[csaa-forum] csaa-forum Digest, Vol 125, Issue 9

Tue Sep 2 12:53:22 CST 2014

Dear All,

thanks so much for your comments....

It would be great if we could discuss this at CSAA pre-fix day.

 I believe that addressing the issue of collaboration in a serious,
sensitive and ethical way in central to how we constitute ourselves as
professional scholars. Aside from ensuring the trust and respect of the
majority of humanities scholars who are casual academics, cultural studies
often relies on undertaking extra-mural collaborative relationships with
non-scholars.

Maybe it's a hangover of my science degree, but I think multiple-authored
papers are a good thing.

I think the issue of research collaboration should be something that the
NTEU should address. (that's our union by the way). Does anyone want to
volunteer to write something for Catalyst? (that's their publication for
casual academic stuff).

Kind Regards
Dr. Margaret Mayhew
untenured, currently nhired casual academic trying to improve their
publication profile while living on small savings accrued from slaving away
on 3 casual teaching contracts last semester.

On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:10 PM, <csaa-forum-request at lists.cdu.edu.au> wrote:

> Send csaa-forum mailing list submissions to
>         csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         csaa-forum-request at lists.cdu.edu.au
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         csaa-forum-owner at lists.cdu.edu.au
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of csaa-forum digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: collaborative publications (Jen.Webb)
>    2. Re: collaborative publications (Sam Carroll)
>    3. Re: collaborative publications (Alison Bartlett)
>    4. Collaborative publications (Ann Deslandes)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 03:57:56 +0000
> From: Jen.Webb <Jen.Webb at canberra.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] collaborative publications
> To: Darren Jorgensen <darren.jorgensen at uwa.edu.au>
> Cc: "csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au" <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>,
> Jon
>         Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>
> Message-ID: <4718B80D-ECCA-419F-859F-B62ADEC7BFFC at canberra.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> There's pointers to this in the Aust Code for the Responsible Conduct of
> Research: appropriate for HASS as well as STEM researchers.
> Best
> Jen Webb
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 1 Sep 2014, at 1:51 pm, "Darren Jorgensen" <darren.jorgensen at uwa.edu.au
> <mailto:darren.jorgensen at uwa.edu.au>> wrote:
>
> hi Jon
>
> I use money as a guide. If I employ someone as an RA, it's not a
> collaboration since I am basically exploiting them and thus 'own' the
> research. A genuine collaboration however is one in which I am not paying
> anyone, and in which we share the direction of the research. In these cases
> I may pay someone else's research expenses for example for travel but not a
> wage, and will co-author with them.
>
> It's still murky! darren
> Darren Jorgensen, art history, University of Western Australia
>
> From: Andrew Murphie <andrew.murphie at gmail.com<mailto:
> andrew.murphie at gmail.com>>
> Reply-To: "andrew.murphie at gmail.com<mailto:andrew.murphie at gmail.com>" <
> andrew.murphie at gmail.com<mailto:andrew.murphie at gmail.com>>
> Date: Monday, 1 September 2014 11:36 AM
> To: Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au<mailto:J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au
> >>
> Cc: "csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au<mailto:csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>" <
> csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au<mailto:csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>>
> Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] collaborative publications
>
> Hi Jon,
>
> thanks for bringing this up. A facetious answer might be that we all
> should just become scientists?it seems increasingly what is wanted. A less
> facetious version of the same is exactly what you point to. There are no
> well established understandings/conventions for this in the humanities, as
> there are in science, all along the line (from research to write up). A
> third thing to emphasise (again I'm just repeating what you've already
> pointed out) is that we perhaps have to admit that there we have a
> different understanding of collaboration in the humanities, because
> collaboration is different, as you point out. We also have no standard
> frameworks for collaboration. There is no standard model (and I'm involved
> in a lot of collaborative work).
>
> My view would be that a forced accounting for collaboration along the
> lines of the sciences would be a gigantic mess all around?one indeed forced
> by the new forms of accounting we are increasingly subjected to. Genuine
> collaboration however is much easier. If there has been collaboration
> (beyond, for example, me taking more credit for my PhD supervisee's
> work?which I find deeply troubling from a number of angles, as I'm sure
> they would, rightly) it is currently labelled as such.
