Kappan Home PDK Home
Electronic Scholarship By Royal Van Horn Illustration © 1998 by Mario Noche

EDUCATORS at all levels who choose to do their professional work using the latest electronic and digital tools are disadvantaged. Schools, colleges, and universities tend to reward people who chair committees but not people who design the Web pages that contain the committee minutes and so make it easier for committees to function. By the same token, scholars who disseminate research reports in printed journals with few readers are admired, while researchers who present their findings in stunning multimedia presentations with widespread appeal are slighted. The writer of a textbook gets instant credit for the "text," while the creator of multimedia gets little if any credit for an "interactive course." Educators beware! If you choose to work in the new media, you may not receive rewards or recognition comparable to that bestowed on those who work in more traditional media.

University Considerations

Because of academic tradition, scholarship that appears on the printed page is highly valued. Printed scholarship is easy to cite on curriculum vitae, and most senior faculty members can distinguish between a "well-placed paper" and publication in a "rag journal." At universities you frequently hear faculty members refer to "first-tier" journals. Publishing houses can even be placed in a type of "pecking order," with the "vanity press" at the bottom of the list. Print is also easy to distribute. All you have to do is photocopy an article or send someone a copy of your book. Even better, make your students go to the bookstore and buy copies of your work.

By contrast, scholarship that ends up in an electronic form is problematic. While it is easy enough to cite on a curriculum vitae, assessing its worth is difficult. Does an interactive CD-ROM disc equal a printed journal article or a book? For instance, imagine a statistical abstract of the condition of education in a school district or state. In one form, this study appears as static charts, graphs, and text on the printed page of a research report. In quite a different form, the same research report might appear as an interactive CD-ROM disc with charts and graphs that are animated and can change to show the progression of a trend. The CD-ROM-based research report might also contain explanatory audio and video clips as well as links to websites with up-to-date information.

Pre-K­12 Considerations

While it may be less of a dilemma for them, educators working in pre-K­12 schools are not isolated from the issues surrounding electronic scholarship. Traditionally, part of a teacher's evaluation is based on lesson plans, curriculum units, course syllabi, handouts, worksheets, and classroom bulletin boards and charts. All are printed material. Imagine for a moment a teacher who chooses to create a website for students or a series of Power Point presentations on topics that are tough to teach and learn -- say, the tilt of the Earth on its axis or the revolution of the Earth around the sun (the often misunderstood mechanisms that cause the seasons). How does this electronic teaching get evaluated?

Personal Example

Here is a personal example of the dilemma of electronic scholarship and keeping up with the times. In the fall of 1989, Wadsworth Publishing Company sent the final edited copy of my book, Advanced Technology in Education, to the printer. The book was released in the fall of 1990 with a 1991 copyright date. As is typical of textbook publishing, the book was not widely used until the fall of 1991. By then, the book on "advanced technology" was two years old! Fortunately for me, the "rate of change" in technology back then was much slower than it is today, so a two-year lag time was acceptable. In early 1993, Wadsworth wanted a second edition, so I wrote one, finishing it in late 1993. The editorial review of the second edition took an entire year, with the results sent to me in late 1994. By then the "rate of change" in technology had become so rapid that I declined to pursue the project. So much for a year of work on a by-then outdated edition of the text.

In 1994 and 1995 I turned my attention to creating a highly interactive multimedia CD-ROM disc, First Grade, which is the digital equivalent of a textbook in terms of "facilitated hours of student learning." As you might guess, the traditional publishers wanted me to write a textbook that would include the CD-ROM as an "ancillary." Since 1995, I have continued to create visually attractive and highly interactive materials that are the electronic equivalent of textbooks, literature reviews, and course syllabi. I love this work! My electronic scholarship is, however, not widely distributed, though I have a few plans (discussed below) for solving that problem.

Based in large part on the publication of Advanced Technology in Education and a few well-placed journal articles -- several of them in the Kappan -- I was promoted to the rank of professor in 1989. That promotion freed me from the need to "grow" my list of print publications. Finally, I was free to work in the new digital media, and I have done so ever since.

Equivalency?

