Publishing Ada: A Retrospective Look at the First Three Years of an Open Peer Review Multi-modal Journal
Download as PPTX, PDF2 likes1,493 views
The document provides a retrospective analysis of the first three years of an open peer review journal, focusing on lessons learned regarding open access, multi-modal content, and production processes. It discusses various challenges and successes in collaboration, production, and assessment, highlighting metrics and user engagement. The document also emphasizes the importance of feminist production practices and the peer review process as mentorship rather than gatekeeping.
Publishing Ada: A Retrospective Look at the First Three Years of an Open Peer Review Multi-modal Journal
- 1. Publishing Ada A Retrospective Look at the First Three Years of an Open Peer Review Multi-modal Journal Karen Estlund, kestlund@uoregon.edu Sarah Hamid, shamid@uoregon.edu Bryce Peake, bpeake@uoregon.edu http://adanewmedia.org
- 2. Outline • Review Goals from 2011/12 - Karen • What we learned: Open Access, open peer review, multimodal • Production Lessons - Sarah • Assessment - Bryce • Cost / labor estimates - Karen
- 3. The Fembot Collective & Ada
- 4. Infrastructure & Hosting Marrero, J. F. (2011 July 3), https://www.flickr.com/photos/jfmfoto/5902024151/ CC-BY-NC-ND 2.0
- 6. Multi-level Peer Review Accepted for Publication Suggestions for Alternative Publication Suggestions for Resubmission Not Accepted for Publication
- 8. Multi-modal & Interactive Zylinska, J. (2014) iEarth. Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, No.5. doi:10.7264/N36W98CFRuberg, B., (2015) Curating with a Click: The Art That Participatory Media Leaves Behind. Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, No.7. doi:10.7264/N3PR7T8X
- 11. Inter-personal Challenges ● Demands of production in an era of smartphones. ● Coordinating meetings. ● Screen communication.
- 12. Inter-personal Successes ● Collaboration & spanning international time zones. ● Google-docs & forms. ● Emphasis on feminist production.
- 13. Personal-Medial Challenges ● Author edits: ○ Edits vs. feedback. ○ Digital reading habits. ● Comment press & coaching OPR.
- 14. Personal-Medial Successes ● Multimodal collaboration. ● Social media. ● OPR access for junior scholars.
- 15. Media-Infrastructural Challenges ● Lack of control over infrastructure; ease of use vs. inconvenience of use.
- 16. Media-Infrastructural Successes ● Easy-access, easy-share. ● Last minute edits.
- 18. Some Metrics
- 19. Metric-driven writing + building ● web is set up for articles about the web to succeed ○ 94k inbound links, 19k were originally pinged by our articles.
- 20. Metric-driven writing + building ● People who show up not for a specific article are going to issues, but not in ‘lead article’ order ○ We now randomize article order on front page.
- 21. Processual Assessments ● Special Issue Editor ○ 1 special issue a year, proposed 2-3 years in advance ○ 8 month turn around from end of cfp to production ○ guided by process document built by webmistress at acceptance of SI. ○ Shifting from ‘flexible’ to ‘set’
- 22. Processual Assessments ● Author perspective ○ Easy submission to author ○ Peer review is time intensive, requires responses during peer review ■ “There aren’t enough hours in the day to keep up with the conversation. If I didn’t have other things to do (other articles to write/submit) then maybe I could be active in the peer review process. It’s just unreasonable to expect academics to put that work into review in the current job climate.” ○ Process is “fast,” but not rapid like news/editorial/ blogging norms.
- 23. Processual Assessments ● Production perspective ○ Team labor - SI Editor, Ada Editors, DSC, Webmistress ○ Review - Invite Expert Reviewers - Format and Posting - Send Formatted, Post-Review Version to Editors, Editors Summarize Comments + Send to Author - Copy Edit Revised Version - Post to Ada - Advertise - Analytics Follow-ups (6mo, yearly)
- 24. Processual Assessments ● Peer Review Perspective ● “I like that it’s mentorship focused. I get to ask myself ‘how can I help make this piece publishable,’ rather than acting as some kind of gatekeeper for a competition-driven scarcity that is traditional journals.” ● “Anonymity is the bane of peer review. I’ve gotten reviews that are insulting. Like this recent one from ______ “Impaling himself on the pole arm of Marxist feminism, the author mistakes “gendered classed” implications for “gendered classed” intentions. Removing the gender dimensions of the analysis, we have the same old, reductive Marxist understanding of telecommunications infrastructure.’ Thanks, that’s absolutely helpful for understanding why you don’t like it. What’s scholarly about this review, though?!”
- 25. Personnel Successes ● Graduate Students ○ Chelsea Bullock (early proj. manager) - Marion Brittain Postdoc Fellow @ Georgia Institute of Technology ○ Mél Hogan (first Fembot Advisory Board member) - Asst. Prof. of Media Studies, Illinois Institute of Tech ○ Brian Reece (DSC graduate student) - Assoc. Dir. for Assessment + Communication, Toppel Career Center @ University of Miami ○ Bryce Peake (first Webmistress) - Intel fellowship, Asst. Prof. of Media + Communication Studies @ University of Maryland Baltimore County
- 26. Personnel Successes ● Faculty ○ Carol Stabile - ACLS ○ Radhika Gajjala - Fulbright Fellow, Norway
- 27. Costs Infrastructure • Web Hosting •WordPress MultiSite w/CommentPress •URLs •Email •FTP • Back-up • Spam Blocker • Google Drive / Dropbox • EZID for DOIs • Archive-It! • Preservation Storage Production Labor • GTF • Designer • Manager • Copy Editing • System Updates • CSS Modifications • Interactive Development
- 28. Review Labor
Editor's Notes
- #4: Original goals
- #5: Sponsorship: CSWS, SOJC, Libraries move-able
- #6: First issue BY-NC-ND (not included in above numbers); website content default options for which license, open culture issues
- #7: Not accepted items not made public
- #8: in-person sessions
- #10: Library indexing issues; MLA Bibliography Google Scholar Wordpress and Metadata issues
- #30: Questions