>
> Not much help perhaps but I'm troubled by these new requirements and not
> sure that we really can fit them without changing what we do in undesired
> ways.
>
> Sigh.
>
> all the best, Andrew
>
>
> On 1 September 2014 13:21, Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au<mailto:
> J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>> wrote:
>
>  Hi All,
>     I'm wondering what opinions are on what is enough work to legitimately
> claim joint authorship for an article/chapter.  Increasingly we in
> Humanities are being asked by our universities to publish jointly, either
> with our doctoral students or with our Research Assistants, or indeed with
> each other.  This, we are constantly told, is what happens in the sciences
> and we are enjoined to behave similarly.  I have assumed that this is
> supposed to increase our research output.
>
> Now, in the sciences, as I understand it, joint publication is relatively
> straightforward.  A senior staff member develops a project on which s/he
> employs one or more RAs or postgrads.  The results are then published under
> all their names with, most likely, the senior staff member having her/his
> name first as lead author.
>
> In Humanities things are different.  So, how much work by one person, say
> the staff member, constitutes enough of a contribution for her/him to be
> included as an author?  For example, would doing one or more Track Changes
> on an article/chapter be enough?  What about if the idea for the article is
> the staff member's?  Would a first drafting, or redrafting be what is
> required?  What about suggesting the most appropriate journal to send the
> article to, and helping the RA/postgrad through the submission and, maybe,
> the revision process?  Or, perhaps, simply the fact of employing the RA on
> a project where funding has been obtained by the staff member--which might
> equate with being the supervisor for a postgrad submitting an article?  Or,
> what combination of these things?
>
> Because collaborative work has been so rare in the Humanities there seems
> to be no normative rules for what is the appropriate amount of input.  I am
> wondering how colleagues are dealing with this relatively new situation.
>
> many thanks,
> Jon
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au<http://www.csaa.asn.au>
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
>
>
> --
>
> "A traveller, who has lost his way, should not ask, Where am I? What he
> really wants to know is, Where are the other places" - Alfred North
> Whitehead
>
> Andrew Murphie - Associate Professor
> School of the Arts and Media,
> University of New South Wales,
> Sydney, Australia, 2052
>
> Editor - The Fibreculture Journal http://fibreculturejournal.org/>
> web: http://www.andrewmurphie.org/ <http://dynamicmedianetwork.org/>
>
> tlf:612 93855548 fax:612 93856812
> room 311H, Robert Webster Building
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au<http://www.csaa.asn.au>
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 15:08:11 +1000
> From: Sam Carroll <samantha at samanthacarroll.com>
> Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] collaborative publications
> Cc: csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
> Message-ID: <E96FE4D5-8955-4DFD-B450-80287831EDBF at samanthacarroll.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> ...so it seems there are actually very clear guidelines for conducting
> these sorts of professional relationships (though they may vary between
> institutions), but that many peeps working in universities aren't actually
> sure what they are, or how to access them?
>
> If only there was some sort of union that could help learn people up on
> this action, or some sort of training procedure for supervisors and
> researchers... :D
>
> On 01/09/2014, at 1:57 PM, Jen.Webb wrote:
>
> > There's pointers to this in the Aust Code for the Responsible Conduct of
> Research: appropriate for HASS as well as STEM researchers.
> > Best
> > Jen Webb
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On 1 Sep 2014, at 1:51 pm, "Darren Jorgensen" <
> darren.jorgensen at uwa.edu.au<mailto:darren.jorgensen at uwa.edu.au>> wrote:
> >
> > hi Jon
> >
> > I use money as a guide. If I employ someone as an RA, it's not a
> collaboration since I am basically exploiting them and thus 'own' the
> research. A genuine collaboration however is one in which I am not paying
> anyone, and in which we share the direction of the research. In these cases
> I may pay someone else's research expenses for example for travel but not a
> wage, and will co-author with them.
> >
> > It's still murky! darren
> > Darren Jorgensen, art history, University of Western Australia
> >
> > From: Andrew Murphie <andrew.murphie at gmail.com<mailto:
> andrew.murphie at gmail.com>>
> > Reply-To: "andrew.murphie at gmail.com<mailto:andrew.murphie at gmail.com>" <
> andrew.murphie at gmail.com<mailto:andrew.murphie at gmail.com>>
> > Date: Monday, 1 September 2014 11:36 AM
> > To: Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au<mailto:
> J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>>
> > Cc: "csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au<mailto:csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>" <
> csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au<mailto:csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>>
> > Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] collaborative publications
> >
> > Hi Jon,
> >
> > thanks for bringing this up. A facetious answer might be that we all
> should just become scientists?it seems increasingly what is wanted. A less
> facetious version of the same is exactly what you point to. There are no
> well established understandings/conventions for this in the humanities, as
> there are in science, all along the line (from research to write up). A
> third thing to emphasise (again I'm just repeating what you've already
> pointed out) is that we perhaps have to admit that there we have a
> different understanding of collaboration in the humanities, because
> collaboration is different, as you point out. We also have no standard
> frameworks for collaboration. There is no standard model (and I'm involved
> in a lot of collaborative work).
> >
> > My view would be that a forced accounting for collaboration along the
> lines of the sciences would be a gigantic mess all around?one indeed forced
> by the new forms of accounting we are increasingly subjected to. Genuine
> collaboration however is much easier. If there has been collaboration
> (beyond, for example, me taking more credit for my PhD supervisee's
> work?which I find deeply troubling from a number of angles, as I'm sure
> they would, rightly) it is currently labelled as such.
> >
> > Not much help perhaps but I'm troubled by these new requirements and not
> sure that we really can fit them without changing what we do in undesired
> ways.
> >
> > Sigh.
> >
> > all the best, Andrew
> >
> >
> > On 1 September 2014 13:21, Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au
> <mailto:J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >    I'm wondering what opinions are on what is enough work to
> legitimately claim joint authorship for an article/chapter.  Increasingly
> we in Humanities are being asked by our universities to publish jointly,
> either with our doctoral students or with our Research Assistants, or
> indeed with each other.  This, we are constantly told, is what happens in
> the sciences and we are enjoined to behave similarly.  I have assumed that
> this is supposed to increase our research output.
> >
> > Now, in the sciences, as I understand it, joint publication is
> relatively straightforward.  A senior staff member develops a project on
> which s/he employs one or more RAs or postgrads.  The results are then
> published under all their names with, most likely, the senior staff member
> having her/his name first as lead author.
> >
> > In Humanities things are different.  So, how much work by one person,
> say the staff member, constitutes enough of a contribution for her/him to
> be included as an author?  For example, would doing one or more Track
> Changes on an article/chapter be enough?  What about if the idea for the
> article is the staff member's?  Would a first drafting, or redrafting be
> what is required?  What about suggesting the most appropriate journal to
> send the article to, and helping the RA/postgrad through the submission
> and, maybe, the revision process?  Or, perhaps, simply the fact of
> employing the RA on a project where funding has been obtained by the staff
> member--which might equate with being the supervisor for a postgrad
> submitting an article?  Or, what combination of these things?
> >
> > Because collaborative work has been so rare in the Humanities there
> seems to be no normative rules for what is the appropriate amount of
> input.  I am wondering how colleagues are dealing with this relatively new
> situation.
> >
> > many thanks,
> > Jon
> > _______________________________________
> >
> > csaa-forum
> > discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
> >
> > www.csaa.asn.au<http://www.csaa.asn.au>
> >
> > change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > "A traveller, who has lost his way, should not ask, Where am I? What he
> really wants to know is, Where are the other places" - Alfred North
> Whitehead
> >
> > Andrew Murphie - Associate Professor
> > School of the Arts and Media,
> > University of New South Wales,
> > Sydney, Australia, 2052
> >
> > Editor - The Fibreculture Journal http://fibreculturejournal.org/>
> > web: http://www.andrewmurphie.org/ <http://dynamicmedianetwork.org/>
> >
> > tlf:612 93855548 fax:612 93856812
> > room 311H, Robert Webster Building
> > _______________________________________
> >
> > csaa-forum
> > discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
> >
> > www.csaa.asn.au<http://www.csaa.asn.au>
> >
> > change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
> > _______________________________________
> >
> > csaa-forum
> > discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
> >
> > www.csaa.asn.au
> >
> > change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 13:15:03 +0800
> From: Alison Bartlett <alison.bartlett at uwa.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] collaborative publications
> To: Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>
> Cc: "csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au" <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>
> Message-ID: <FBCDD6C6-5E6E-4BA8-B75D-16569B5388C4 at uwa.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> There's plenty of defensive about exploiting others in these strange new
> collaborative worlds,
> but I'm starting to think that there are no losers in this paradigm shift,
> especially now my university is giving equal publication points (not
> fractional) to every collaborator.
>
> It has to assist postgrads to have a senior scholar's name on their
> papers, not to mention advice on how to structure, where to send, how to
> receive reviewers' comments, etc. It's arguably part of mentoring,
> modelling, and research training.
> As an editor of a journal I've starting twinning authors - if a paper
> isn't quite up to publication, I'll offer the option of finding a more
> experienced scholar in the area to co-author so that it can be published.
> It's worked beautifully.
> And forcollaborations with colleagues, discussion at the beginning of the
> project seems key to agreeing on coauthorship practice.
>
> Nice to have those protocols handy Deb - thanks!
>
> Alison Bartlett
>
>
> On 01/09/2014, at 11:21 AM, Jon Stratton <J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au<mailto:
> J.Stratton at curtin.edu.au>> wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>    I'm wondering what opinions are on what is enough work to legitimately
> claim joint authorship for an article/chapter.  Increasingly we in
> Humanities are being asked by our universities to publish jointly, either
> with our doctoral students or with our Research Assistants, or indeed with
> each other.  This, we are constantly told, is what happens in the sciences
> and we are enjoined to behave similarly.  I have assumed that this is
> supposed to increase our research output.
>
> Now, in the sciences, as I understand it, joint publication is relatively
> straightforward.  A senior staff member develops a project on which s/he
> employs one or more RAs or postgrads.  The results are then published under
> all their names with, most likely, the senior staff member having her/his
> name first as lead author.
>
> In Humanities things are different.  So, how much work by one person, say
> the staff member, constitutes enough of a contribution for her/him to be
> included as an author?  For example, would doing one or more Track Changes
> on an article/chapter be enough?  What about if the idea for the article is
> the staff member's?  Would a first drafting, or redrafting be what is
> required?  What about suggesting the most appropriate journal to send the
> article to, and helping the RA/postgrad through the submission and, maybe,
> the revision process?  Or, perhaps, simply the fact of employing the RA on
> a project where funding has been obtained by the staff member--which might
> equate with being the supervisor for a postgrad submitting an article?  Or,
> what combination of these things?
>
> Because collaborative work has been so rare in the Humanities there seems
> to be no normative rules for what is the appropriate amount of input.  I am
> wondering how colleagues are dealing with this relatively new situation.
>
> many thanks,
> Jon
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au<http://www.csaa.asn.au>
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20140901/346ca750/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 15:40:08 +0930
> From: Ann Deslandes <ann.deslandes at gmail.com>
> Subject: [csaa-forum] Collaborative publications
> To: csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
> Message-ID:
>         <CAJ1NW--J3FG-FHWsLdY3VZnZ=uv==
> 7ceGL7dvvdxnyZAs6UYeA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'd ask that *the rights and needs of non-tenured academics are considered
> by the tenured before any response to the issue of collaboration is
> formulated further.*
>
> I'm deeply troubled by notions such as:
>
> "If I employ someone as an RA, it's not a collaboration since I am
> basically exploiting them and thus 'own' the research."
>
> I think this willingness to see the employer-RA relationship as
> exploitative and to dismiss the potential for RAs to be co-authors of work
> they collaborate on suggests an initial conversation is required regarding
> the position of casual academics hired to support tenured academics'
> research activity in the question of collaboration.
>
> I'm afraid I'm not in a position to contribute to further debate on this
> but wanted to put the above forward from the perspective of a long-term
> casually-employed academic who remains a scholar in their own right and
> expects to be both paid for their work and to be treated as a collaborator
> when they have contributed conceptually and technically to the production
> of a published work.
>
> Sincerely, Ann Deslandes.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20140901/b220b05d/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
> End of csaa-forum Digest, Vol 125, Issue 9
> ******************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cdu.edu.au/pipermail/csaa-forum/attachments/20140902/161769ce/attachment-0001.html 