Experimenting with academic subjectivity: collective writing, peer production and collective intelligence

Q1 Arts and Humanities
M. Peters, Tina Besley, S. Arndt
{"title":"Experimenting with academic subjectivity: collective writing, peer production and collective intelligence","authors":"M. Peters, Tina Besley, S. Arndt","doi":"10.1080/23265507.2018.1557072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Following involvement in several academic collectively written articles, the authors question traditional notions of the ‘lone’ individualist author model as the expected standard in the humanities as opposed to large research teams in physical sciences. They use Barthes and Foucault to question the function and the concept of the author and assumed notions of subjectivity. Recent collective writing as a form of peer production and publishing is an attempt to reinvent the concepts of authorship, the author subject and author subjectivity. These bring to the fore the processes of peer review, questions of ownership (for example, of what remains in a revision, whose contribution becomes revised and by whom), and blurr the boundaries around author/collective voice and are discussed in this paper. Its transversality is proving as complex as the term suggests, in terms of developing new ways of connecting, thinking, examining and working, in ways that have not been the norm at least in the field of philosophy of education. Contemporary questions of the potential social, philosophical, legal, epistemological and ethical implications for and of authorship and subjectivity have barely been touched on to date, but this article begins to broach this gap.","PeriodicalId":43562,"journal":{"name":"Open Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23265507.2018.1557072","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Review of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1557072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

ABSTRACT Following involvement in several academic collectively written articles, the authors question traditional notions of the ‘lone’ individualist author model as the expected standard in the humanities as opposed to large research teams in physical sciences. They use Barthes and Foucault to question the function and the concept of the author and assumed notions of subjectivity. Recent collective writing as a form of peer production and publishing is an attempt to reinvent the concepts of authorship, the author subject and author subjectivity. These bring to the fore the processes of peer review, questions of ownership (for example, of what remains in a revision, whose contribution becomes revised and by whom), and blurr the boundaries around author/collective voice and are discussed in this paper. Its transversality is proving as complex as the term suggests, in terms of developing new ways of connecting, thinking, examining and working, in ways that have not been the norm at least in the field of philosophy of education. Contemporary questions of the potential social, philosophical, legal, epistemological and ethical implications for and of authorship and subjectivity have barely been touched on to date, but this article begins to broach this gap.
学术主体性实验:集体写作、同侪生产与集体智慧
在参与了几篇学术集体撰写的文章之后,作者质疑“孤独”个人主义作者模式作为人文学科预期标准的传统观念,而不是物理科学领域的大型研究团队。他们利用巴特和福柯来质疑作者的功能和概念,以及假设的主体性概念。最近的集体写作作为同伴生产和出版的一种形式,试图重塑作者身份、作者主体和作者主体性的概念。这些将同行评审过程、所有权问题(例如,修订中保留的内容,谁的贡献被修订以及由谁修改)以及模糊作者/集体声音之间的界限带到前台,并在本文中进行了讨论。它的横向性正如这个词所暗示的那样复杂,在发展联系、思考、检查和工作的新方式方面,这种方式至少在教育哲学领域还不是常态。到目前为止,作者身份和主体性的潜在社会、哲学、法律、认识论和伦理影响的当代问题几乎没有被触及,但本文开始触及这一差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Open Review of Educational Research
Open Review of Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信