[Air-L] conference discussion

[Nicole Ellison]

Heya,
I agree with Terri that there should be a space for the kinds of work she
describes, but I also want to point out that for the kind of work that at
least some of us do, it is quite difficult to adequately assess a paper
that is based on proposed research that hasn't been conducted yet. If I'm
reviewing a paper, I'd like to see findings and I'd like to see
conclusions. If an author doesn't have them yet, maybe the paper should be
submitted the following year.
Since I know this is likely to be misunderstood, let me say it again: I
think there should be a place for work in progress,
performance, activist collaborations, etc. But there is also good,
interesting, empirical work that can be written up in January and presented
months later, and which can't really be assessed until this is done. For
instance, suppose you propose an experiment and your manipulation doesn't
work? I don't personally do experiments, but I'd like AOIR to be a place
where this kind of work is welcome along with everything else. That was
kind of the genesis for the organization in the first place, if I recall
correctly.
I think different formats for different kinds of work is the ticket here.

Nicole