The long and short of it 2

January 5, 2007

Questions about who reads what academics write - and what they do with the information having read it - are fascinating. But when questions are set only in the context of giving a rationale to funding decisions, a broader perspective is lost.

When I retired I put my work online, free for anyone to download. Five years on, I have a website that gets 7,500 visits a month.

This sounds like a readership well beyond the dreams of ordinary academic vanity. Academics are starting to put their reading lists online with hyperlinks to online sources. As a result, I am discovering which university has assigned which of my papers and for what course - and how many students have clicked on the links. Of course, I can't see how many then cited the paper - or, for that matter, plagiarised it.

But as more academic work appears on the web, it will become relatively easy to devise metrics to tell us who is reading what, where and to what effect. At the very least, this will be a corrective to the approaches - including the parochial and self-serving - Jon which academics now rely.

Trevor Pateman

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October