D ocum e nt New Criteria for New Media

Jon Ippolito, Joline Blais, Owen F. Smith, Steve Evans and Nathan Stormer

Part 1: Introduction by Jon Ippolito print journals do have some ad- © Jon Ippolito vantages over virtual ink. For one In 1998, Benjamin Weil curated an exhibition for London’s thing, paper is much more back- Institute for Contemporary Art called Web Classics. The title ward compatible; it is easier to find a university library with a century- was both ironic—the Web had only been around for 5 years at abst r act the time—and prophetic. Weil, a co-founder of the influential old book than a working floppy site ada’web and later at the San Francisco Museum drive. But research universities are This paper argues for rede- of Modern Art, once opined that every calendar year corre- supposed to represent the future as fining evaluation criteria for sponded to three Web years. well as the past, and the future is faculty working in new media about connecting rather than stor- research and makes specific Weil was right that Internet art has grown up quickly, at least recommendations for promotion to judge from the frequency of e-mails popping into my inbox ing knowledge. and tenure committees in U.S. from masters’ and Ph.D. students researching ada’web and its Fortunately, new media of- universities. contemporaries. In recognition of the speedy maturation of fer plenty of ways for scholars to networked media, a new generation of fledgling new media connect. ThoughtMesh [1], a project soon establish a tenured foothold in academic departments Craig Dietrich and I have devel- worldwide. oped for the Still Water network Or will they? The university, an institution that dates back to for art and culture at the University of Maine and University the 5th century BC, operates by calendar years rather than Web of Southern California’s Vectors program, gives readers a years, and academic review committees still expect candidates tag-based navigation system that uses keywords to connect ex- for promotion and tenure to hand them stacks of books and cerpts of essays published on different web sites. For example, periodicals rather than a list of URLs. Nevertheless, I hope that the reader of an essay on modern art can pick a single term being a new media scholar means more than publishing books out of that essay’s tag cloud, such as “” and with the word “digital” or “Internet” in the title. Marxism and view a list of all the sections from that essay that relate to Paik. feminism were also revolutionary discourses, but they failed to Or one can view a list of sections of other articles tagged with change the way history and other academic disciplines do busi- “Nam June Paik” and jump right to one of those sections. One ness. By that I mean that even in universities where Marxism can also combine tags to narrow the search: “Nam June Paik” or feminism influence scholarship, the broadcast paradigms + “Fluxus” + “1962.” are still in place: professors “instructing” students, scholars Related efforts include Still Water Research Fellow John competing for publication in prestigious journals, attention- Bell’s distributed publication system Re:Paik [2], which allows scholars and critics to ferret out and the one-way flow of information. share contemporary signs of the legacy of this “grandfather New media hold out the promise of toppling these behav- of video art” in everything from museum exhibitions to pop ioral hierarchies, rather than merely changing the subjects music. Recognizing new-media researchers’ need to get infor- taught according to them. Whether this effort succeeds will mation into the collective ether as quickly as possible, Leo- depend on whether we, as a group of scholars and activists, can nardo has embarked on Leonardo Transactions (http://www. point out the hypocrisy of preaching decentralization from leonardotransactions.com/), a “fast track” section of its vener- PowerPoint slides or closed-access journals and investigate and able print journal, which subjects two-page papers to a faster contribute to networked modes of sharing knowledge. referee process than most peer-reviewed journals can muster. Consider scholarly publication, for example. Books and Of course, academics can also circulate ideas quickly and widely by blogging, contributing to Wikipedia, or at least pub- lishing in open access repositories. Jon Ippolito (, professor), 406 Chadbourne Hall, The University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469-5713, U.S.A. E-mail: . Unfortunately, few new-media academics are going to bother with these innovations if their departments’ criteria Joline Blais (writer, educator), 400 Chadbourne Hall, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469-5713, U.S.A. E-mail: . for promotion and tenure recognize only dead-tree journals. That is why these criteria have to change. It will not be easy; the Owen F. Smith (educator, artist), 404 Chadbourne Hall, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, U.S.A. E-mail: . most conservative constituents of university hierarchies often control these criteria. Times are changing, however: not only Steve Evans (educator, literary critic), National Poetry Foundation, 313 Neville Hall, Uni- versity of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, U.S.A. E-mail: . is tenure irrelevant in many universities worldwide, but even in

