[Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR.

Thu May 30 11:09:15 PDT 2013

Good Day,

I researcher in education and Internet in Colombia

Can anyone tell me if there are scholarships for travel?

and power particuipar speaker at the conference this year??

THANKS ¡¡

:::::::::::::::::

> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700
> From: halavais at gmail.com
> To: jhunsinger at wlu.ca
> CC: 
> Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR.
> 
> OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template
> issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated.
> 
> TEMPLATE
> 
> On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the
> reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings.
> I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for
> VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and
> to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many
> of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have
> proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting
> our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was
> important.
> 
> The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a
> collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you
> know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at
> least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a
> format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I
> quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required
> their use.
> 
> Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care
> less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the
> most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that
> doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use
> whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary.
> Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA
> or Chicago then signal "Humanities"?
> 
> I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking
> people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a
> number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for
> not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who
> have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't
> worthy of ongoing support.
> 
> WORD COUNT
> 
> On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is
> that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few
> grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of
> restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard
> consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard
> to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this
> results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors
> those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my
> longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word
> abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and
> some of the proposals were quite short.
> 
> We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but
> the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a
> nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of
> reviewer time.
> 
> REVIEWING
> 
> Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who
> volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not,
> meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign
> reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews
> than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better
> guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will
> hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step
> is to be willing to put time into reviewing.
> 
> I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent
> reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range
> of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of
> this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and
> respect for volunteering to review.
> 
> Alex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger <jhunsinger at wlu.ca> wrote:
> > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a
> > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract.
> > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of
> > clarity.  I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full
> > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not
> > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a
> > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract.  the clarity of the two
> > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways
> > that this system is not
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais <halavais at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit
> >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content
> >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for
> >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted.
> >>
> >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was
> >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've
> >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't
> >> directly a template issue.)
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Alex
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood <f.attwood at mdx.ac.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had
> >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it.
> >> >
> >> > My feeling is that  the new format for submitting proposals seems to
> >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that
> >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in
> >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind
> >> > of format.  It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative,
> >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format
> >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of
> >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed
> >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission
> >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued.
> >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting
> >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking.
> >> > Feona
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Pals,
> >> >>
> >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the
> >> >> list
> >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of
> >> >> Internet Researchers today.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I
> >> >> feel
> >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these
> >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as
> >> >> my
> >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be
> >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well.
> >> >>
> >> >> Some Big Questions I Have:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as
> >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these
> >> >> organizations?
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it
> >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it
> >> >> reflected in submission procedures?
> >> >>
> >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization?
> >> >> How
> >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent,
> >> >> necessary or
> >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous?
> >> >>
> >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and
> >> >> artists
> >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer
> >> >> used
> >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as
> >> >> ubiquitous
> >> >> as literature studies.
> >> >>
> >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases
> >> >> professionalization
> >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars
> >> >> and
> >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the
> >> >> boundaries
> >> >> of the field?
> >> >>
> >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and
> >> >> leave the rest.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Fondly,
> >> >> T
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> <http://goog_689013053>
> >> >>
> >> >> <http://goog_689013053>
> >> >>
> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft
> >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program
> >> >> School of Arts & Sciences
> >> >> New York University
> >> >> 726 Broadway  NY NY 10003
> >> >>
> >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net <http://goog_689013053>**
> >> >> *(needs a serious updating)
> >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft
> >> >> twitter: @terrisenft
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> >> >>
> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> >> >> http://www.aoir.org/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all
> >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All
> >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital
> >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient.
> >> >
> >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed
> >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items
> >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS.  There are
> >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be
> >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University.
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> >> >
> >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> >> > http://www.aoir.org/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> --
> >> //
> >> // This email is
> >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded.
> >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing.
> >> //
> >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur
> >> // http://alex.halavais.net
> >> //
> >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone.
> >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.)
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> >>
> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> >> http://www.aoir.org/
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> //
> // This email is
> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded.
> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing.
> //
> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur
> // http://alex.halavais.net
> //
> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone.
> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.)
> _______________________________________________
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> 
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/