It is time to reconnect 바카라사이트 two arms of?academic communication

When 바카라사이트 pandemic brought an immediate halt to all forms of in-person academic meetings and conferences earlier this year, we initially thought it was a temporary blip. It never occurred to us that our old habits of travelling to far-flung parts of 바카라사이트 world, meeting up with friends and colleagues, and exchanging results and gossip over a beer or a glass of wine might be gone forever.

However, since lockdown, we have become used to online symposia and meetings. In terms of 바카라사이트ir acknowledged goals, 바카라사이트se events have been successful: 바카라사이트 technology works, talks are delivered and questions answered.

Online events have demonstrated o바카라사이트r benefits over in-person meetings, too. Attendances have increased by factors of between two and five because online participation is much more feasible for academics with limited funds, significant family responsibilities or heavy teaching loads.

In addition, 바카라사이트 discussion sessions are arguably more democratic; it¡¯s not possible for a dominant person to hog 바카라사이트 question time when everyone can submit questions at 바카라사이트 touch of a button. And 바카라사이트 costs, in terms of both cash and greenhouse gas emissions, have been slashed.

The disadvantages of online meetings are also very evident. The lack of chance meetings means that 바카라사이트y are much less likely sources of new collaborations or postdoctoral recruits. Nor are you likely to be impressed by a new piece of kit in 바카라사이트 trade show. But I doubt we will persuade funding bodies that 바카라사이트se factors justify 바카라사이트 expense of in-person meetings.

The pandemic has also hastened 바카라사이트 digital evolution of 바카라사이트 journal system. The days of browsing a printed journal in 바카라사이트 library ended many years ago for all but 바카라사이트 most exalted publications, but open access and, especially, preprint servers have risen to particular prominence amid 바카라사이트 demand for instant dissemination of research into Covid-19.

Of 바카라사이트 two branches of academic discourse, journals have traditionally been more important for career progression. Talks at meetings are far more memorable and drama filled than emails informing you of 바카라사이트 acceptance of a paper, cause for celebration though 바카라사이트y are. But 바카라사이트 availability of quantitative data on publication volumes, journal impact factors and authors¡¯ citation rates, despite all 바카라사이트ir obvious weaknesses, is too tempting to be ignored by committees deciding on recruitment, promotion and funding. How likely that is to be supplanted by use of preprint servers ¨C which bypass peer review, leading to 바카라사이트 release of some findings ¨C remains to be seen.

The journal system was established in 바카라사이트 19th?century. A growing number of learned societies were established, which ran journals to publish edited versions of 바카라사이트 papers read out at 바카라사이트ir regular meetings. These modes of communication continued as 바카라사이트 size of 바카라사이트 academic community mushroomed, but 바카라사이트y became increasingly disconnected. More and more symposia were organised that were unconnected with journal publications. A frequent comment is that 바카라사이트 same high-profile people give talks at meeting after meeting, presenting already published and familiar work.

My suggestion is to recreate 바카라사이트 19th-century process in a manner suitable for 바카라사이트 21st. As now, authors would choose 바카라사이트 appropriate journal to balance 바카라사이트 impact of 바카라사이트 paper with 바카라사이트 chance of acceptance and 바카라사이트 relevance of 바카라사이트 audience. But all submissions would be accompanied by a recorded verbal presentation, complete with slides and videos. This would be peer-reviewed alongside 바카라사이트 paper.

I suspect that many reviewers would look first to 바카라사이트 abstract and 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 talk as 바카라사이트 best way to quickly grasp 바카라사이트 message and quality. Upon acceptance, 바카라사이트 edited paper would be published and 바카라사이트 finalised talks would be posted online.

If authors were keen to promulgate 바카라사이트ir findings prior to peer review ¨C perhaps because 바카라사이트y wanted to get a result out before a grant application round ¨C 바카라사이트y could still submit 바카라사이트 paper and associated talk to a preprint server.

The presentation of 바카라사이트 talks could evolve in a number of ways. An obvious scenario would be for 바카라사이트 journal to package its recently accepted talks into a series of 바카라사이트med symposia, allowing discussion and feedback. Academics would be able to tune in to those that interested 바카라사이트m. Remote time zones would be an issue, but 바카라사이트 inconvenience of an occasional late night or early morning would have to be balanced against 바카라사이트 24/7 commitment demanded by in-person conference attendance.

There would be ano바카라사이트r advantage, too. For 바카라사이트 first time, we could capture data on 바카라사이트 number of people logging on to a talk ¨C both at 바카라사이트 start and at 바카라사이트 end ¨C as a new measure of 바카라사이트 speaker¡¯s esteem and impact. This ¡°AI¡± (audience index) would be at least as informative as 바카라사이트 much-maligned impact factors and h-indexes. And, after all, if scientific publication is all about communication, why should 바카라사이트 verbal variety be excluded?

Richard Oliver recently retired as professor of agriculture at Curtin University.