University of Florida Homepage

DH in Tenure & Promotion

From our discussion of T&P and publicly engaged, digital scholarship, and translational scholarship on March 24, 2016, see the resulting:

At UF, the Digital Humanities Working Group (DHWG) and many others are interested in ensuring that structural processes support the necessary review, valuation, and validation of all forms of scholarly work, including collaborative and digital research practices. In addition to the resources on this page, we expect to continue to hold conversations and conduct activities in order to validate or put in place the necessary processes.  Processes for review, valuation, and validation of collaborative and digital scholarly work are clearly needed in the Digital Humanities, Humanities, Sciences, Social Sciences, Informatics, and many other areas as all of our work becomes increasingly collaborative and inter- or multi-disciplinary.

Please contact us to join the discussion on the DHWG email list, and to participate for next steps on this, or join the Zotero group to share resources.

Resources for DH in Tenure & Promotion

Resources for Peer Review for Alternative Scholarly Products

In order to support alternative scholarly products which are common with scholarship in the age of Big Data, including the Digital Humanities and other types of Digital Scholarship, additional resources are needed especially for peer review. Some of the needed resources already exist and are available, with others  in development to support peer review, publishing, and other critical needs.

Venues for Review of Alternative Scholarly Works (as models and for reviewing)


Examples and/or Models

Research Resources

UF Facilitated Peer Review Committee

In addition to the external resources listed above, the Facilitated Peer Review Committee was established at UF with the approval of the Dean of the Libraries to support the peer review process for alternative scholarly works across the UF campus. The Committee was developed as a pilot to act in a manner akin to an editorial board that facilitates, but not conduct, peer review. Peer review is conducted by subject experts. This supportive process is critically needed across many fields to support scholarly efforts in multimedia publication, data curation, publicly-engaged scholarship, collaborative work, and other forms of alternative scholarly products that do not fit within established disciplinary traditions. After the pilot, the UF Digital Humanities Library Group has been discussing next steps for this group in support of broad academic community needs.

For more information, see the Facilitated Peer Review Committee website.