Nathan Stormer (educator), 430 Dunn Hall, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, U.S.A. countries such as the U.K. and the U.S. traditional criteria are E-mail: . becoming overshadowed by “research assessment exercises” and other metrics. By publishing the following criteria de- ©2009 ISAST. Individual article sections copyright as indicated. Published under Creative Commons Attribution (CC-by) license. All rights not granted thereunder to the public are reserved to the publisher and may not be exercised without its express written permission. LEONARDO, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 71–75, 2009 71

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon.2009.42.1.71 by guest on 28 September 2021 veloped by Still Water, the research arm ten requires its practitioners to develop distributed publication are on the hori- of the University of Maine’s New Media a critical context for their own creative zon, at the time of this writing these sys- Department, we hope to influence these work. This is why the majority of first- tems are only in the planning stage [11]. fledgling developments—if only philo- generation new media critics are also art- Finally, as the MLA warns, participation sophically—and remind scholars of all ists [7]. It is also why new media research in electronic scholarship should not place generations that impact in our field can spans numerous genres, from critical es- extra demands on a researcher [12]; an and should be measured differently. says to political activism to community- accomplishment in new media research building to software design. New media should substitute for a print article or faculties may profit by examining and monograph, not merely supplement Part 2: New Criteria for borrowing criteria from practice-based them. New Media ( January 2008) departments such as journalism and ar- © Jon Ippolito et al. chitecture. Alternative Recognition Authors: Joline Blais, Jon Ippolito, and Measures Owen Smith in collaboration with Steve Limitations of Academic Given the accessibility and timeliness re- Evans and Nathan Stormer. Journals quired for new media research, the fol- These differences may require evaluators lowing measures of recognition should Introduction of new media artist-researchers to look be prioritized in the evaluation of new Recognition and achievement in the beyond the usual standards applicable media research candidates: field of new media must be measured by in other disciplines. As noted by a 2003 standards as high as but different from National Academies report: 1. Invited/Edited Publications those in established artistic or scien- Invitations to publish in edited electronic tific disciplines. As the reports from the Because the field of [Information Tech- journals or printed magazines and books nology and Creative Practices] is young American Council of Learned Societies and dynamic, ITCP production is hard to should be recognized as the kind of peer [3], the Modern Language Association evaluate. Traditional review panels . . . may influence that in other fields would be [4], and the University of Maine [5] rec- be hampered by their members’ ties signaled by acceptance in peer-reviewed ommend, promotion and tenure guide- to single disciplines and the absence journals. of a time-tested consensus about what lines must be revised to encourage the constitutes good work in ITCP and why creative and innovative use of technology [8]. 2. Live Conferences if universities are to remain relevant in The 2003 National Academies study the 21st century. Ironically, the National Academies concludes that conferences on new me- The following points summarize some study found that the highest benchmark dia, both face-to-face and virtual, offer of the key areas in which new media re- for success in traditional academic de- a more useful and in some cases more search departs from traditional academic partments, publication in peer-reviewed prestigious venue for exposition than scholarship, with the aim of providing a journals, is less relevant to success in new academic journals: rationale for specific criteria for universi- media—and empirically less an accurate ties with U.S.-style promotion and tenure measure of stature in the field—than [The sluggishness of journal publica- more supple or timely forms of intellec- tions] is offset somewhat by a flourishing policies. array of conferences and other forums, tual exposition: in both virtual and real space, that pro- vide a sense of community and an outlet New Form and Content The gold standard for academia—and The differences between traditional and as well as feedback [13] . . . The prestige the criterion most easily understood by associated with presentations at major new media excellence lie in both form parties outside a given subdiscipline—is conferences actually makes some of them and content. The hard-copy format of the so-called archival journal (often pub- more selective than journals [14]. traditional review documentation, such lished by scholarly or professional societ- ies) that involves considerable editorial New forms of conference archiving— as photocopies or slides, is insufficient selection plus prepublication review for evaluating new media work; screen- and revision, which function as a screen- such as archived Webcasts—add value shots do little justice to electronic proj- ing system for quality. But the long lead and exposure to the research presented ects based on innovative interactive or time for such publications poses prob- at conferences. participatory design. As the MLA puts it, lems for subdisciplines in which timeli- ness—quickly getting an idea into the “evaluative bodies should review faculty field—matters [9]. 3. Citations members’ work in the medium in which Citations are a valuable and versatile mea- it was produced. For example, Web-based Leonardo journal (MIT Press) is as of sure of peer influence because they may projects should be viewed online, not in this writing the only print journal with come from or point to a variety of genres, printed form” [6]. a longstanding track record as a peer- from Web sites to databases to books in Further complicating the evalua- reviewed journal about new media. print. Examples include citations in: tion of new media achievements is the There is currently a new handful of peer- fact that they are often interdisciplin- reviewed journals devoted to new me- a. Electronic archives and recognition ary, as reflected by the current Univer- dia, such as Leonardo Electronic Almanac networks, such as the publicly ac- sity of Maine New Media faculty, whose (Cambridge), Fibreculture (Sydney), First cessible databases maintained by backgrounds range from engineering Monday (Chicago), Vectors (Los Angeles), the Daniel Langlois Foundation to computer science to fine art to pho- and Digital Creativity (Copenhagen). Yet (Montreal), the V2 organization tojournalism to literature. Established the field’s most prominent print publish- (Rotterdam), the Database of Vir- faculties with ties to new media may sig- ers and research archivists [10] have ac- tual Art (Berlin), and the Media Art nal themselves as exclusively critical or knowledged a 15–25 year lag and limited Net database (Karlsruhe). creative, as in the distinction between exposure that makes print publications b. Books, printed journals, and newspa- Art History and Studio Art, respectively. far less relevant for new media research. pers. These are easier to find now, New media’s brief history, however, of- Although promising new paradigms for thanks to Google Scholar, Google

