Re: E-publish or perish

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Stephanie Wilson: "Re: Broadening the Problem"
• Previous message: SS51000: "False quantification to the nth degree"

What about a selection/promotion system that is peer reviewed (to combine
two of the discussion strings now on Anthro-L)? Instead of personnel
officers dependent of publish-or-perish-in-prestigious-journals, how
about an annual review for all profs (tenured or not) based on a peer
evaluation (peers= people in the same sub-field, but in different
universities) and on student evaluations (I'm tired of profs who can't
teach)? This way the reviewers would be more likely to base their
decision on content of the written material, not just the quantity.
And, hopefully, the quality of teaching would improve, as well. Yes, it
could put more of a strain on those already overstressed with peer
reviewing, but someone would also have to review their material as well.

Thought off the top of my head,
Steph Wilson

• Next message: Stephanie Wilson: "Re: Broadening the Problem"
• Previous message: SS51000: "False quantification to the nth degree"