Athabasca University | AU Student/Staff Login | Invited Guest Login
To blog research in progress, or not to blog research in progress?
Publicly posting the draft of a not-yet-presented conference paper sure feels strange. Vertiginous. Like just contemplating it summons an angel to one ear and a devil to the other. But as they argue with each other to counsel me, I can't tell which is the angel and which the devil. So let's just call them both daemons.
Daemon 1: It's research about intellectual property regulation. For the Socialist Studies people, no less. Publishing it freely matches your form to your content.
Daemon 2: Form schmorm. You're giving away something you put a lot of work into. You could send it to a few different journals. You put it out there like this, it's not peer-reviewed, and who would want to publish it?
Daemon 1: And a journal might accept it, and it might see print as soon as next year. The paper's about something happening right now. Besides, it's tangential to your main research. You have enough other things going on. You can share this.
Daemon 2: Right now there could be a grad student out there looking to cut a corner. They can copy it, paraphrase it, put their name on it, and hand it in, and who'd know?
Daemon 1: But if the prof suspects anything, a Google search points here.
Daemon 2: I just tried that and I see nothing.
Daemon 1: Give it a minute. Besides, you could always broadcast your link, play the Google search game. Claim it early and publicly as yours. Like the digital version of mailing yourself a registered letter. And don't forget: that way you might even get some useful feedback, from colleagues and friendly strangers alike.
Daemon 2: Just who do you think you are? Big names can afford to give their content away. You, sir, are far from a big name.
Daemon 1: But others are making names by giving content away. And don't forget what the content is, here: critical research on the copyfight. It's a hot topic, but not in the jargon-heavy, name-dropping academical style you write.
Daemon 2: Perfect gift for a clever grad student.
Daemon 1: Now it's my turn to say So what? Isn't this an idea that you want to spread?
I could let them go on, but I think Daemon 1 has convinced me. Score 1 for the devil I don't know.
Mark A. McCutcheon
Tag cloud
Comments
Hi Mark,
This is a superb exemplar of the method for using the blog as a sounding board, pitting one daemon against the other to aid you with decision-making. It aids in clarifying issues, bracketing opposing perspectives, and invites the readers to join in your discussion, and watch for updates on the debate.
You have allowed yourself the chance to creatively present an internal debate; by externalizing it, the blog has given you a working draft for further iterations. The decision is a tentative one, awaiting further elaborations.
Your post has aided me with further formulating my ideas on identity construction processes, as your post is clearly a form of performance in which you role-play two opposing perspectives. You refer to the word vertiginous, and I find it is an apt adjective when using quaternity (the act of drawing ideas to a central focus, rather than forcing the ideas to have a beginning, middle, and end) for connective writing to engage in sense-making.
The issue you raise about publishing your work in blogs gives me food for thought.
I should credit Mary, Nancy, and Sandra--other TLSTN students (participants? delegates? instigators?)--with some of the ideas dramatized here. They led a useful discussion of the pros and cons of publishing research in progress.
Quaternity: good word, that.