What is it that networks affect? The scholars' relationship to people, to resources and to the artefacts through which they enact their scholarship.

What are the politics behind the interest in scholarship? Is this a way to define activity that is not measurable research or direct teaching for managers?

How does being 'digital' affect scholarship? Does it impact upon the quality of what we do? The speed? The accessability? Or the outputs?

As we engage in the promotion of web 2.0 or cloud tools for the teaching and learning space – my colleagues and I at the U of Memphis have found it necessary to build a list of recommended tools. Not standards – but recommendations, since the act of dictating a standard for which tools faculty should use is arbitrary, at best. However, helping our faculty group tools around specific classifications in a list has proven, (so far), to be a big hit and has helped our faculty to focus on certain tools as they attempt to embrace teaching in this new digital landscape. We are happy to share our “taxonomy of tools” with others and welcome any feedback.

Biggest question is where the line between technology as delivery/process/product & technology as learning object (in all subjects) needs to be. Example attempt

Co-learning skills + critical thinking + knowledge key triangle of success. Individual assessment (academia & workplace) needs to be reflective of 3-corners

Sally Magnan in 2007 touched on that for SLA and language pedagogy scholarship

In addition or instead (perhaps evolution becomes part of review criteria), we need a code of ethics about disclosing edits.

The outputs of digital scholarship exist in a continuum. We will need a versioning system to snapshot a particular artefact with its comments/reviews at a point

Collaboration is a conundrum for all workplaces because hiring and promotion are individual.

Collaboration is a conundrum for academic recognition because academia is so hierarchical.

is Trigwell and Shale more useful? That paper is available on Birmingham Uni site.

I think digital scholarship could also be more about collaboration on a larger scale than traditional scholarship.

How do actiivities of digital scholarship map on to the Boyer framework? If looking at scholarship of teaching and learning specifically, is Trigwell and Shale

Has there been any research done on alternative forms of publishing in academia? What does it say?

I posted similar ideas on a blog post on participatory scholarship that may be helpful:

Do we need to specify 'digital' scholarship? How were the functions of the digital part carried out before or did they not happen? ie about more than tech?

Are you a digital scholar? How would I know?

Accountability not only for our own scholarship but encouraging, challenging, and continuing others' learning and scholarship.

Open rough drafts, available for commenting from social networks

The important artifacts are those that allow us to communicate better. Avoid
"on-line" = "alone"

scholarship as not simply an 'academic' effort but as an open activity, an engagement with civil society as well

The tyranny of print. The idea of finished product is a relic of the demands of print schedules and archives (building on @gsiemens)

new formats - i.e. not only text review - videos/podcasts, etc

iterative - artifacts of scholarship as living - i.e. ongoing discussion/annotation directly within/on the article/artifact

social and developmental - scholarship as discourse

I keep thinking that the flattening of the review process is important somehow. Wondering how scale and speed affect peer review

My slideshare on dig schol

Digital

open

Networked