It sometimes feels like most of what is written in academia are proposals for funding – most of which propose research which never actually gets funded. Kind of weird, isn’t it? Empirically, proposals may not actually be the largest amount of text, but they clearly are important. More often than not, proposals decide if something […]
Posts Tagged ‘review’
The perks and perils of peer review
I would argue peer review is the central mechanism of subjectivation in academia – in and through participation in peer review one is created as an academic. The idea is quite simple really: by having one or two experts in the field review a text, an editor of a journal or a book evaluates the […]
Recap Bayart/Appadurai and second writing assignment
Thank you all for a very intense double session last Friday! For those who could not be there, here is a recap of what we discussed in photographs: And for the Appadurai, I tried to collect your explanations of the most important ideas in a very sophisticated graphical display. Judge for yourself: At the very […]
Die