dice.camp is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A Mastodon server for RPG folks to hang out and talk. Not owned by a billionaire.

Administered by:

Server stats:

1.7K
active users

#rankings

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

"Roles, Challenges, and Sustainability of Australian Journals: A Survey of Editors" doi.org/10.1515/opis-2025-0013 #journals #publishing #openaccess #editors #rankings #internationalization

De Gruyter · Roles, Challenges, and Sustainability of Australian Journals: A Survey of EditorsThis article reports the findings of a survey of 139 editors of Australian journals. The survey investigated the editors’ views on distinct roles of Australian journals, the potential conflicts between national roles and internationalization, and the factors affecting long-term viability of journals. Findings show that editors highly value the role of Australian journals in linking research and practice in the Australian context and sustaining local disciplinary communities. While the majority of editors (76%) see little to no conflict between internationalization and maintaining local roles, some see challenges in balancing local relevance with international appeal. The survey highlights a link between journal rankings, author incentives, and the ability to attract quality submissions, particularly for journals focusing on local issues. Attracting quality submissions and qualified reviewers emerged as the most important factors for long-term viability, with the latter also being the most significant challenge. The study highlights a strong reliance on voluntary work as 45% of editors receive no compensation for their roles, a concern for the sustainability of journals. Open access strategies vary, but 88% of journals were satisfied with their current publishing model. There was low satisfaction with support from parent organizations in areas such as training and professional development.

"Rather than using metrics as the sole truth when it comes to assessing academic performance, we should put them in perspective. We could do this by complementing quantitative metrics with qualitative information. Narratives, discussions of assumptions, and explanations can give back much-needed context to interpret metrics. Read a job candidate’s working paper instead of counting her publications in journals. Metrics can be great conversation starters, but should not replace our understanding of what (a) good research(er) is.

If we don’t change our use of metrics, research quality itself may suffer. Peter Higgs, the Nobel laureate who passed away last year, warned in an interview: “Today I wouldn’t get an academic job. It’s as simple as that. I don’t think I would be regarded as productive enough.” The pressure to produce and perform in the short term can come at the expense of scientific progress in the long term. A more critical stance towards metrics and rankings is essential if we want to enhance the quality and credibility of research."

socialsciencespace.com/2025/01

Social Science Space · How Research Credibility Suffers in a Quantified Society - Social Science SpaceTo address research credibility issues, we must reform the role of metrics, rankings, and incentives in universities.

Performance Enhancing AI

In my opinion, performance enhancing AI is exactly like performance enhancing drugs in sports. Performance enhancing AI should be banned in the fine arts when it comes to prizing.

Why? Because the jobs that pay in the fine arts are coveted by their law abiding practitioners. When dull, boring jobs are eliminated, usually no one bats an eye or cries. But when artists, writers and performers etc. are replaced, the many who have worked their lives to get to these positions, will be sad and distraught. These coveted jobs should not be taken by machines. Even if the machines are helped by humans and thus have some human content. And it’s unfair for a human to take credit for a machine’s work even if the human did part of the work.

I know the horse is out of the stable already and how can we retroactively enforce adherence to whatever laws we make? We can try, just as they did in sports, to catch the cheaters. I believe we can do a half decent job. Sure there are examples in sport of cheaters winning here and there. Well we can catch them eventually and enforce rules much after the fact.

I am not necessarily saying goodbye to all works with performance enhancing AI. I’m just saying take them out of all awards and have all works honestly listing any and all AI used in its creation. I think we like to support artists. Not the intellectual abilities of machines and artists. Not the intellectual abilities of machines. Give consumers the opportunity to choose what they support. I believe most will eventually support the pure artists. Especially when AI is coming after their own coveted jobs.

Right now AI is being considered for making book covers. Artists are expensive and indie book writers are trying to keep costs down.

Right now starving artists are tempted to write their grant applications, a prospectus for an art show or just a brief biography of themselves with AI. Proper editing is expensive.

To both of these I say don’t do it. AI is currently angling for both positions. Notice how work for both fine arts is disappearing if you do this.

Even such a “minor” use of AI should have to be acknowledged up front and can be reason enough to ban you from awards.

AI will eventually be coming for all the other jobs, too. Yes, science, even research and theorizing can be done by AI in my belief. Computer Science is part of that. No coveted job is safe with AI. I say, legislate things so coveted jobs are still mostly done by humans.

New study: "Many academics in the discipline of #English working at #Australian universities are expected to comply with institutional policies…which use various journal #rankings as a proxy for #quality. This is in spite of the fact that extensive research demonstrates that such rankings are problematic when used to evaluate individual researchers, particularly in the #humanities."
australianhumanitiesreview.org

#Academia #Assessment #Australia #ScolComm
@academicchatter

australianhumanitiesreview.orgThe Impact of Journal Ranking Systems on the Discipline of English in Australia – AHR

The #EuropeanCommission has released details on how it will implement its 10 important commitments to reform research #assessment.
research-and-innovation.ec.eur

The top 3 for me:

"2: Base research assessment primarily on qualitative evaluation…supported by responsible use of quantitative indicators…

3: Abandon inappropriate uses…of journal and pub-based metrics, in particular inappropriate uses of Journal Impact Factor (#JIF) and h-index…

4: Avoid the use of #rankings of research organisations…"