The Shifting Genres of Scholarly Multimedia: Webtexts As Innovation
In this article, I discuss webtexts as a multi-genre, multi-mediated type of research publication. After briefly describing what webtexts are, how they function, what their histories have looked like, and what media have been used to design them, I examine more closely what genres have been assigned to them and how those genres have fluctuated across time. This article explores how the genres of webtexts can be difficult to stabilize due to their technological and media innovations. This lack of stability is an unsolved preservation problem that rich metadata can partially ameliorate so that readers can interpret and interact with webtexts into the future. Although there doesn’t exist any official controlled vocabulary for metadata that would apply to webtext genres, this article outlines one attempt at creating a vocabulary for webtexts and their media elements that attends to their historical and generic shifts.
Baca, Murtha (Ed.). (2008). Introduction to metadata, 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Getty Research Institute. Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/intrometadata/
Ball, Cheryl E. (2012). Assessing scholarly multimedia: A rhetorical genre studies approach. Technical Communication Quarterly, 21 [Special issue: Making the implicit explicit in assessing multimodal composition], 61–77.
Ball, Cheryl E. (2013). Pirates of metadata or, The true adventures of how one editor, fifteen undergraduate publishing majors, and 25,000 media elements survived a metadata mining project. In Stephanie Davis-Kahl & Merinda Hensley (Eds.), Extend and unify: Outreach and education for scholarly communication and information literacy programs. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries.
Ball, Cheryl E., & Eyman, Douglas. (2015, Fall). Editorial workflows for multimedia-rich scholarship. Journal of Electronic Publishing.
Ball, Cheryl E., & Moeller, Ryan M. (2008). Converging the ASS[umptions] between U and ME; or How new media can bridge the scholarly/creative split in English studies. Computers & Composition Online. Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://casit.bgsu.edu/cconline/convergence/
Bellotti, Victoria, & Rogers, Yvonne. (1997). From web press to web pressure: multimedia representations and multimedia publishing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 279–286). ACM. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=258755
Bergeron, Bryan P., & Bailin, Michael T. (1996). Collaborative hypermedia development: considerations for academic publishing. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5(2), 101–112.
Berkenkotter, Carol, & Huckin, Thomas N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: cognition/culture/power. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1995-97008-000
Bott, David M., & Hargens, Lowell L. (1991). Are sociologists’ publications uncited? citation rates of journal articles, chapters, and books. The American Sociologist, 22(2), 147–158.
Canagarajah, A. S. (1996). “Nondiscursive” requirements in academic publishing, material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written Communication, 13(4), 435–472. doi:10.1177/0741088396013004001
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2014). Changing knowledge ecologies and the transformation of the scholarly journal. In B. Cope & A. Phillips (Eds.), The future of the academic journal, 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing.
Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy and the design of social futures. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cope, B., & Phillips, A. (2014). The future of the academic journal, 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing.
Cox, John E. (1998). The changing economic model of scholarly publishing: uncertainty, complexity, and multimedia serials. Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, 22(2), 161–166.
DCMI Type Vocabulary, (2006, August 28). Retreived Novermber 1, 2015, from http://dublincore.org/documents/2006/08/28/dcmi-type-vocabulary/)
Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1. (2012-06-14). Retrieved November 1, 2015, from http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/
English, James. (2005). Academic journals in the global age: New vs. old forms of inquiry. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 37, 8–18.
Eyman, D. (2000). Does anybody read Kairos? [Editorial]. Kairos: A Journal for Teachers of Writing in Webbed Environments, 5(1). Retrieved November 1, 2015, from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/5.1/binder.html?loggingon/eyman.html
Eyman, D., Walker, J., Purdy, J., & Reilly, C. (Eds.). (2007b). Computers and Composition Online [Special issue: Online Research, Writing, and Citation Practices].
Eyman, Douglas, & Ball, Cheryl E. (2014). Composing for digital publication: Rhetoric, design, code. Composition Studies 42(1), 114–117.
Eyman, Douglas, & Ball, Cheryl E. (2015). Digital humanities scholarship and electronic publication. In Jim Ridolfo & William Hart-Davidson (Eds.), Rhetoric and the digital humanities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Eyman, Douglas, & Ball, Cheryl E. (2015/forthcoming). History of a broken thing: The multi-journal special issue on electronic publication. In Bruce McComisky (Ed.), Microhistories in composition studies. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
Eyman, Douglas, Ball, Cheryl E., Boggs, Jeremy, Booher, Amanda K., Burnside, Elkie, DeWitt, Scott Lloyd, Dockter, Jason, Dolmage, Jay, Gardner, Traci, Georgi, Sara, Hinderliter, Hal, Ivey, Susan, Keller, Michael, Kelley, Rachael, Kennedy, Sarah, Kennison, Rebecca, McClanahan, Pamela, Ries, Alex, Roberts, Kassi, Schlosser, Melanie, Stolley, Karl, Walter, John Paul, Williams, George H., Yergeau, Melanie, & Zdenek, Sean. (2016). Access/ibility: Access and usability for digital publishing. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy 20(2). Retrieved March 6, 2016, from http://kairos.technorhetoric. net/20.2/topoi/eyman-et-al/index.html
Fitzpatrick, Kathleen. 2011. Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy. New York: New York University Press.
Harnad, Stevan. (1996). Implementing peer review on the net: Scientific quality control in scholarly electronic journals. Scholarly publishing: The electronics frontier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hyland, Ken. (1999). Academic attribution: citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 341–367.
Kahin, Brian, & Varian, Hal R. (2000). Internet publishing and beyond: the economics of digital information and intellectual property. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. New York, NY: Routledge.
Kuhn, V. (2008). The components of scholarly multimedia. In V. Kuhn & V. Vitanza (Eds.), From gallery to webtext [Webtext compilation]. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 12(3). Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/12.3/topoi/gallery/index.html
Kuhn, V., Johnson, DJ, & Lopez, D. (2010). Speaking with students: Profiles in digital pedagogy. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 14(2). Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/14.2/interviews/kuhn/
Lee, Carole J., Sugimoto, Cassidy R., Zhang, Guo, & Cronin, Blaise. (2013). Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2–17.
Lemke, Jay. (2006). Toward critical multimedia literacy: Technology, research, and politics. In Michael McKenna (Ed.), International handbook of literacy and technology: Volume two (pp. 3–14). Psychology Press.
Liestøl, G. (2010). On mobility, localization and the possibility of digital genre design. In I. Wagner, T. Bratteteig, & D. Stuedahl (Eds.), Exploring digital design (pp. 171-188). London, UK: Springer.
Liestøl, G., Morrison, A., & Rasmussen, T. (Eds.) (2004). Digital media revisited: Theoretical and conceptual innovations in digital domains. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Purdy, J., &. Walker, J. (2012). Scholarship on the move: A rhetorical analysis of scholarly activity in digital spaces. In D. Journet, C. Ball, & R. Trauman (Eds.), New work of composing (n.p.). Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, Computers and Composition Digital Press. Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://ccdigitalpress.org/nwc/chapters/purdy-walker
Reilly, C., & Eyman, D. (2007a). Multifaceted methods for multi-modal texts: Alternate approaches to citation analysis for electronic sources. In Heidi McKee & Dànielle DeVoss (Eds.), Digital writing research: Technologies, methodologies, and ethicial issues (353-375). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Russell, David R., Lea, Mary, Parker, Jan, Street, Brian, & Donahue, Tiane. (2009). Exploring notions of genre in “academic literacies” and “writing across the curriculum”: Approaches across countries and contexts. In C. Bazerman,A. Bonini, & D. Figueiredo (Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 459– 491). [Perspectives on Writing series]. Fort Collins, Colorado: WAC Clearinghouse.
Smart, J., & Bayer, A. (1986). Author collaboration and impact: a note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles. Scientometrics, 10(5-6), 297–305.
Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: A flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99(4), 17-182.
Swales, John. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tenopir, Carol, & King, Donald W. (2000). Towards electronic journals: Realities for scientists, librarians, and publishers. Special Libraries Association. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/carol_tenopir/7/
Ventola, Eija, & Mauranen, Anna. (1996). Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues (Vol. 41). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.
Warner, Allison Brovey. (2007). Constructing a tool for assessing scholarly webtexts. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 12(1). Retrieved from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/12.1/topoi/warner/
Whitworth, Brian, & Friedman, Rob. (2009). Reinventing academic publishing online. Part II: A socio-technical vision. First Monday, 14(9). Retrieved November 11, 2015, from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2642
Willinsky, John. (2006). The access principle: The case for open access research and scholarship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution BY 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).