undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbjourne1mo ago0 comments

I really am not sure about that: https://biologue.plos.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2020/05...

The problem is that "optimizing for peer-review" is not the same thing as optimizing for quality. E.g., I like to add a few tongue-in-cheeks to entertain the reader. But then I have to worry endlessly about anal-retentive reviewers who refuse to see the big picture.

0 comments

bonoboTP1mo ago

Currently a kind of rule of thumb is that a PhD student can graduate after approximately 3 papers published in a good peer reviewed venue.

If peer review were to go away, this whole academic system would get into a crisis. It's dysfunctional and has many problems but it's kinda load bearing for the system to chug along.

mitthrowaway21mo ago

Maybe their institution should evaluate whether their papers pass muster? It's the one conferring the degree.

DANmode1mo ago

No hard rule, no crisis.

Maybe we can go back to very opinionated “true” academia,

where there are institutional gatekeepers,

but they mostly get it right on who to award (and not),

vs the current game of

“whoever plays ball with funding sources the best = the best academic”,

which is obviously bullshit.

vkou1mo ago

You'll still need to convince the purseholders to pay you, and they'll want some objective metric to measure your output, and whatever metric they pick will be gamed.

DANmode1mo ago

The point of my comment was,

in much earlier institutions of knowledge and excellence,

the only transparent metric was whether or not they approved you.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

bonoboTP1mo ago

Currently a kind of rule of thumb is that a PhD student can graduate after approximately 3 papers published in a good peer reviewed venue.

If peer review were to go away, this whole academic system would get into a crisis. It's dysfunctional and has many problems but it's kinda load bearing for the system to chug along.

mitthrowaway21mo ago

Maybe their institution should evaluate whether their papers pass muster? It's the one conferring the degree.

DANmode1mo ago

No hard rule, no crisis.

Maybe we can go back to very opinionated “true” academia,

where there are institutional gatekeepers,

but they mostly get it right on who to award (and not),

vs the current game of

“whoever plays ball with funding sources the best = the best academic”,

which is obviously bullshit.

vkou1mo ago

You'll still need to convince the purseholders to pay you, and they'll want some objective metric to measure your output, and whatever metric they pick will be gamed.

DANmode1mo ago

The point of my comment was,

in much earlier institutions of knowledge and excellence,

the only transparent metric was whether or not they approved you.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse