Although the biggest issue is that our current model of resorting to medication is the most efficient band-aid solution to dealing with our increasingly growing population with psychiatric disorders. Therapy takes a long time, for someone with really bad case of BPD it can take them several years to become better through serious intervention. I think it's its important that we acknowledge these psychological injuries because our current model ‘oh you’re chemically imbalanced’ puts the onus of responsibility solely on the individual as if they are deficient. Our current model does overlook these psychological injuries. Nevertheless, if we are to treat people en mass effectively the whole mental health care system needs a paradigm shift.

I've never thought about this but it makes so much sense

WIthin the euro-/western-centric paradigm of understanding of mental health

I think in our popular discourse this isn't discussed enough, the effect of the toxic boss, especially since we spend so much of our lives in North America at work. Even if we aren't at work, work related stress still creeps in our lives outside.

This is interesting, I looked up the article to see what the resesarchers defined as 'trauma'

"childhood experiences, including emotional, physical, and sexual abuse; household substance abuse, mental illness, and incarceration; and parental domestic violence, separation, or divorce."

This is called confounding bias

This is such stark contrast to the role of public libraries. At least in Vancouver, libraries have served crucial roles and spaces in community building

This isn't revolutionary, indigenous teaching practices and pedagogies have been talking about this for a long time

Or perhaps re-thinking what prestige means? While I understand the argument for a paradigm shift, in the meantime can we create non-partisan institutions that can provide accreditation/measure of an institution's engagement with the public? I am thinking a myriad of flexible and holistic measures the institution's engagement, and having their community/stakeholders involved in the process.

In tandem, we must know who is in our community before we create an institution that reflects it

I had never thought of prestigious universities this way, but now I will

This is sad but competitiveness can be expressed in different modalities

I believe that universities that have graduate students should train their students in-house regarding different ways of scholarly communication as a part of their degree program

I find the idea of channeling ideas through 'public intellectuals' problematic. While the revere for public intellectuals has decreased overtime in North America, the individuals who are considered so are mostly older white men. Thus, I agree with the author that we should all consider ourselves public intellectuals so that we challenge the normative ideas of who can be a public intellectual. That it is not just the Noam Chomskys, Sam Harris', and Neil deGrasse Tysons

This is such an important point

This is such an important point - not the scale of engagement but the depth of engagement

The mid-1990s was also the time where the early founders of cryptocurrency were having similar ideas: the possibility of a currency that was decentralized and not controlled by a government. I find this parallel of timing interesting of both movements trying to take centralized power away from large institutions

How did they find her blog? I wonder if she engaged in the material in other scholars' blogs? I think I would be more likely to critically and constructively engage in someone's work if they did so with mine.

I have heard of instructors not wanting to share their syllabi to other instructors for fear that people will 'take' their idea. I find it kind of silly because not everyone will teach materials the same way.

Indigenous practices of teaching have always emphasized this - building a relationship between and with the learners so they feel ownership over their learning. Everyone plays a valuable role and has skills/gifts to share, therefore; teaching/learning should be collaborative.

I didn't find this article much of an "action" plan. Rather vague and abstract ideas about community and community control of academic publishing infrastructure without any examples of how this could manifest in practice

What does this mean theoretically and in practice?

This is such a vague figure, likely because these corporations keep their books private. However, I wonder if the authors mean this is the market for western academic publishing houses

Who is in this "our"?

The relationship between specialization of research and monopolization of publishing is something that I have never thought about but makes sense

Not just scientists

I love these questions

I have been taking a 6-week online free course through UBC's Faculty of Education called Reconciliation Through Indigenous Education. I am halfway done, and I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in learning about and incorporating indigenous knowledge/practices in their teaching.

Knowledge creation as advocacy and activism

Wasn't just knowledge practices that made them victims, it was also because their behaviours and appearance defied what was appropriate by men:

On the Trail of the "Witches:" Wise Women, Midwives and the European Witch Hunts

beautiful metaphor

Sounds like the current university system... that devalues teaching over high-impact publications

I like this delineation

David Harvey is one of my scholarly heroes, for others who are interested in his work I highly recommend his book Planet of the Slums (2007). Full pdf here

I have so many questions to ask! E.g. Do the non-university users have confidence in their data literacy abilities?

Yes, in business terms the ROI, the Return on Investment.

It would be interesting to look at the demographics or motivations of these individuals for sharing this research. Is it a way for them to show to their peers how informed they are? Is it for advocacy or activist reasons? Personal reasons such, experiencing an illness?

Perhaps they are also accessing these articles for teaching purposes, such as showing the way a topic can be researched, different writing genres, and etc.

This semester I taught my Introduction to Research Design students how to use Google Scholar as a tool for their assignments. They were quite amazed, especially by the reference generator and being able to search within the "cited by" section. I was quite impressed at the peer-reviewed work they were able to find that pertained to their topic -- a Vancouver neighbourhood of their choosing.

It would be interesting to see graphs that depict:

• Discipline of article vs. country/global region
• NGO/private research funding in the country vs. rate of country download

This would would be an interesting thing to further investigate. What are these papers being used for? Particularly by those unemployed?

I sometimes download articles to read in my spare time if I find the topic interesting.

I wonder how much of the article they are actually reading

That's what I was thinking

I like this!

It would be interesting to know where these funds were used instead, was it a better return on investment?

From the citation: "The Open Access-adjusted Cost Per Download (OA-adj CPD) is a proposed metric that subtracts the downloads that could be met by OA copies of articles within subscription journals. In this simple model it discounts it entirely, but that could easily be adjusted for the degree to which each institution felt OA copies could substitute for subscription copies."

In my discipline of sociology and anthropology, I have found that texts that are freely available and were published prior to the internet are usually works that are considered seminal or have been highly-cited.

So much nomenclature... I am finding it confusing.

Link to their website: Unpaywall

Recent journal article on this: We've failed: Pirate black open access is trumping green and gold and we must change our approach

"An article processing charge (APC), also known as a publication fee, is a fee which is sometimes charged to authors to make a work available open access in either an open access journal or hybrid journal.

This fee is usually paid by an author's institution or research funder rather than by the author themselves.

Some publishers waive the fee in cases of hardship.An article processing charge does not guarantee that the author retains copyright to the work, or that it will be made available under a Creative Commons license."

"Embargo) is a period during which access to academic journals is not allowed to users who have not paid for access (or have access through their institution). The purpose of this is to ensure publishers have revenue to support their activities"

A hybrid open-access journal is a subscription journal in which some of the articles are open access.

Gold stands for publications available directly from the publisher

In practice, I wonder how this will be done

You can do this type of thing as a volunteer with the Museum of Anthropology

Flint Michigan is one example that really sticks out to me:

The Flint water crisis: how citizen scientists exposed poisonous politics

Important to note this article takes a very westerncentric/eurocentric perspective. Science by those without formal training in the natural sciences has occurred much earlier. I suppose it depends what you define as 'science'.

For instance, in ancient India regarding water governance (approx. 300 BC): "The kings did not have armies of public works engineers; they provided fiscal incentives to communities and individuals who built water systems."

From the Oxford dictionary:

citizen science noun [mass noun] the collection and analysis of data relating to the natural world by members of the general public, typically as part of a collaborative project with professional scientists: the director of education sees a need for citizen science in astronomy | [as modifier] : citizen science projects.

I am inspired by the lack of inspiring discussion on altmetrics. We can't make a perfect system unless it exists for us to make improvements on.

I (hypothetically, kind of - not really) suggest that our PDC class submits a research proposal for funds to create our own open-source alt metric system for eventual beta testing. We have enough diverse and critical minds to think about the objectives and limitations of factors that would go into a social media research altmetric.

Neither does impact factor/number or citation count...

I think having a beta version of an open-source Altmetric would be worth giving a shot. We can't perfect anything unless we put it into practice

I think researchers and consumers of research (hopefully) would be able to take any altmetric measure with a grain of salt. In our social media age, I think most people have awareness for the reasons why something goes viral (e.g. its really bad or good). I hope the same attitude would extend to research altmetrics.

The Matthew effect, Matthew principle, or Matthew effect of accumulated advantage can be observed in many aspects of life and fields of activity. It is sometimes summarized by the adage "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer - Wikipedia

Where is the researcher and the individual research consumer in this conversation as stakeholders?

This would be an interesting question to ask the class, what platforms do we use to learn about latest research (in our field)?

More like the wisdom of those who create the algorithms...

statistical analysis of books, articles, or other publications.

I would have liked a discussion on whether indigenous women have been given the capacity of learning and knowing how to read indigenous laws. I would have also liked to seen a discussion on how these laws are implemented in practice, why implements them? Are/have women been involved?

This is important whenever we think about feminist perspectives, it isn't inherently about women rather the focus is on how gender is important

I think this discourse of learning how indigenous stories/culture can be applicable and help us understand contexts beyond indigeneity is important, especially if we want people to respect indigenous sovereignty and law

I agree with this point, however; I believe that our Canadian legal system also needs this introspection and reflection. Many feminist scholars would argue that our sexual harassment/assault laws do not address the realities of the ways people experience harassment/assault, and that it often works against the victim.

I think we also need to understand why this 'perfect' discourse is perpetrated. Would it work in the favour of the indigenous groups if these complex realities came to light? Would people still respect indigenous sovereignty and culture as much, especially given the racism and marginalization they face(d)?

Im waiting for them to operationalize this term... what does it mean to the authors?

The 1869 Lands and Enfranchisement Acts is indicative of how this sexism was institutionalized:

Act of denial of status for indigenous women

This is why an intersectional approach with these issues is crucial. Often gendered violence is linked to axes such as socioeconomic status, education, and race.

Such an important point

I think guidelines should consider an academic's relationship with non-traditional academic partners could be indicators of service or public good. In addition, partnerships with organizations/institutions that are under-resourced or in lower-middle income countries (LMICs) could show public good/service through global research/knowledge capacity building

Teaching in the form of tuition is also what the university makes most of its money from

The authors should have explained this better or provided more evidence - correlation is not causation

We must be cautious of not displacing residents or contributing to gentrification through such 'revitalization' projects

I think an important point that is missing from this conversation is who goes to this university? Is this university assessable to the communities around it? How much are the backgrounds of students reflective of the socio-demographic from the region?

Otherwise, you could have a population of faculty and students who have no idea what the lived realities are of those in poverty, and the challenges of these communities, and etc. This could cause a disconnect especially if the university's mandate is to help tackle the neighbourhood's challenges

What a lovely idea, but its seems too idealistic. We have to live in a society that firsts sees value in all types of people

I believe this process will only be reciprocal if partners have equal say in problem identification and solving. Rather than having a partner, e.g. the university, dominating the conversation on what are the priorities in a community

I think its a little problematic: we want coalitions from within and outside the academy and draw upon diverse expertise, but its the university who is going to/needs create these?

Is full participation from a community ever achievable?

having or showing keen mental discernment and good judgement; wise or shrewd

Coming from the discipline of anthropology, I am astounded that the University of Utah is using this positivist way of measuring impact. Especially in a discipline that regularly questions quantitative measures.

Furthermore, I think that impact should be based on whether the academic is publishing in the journals that are the most appropriate for their speciality. Are they publishing in journals, while may not have a high readership, are influential in their field?

Also, evaluation of self-referencing should also be taken into consideration, and that sometimes articles are cited because they are criticized

Shouldn't the same scrutiny be upheld to non-OA publications? Just because your article is published in a journal doesn't automatically mean its more credible or impactful. There are thousands of journals out there, some of better quality than others.

I wonder if this is because these tenure guideline/documents are outdated? I mean, how often do these guidelines get reviewed? Open-access is relatively new, especially more so in certain disciplines

It would be even better if they also included some wording regarding ways of thinking that have been historically overlooked or marginalized in the academy

It's important to remember that whatever is considered "new" is still grounded within a type of epistemology and ontology

I like the acknowledgement of "diverse publics and communities"

I wonder if these universities provided definitions of what they meant as "traditional" or "service". I can see how service and dissemination could be interpreted as the same thing

I wonder if some institutions try to make this information confidential? I could see this happening to make the promotion/recognition process vague

Perhaps I am oblivious to this, but I have not observed that most academics have their work publicly scrutinized. Definitely, within the academy and especially within their departments. I don’t think the public really scrutinizes what faculty do, I think most people assume institutions do good work

Unfortunately, these other forms of more public outreach are harder to measure in terms of their scope/engagement/influence

Reminds me of our first PDC discussion on why do governments fund research/education

the state; republic; commonwealth.

Another definition for policy-making

Definition

Definition

This makes me imagine a room of policy makers discussing epistemology and ontology

Great example of this is this discourse of the "welfare queen" and the erosion of welfare services in the United States under the Clinton administration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen

This is the definition

In addition, funding restraints

This is the main argument in the article

Yes this is very important, and we must remember that policy makers are not experts in all fields

How do we do this in practice?

Until a new a new type of structural learning is considered better

What a loaded term

And other ways of knowing e.g. indigenous knowledge

I wonder if put into practice, how much would this slow down the policy making process? Is this feasible when immediate/urgent policy decisions need to be made?

Such a key point in the article

Indeed, we have to remember that the scientific method is based on our cultural understanding of 'best' way to attain knowledge. It is also important to think about who are funding these studies that policy makers draw upon?

Context is so important! In addition, it would be worthwhile for policy makers to see what sample size, population, etc etc were involved in the processes of "scientific knowledge"

So much to unpack here -- usable knowledge to which stakeholders in the decision-making process? Political support of who? Political support will have an inherent bias

I'd say "and/or"

Not all social goals have to also be economic, and vice versa

A discussion on what constitutes as evidence or good evidence is also necessary

I liked that he provided his own definition

Yes!

Easier said than done - there is an art to story telling That's why so company institutions/companies pay marketers to do it for them

What does "good" mean?

I think this is the best strategy to think around post-truthers and emotional appeals. This strategy should not just apply for policy makers, but even for people in the university -- like us.

I often feel like this perspective often gets forgotten

I feel that any scientist whose research can inform policies should be familiar with policy theory. I think if there was at least a crash course on policy theory by a non-partisan group it may be helpful. Perhaps some sort of certification of completion could also be useful?

As someone who occasionally smokes --I know how bad cigarettes are. Yet, I still do it in the times that I do because I think it is rational to me to do so or the benefits outweigh the risks in the moment. E.g. "I really need this cigarette because it will help me get through my day, and I have 100 essays to mark"

I guess what I am trying to say is that we should be cognizant and to be cautious of the way we judge others for their lack of "critical thinking". We need to be aware that rationalities are dependent upon culture and personal experience. We need to be wary of cultural imperialism

We should also think about how powerful placebos are though, some research indicates that placebos can increase certain outcomes

a loud and hearty laugh

This is a rather Eurocentric view of the self. In many cultures, especially that are more collectivist orientated there isn't the idea of the self or it is not developed in the way it is on Eurocentric/ethnocentric teachings that we have been exposed to in North America. Therefore, the idea of a self in these societies can be challenging to understand and to conceive

I don't buy this. I don't think most people have the time to be thinking about the nature of their reality or be solipsistic. It is a rather privileged position to be in to be able to spend one's time pondering about the social construction of reality.

The author also fails to provide examples of what he means as "anti-realist" doctrines. So I am just speaking on my interpretation of his writing.

In practice, perhaps what the author is talking about are those who believe in "alternative facts" are anti-realists. I think it takes a lot of time, education, intellectual engagement to b able to triangulate data, and be media literate -- i.e. privileged, in order to really have an 'objective' view on the world. While the author does state that objectivity may never be achieved but its a goal, he fails to consider what type of society/culture, education system, values, institutions, resources are needed to create a democracy of "informed" citizens.

I think for many people in the world their sense of reality is based on patterns they see, socialization, personal experiences, in addition to appeals of authority, etc, So I think we should be more understanding of where and why anti-realist doctrines come from in social life

Perhaps bullshit is a manifestation of convenience?

I interpret this as there is a spectrum of deception based on the precision and whether there is a predetermined intent. I feel that when one lies its usually pertains to the individual/personal level of deception, whereas bullshit relates to the way one (purposefully) views the reality of the world

Context matters!

"beaten out or shaped by hammering"

We call this appeal to emotion

Apparently this is a new word from the 20th century -- for some reason I thought the word would have an older etymology

Even more interesting is the exponential increase of the word being used in the 2000s