All entries for November 2024

New (Guest) Episode: Poetry, Power & the Wind

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

Ruminations on renewable energy, poetry and the Irish perspective make for an exciting new podcast episode.

A new episode of the Exchanges Discourse is now live, but it’s a little different to our usual ones. You see, this has been produced in association with the MaREI research centre and University College Cork on the theme of ‘Energy Poetry’. Which means Fionn Rogan and Paul Deane take centre stage, along with a special guest, and other than a brief introduction you won’t hear much from me for once.

Listen in here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1yFcuGuwP0kR7z1t86A70O

This is actually the first in a short mini-series of episodes which the MaREI team will be sharing through our platform, so there will be more to come in the months ahead which you will be able to enjoy. This very first episode, entitled Harnessing the Wind, features discussions on and around the poetry of Derek Mahon along with a lengthy interview with Brendan Tuohy (EirGrid) on how poetry informs his work today. Around this there is an informed discussion on energy generation in Ireland, especially as it pertains to wind power, along with considerations of course of its relationship to poetry.

It really is a beautiful, lyrical listen that I’m sure lovers of poetry and scientific/arts collaboration will be fascinated to hear. I certainly enjoyed it on a number of levels, not least because it was the easiest podcast episode in a long time to edit.[1] Incidentally, when Evan Boyle first approached me a few months ago to see if we’d like to showcase their work in this area, I felt the science and arts cross-over felt like a great example of interdisciplinarity. I also perceived it was a good opportunity to collaborate and promote something a little more experimental in Exchanges ‘ ‘publishing’ activities.

Now, that doesn’t mean we’re going to switch away from the journal to be a podcast publisher for a myriad of other people – this is very much a toe in the water, a pilot programme really. Anything more regular than this occasional series would require a re-examination of our priorities and re-tasking of ever-slim staffing resource from other activities. But it does at least feel that there is a viable potential to share spoken word materials alongside the Exchanges brand, within our mission. That, I am pleased to say, seems to validate my decision to work on this collaboration. Naturally, what this means for the future, we shall just have to see in the fullness of time.

In the meanwhile, I hope listeners will agree, this collaboration has more than paid off - it is a glorious episode, well worth your time to listen to. I am certainly looking forward to helping produce and share the next episode(s) in the coming months. Thanks to Evan and the whole team for their hard work in collating this too!

---

Endnotes

[1] Don’t get me started on my hours long battle with the Spotify for Creators interface which steadfastly refused to make the episode live yesterday. Thankfully, today the system finally worked as it should!

Gareth Johnson : 28 Nov 2024 10:11 |  Tags: Collaboration Episode Guest Interdisciplinary Marei Podcast Poetry Power Wind |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Attending the Third International Conference on Sustainability Culture

An early start for a truly international event on sustainability culture is well worth the effort

This morning I had a super early start…at 4am…in order to be up, ready and chirpy enough to attend the 3^rd International Conference on Sustainability Culture#mce_temp_url#. This event, hosted by Dr Theodoor Richard and the National Chung Hsing University in Taiwan was, naturally, running on their local time for an afternoon’s event. While I’ll confess it was a bit of a challenge to rouse myself to alert status in the dead of night [1], I was really glad I did – not least because the event ties into a future special issue of Exchanges.

Mostly I was delighted to be there because the speakers and topics of discussion were fascinating ones. Perhaps I was a little spoiled because the topic of sustainability and environmentalism have long been close to my heart, but it was superb to hear such a variety of topics and insights too. The speakers were drawn from around the world, although I believe I was the furthest west of all the delegates for once. A refreshing change! Thankfully, most of the speakers are going to be (hopefully) appearing in the special issue, so it’ll be a pleasure you’ll all be able to enjoy once that comes out next year.

The event opened with a welcome from Professor Jen Ming-Song, a university dean of our hosts for today. This was followed by a keynote talk from Emeritus Professor Geoffrey Scott (WSU, Australia) who spoke with such a casual but engaging style that I found myself quite envious of his aplomb. Geoffrey shared many thoughts about enabling sustainable cultures within higher education institutions, and how to affect change from both a top down and bottom-up approach. As someone with a long and storied career his candid insights were useful – especially when it came to dealing with and influencing your university vice-chancellor (or similar) and their often-entrenched perspectives![2]

This rousing intro was followed by four shorter papers from Duncan Furquhar, Maria Giovanna Cassa, Graham Wood and Lucy Sabin. The topics were varied, from soil carbon capture to ethnographic studies of permaculture in Sardinia, through philosophical considerations of ‘sustainability culture’ and finally a fascinating look at the fusion of art and science in an over-agrochemicaled world. There was something to consider or be enlightened by in each of these talks, and I think what I liked the most was how genuinely interdisciplinary this made the event. Indeed, it reinforced for me that the topic of sustainability culture is an excellent match for Exchanges’ publication mission too.[3]