72 Ippolito et al., New Criteria for New Media

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon.2009.42.1.71 by guest on 28 September 2021 Print, and Amazon’s “look inside privileging new media research with di- I. Teaching and the book” feature. rect effect on local or global communi- Instructional Activities c. Syllabi and other pedagogical con- ties, the university can remain relevant in New media pedagogy must be light on texts. Google searches on .edu an age where much research takes place its feet to stay relevant. Below are some domains and citations of the outside the ivory tower. instructional activities that serve as im- author’s work in syllabi from out- portant supplements to regular courses side universities can measure the 7. Net-Native Recognition Metrics on the new media curriculum. academic currency of an individual Peer-evaluated online communities may researcher or her ideas. In the sci- invent their own measures of member A. Other Teaching Activities ences, readings or projects cited evaluation, in which case they may be Independent Study, Directed Research, on a syllabus are likely to be popu- relevant to a researcher who participates etc. (list by course number) lar textbooks, but in an emerging in those communities. Examples of such Because new media’s tools and topics field such as new media, such rec- self-policing communities include Slash- proliferate too quickly to be captured by ognition is a more valid marker of dot, The Pool, Open Theory, and the any one curriculum, faculty are encour- relevance. Distributed Learning Project. The MLA aged to teach independent studies when pins the responsibility for learning these students want to explore research areas 4. Download/Visitor Counts new metrics on reviewers rather than not on a current syllabus. Downloads and other traffic-related sta- the reviewed [20]. Given the mutability In addition, new media student and tistics represent a measure of influence of such metrics, however, promotion and faculty projects often reach beyond that has gained importance in the online tenure candidates may be called upon to the walls of the classroom into the real community recently. As a 2005 open ac- explain and give context to these met- world. The new media program recog- cess study [15] concludes: rics for their reviewers. Again, efforts nizes the value of directed research in to educate a scholar’s colleagues about which faculty involve students in outside Whereas the significance of citation new media should be considered part of collaborations for artistic or commercial impact is well established, access of re- purposes, as well as faculty members who search literature via the Web provides a that scholar’s research, not supplemental new metric for measuring the impact of to it. facilitate students’ exposure to or par- articles—Web download impact. Down- ticipation in national and international load impact is useful for at least two exhibitions, conferences, and other 8. Reference Letters/Committees reasons: (1) The portion of download venues. variance that is correlated with citation Letters of recommendation from outside counts provides an early-days estimate of referees are an important compensation B. Curriculum and Course Development probable citation impact that can begin for the irrelevance of traditional recog- to be tracked from the instant an article 1. Curriculum nition venues. Nevertheless, it is insuffi- is made Open Access and that already During its building years, the new cient merely to solicit such letters from attains its maximum predictive power af- media program expects its faculty to ter 6 months. (2) The portion of down- professors tenured in new media at other contribute more to curriculum devel- load variance that is uncorrelated with universities, since so few exist. More valu- opment than expected in other depart- citation counts provides a second, partly able is to use the measures outlined in independent estimate of the impact of ments. This work may take the form this document to identify pre-eminent an article, sensitive to another form of of course proposals, curriculum pro- figures in new media, or to require new research usage that is not reflected in posals, or curriculum subcommittee citations [16]. media promotion and tenure candidates membership. to identify such figures and supply evi- 2. Courses dence that they qualify according to the 5. Impact in Online Discussions Given the quick pace of new media evo- criteria above. It has also been suggested Email discussion lists are the proving lution, the program recognizes excep- that the membership of review com- grounds of new media discourse. They tional value in developing courses that mittees for researchers in new media vary greatly in tone and substance, but explore new pedagogies or emerging should also represent a balance of criti- even the least moderated of such lists can technologies. cal and creative experts with standing in subject their authors to rigorous—and at It is understood that new media faculty both the academic and the outside times withering—scrutiny [17]. Measures may spend a significant portion of their world. such as the number of list subscribers, research or course preparation time geographic scope, the presence or ab- learning an emerging technology, such as sence of moderation, and the number a new programming language, with the of replies triggered by a given contribu- Part 3: Criteria by understanding that such knowledge may tion can give a sense of the importance Category lay the groundwork for future research of each discussion list [18]. © University of Maine or new courses. This groundwork is not The following criteria formulated by “brushing up on skills,” but experiment- 6. Impact in the Real World the University of Maine’s New Media ing with promising yet unproven systems, While magazine columns and newspa- Department offer one example of how codes, or devices. per editorials may have little standing universities can adapt their standards of in traditional academic subjects, one of recognition to reflect the growing im- II. Research and Scholarly the strengths of new media are their rel- portance of electronic scholarship in the Activities evance to a daily life that is increasingly 21st century. Because of the rapid pace Good collaborators are critical to thriv- inflected by the relentless proliferation of innovation in electronic formats, this ing research ecosystems. Candidates of technologies. Even counting Google list must remain partial, since it is impos- are encouraged to list any collaborative search returns on the author’s name or sible to predict what new recognition roles they have played in publications statistically improbable phrases can be mechanisms may be relevant a few years and other activities, such as conceptual a measure of real-world impact [19]. By from now. architect, approach designer, release en-

