Forget the format, focus on the functions: research evaluation, re-evaluated

Wow, this is the fastest write up ever! Many thanks, Charlie. Let’s keep working on this!! #sydconf15

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized on by .

About chaimaiblog

Supporter of the Karen people, librarian, traveler ... I love to view and take photos of places, creatures and people.....and to learn jokes in other languages. We now live in Darug country in Australia. I acknowledge the Darug, Darkinjung, Dharawal, Gundungurra, Wanarua and Wiraduri peoples, ancestors and traditional custodians of the land on which we live and work together and commit to building better relationships with all peoples.

2 thoughts on “Forget the format, focus on the functions: research evaluation, re-evaluated

  1. richiehowittRichie Howitt

    Richie Howitt’s response to Charlie’s posting:
    Thanks Charlie – I enjoyed your comments both in the sessions and now this response.
    I found myself thinking about all this post-non-conference and coming back to the value of the container. We like Basho’s haikus and Shakespeare’s sonnets because they are haiku’s and sonnets. We don’t expect to find the craft, skill and insight of the poet somewhere else when we are reading the poem. And they got such joy from producing a good one. As a researcher, I quite like writing to the disciplined from of the journal article or the book chapter (not solely – I do enjoy singing at students, and the nourishing and much less structured conversations of PhD supervision sessions for example), and I wondered if we might have been a bit harsh on particular forms in our enthusiasm for getting our heads around process and relationship.
    I am quite chuffed when I produce a good journal paper. And I’m sometimes an ‘abstract thinker’ – I try to capture a whole thought in the form of a title and abstract for an imagined future paper and file it away. These ideas that I capture as an abstract are bigger and more refined than a tweet, but less refined and coherent than a manuscript ready for submission. I put them away for later attention and development (and transformation). Many of them languish … but some come to fruition.
    I like words, but I recognise that they are (some of) the raw materials for thought and proposition. I don’t mistake them for the finished product of scholarship. Today I’ve serendipitously stumbled upon Guattari’s use of ‘dissensus’ in The Three Ecologies and been led on to thinking about the value of dissent in complex and pluralist and creative scholarship. In the conference someone warned of throwing out babies when we clean out the bathwater … and I’ve reflected on the risks of keeping all the bathwater in order to be able to reconstruct the baby’s momentary embodied experience of bathing. While we would be awed by the value of Monet’s painting palette as an artefact, perhaps we should not mistake it for the finished paintings (plural and diverse).
    What ever the containers, the gift of scholarship – the deliberate and considered scholarly communication – should be valued and treasured and encouraged.
    Thanks for your provocations.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. joanna46

    Good point, Richie! As McLuhan said, “The medium is the message.” Perhaps more accurately “part of the message”.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s