Interesting article with the backstory to an IRRODL article on MOOCs referenced here last week. I love the bit about the reviewers ("We didn’t receive any guidance from the Editor as to which Reviewer to believe. So we didn’t do a major rewrite :)"). Also worth noting: "Reviewer B strongly objected to our use of blog posts as sources of information, and I have to say that we rather strongly objected to his/her objection." Mackness gives three very good reasons for her position:
- most of the conversations about connectivism and MOOCs happen in blogs
- we were worried that our paper was going to be out of date before it was even published
- neither of us works for an academic institution, nor do we live within easy access of a university library
I'm sympathetic. Most of my work has been published in blog form; from my perspective life is too short to have to deal with arbitrary reviewers and edits well past the point of diminishing returns. The result has been that the citations have frequently gone elsewhere. I understand the need for peer review - but we need a better system. Realted: MOOCs are here to stay, by Graham Attwell.
- most of the conversations about connectivism and MOOCs happen in blogs
- we were worried that our paper was going to be out of date before it was even published
- neither of us works for an academic institution, nor do we live within easy access of a university library
I'm sympathetic. Most of my work has been published in blog form; from my perspective life is too short to have to deal with arbitrary reviewers and edits well past the point of diminishing returns. The result has been that the citations have frequently gone elsewhere. I understand the need for peer review - but we need a better system. Realted: MOOCs are here to stay, by Graham Attwell.
Today: 0 Total: 1121 [Direct link] [Share]
