next »

[msparticularity]

I disagree -- and many of my colleagues (at multiple institutions and in multiple disciplines) do as well. I actually re-wrote and heavily edited my dissertation before it was published by VDM (i.e., it is a different document), and, additionally, I simply don't believe in all of this academic sniping or snobbery, which, essentially, is what this is.  You all talk from your own disciplines, experiences and institutions, we all do, and your realities, restrictions and beliefs are not everyone's. I thank God every day that my school, department, and colleagues are such amazing people (and accomplished), and don't engage in such nitpicking. Though it is listed as a monograph on my CV (as I believe that is what it is), it is clear via the language I use there that it is writing and research completely based on my dissertation.   

Dr_Zack, I think the problem is that to categorize something as a scholarly monograph carries the implication that it has been peer-reviewed as a condition of publication--something that academic presses do and that VDM does not. As many have stated here, there's nothing at all wrong with deciding to publish one's diss through VDM if one would like some nicely bound copies to keep and to share, and also so one can reference one's dissertation in a format in which it is (at least theoretically) accessible--it represents an alternative to citing it as an "unpublished dissertation."

However, to categorize this piece as a monograph opens you to charges of misrepresenting your record of publication, which could have consequences when you are reviewed for tenure.

[yellowtractor]

Many of us believe in the academic integrity of both our disciplines and our institutions.  Peer-reviewed publications are, for at least some of us, a component of that integrity.  We aggressively regulate and defend the quality of our work--or try to--through means we feel are, whatever their demerits, more reliable than the open market.

A vanity publisher offers an attractive product to those for whom vanity is paramount.  No sarcasm intended whatsoever, Dr. Zack.  It's fine, of course, if you eschew the prevailing professional standards.  I hope it's fine with you if we seek to enforce same.

[cranefly]

Many of us believe in the academic integrity of both our disciplines and our institutions.  Peer-reviewed publications are, for at least some of us, a component of that integrity.  We aggressively regulate and defend the quality of our work--or try to--through means we feel are, whatever their demerits, more reliable than the open market.

A vanity publisher offers an attractive product to those for whom vanity is paramount.  No sarcasm intended whatsoever, Dr. Zack.  It's fine, of course, if you eschew the prevailing professional standards.  I hope it's fine with you if we seek to enforce same.

And, of course, why WOULD you want to publish something with VDM if it was good enough to be published by a university press who would spend time and money promoting your book and sell it for a reasonable cost? Publishing with a non-peer-review publisher immediately casts doubt on the credibility of the work, in my mind. I've said before, I made the mistake of purchasing one of their "books" which turned out to be a very poorly written master's thesis that I would never have even passed.

[collegekidsmom]

Also, many academic libraries would take a pass on a VDM book. Many authors enjoy seeing their books added to libraries. Please, don't send me any "gifts" of VDM books for the collection...

[polly_mer]

Also, many academic libraries would take a pass on a VDM book. Many authors enjoy seeing their books added to libraries. Please, don't send me any "gifts" of VDM books for the collection...

That's one of them there librarian elitist practices, isn't it?  First you didn't want all of my old National Geographics, then you refused my stack of practically new romance novels, and now you won't take a perfectly good VDM book even though it's free.

[onion]

Many of us believe in the academic integrity of both our disciplines and our institutions.  Peer-reviewed publications are, for at least some of us, a component of that integrity.  We aggressively regulate and defend the quality of our work--or try to--through means we feel are, whatever their demerits, more reliable than the open market.

A vanity publisher offers an attractive product to those for whom vanity is paramount.  No sarcasm intended whatsoever, Dr. Zack.  It's fine, of course, if you eschew the prevailing professional standards.  I hope it's fine with you if we seek to enforce same.

Following up on this idea, Dr. Zack mentioned that he was glad that his colleagues were "amazing and accomplished" people who did not engage in "nitpicking".  But if Dr. Zack is not yet tenured, when it comes time to solicit outside letters for his tenure case, that VDM "monograph" may bite him in the butt.  If I were an outside reviewer on a tenure case and someone had a VDM "book", my eyes would bug out of my head and I'd write a letter that would reflect that dismay and disdain.

So as a cautionary note to all others who may stumble upon this thread: Do not publish your dissertation with VDM.  Send it to an actual university or academic press where your work will be peer reviewed.  It will pay dividends in the end.

[southerntransplant]

I recently checked out the web page of a departmental colleague in my cohort (mostly because he told me about a link to pictures of his newborn twins). On the way there I noticed he was trumpeting a new book he wrote - to be published in VDM.

(shakes head)

This is kind of a bummer - it's based on extensions of his dissertation, which won an award at his university. Hopefully it doesn't bite him too hard.

[octoprof]

Though it is listed as a monograph on my CV (as I believe that is what it is), it is clear via the language I use there that it is writing and research completely based on my dissertation.   

In one sentence, you make my point succinctly. Thanks!

A monograph is not the same thing as publishing your dissertation with VDM, even if you did edit it. It's still just a dissertation in fancy dress. 

A monograph, generally, regardless of discipline, is a term used to describe a unique work that, if listed as published, has been peer reviewed, hopefully.

Thus, a monograph is not the same thing as publishing your dissertation with VDM, or vice versa.

There, I did that without being insipid or using hyperbole. Don't faint. :o)

[sacroiliac]

A monograph, generally, regardless of discipline, is a term used to describe a unique work that, if listed as published, has been peer reviewed, hopefully.

Not exactly a definitive statement, there.

[watermarkup]

I second Southerntransplant's observation. If you start poking around your fine institution's website, or those of peer departments, books from VDM and presses of similar repute turn up surprisingly often, often in the context of a press release. The mind boggles.

[womanofproperty]

A monograph, generally, regardless of discipline, is a term used to describe a unique work that, if listed as published, has been peer reviewed, hopefully.

Not exactly a definitive statement, there.

How about the statement here?

[sacroiliac]

A monograph, generally, regardless of discipline, is a term used to describe a unique work that, if listed as published, has been peer reviewed, hopefully.

Not exactly a definitive statement, there.

How about the statement here?

"critically reviewed", "externally reviewed" but no mention of peer review.

And can monographs only be "scientific"?

Lots of verbosity regarding what monographs are not - but is the NRC description complete? And universally definitive?

[msparticularity]

And can monographs only be "scientific"?

Lots of verbosity regarding what monographs are not - but is the NRC description complete? And universally definitive?

The reference to "scientific" is context-specific; this definition pertains to the Canadian NRC Press. Other parts seem relevant to a variety of fields, particularly the idea that it is an in-depth treatise that gives comprehensive treatment to a single topic, and that it is original and cutting-edge research. And, of course, what differentiates it from the works published by VDM and similar outlets is that it is reviewed and edited (by peers and/or by expert editorial staff).

[sacroiliac]

And can monographs only be "scientific"?

Lots of verbosity regarding what monographs are not - but is the NRC description complete? And universally definitive?

The reference to "scientific" is context-specific; this definition pertains to the Canadian NRC Press. Other parts seem relevant to a variety of fields, particularly the idea that it is an in-depth treatise that gives comprehensive treatment to a single topic, and that it is original and cutting-edge research. And, of course, what differentiates it from the works published by VDM and similar outlets is that it is reviewed and edited (by peers and/or by expert editorial staff).

Obviously. I am not disputing that the quality of scientific monographs produced by the NRC are most likely of a superior quality (and peer-reviewed) to those of VDM.

But the NRC definition applies to the books produced in its very own scientific, monograph series - this is not some universal definition of a monograph. Nor is it even a unversal definition of a scientific monograph.

I believe absolutely that there can be good monographs, but that there can also be bad monographs - where perhaps the deciding factor is related, in part, to some specific aspect of the peer review process. However, the fact that something has or has not been peer-reviewed is not the deciding factor on whether or not something can be classified as a monograph. Thus, I believe it would be possible to publish something that could be called a monograph via VDM. Whether or not it would be considered any good...is an entirely separate issue. And I would certainly not want to build a tenure case around such a publication.

[msparticularity]

And can monographs only be "scientific"?

Lots of verbosity regarding what monographs are not - but is the NRC description complete? And universally definitive?

The reference to "scientific" is context-specific; this definition pertains to the Canadian NRC Press. Other parts seem relevant to a variety of fields, particularly the idea that it is an in-depth treatise that gives comprehensive treatment to a single topic, and that it is original and cutting-edge research. And, of course, what differentiates it from the works published by VDM and similar outlets is that it is reviewed and edited (by peers and/or by expert editorial staff).

Obviously. I am not disputing that the quality of scientific monographs produced by the NRC are most likely of a superior quality (and peer-reviewed) to those of VDM.

But the NRC definition applies to the books produced in its very own scientific, monograph series - this is not some universal definition of a monograph. Nor is it even a unversal definition of a scientific monograph.

I believe absolutely that there can be good monographs, but that there can also be bad monographs - where perhaps the deciding factor is related, in part, to some specific aspect of the peer review process. However, the fact that something has or has not been peer-reviewed is not the deciding factor on whether or not something can be classified as a monograph. Thus, I believe it would be possible to publish something that could be called a monograph via VDM. Whether or not it would be considered any good...is an entirely separate issue. And I would certainly not want to build a tenure case around such a publication.

I agree with you overall--except for the last point: that a published thesis/dissertation with VDM might be considered a monograph by anyone in academia. Every definition and discussion I have ever seen refers to a monograph as a "scholarly publication." While criteria for being scholarly may vary a bit, peer review of some sort (even if that just means that the editor is the peer) is at the heart of the difference between scholarly and non-scholarly publications. This is what is lacking with VDM.