Ippolito et al., New Criteria for New Media 73

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon.2009.42.1.71 by guest on 28 September 2021 gineer, or matchmaker (e.g., introducing tions or independent organizations, and New media can be especially effective two other researchers whose collabora- can include online exhibitions as well as in transforming local cultures as well as tion results in a publication). Each new physical installations. global ones. Faculty research in this area media department may choose to weight a. Participating can be distinguished from traditional these various roles according to its own b. Curated academic “service” by its innovative, priorities. 2. Performance Related Activities activist, or performative character. This category includes political de- A. Publications sign, social software, and interactive IV. Special Recognition/ 1. Books/Monographs performance. Awards/Honors Received Networked or rich-media publications 3. Creative Writing and Poetry such as extended blogs, DVDs, or CD- This category includes literature in all its A. Press ROMs should be included if they con- forms, both analogue and digital, in print Given the limitations of publishing new stitute a sustained investigation of a or online. media research in academic journals, particular topic. recognition from the press in the form 2. Refereed Journal Articles C. Professional Presentations and Posters of articles or interviews about a research- In a new media context, a “closed peer- (please indicate if regional, national, or er’s work can be a valuable indicator of review” article includes invited contri- international) influence. butions to edited print journals and 1. Conferences and Discussions orga- 1. Print and Broadcast Press networked journals. The format of these nized This category includes outside sources contributions may go beyond the form Researchers in new media at this point such as general-interest newspapers, ra- of a written essay to include podcasts, in its development are actively filling in dio or TV spots, and specialized journals videoblogs, and other forms of archival gaps in the awareness of new media’s own or magazines. media. history, a critical vocabulary, and other 2. Electronic Press An “open peer-review” article includes intellectual frameworks already in place This category includes articles in online contributions to self-policing publication in other fields. The new media program journals as well as blogs. networks, where the quality or relevance recognizes the value that organizing of contributions is subject to community private and public events has for the B. Citations debate and evaluation. field as a whole and, when local, for our Only general citations go here; citations 3. Chapters of Books/Monographs students. to document the relevance and achieve- (please indicate if invited or juried) 2. Presentations ment of specific projects should accom- Essays or chapters in edited volumes are As studies of new media have argued, pany the entries on that research above. more important in new media than the presenting research at prestigious con- 1. Print Citations sciences, for these edited volumes estab- ferences can be more important than Although they are not as timely as elec- lish standards for discourse in emergent publishing it. tronic citations, citations in books on subdisciplines of new media. While there is no substitute for in- new media can suggest a measure of a This category should also include in- person gatherings, teleconferences are researcher’s influence and relevance to vited contributions to edited, single-issue gradually becoming an important venue the field. networked publications. for conference presentations, though 2. Electronic Citations 4. Edited Volumes they vary in degree of formality and One measure of influence in academia This category includes coordinating organization. can be suggested by citations in other or managing a multi-user discussion university syllabi. (See the breakdown in list, whether accessible via email or III. Service Part 2.) Web. This category also includes the con- A. Service to University ception, design, engineering, and/or 1. Department Part 4: Note from Roger editing of organized media collections, As a fledgling program with a high stu- F. Malina, Leonardo  including film festivals, networked data- dent-to-teacher ratio, the new media Executive Editor bases, and publications. program requires an unusual amount © ISAST 5. Technical Reports/Book Reviews of innovation and labor from its faculty, The problem discussed by Jon Ippolito is This category includes networked reports which should be taken into consideration one that faces many young professionals and reviews. when evaluating faculty contributions to in academic institutions internationally. 6. Other Publications (e.g., Editorials, other areas. Over the years we have been contacted Working Papers, etc.) 2. University by chairs of promotion and tenure com- This category includes essays published Because new media promise to change mittees at a number of institutions who to email lists, including all contributions the methods of many academic disci- want to understand whether Leonardo’s to discussions sparked by the publication plines, faculty are encouraged to lend scholarly publications use peer review of that essay. their voice to interdisciplinary commit- (they do), and what kind (we use single tees and work with other departments blind review). Yet traditional peer review B. Creative Activities, Exhibitions, and to envision and develop programs that is evolving in science and engineering, Performance-Related Activities integrate new media into their own not only to take into account the prolif- (please indicate whether regional, inter- practices. eration of examples of fraud and plagia- national, national, solo, group, invited rism surviving peer review, but also to or juried) B. Service to the Public open up the process to counter obstacles 1. Exhibitions (e.g., service on state commissions, to interdisciplinary scholarship. This category includes networked exhibi- public schools, civic groups, consulting, We have been asked for impact and tions hosted by brick-and-mortar institu- media interviews, public presentations) citation statistics (Leonardo is in the ISI

74 Ippolito et al., New Criteria for New Media

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon.2009.42.1.71 by guest on 28 September 2021 database). Yet, as pointed out by Ippolito, motion, , As of December 21, 2005, one of the premiere it is clear that many of the leading prac- accessed January 2, 2007. bibliographic indices in new media, the Langlois Foundation’s CR+D database, included the fol- titioners in rapidly changing interdisci- 5. “The Commission encourages each department lowing indexation for “Jon Ippolito”: Author of 10 plinary fields not only fall between the on campus, as well as the University as a whole, to documents; Subject of 48 documents; Participant examine promotion and tenure criteria to recognize to 21 events; and Organizer of 2 events. Of the 10 cracks of established evaluation systems and reward innovative uses of technology in teach- documents by the author indexed, 1 is from an email but also are disseminating their work in ing, research and service.... The University needs list and 2 are parts of Web sites. In the case of artist new ways on-line that entirely escape as- to consider the criteria and standards used in the and critic Alexander Galloway, the relevance of his promotion and tenure process. The Commission online texts is even more striking: although by 2005 sessment by existing metrics. I have been encourages each department and the University as he was the author of several journal articles and an asked to write letters of recommenda- a whole to consider whether faculty efforts in this important book from MIT Press, the two documents area are recognized, valued, and/or encouraged.” tion taking into account authors’ work that represented his writing in the CR+D database November 2003 report of the University of Maine were both from email lists. in on-line communities such as Second Commission on Information Technologies, accessed Life and to comment on the “perceived at 19. A statistically significant number of Google re- on May 2, 2004. turns, e.g., >30, may be a necessary but insufficient value” of certain on-line conference ven- condition for confirming global impact. ues and archives. Some of the most influ- 6. MLA Committee on Information Technology. “Guidelines for Evaluating Work with Digital Media 20. “In evaluating scholarship for tenure and pro- ential collections of texts and work in our in the Modern Languages.” 20 May 2000. ADE Bulle- motion, committees and administrators must take fields have never seen the light of print. tin 132 (2002): 94–-95. 82, mirrored at , accessed 2 mechanisms of oversight and assessment that already In the sciences, a number of open- January 2007. govern the production of a great deal of digital schol- archive systems now co-exist with more arship and of the well-established role of new media traditional scholarly publishing business 7. A brief sampling of new media theorist-practitio- in humanities research. It is of course convenient ners and institutions they have been connected with when electronic scholarly editing and writing are models. In neither the art-and-technol- includes Simon Biggs (Edinburgh), Matthew Fuller clearly analogous to their print counterparts. But ogy nor the new-media fields do such (Piet Zwart Institute), Mary Flanagan (Hunter), when new media make new forms of scholarship Alexander Galloway (NYU), Kenneth Goldberg “evaluatable” open archive systems exist. possible, those forms can be assessed with the same (Berkeley), Eduardo Kac (Art Institute of Chicago), rigor used to judge scholarly quality in print media. Yet, it is possible for open archive systems Natalie Jeremijenko (UCSD), Raphael Lozano-Hem- We must have the flexibility to ensure that, as new to allow rapid dissemination while texts mer (Karlstad University, Sweden), Lev Manovich sources and instruments for knowing develop, the (UCSD), Randall Packer (American University), meaning of scholarship can expand and remain rel- proceed through peer-reviewing systems. Richard Rinehart (Berkeley), and Jeffrey Shaw evant to our changing times.” MLA Task Force on Leonardo Transactions, under Editor-in- (ZKM). Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion [4] p. 46. Chief Ernest Edmonds, is one experi- 8. National Research Council, Beyond Productiv- ment in coupling an open archive with ity: Information Technology, Innovation, and Creativity (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, peer-review journal flow. 2003) pp. 8–9. Manuscript received 16 August 2007. As indicated by Ippolito, we are inter- ested in documenting in Leonardo various 9. National Research Council [8] p. 188. Jon Ippolito’s current projects—including international approaches that develop 10. These estimates are from Roger Malina (Execu- the Variable Media Network, The Pool and tive Editor of Leonardo journal) and the Daniel Lan- ThoughtMesh—aim to expand the art world “alternative evaluation criteria or met- glois Foundation’s Alain Depocas (Director of the rics” to allow assessment of new modes Centre for Documentation + Research). beyond its traditional preoccupations. of scholarly text dissemination and pub- 11. The Interarchive project is a possible model lication. for distributed publication; see . House, a merging of the Wabanaki Long- house, permaculture gardens and networked References and Notes 12. “Change in favor of a more capacious conception of scholarship, which we strongly endorse, should collaboration; the Cross-Cultural Partner- Unedited references as provided by authors. not mean ever-wider demands on faculty members, ship, a legal framework for sharing connected 1. ThoughtMesh by Jon Ippolito and Craig Dietrich, most especially those coming up for tenure and pro- knowledge responsibly and sustainably; and , accessed 10 July 2007. motion.” MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship At the Edge of Art, a book on strategies that for Tenure and Promotion [4] p. 21. empower new media to reshape the prac- 2. Re:Paik by John Bell, , ac- cessed 10 July 2007. 13. National Research Council [8] pp. 8–9. tice of art and beyond. 3. The ACLS recommends “policies for tenure and 14. National Research Council [8] p. 188. promotion that recognize and reward digital schol- Owen F. Smith is an historian of alternative 15. Tim Brody and Stevan Harnad, “Earlier Web Us- arship and scholarly communication; recognition art forms, a producer of multiples and a digi- age Statistics as Predictors of Later Citation Impact”, should be given not only to scholarship that uses the , accessed tal and performance artist. His scholarly work humanities and social science cyberinfrastructure but 5 March 2005. has been published in numerous books and also to scholarship that contributes to its design, con- catalogs on Fluxus, Intermedia and related struction, and growth.... We might expect younger 16. Kurtz, Michael J. (2004) “Restrictive access poli- colleagues to use new technologies with greater flu- cies cut readership of electronic research journal forms of creativity. His work as an artist has ency and ease, but with tenure at stake, they will also articles by a factor of two,” Harvard-Smithsonian been exhibited throughout the U.S.A., Europe be more risk-averse.... Senior scholars now have both Centre for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, , pp. 1–2. risks, first among which is to condone risk taking in their junior colleagues and their graduate students, 17. This recent [http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Ar- Steve Evans’s writing and research focus on making sure that such endeavors are appropriately chives/nettime-l0504/msg00051.html] rejoinder poetry and poetics, critical theory and the rewarded.” “Our Cultural Commonwealth,” report by Morlock Elloi on the list exemplifies by the ACLS Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for the expectations of such online forums: If you have avant-garde. He runs the New Writing Series the Humanities and Social Sciences, 29 July 2006, any past publications that might help me under- at the University of Maine, does projects with , accessed January 2, 2007. While I understand that in paid-speaker-world the web site, thirdfactory.net, devoted to contem- weight of the argument is computed as (volume of 4. “Departments and institutions should recognize publications) × (number of speeches), on nettime porary poetry. the legitimacy of scholarship produced in new me- and elsewhere closer to reality arguments stand for dia, whether by individuals or in collaboration, and themselves. create procedures for evaluating these forms of Nathan Stormer’s principal research area scholarship.” December 2006 report of the MLA Task 18. Electronic and email texts also have a currency is medical rhetoric about abortion. He also Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Pro- acknowledged by leading institutions in the field. teaches and researches visuality and culture.

Ippolito et al., New Criteria for New Media 75

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon.2009.42.1.71 by guest on 28 September 2021 Call for Papers

Nanotechnology, Nanoscale Science and Art

Leonardo Special Section Guest Editors: Tom Rockwell and Tami I. Spector

Over the last decade, “nano” has become the buzzword signifying everything from imagined atomic-scale robotic utopias to small electronics. For scientists the shift toward nano has also become ubiquitous; what used to be referred to as “molecular” has been reframed as “nano,” 27 journals devoted to nanotech/ nanoscience are now published, and the National Science Foundation and other granting agencies have devoted a significant amount of funding toward nanotech/nanoscience. Among engineers, scientists and science-studies scholars, discussions of the potential of nanotech/nanoscience abound, including confer- ences that debate the pros and cons of a nano-hegemony and attempt to debunk some of the hype. Artists, however, have only begun to explore this emergent scientific field, leaving it wide open for creative inter- pretation. With this special section of Leonardo we hope to ignite artists’ interest in the exploration of nano- tech/nanoscience and encourage scientists, scholars and educators to contemplate the implications of an art-nanotech/nanoscience connection.

Leonardo, in collaboration with the Exploratorium under the auspices of the Nanotech Informal Science Education Network, will publish a series of special sections periodically over the next 5 years exploring the intersections of nanotech/nanoscience and art. We are especially seeking submissions of artworks (visual, performance, sound, etc.) with artists’ statements explaining the relationship of the work to nanotech/ nanoscience; essays from scientists, engineers and scholars exploring the connection between nanotech/ nanoscience and art; and essays and visuals aiming at nanotech/nanoscience education that uses the arts as a pedagogical tool. Articles published to date as part of this special project include:

Tami I. Spector, “Introduction: Nanotechnology, Nanoscale Science and Art,” Leonardo 41, No. 4.

Filipe Rocha da Silva, “Nanoscale and ,” Leonardo 41, No. 4. Boo Chapple with William Wong, “Can You Hear the Femur Play? Bone Audio Speakers at the Nanoscale,” Leonardo 41, No. 4. Jane Bearinger, “Chaos Control on the Nanoscale,” Leonardo 41, No. 4. Interested artists and authors are invited to send proposals, queries and/or manuscripts to the Leonardo editorial office: Leonardo, 211 Sutter St., Ste. 501, San Francisco, CA 94108, U.S.A. E-mail: . Editorial Guidelines for Authors can be found at .

This project is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. ESI-0532536.

Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon.2009.42.1.71 by guest on 28 September 2021