After a short break we went into an hour-long discussion, drawing in the other eager participants as we explored contrast viewpoints – not least of which being the tensions between expansion versus contraction as a key aspect of sustainability. Alongside this there was naturally, no pun intended, the extant tensions between industrialisation, expansional and economic factors vs traditional, local, and desirable lifestyles. There was much debate around agency and power relations, a long-time keen interest of mine, and while there was some common ground among the delegates, there’s also a fair bit of disagreement on where (and with whom) the power for change lies: be it the economic overlords, political actors or strongly networked communities.

For me, I certainly think one of the key takeaways from the discussions was that while much of is what is traditional (be it in agriculture, society or life in general) IS sustainable. Yet, the tensions arise, and the environment is impacted, because these aspects are not scalable or even maintainable at current levels. Food production and related security issues being just one such exemplar of this concern.

As I say, this was an excellent event and with lots to chew over for everyone in attendance – me certainly among them. I shall be reflecting on the lessons for some time, and no doubt once the special issue comes to publication, there will be more to be said by scholars better informed on the topics than I!

My thanks to Theodoor and colleagues for organising the event, and of course everyone who contributed to it!

---

Endnotes

[1] I was up with my alarm, but how I made breakfast and tea beforehand, was pretty much on autopilot.

[2] Strong resonances here with our Research Culture issue(s) too.

[3] For more of my thoughts on the event – see the @ExchangesJournal Bluesky profile, or indeed follow the #tag #SustainabilityCulture.

Gareth Johnson : 26 Nov 2024 10:41 |  Tags: Conference Culture Event Icsc Issue Special Sustainability Taiwan |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Nothing but Bluesky Ahead – Farewell Twitter/X

Writing about web page https://bsky.app/profile/exchangesjournal.bsky.social

Exchanges moves its primary microblogging output over to Bluesky, as Twitter/X diminishes

If you’re any kind of social media user, you can’t have avoided the debates around the downturn in Twitter/X as the preeminent social media discussion site. While I’ve been mulling Exchanges presence for some months now [1], with the recent US election fallout, it’s become an even more acute question about remaining on site which is increasingly swaying away from any pretence at ‘fairness’ or ‘balance’. It is a shame, as personally I joined Twitter way back in the late 00s and back in the early days it was a brilliant tool for finding likeminded people. I had more than a few beneficial, and surprise, collaborations emerging as a result of being on there. Not to mention creating many long running professional friendships too. Hence, when I took over running Exchanges in April 2018, one of the very first things I did, during my first week, was set up our Twitter account. At the time it was totally a no-brainer in terms of trying to reach out to potential contributors around the world.

Back in the 2010s Twitter was clearly a major channel of communication for academics and those in higher education alike. However, over the years, as the platform shifted to more of a mass market, the signal to noise ratio certainly changed, and not for the better. Personally, I suspect we passed ‘peak Twitter’ during the pandemic years, as we all reached out to one another for some human contact. With Twitter’s sale in late 2022, and the actions of its new owner, I started to have more than a few concerns about it as a channel and started asking myself if it was one we should continue to be associated. However, as a small journal, with limited marketing impact and visibility staying on the platform even then remained one of the major routes we had to reach potential contributors to the journal.

That said, over the past 18 months Musk’s ‘X’ has continued to remove many of the safeguards which are an essential part of any reliable communication channel. Consequently, I set up a Mastodon instance last year, although I will confess I found that a challenging platform to find new followers. Our account’s over there is still live but currently dormant in terms of new content. As soon as I was able though I set up a Bluesky account, as everything I heard about this platform pointed towards it being a viable alternative to Twitter/X, and being run more along the lines of that platform in its ‘better’ days. Since then, I’ve been running the two instances in tandem – posting to Twitter/X and Bluesky at the same time.

However, then the US election happened, with the run up to this making Twitter/X’s owner’s political leanings becoming…more overt. The resultant increased migration of notable bodies, organisations and peoples away from Twitter/X and onto Bluesky argues that the time to close down one account and focus on another is here.

Now, as I drafted this article last week we had 452 followers on Twitter/X (fallen to 447 today) and around 21 on Bluesky.[2] Getting those ~450 followers took us a good two years, and while I am loathed to leave them, something interesting has been happening in the four days since I started writing this piece. Without me posting anything our Bluesky followers has increased to 31. Still small-beer, but a reinforcement that our potential audience there is growing. Such a growth rate in followers seems to argue to me that we’re on the cusp of enough people with interest in the journal migrating across to Bluesky to make the transition I’ve been mulling not only agreeable but logical.

I set up the Twitter/X account to create and sustain conversations around the Exchanges journal, and scholarly publishing. And to my mind, Bluesky is where these conversations are going to be able to continue, without (as) a concerning political dimension. There’s also my slight concern that continuing to associate with Twitter/X lends credibility to its owner and the political bed into which he’s (literally) jumped. That, is just one more thing which makes me believe this is the right move to do!

So, from today we’re going to be scaling back our Twitter/X output to an effective minimum – probably mostly using it to encourage people to come find us on Bluesky. We’ll keep the domain alive, given were I to delete it, after a month or so, someone else could register our handle. I really don’t want to be dealing with ‘fake’ Exchanges, so that’s account will be retained.[3]

Hence, it’s farewell to Twitter/X, and hello to Bluesky in a big way now. I hope you’ll come join us there!

---

Follow Exchanges on Bluesky at: @ExchangesJournal (https://bsky.app/profile/exchangesjournal.bsky.social)

---

Endnotes

[1] I confess personally, I departed from it during 2023 once Musk’s agenda became pretty apparent. It’s not a decision I regret at all. It’s noticeable my personal account followers has been swelling in the last week too – and that’s a place I only talk about social rather than work things!

[2] I think we’re still niche enough to be ‘indy’ or ‘underground’, which while cool is a bit frustrating when I’d like us to be a heck of lot more visible. Maybe the mass-migration to Bluesky might end up seeing us increase in followers a lot faster?

[3] It is exactly what I did with my own account for the same reasons.

Gareth Johnson : 19 Nov 2024 09:39 |  Tags: Announcement Bluesky Media Microblogging Migration Social Twitter X |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Podcast Episodes Focus in on Researcher Development

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

It’s a two for one deal as two new episodes consider issues around developing researchers and experiences with peer-reviewers too.

I was rather fortunate to be able to host not one but two guests on recent episodes of the Exchanges Discourse podcast, and even more delighted to discover the episodes rather complimented each other. I would like to pretend this was clever planning, but I don’t think anyone actually would be fooled!

In the first episode I talk with Anna Fancett (Warwick) about her varied and exciting international career, as well as her current work at the University of Warwick where she’s helping to develop postgraduate researchers’ writing skills: a topic close to my editorial heart! Alongside looking into the paper she authored on this topic for our Research Culture special issue, we also consider the lessons which can be drawn from developing effective workshops. Anna also talks about her thoughts on engaging positively with the peer-review process. We touch particularly here on issues of dealing with more negative feedback and of course our own thoughts on how we approaching reviewing ourselves.

In the other episode, out today, I chat to Taryn Bell (Leeds) about her life as an archaeology academic, but mainly about her work with colleagues in Leeds and York in developing researchers. Again, centred around a paper in our Research Culture issue, we exchange thoughts on the tricky matter of offering focused, bespoke workshops suitable for particular career stages, versus the emergent benefits in getting scholars across the board to exchange experiences. We even touch a little on the issue of agism – why, for example, do so many universities seem to assume all PhD students and early career researchers are ‘young’? And does this speak to some concerning biases which we need to challenge in our own thinking and development planning? Similarly to Anna’s episode, we talk about peer-review and getting the most out of it and thankfully uncover some more positive examples along the way.

Both episodes of course contain our signature discussions concerning advice for new authors looking to publish, from experienced authors who’ve known the growing pains themselves.

You can listen to the episodes here:

Anna: https://spotifycreators-web.app.link/e/L1K8f0VFuOb

Taryn: https://spotifycreators-web.app.link/e/40VKqZVFuOb

Or to catch up with all the past episodes of the podcast – and there’ve been a lot lately – visit:

https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

We’ll be taking a short break from new episodes now – but hopefully will have one or two more to round out the year/season in the coming weeks.

Gareth Johnson : 13 Nov 2024 15:11 |  Tags: Developing Episodes New Peer-Reviewers Podcast Postgraduates Researchers |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Discussing Reviewer Suitability & Citation Justice with Early Stage Scholars

The first training session of the new academic session brought discussions around reviewer quality.

This week I had the pleasure of contributing to Harriet Richmond’s early-stage researcher session focussing on publication. As blog readers will be aware, I’ve been feeding into these sessions for almost three years now, around once a term generally. As always it was a pleasure to collaborate with Harriet, who is a great teacher and all round good-egg. Certainly I always come away with some thoughts on improving my own teaching, or new piece of information to ruminate upon, so being involved is always a win-win for me.

I also enjoy participating because these workshop sessions are also a wonderful opportunity to share some of my personal experiences as an editor and reviewer with researchers who are a little earlier in their career track than I. The hope is – like this week’s cohort – that it sparks some conversation and perhaps demystifies the area a little. I do often feel it’s a shame that in the post-pandemic period we’ve kept the workshops online only, which perhaps slightly curtails a more free-flowing exchange of thoughts and ideas. That might be a personal preference for ‘live’ performance in my teaching, and I can see why the delegates enjoy not having to schlep into campus for the sessions: less time away from the lab and office probably pays them dividends in a busy schedule. No matter, as always, this week’s exchange online was still good enough to pick up on a few new threads of conversation.

This time around I introduced ideas of citation justice, as discussed in our recent podcast, into the debate. This arose out of a delegate discussion about questionable citation habits and bias within them. It was handy to be able to talk a little about these concepts and highlight some of the ideas around introducing a ‘beneficial bias’: although, I should note that for now Exchanges has no hard and fast policy in this area. All the same, I’ll be looking forward to reading the Reinvention report, and perhaps kicking off some policy discussions with my Board as a result. Getting better and broader representation within article citations can only benefit readers, researchers and authors alike in my opinion.

We also got into an interesting debate over journals/editors and their ability to pick ‘quality’ reviewers. Now, if you’re an editor you probably don’t need me to tell you how challenging it can be, with the hundreds of thousands [1] of manuscripts annually in need of multiple reviewers, especially with academics’ time increasingly stretched across so many research, teaching and administration priorities. With this initial hill to climb just to get >any< reviewers on board, conceptualisations of also judging their quality beyond a simple visit to their personal/professional website [2] sounds like an even bigger slope to ascend. As journal editors we offer lots of guidance to reviewers on how to do a quality job, as well as advising reviewers about those times when they feel they might be out-of-scope for a particular paper [3]. Truth be told though, much of the responsibility for invalidating a reviewer does seem to fall on the prospective reviewers’ shoulders themselves. It’s a bit of a sector norm, and perhaps one which deserves some greater consideration – I’ve certainly been inspired to look around and see what other journals are doing. Perhaps a small debate among my editorial team is also worthwhile following up on these conversations too – we do have a Board meeting scheduled for next month after all!

This week’s session also saw the second running of my ‘you are the reviewer!’ case study challenge, wherein the delegates had to make a judgement on several not-so-hypothetical reviewing problems. Once again the delegates rose to the challenge well, and it was good to see that the approach we had adopted in each case – the examples being anonymised but real ones – seemed to chime with the views of the scholars present. I might tweak the examples for the next running of the course in the new year though, just to avoid things becoming too staid or stale.

So, a good session from my perspective, and I hope from the delegates too. I think my next task is to take that annual look at my teaching notes and think about how my contribution could be tweaked or improved. I certainly got the feeling this time, that another refresh of the slides and accompanying interactions could do with another polish!

---

Endnotes

[1] Almost certainly more when you consider how many articles are rejected annually. With a ~50% decline rate for Exchanges the 68 articles we published this years therefore equates to ~140 submissions as a back of the envelope calculation. And we’re a relatively small journal with a small ingest of article submissions!

[2] Or of course knowing them in person.

[3] Doubly tricky for interdisciplinary papers where few, if anyone other than the author, will be entirely conversant with the paper’s themes, methodologies and methods.

Gareth Johnson : 07 Nov 2024 09:13 |  Tags: 2024 Development Early November Researchers Stage Training |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Episode: Celebrating the MRC at 50

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

Two guests in one episode reflect back on the ground breaking Modern Records Centre’s first fifty years

Delighted to report another in our series of recent podcast episodes, which this time takes a look at both the special issue and events which celebrated the Modern Records Centre (MRC) at 50 years old. Talking with Pierre Bothcherby and Rachel MacGregor we use the framing of their lead article in the issue as a stepping stone to consider what the issue and symposium has to tell us about the famous archive. Along the way we touch on what are our favourite talks and papers in the issue – although acknowledging that we secretly have a soft spot for them all. We also take the chance to look forward to what’s next for the MRC, and while we can’t look at what’s going to happen in 2073 for the centennial, at least we look to the next big date for the university!

Listen in here:

• https://spotifyanchor-web.app.link/e/xBHEom268Nb[34:36]

Gareth Johnson : 05 Nov 2024 13:47 |  Tags: Anniversary Centre Episode Modern Mrc Podcast Records |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem