In many of my classes — most often Grad classes and those dealing with the materiality of the book — I have an exercise where I bring in a stack of monographs, journals, collections of essays, annuals, articles, notes, and reviews. I line them up willy-nilly in front of the class and have my students put them in order of credibility. After much shuffling and discussion, I have them rationalize their decisions. Then I “grade” the class’ choices, re-ordering the books from most credible to least. The exercise teaches students how to evaluate a book or publisher, how to look for the editorial apparatus, how to figure out what a note is versus an article without the context of the journal (much like electronic access). This class (Popular Print Culture) did it the first day and did a pretty good job. But every year I include at least one Edwin Mellon Press book as one of the red-herrings.
Well, the following article is all about how academics evaluate publishers — and the dangers of doing so. This was reblogged from Ted Striphas’ The Late Age of Print FB page, which is well worth liking.
An academic press sues a librarian, raising issues of academic freedom | Inside Higher Ed.
I include it here since it is so topical for this class, which deals with “reading” into the material aspects of print so as to extrapolate about their cultural position and/or machinations.