that make it possible for them to complete their work in decent time. We owe them degrees with somewhat flexible career outcomes. And we owe it to them to match the size of our incoming cohorts – as best as we possibly can – to the job market success of recent graduates, and not chiefly to the sometimes self-indulgent abstractions of graduate teaching.
These things are within reach. These things can be done.
Matt’s essay is part of a larger ongoing conversation happening with extra vigor, and also extra despair, right now. (I am not going to provide a pile of links here. If you are involved in training graduate students, are a graduate student, or think you want to be a graduate student, you should be plugged into this conversation. If you have not found it on your own, you should be reading Inside Higher Education and those parts of the Chronicle of Higher Education that you can access (it is not all freely accessible and not everyone has access to an institutional subscription). You should also be following the discussion on Twitter (@sarahkendzior and those whom she is in dialogue with would be a good start) and elsewhere on the open web.)
The timing of the debt discussion is particularly appropriate because right now, in research universities around the United States, academic departments with graduate programs are reviewing applications from would-be masters and doctoral students. Such departments face many hard to answer questions. Who to admit and why? How many students to admit? Of those admitted, how many will come? Will we provide financial support for some or all of those we admit? How long will it take for an admitted applicant to accomplish the learning and career goals that they are describing in their application? Can we adequately mentor and train the person we are learning about in a large but partial PDF file? What will the career prospects be for these applicants two or six or eight years from now? How is my university changing and how is the world changing and how will these changes shape the experiences of, and prospects for, these applicants?
In my own department, I am deeply involved in this process right now. No one can know exactly how to answer such questions or to perfectly do this work–and it is really work. When it is done and some of those applicants join us next fall, I will try my best to fulfill those obligations that Matt outlines in his essay. At least those things seem clear.
Jan 15
On Savage Minds, Alex Golub very generously celebrates the recent publication of a large quantity of open access journal articles in anthropology and neighboring fields. I wish to add one point. I am talking to you under-informed, confusion-promulgating open access skeptics.
Not one of the journals that Alex highlights in his new post (to which we can add the remarkable Hau, the focus of other recent posts (1, 2) on Savage Minds) relies upon author fees to achieve this abundance. It is fair to say that the growing embrace of gold and hybrid open access by large commercial publishers (old and new) has very properly accelerated discussion of author-side charges and their very significant downsides. This shift has also erased older binaries and made it harder to talk about open access more broadly. But those wishing to advance the pro-/con- discussion of gold open access have an obligation to understand facts on the ground and to stop prematurely overgeneralizing on the basis of ignorance. The widespread conflation of all forms of gold open access with author-pays gold open access is not only unhelpful, it is an insult to all of those academics (and others) who take time out from their own work to help review and publish the writings of their colleagues in free-to-all-internet users and free-to-author ways. It is also unfair to those generous agencies and individuals in the world who are donating cash and services and attention and expertise to the building out of a progressive open access publishing ecosystem.
The community of people engaging with open access questions critically, and even skeptically, needs to grow and I want to welcome rather than discourage newcomers. But, if you cannot take the time to study the subject of open access in sufficient depth to make evidence-based pronouncements, then you should stop talking and start listening.
Coda: In my world, the conflation is most often an honest mistake by well-meaning people but it is also sometimes intentional FUD. One illustration of the rhetorical steps one takes to malign gold open access through conflation are illustrated by Konrad M. Lawson in today’s ProfHacker post. (See also Open Access: Six Myths to Put to Rest.)
Shreds and Patches 