George has posted a recording of his presentation to his blog and it is worth listening to. (See also – http://change.mooc.ca/recordings.htm) Another very interesting part of this presentation was the chat that it provoked. This focused on the question on ‘what is a scholar?’ a question that novice academics must surely think about. I have pulled together some of the key ideas and questions that came out of this chat. I’m not going to try and identify those responsible for each comment – but these are the people who contributed (in no particular order): Lisa Lane, Keith Hamon, Stephen Downes, Verena Roberts, ljp and Bon
This is how I have interpreted the key ideas – but I have also included quotes from the chat below.
- You have to be networked to be a scholar
- These days you not only have to be networked to be a scholar – you also have to be networked online
- As a scholar you need to have your work critically assessed and this happens by submitting your work online
- Sharing is an essential element of scholarship
- Blogging can be scholarship
- There is no such thing as a non-connected scholar
- Scholarship relies on interaction
- Institutional management processes are a constraint on scholarship
The discussion started with the question of whether in this digital age a scholar can be a scholar without being online. The conversation (chat) included these comments……
‘the act of becoming a scholar is (now / in the future) the same as the act of *creating* an online social network’
‘your activities may be online and off, but your *scholarly* activities (papers, presentations, discussion, etc) ought to be online – otherwise the
y’re just private & therefore not very scholarly’
‘I think we all became scholars by participating in networks, online and off’
‘… the extent that they are not online I think they are over time becoming less and less “scholars”
I became a scholar BY participating in online social networks (no chicken, no egg)
Then there was the question of whether you need to have your work critically assessed by online networks to be a scholar
‘…you can’t submit your work to critical assessment (these days) without really being online, and a person who does not subject their work to critical assessment is arguably not a scholar’
Sharing was considered an essential element of scholarship
‘..sharing is what makes scholarship valuable’
‘I can’t think of any scholarship that isn’t shared eventually’
‘That makes most blogging qualify as scholarship?’
‘… no but it does mean that blogging can be scholarship’
‘Do you have to be with a University and digital in order to be a scholar?’
What are the institutional constraints on scholarships?
‘ …institutions cannot change quickly enough to support the kind of work we are doing’‘management is based on [a] measurement, and [b] best practices and these are antithetical to good work’
we keep having to go outside institutions to do good work?
as a grad student, this academia beyond the institution potential is what i find most profoundly absent withIN the institution. little support and no scaffolding. people can’t model or even recognize what they don’t understand.
because our institutions keep wanting to ‘manage’ us
because the institutions cannot change quickly enough to support the kind of work we are doing, for instance here today
& management is based on [a] measurement, and [b] best practices and these are antithetical to good work
I wonder whether creating an environment for scholarship is an institution’s responsibility any more?
Can a person working on his own be a scholar?
I don’t think you can say an individual working on his/her own can’t be a scholar.
if a person is working on his/her own, then, what is it that makes them a scholar (and not, say, a carpenter)?
no scholar works on their own – that pile of books IS a network of scholars
There is no individual working alone – we are all born out of a discipline, or network of study, and we conduct our study (even alone) within the context of that network, using its language, tools, resources, reference points, even if we extend them or change them
generally, I think we would agree that just reading a bunch of books is not by itself ‘scholarship’
Maybe its about the interaction as well? Its difficult to interact “with” a book…have to interact in order to be a digital scholar?
a “bunch of books” + peer review of ones own work can equal scholarship
actually successful readers are highly interactive with the books they read
All these comments and questions seem to me to be directly relevant to the work of lecturers in Higher Education, whether or not they are new to the job.
Is the identity of people working in Higher Education changing?
Or do you keep your identity intact in a special place known only to you as one chat participant commented ……
Final quote from the chat…
I keep my identity in a small cardboard box in the attic
I love this comment :-)