Re: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR
HI, all. I just want to echo what has already been said about the conference organizers. You guys are awesome. I appreciate all your work. I'm sure everyone feels the same. I, personally, see this conversation as part of the growing pains of the organization. The change in the submission process just happened to be the thing that sparked it. But, the conversation was probably going to happen sooner or later. If such conversations didn't happen occasionally, AoiR would become calcified and cease to be the reflexive intellectual space we all seem to appreciate. But, I have nothing by love and praise for the conference organizers. There have been a lot of good ideas put forth. I think the track idea might be a useful one to think about. We're an interdisciplinary organization, and if we want to have an interdiscipinary conference we need to try and find a way to accommodate the disciplinary needs of members. That way people can "fit" AoIR into what they need to be doing for tenure, promotion, travel funds, etc. A lot of people have said that their home departments don't take AoIR conferences seriously and won't give them funding to come. Those people need a peer refereed full paper that can be published in proceedings to justify their attendance to their departments. I would hate to see AoiR conferences loose those people and their work. So, we should keep those needs in mind. But, we also need to keep in mind the points that have already been made about work in-progress, performances, activist work, etc. It seems like there could be some kind of track system for different kinds of work so that we can be more confident that those different "flavors" of contribution are being evaluated appropriate criteria. Also, ditto to what Terri said about being willing to help. As these problems get tackled, I'm always happy to help with what I can. Best, Sarah Florini A.W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow Department of Communication Arts University of Wisconsin-Madison
Hey folks, I've reviewed submissions for most of the IR conferences, and have been on the Conference Committee for three years now, as program chair and as VP. In October, I'll be AoIR's incoming president, and will continue on the committee in that capacity. As such, I've been following this discussion with a great deal of interest and thought. I want to thank all of you for your thoughtful comments and ideas. I also want to say, first and foremost, that you all rock, and our conference rocks. Rest assured that the decisions on what to accept were very difficult; if we have not managed to take your submission for this conference it's not a reflection on the quality of your work. We simply had too much good work. I hope I'll see you all in Denver, because I can promise you it will be a great conference. What I mostly hear when I talk to people who attend the IR conferences is that they are better in many ways than other conferences they attend. I have also heard people say that this perception doesn't always extend to people in their departments, disciplines, etc. That's sad, and I hope we can do a better job of showing people outside of AoIR who we are and what we do. I know that desire has driven many of the things Alex and the other members of the executive committee have been trying to do over the past several years. SPIR, and the (slightly) longer submissions, is part of those efforts. I see much of the struggle here as part of the hard work of being interdisciplinary. That struggle will continue in the process of planning the conference, including the work of reviewing. There have been a lot of good suggestions that have come up in this discussion, and I'm assembling these for later reflection and discussion amongst the conference committee and the executive committee. About the only thing I'll say upfront is that we have a tradition of avoiding tracks at AoIR, and I'm not convinced we should abandon that tradition. That seems to me to be a way to move away from interdisciplinarity, back to our separate silos, rather than mixing it up, and exposing ourselves to the wide variety of types of work that appear at the IR conferences. If anything, I'll be pushing this year and the next few years to mix things up more. Thanks again for all your hard work, and I look forward to seeing you in Denver! Lori
Great response Lori. You rock! :) I totally get receiving too many great submissions and having to make hard choices. But investing all that time writing a short paper, fiddling around with formatting etc makes that rejection even more disappointing. We expect that with a journal submission but for a conference abstract? I still firmly believe that the potential of a paper can still be assessed in 600 words. I would also never use more than 2 reviewers unless there was a complete difference of opinion. If we don't want to go with "tracks", and we want to remain interdisciplinary, then we need to work on the proposal guidelines so that they do not disadvantage submissions based in humanities and or cultural studies that are primarily theoretical engagements. (I don't want to say theoretically-based because I would hope much empirical work would be theoretically informed). Cultural studies papers do not have "Methodology" sections. They do not have "Discussions of Findings." So some "and/or" phrasing will be needed. One suggestion would be to is add a place on the form to indicate "discipline(s)". Reviewers should also specify their disciplinary orientation not just their areas of interest or expertise. best Rhiannon ________________________________ From: "Kendall, Lori" <loriken@illinois.edu> To: "air-l@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 6:56:15 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Hey folks, I've reviewed submissions for most of the IR conferences, and have been on the Conference Committee for three years now, as program chair and as VP. In October, I'll be AoIR's incoming president, and will continue on the committee in that capacity. As such, I've been following this discussion with a great deal of interest and thought. I want to thank all of you for your thoughtful comments and ideas. I also want to say, first and foremost, that you all rock, and our conference rocks. Rest assured that the decisions on what to accept were very difficult; if we have not managed to take your submission for this conference it's not a reflection on the quality of your work. We simply had too much good work. I hope I'll see you all in Denver, because I can promise you it will be a great conference. What I mostly hear when I talk to people who attend the IR conferences is that they are better in many ways than other conferences they attend. I have also heard people say that this perception doesn't always extend to people in their departments, disciplines, etc. That's sad, and I hope we can do a better job of showing people outside of AoIR who we are and what we do. I know that desire has driven many of the things Alex and the other members of the executive committee have been trying to do over the past several years. SPIR, and the (slightly) longer submissions, is part of those efforts. I see much of the struggle here as part of the hard work of being interdisciplinary. That struggle will continue in the process of planning the conference, including the work of reviewing. There have been a lot of good suggestions that have come up in this discussion, and I'm assembling these for later reflection and discussion amongst the conference committee and the executive committee. About the only thing I'll say upfront is that we have a tradition of avoiding tracks at AoIR, and I'm not convinced we should abandon that tradition. That seems to me to be a way to move away from interdisciplinarity, back to our separate silos, rather than mixing it up, and exposing ourselves to the wide variety of types of work that appear at the IR conferences. If anything, I'll be pushing this year and the next few years to mix things up more. Thanks again for all your hard work, and I look forward to seeing you in Denver! Lori _______________________________________________ The Air-L@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/
participants (3)
-
Kendall, Lori -
Rhiannon Bury -
Sarah Florini