collect lists of publication channels!
I was at an information meeting about the new system for financing research the other day. Argue as we may, the system’s going through, and that means: Norwegian new media researchers, we need to work together. The new system for measuring research depends on your “publication channel” (i.e. journal, website, publisher) being on a master list of approved peer-reviewed “channels”. The list is updated yearly according to recommendations from each discipline’s nasjonalt fagrÂd. Not many of the journals in our field are on the list yet, but many clearly qualify if we simply get one of the national committees to nominate them. The deadline for the national committee to send in their recommendations is August 22, and that list will be what is used to assess anything published in 2005.
I suggest we compile a list here – add comments! – and send it to the national committee in plenty of time for it to go through. I’ve written to Bj¯rn S¯rensen, who runs the committee and is an excellent guy and a new media researcher too. To be included, a journal must be peer-reviewed. If you publish research in a “channel” that’s not peer-reviewed, it counts as formidling, or popularisation, not as research.
The idea is that you get one point for anything published in any journal on the list. If you get something published in a journal on the “level 2” list, you get five points. Level 2 journals are supposed to account for about 20% of the publications in each discipline, so some disciplines will have one big journal in level 2 while others will have lots of very small ones. How those points translate into money and whether the individual research, the department or the university at large gets the money isn’t clear yet and will in most cases be decided on a local level, apparently.
There might be a good reason for this, in a way. See, international evaluations of Norwegian research have found that our research is excellent, but that we’re not ambitious enough about the quality of the journals we submit our stuff too. Part of the point of this reform is to encourage us to be more daring in where we send stuff, which in theory will then disseminate Norwegian research more and we’ll all do better. Also, they’re working on a system to also give credit to formidling, which would cover publication in non-scholarly outlets and, I assume, weblogging.
OK: the list is in a huge Excel file over at the UHR website; I copied it into plain HTML here. The level 2 list is here, in HTML. In principle any peer-reviewed scholarly journal can be on the list. Ones I’d like added include: Game Studies,
Journal of Digital Information (it’s already in), Rhizomes, m/c, Fibreculture (list to be continued)
There’s also a level 2 list, which is supposed to represent more or less the best publication channels, where about 1/5 of articles are published. If you publish in these, you get 5 points, while the regular list only gets you one. Journals I could conceivably send something to include World Literature Today, which interestingly wants “essays for a broad audience” rather than dense scholarship (maybe something on electronic literature, eh?), American Literature, (will be added to as I see places)