My list of publications now includes such things as First Grade (described above), Risk and Resiliency (a review of over 100 research studies), and Works on Fire (a review of six major bodies of knowledge concerning inner-city schools and ghettos). These three "publications" are highly interactive multimedia with video, audio, animated charts and graphs, and brief explanatory text. But how would any university or school committee or any prospective employer be able to weigh these digital electronic works against my scholarly works that have appeared in print? I assure you that one article in the American Educational Research Journal is worth a lot more at promotion time than any multimedia project.

At least one discipline has a potential solution to the problems discussed here. It is management information science (MIS) -- a collection of more specific disciplines within most colleges of business. (As I understand it, MIS includes management information science, information science, and system design.) Take a look at this website: http://www.isworld.org. If your electronic work appears on this website, you will also get a citation for an abstract that will appear in print in one of the cooperating journals associated with the website. Thus anyone contributing electronic work gets a print citation for the work. I don't believe that this is the best solution for all electronic scholarship, but it is surely one possibility.

Teaching, Scholarship, and Service

Most of this discussion so far has been about scholarship, but faculty evaluations also include teaching and service components. One can choose to teach using print, chalk, and a chalkboard. Or one can choose to teach using a variety of media, including electronic presentations, digital and streaming video, course websites, discussion groups, and so on. Unfortunately, I have yet to see procedures or instruments for evaluating instruction that attend to the use of the new media as a teaching tool.

Similar issues arise in the area of community service. Traditionally, service to the profession and the community has taken the form of service on, work with, or leadership of a committee. Of course, one could choose to serve by creating new media for the profession or the community organization. Moderating an electronic discussion group for an organization is a lot like chairing a committee. But how would I cite that, and who could evaluate its value?

Working heavily in the new media for more than a decade prompts me to propose the widespread discussion and adoption of a bill of rights for electronic educators. The following is a draft of such a bill.

Electronic Educators' Bill of Rights

1. The evaluation of teaching, scholarship, and service to the profession shall be free from bias toward the medium of the printed page.

2. Any educator whose teaching, scholarship, or service to the profession is to be reviewed or evaluated shall be free to submit specimens of his or her work in any medium or form commonly available.

3. Individuals and committees charged with the responsibility of evaluating the work of others have an obligation to give equal attention to print and electronic presentations.

4. Both the individual whose work is to be evaluated and the person or committee charged to undertake the evaluation have an equal responsibility to make available the equipment necessary for the timely completion of the evaluation process. For example, review committees may need convenient access to various computer platforms.

5. Digital and analog media have unique characteristics, but one is not inherently better or more valuable than the other.

6. Conventions that relate to the proper citation of works done by others, to layout and design, and to use of language apply to works done in nonprint media, just as they apply to print media.

7. Educators responsible for evaluating the work of others that is submitted in a variety of media are better prepared to do so if they have personally worked in both print and nonprint media.

8. The education profession has an obligation to study and develop a greater understanding of the kinds of issues embodied in this draft bill of rights.

I feel strongly enough about electronic scholarship that I have decided to do three things. First, I am creating an Internet site that will promote electronic scholarship (http://www.electronicscholar.com). I am new to website creation, so please bear with me as I develop the site. Do send comments, suggestions, and contributions, though. Second, I am starting a moderated discussion group on the topic. To join the Electronic Scholar discussion group, e-mail rvanhorn@unf.edu or visit the Electronic Scholar website at the address above. Third, I am contemplating the formation of an International Electronic Scholar Review Board (IESRB) that will include scholars from a wide range of disciplines who are well qualified to provide the outside juried review of scholarship done with and reported by means of electronic/digital tools. I already have commitments from six noted scholars whose works appear in both print and nonprint forms. The IESRB should be in full operation by fall 2000, but it may function in a limited way during the university promotion and tenure cycle this year.

I solicit your comments. However, I anticipate a sizable volume of e-mail on this column. I promise to acknowledge and respond to all the correspondence I receive, but please be patient if it takes a week or so for me to reply. Perhaps, with a lot of help from educators at all levels, we can make strides toward appropriately acknowledging and rewarding educators who choose to work in nontraditional media.

PDK Home | Site Map
Kappan Professional Journal

Last updated 8 December 1999
URL: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kvan9911.htm
Copyright 1999 Phi Delta Kappa International