For my upcoming evaluation, I put together an updated CV. On the off chance that it might interest someone, here it is.
Well, it’s not just an exersize in narcissism. I really struggled to figure out how to divide up the various kinds of projects I have been working on, in the “Scholarship” section. I settled on the following.
- Book chapter (peer reviewed)
- Edited works. Includes my digital republication of the Origin of Species.
- Invited lecture.
- “Evolution Resources” column in Evolution: Education and Outreach.
- Book reviews.
- Web presence. Blogs, twitter.
- Development. I am the BibDesk release engineer. Lapsed, apparently. Seriously, though, I will get to the next release soon.
- Computing. Applications, including svn, Emacs, other development tools.
I have no idea what this will mean to the Dean, the Provost, or the evaluation committee. Nor will I find out, either, except by way of a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down.”
It’s important to differentiate these different kinds of works according to their nature and purpose, rather than lumping them together as “web publications” or “software.” Look, we don’t put journal articles, posters, and books in the same category because they are all printed materials (or at least, used to be). In fact, some of the digital works do more or less the same thing as their print analogs, for instance, bibliographies. Whether in print or in the form of a BibTeX database, a collection of bibliographic records serve the same essential functions.
One thing that is clear, whatever other confusions there may be, is that I need to publish papers in the usual places, peer-reviewed periodicals, whether online or in any other form.
I’d be interested to hear about how other people in the Humanities working on digital projects have represented them to their administrators.