« We're all studio bands now | Main | The Keynote Equivalent? »




I do find this interesting and relevant as a student, and as a research aware practitioner.
As a tutor with students starting out in Higher Education, electronic 'persona' is vital: it is part of what draws them in and how they know me and each other.
As a student I feel included in a relevant community without having to move my body to a particular institution. This sort of inclusion is what is happening right here.
It seems far from certain that this benefit comes at no cost, in fact 'floating around' on line takes up time, but then so does poking around in the library stacks. Making entries takes time, and whilst we can make use of things already written it is also those just for that moment, almost serendipitous comments that make the on-line presence 'personable'. But then if we engage with others either virtually or in the flesh time to give a personal sparkle is what makes for a research and learning environment that is attractive.

Chris Jones

I am not sure that I argued that establishing an online identity wasn't suitable for some academics and I think my comment was reacting to an idea of digital scholarship which is a somewhat different thing.

Like most if not all academics I have an online identity, for example represented in a university home page with a list of publications and detailing other aspects of my academic work and providing contact details. I also have an online identity that is loosely linked to my working life, in my case a Facebook profile, a Twitter stream and a number of online networks such as Plaxo and Linkdin. The existence of an online identity is not the same thing as having an academic online identity.

My comment was about the way digital scholarship seems to assume a role online rather like that exemplified by the traditional public intellectual.

As to Martin's arguments I think they blur this distinction. As an example let's take his argument of recognition - This argument suggests that academics require an online identity but then it goes on to argue that the current kinds of academic recognition are too narrowly drawn and exclude digital scholarship.

My point is that the first argument for an online identity for academics does not relate to the second argument about academic recognition and digital scholarship. I have an online identity but I do not think I am engaged in digital scholarship.

I am not sure that there is a clear notion about what digital scholarship might entail and I will illustrate this by examining he use of scholarship in debates in my own university. Currently at the Open University the idea of scholarship arises in a number of contexts with different definitions and implications. For example in relation to the 'scholarship of teaching and learning' and in discussions following the research assessment exercise that seem to suggest a role for full academics in terms of scholarship as an alternative for those excluded from the research assessment exercise. Even without exploring the digital aspect of scholarship the idea of scholarship alone is politically charged, used in a variety of ways and lacking any real clarity.

Digital scholarship could refer to the use of digital and networked tools to assist in doing scholarly work. This could be a relatively solitary task with a digital scholar sat in a connected but cell like isolation. The aspects of scholarship Martin seems to emphasise are the ways digital technologies can be used to disseminate ideas or to create new ideas in cooperative or collective enterprises.

I have no objection to these developments but I think it may generalise a minority position, that of the public intellectual, and downplay another important aspect of academic work, the pursuit of a relatively solitary or narrowly understood intellectual project.

Andre Malan

I think that the argument of imperative makes a lot of sense in the following context: Students who feel like they have a relationship with their professor will perform better. They will contribute more to the conversation and think more deeply about the topic. Now, instructors do not have the time to develop real personal relationships with their students in the traditional sense. Having a visible social media presence (and Facebook doesn't count because I can't see you till I befriend you) is the only viable means of accomplishing this relationship. University home pages and even personal websites do not count as they often strip all aspects of humanity from the instructor unless they are being continuously updated with content that contains a personal tone.


Interesting but I wonder if we know what we mean by 'traditional scholarship' and if we do do our meanings agree with each other?

freelance writing job

This argument suggests that academics require an online identity but then it goes on to argue that the current kinds of academic recognition are too narrowly drawn and exclude digital scholarship.

Amir Khatri

If one thinks this social media stuff has any relevance,instagram followers now

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos and videos from edtechie99. Make your own badge here.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter