Occasionally, I come across an article in a peer review publication that reminds me of just how ineffective “expert” peer review can be. This article in Innovate is a recent example. How do articles like this make it through a peer review process??
-
‹ Home
Contents
-
Categories
-
Tags
Adoption Articles Blogging Classification/Ontologies Collaboration Community Connectivism Content Content Management Copyright/IP/DRM Design Elearning Evaluation/Assessment/ROI Games/Simulations Information Architecture Innovation Instructional Design Knowledge Management Learning Learning Objects Legal LMS Media Networks Open Source Podcasting Random Thoughts Research Resources ROI Search Semantic Web SNA Social Standards Storytelling Teaching Technology Theories Tools Trends Usability Wiki Wireless/PDAs XML
-
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
- July 2002
- June 2002
Blogroll
-
RSS Feeds
-
Meta
5 Comments
I think when you become a ‘name’ like Prensky, editors are so excited to be able to get a piece from you, they abandon the peer review process, no doubt deeming it an insult to a celebrity. I don’t mind, I’m not that keen on the peer review process to start with, but people shouldn’t hold it up as some uncorrutable, infallible ideal in publishing.
And don’t get me started on digital natives….
That article would have been very difficult to anonymise so I doubt that the peer review was blind. In this case, it would be very important to use skilled reviewers. Peer review is only as good as the people who do it, but usually better than ‘ recommender systems IMHO.
Can you talk about some of your specific criticisms? I am taking a course, Prensky is required reading (though not this article specifically) and I am trying to vet all this info coming at me.
Prensky spoke at a conference I attended. I got his autograph and everything! Then I was required to read “Don’t Bother Me Mom-I’m Learning!” in a course at the same time I read “Games & Simulations in Online Learning” in which Prensky is a co-editor. The difference in quality and research based writing was startling, and my classmates and I began to seriously question Prensky’s statements. It was a great learning experience! I learned what NOT to do! lol
@John If it is relevant to your work, it would probably be good idea for you to come up with your own criticisms. I would start with the definitions of terms used (did he?) and then examine the quality and appropriateness of the evidence for the (bold) claims he makes