Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Damn the publishers

By Melissa Gregg - posted Thursday, 28 May 2009


How much longer can Australian universities accept the lack of outlets to publish research in this country? The Excellence in Research for Australia initiative will make publishing outcomes more important than ever. But present indicators of academic merit appear poised to punish Australian research for its very Australian-ness.

Three years ago, I won an Australian Research Council Postdoctoral Fellowship to study an issue that affects a large cross-section of Australians: online technology's impact on work and home life. It's an issue with clear policy application at government and workplace level. But how will the research contribute to public debate without a local publisher for my book, From Boardroom to Bedroom: Online culture, intimacy and the new world of work?

The stack of rejection letters I've received lately shows the ludicrousness of the situation.

Advertisement

One well-known Australian scholarly publisher responded to my book proposal saying: "Our priority is to publish textbooks that will be prescribed for specific courses. Unless we can identify a strong market and specific courses for which the book can be prescribed as a core text, it falls outside my publishing program."

A local trade press was slightly more considerate: "From the proposal you sent, this looks like a thorough and thoughtful study of a phenomenon that is quietly changing the lives of many of us. That said, our experience is that we generally aren't able to find a significant readership for academic studies of this kind among general readers, even where the topic is an issue related to their lives."

If local presses aren't interested, what about further afield? A British editor wrote: "it's an interesting project but for us to be even able to consider it, I'd have to ask you to really play down the Australian-based empirical material. The focus on the Australian material would significantly reduce the market."

But taking the cake is the US publisher who would consider a revised proposal if I placed the US "at the heart of the book".

A major contradiction exists between funding models that reward research targeted to "national priorities" and the structures in place to disseminate that research. With the market for quality scholarship so small in Australia, it's a no-brainer that the ARC urgently heeds the call for subsidies coming from a range of publishers and advocacy bodies.

Scholarly publishing for unknown authors is in a state of almost complete lock-down. Leading professors will tell you it's been that way for years.

Advertisement

The only way "in" is to have contacts in the right networks. Well, my rejection tally is a running joke on Facebook. It's become a bonding device for other young academics with their own knock-back letters.

In the latest ERA blueprint, scholarly presses ranked highest in my field would prefer me to summarise the work of overseas scholars for American undergraduate students rather than produce original research about my own country.

To have my work published in A-ranked journals, I need to join a waiting list that is up to three years long.

This publishing lag hardly helps when numerical outputs are the key sorting mechanism used by grant assessors and potential employers alike. The ERA emphasis on quality and quantity bears no realistic relationship to the opportunities that are available to the majority.

At least university libraries are starting to recognise that online publishing allows articles to be widely read and cited. But "e-repositories" do little to overturn the commercial imperatives that determine book contracts and journal subscriptions.

When marketing decisions have direct power over career advancement, scholars are rewarded for producing palatable research that appeals to a preconceived audience. Those who choose not to pursue original research about their own country are actually rewarded.

Meanwhile, the time that junior scholars could spend writing original articles to improve their prospects is increasingly invaded by administrative requests.

Hours are spent wading through spreadsheets to correct journal rankings amassed by bureaucrats, and compiling lists to prove the "impact factor" of one's writing.

The situation is nothing short of alienating. The highlight of the job - getting published - has become an exercise in minimising losses from poor odds.

If emerging scholars were actually consulted about the changes affecting their prospects, they'd testify that open access journals with effective peer review systems already demonstrate alternatives to this model. Aside from the worldwide exposure it offers research, the great benefit of online publishing is its speed. It allows young academics to contribute to their field in a timeframe that can match today's steep requirements for employability.

Let's hope that by the time we see the findings from this ERA, its onerous auditing processes will have caught up with reality. No one would dispute that textbooks are vital to any education system. But Australian scholars also need to believe they have a further role: to address the broader issues affecting their own, and fellow citizens', experience.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

First published in The Australian on May 27, 2009.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

8 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Melissa Gregg is an ARC Discovery fellow in the department of gender and cultural studies at the University of Sydney. In November 2009 Melissa is organising a major national conference on academic labour, "The State of the Industry", supported by the ARC Cultural Research Network.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Melissa Gregg

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Melissa Gregg
Article Tools
Comment 8 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy