3.1 Focused discussion with mid-career and senior scholars  (Page 4/7)

Although some mid-career scholars argued that younger scholars (and the field as a whole) might be better servedby writing articles than by writing books, they quickly pointed out that they do so“at their peril.”As one scholar put it,“The problem is how the tenure committee will evaluate shorter works.Although [such a piece] may seem brilliant to us, it may not to thecommittee, which is looking at weight.”

Finally (as younger scholars also mentioned in their discussion session), many deans are not from the field of arthistory and don’t understand why publishing in this field is“different.”

Electronic publishing

While mid-career scholars were unsure of the role electronic publications might play in the field of art andarchitectural history, most agreed that 1) electronic publications are likely to play an increasingly important role, and 2) the bookwill continue to be an important medium for art history scholarship. On balance, the sentiment in the group was that theelectronic medium needed to be further exploited by art history scholars and that electronic publications, if properly vetted,ought to be taken more seriously as outlets for scholarship.

Scholars were particularly eager to discuss the possibilities of e-publication in relation to dissertations.Since few dissertations are published as dissertations (either because they are not published at all or because they have been sothoroughly revised that they only faintly resemble the dissertations they once were), it was suggested by one scholar thatdissertations be considered for potential electronic publication as dissertations. A mechanism for vetting dissertations would have tobe established to ensure that publication in this electronic format would carry some weight.“If one had a vetted process, outstanding dissertations would be as eligible [to be considered for tenure]as reworked dissertations that had made the transition [toprint].”

Electronic publication might also be considered an option for books that might otherwise have smallerprint runs of just 500 copies, which would allow such titles to be much more widely distributed than their printed versions could be.But the question to which scholars continued to return was the extent to which electronic publications (of any type) would betaken seriously by tenure committees.

One scholar put it this way:“There are two issues we can talk about: 1) the intrinsic merit of a productwhether print or digital, and 2) how this product is used by the field as a means of promotion. It seems to me that there are somany books that shouldn’t have been published and could have been better with so little effort. [But they were pushed through anywaybecause] committees just won’t countenance a CV without a book.”

Another scholar noted that now“there are more venues for publishing because of digital publishing. But it’s not a happy outlook because digital publishing is not accepted. For everymonograph publisher who is not accepting monographs, there are many forms [in which]to publish. But it’s not good for first-time authors who want to teach in the institutions such as we teachin.”