Abstract:Scholars in the humanities rely on carefully-constructed prose to convey ideas, while many in the sciences deploy numerical precision instead. Although university administrators often tout multi- or inter-discipinarity, it is unclear whether there is a deep understanding of how these modes of investigation are different, and how those differences might be accommodated and supported. For example, the disciplines that use numbers as a chief mode of expression were from the beginning conceived, embodied with and configured for external assessment as part of their claims to authority. As a consequence, their metrics were not designed to assess other kinds of scholarship such as that of the arts and the humanities. And, read in the opposite direction, the fact that the humanities were never customised for those numerical-based controls should not be understood as a failing of the discipline, but as an integral dimension of its distinct practice. This contribution offers a study of documentary form in the academy. The discussion will examine how scholarship in different fields came to have different formal features. It will furthermore consider what the implications of these differences are for how the disciplines are now seen and assessed. By looking to the history and traditions of different forms of scholarship, this chapter seeks to offer insight into the current debates about how productivity and impact are to be defined, marked and assessed in the academy. This chapter introduces the possibility that humanistic research might be expressed in word or wood and investigates the consequences of such a provocation. It concerns itself with select dimensions of scholarly publication that are especially apparent from a perspective across wood and word-among them, peer review, assessment, dissemination, citation and ownership. Under the intensifying exigencies of documentation, components of the written document that were once provisional become obligatory and codified through practice. The foregoing discussion of a historically informed experiment in academic publishing raises for consideration how specific practices of knowledge have been legitimised over time. The moments of friction encountered by the Cabinet, Box and Article provide clues about how certain forms of knowledge gain traction over time. Conceiving publications as unique performances of meaning may stimulate alternative strategies of assessment, interpretation and dissemination that are cognisant of—and work in concert with—the diverse forms at issue.

Can criticism lead to constructive dialogue? Reaffirming a novel study

“It’s Not Scientific Enough”: Analyzing the Development of Academic Criticism in a Graduate Student Writer

From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education

The origin, consequence, and visibility of criticism in science

Constructive and obsessive criticism in science

From constructive to critical and everywhere in between: education leaders' decision-making related to harsh feedback from learners about their teachers

The Intrinsic Relationship Between Literary Theory and Criticism — Based on the Analysis of Bressler's "Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice"

Critical Thinking as Discourse

Cooperative Criticism: When Criticism Enhances Creativity in Brainstorming and Negotiation

On literary ethical criticism

Developing teacher feedback literacy through self-study: Exploring written commentary in a critical language writing curriculum

The notion of criticism at the present time: from postcriticism to an ethics of reading well

Enhancing the impact of literature reviews: guidelines for making meaningful contributions

Dialogue within peer feedback processes: clarification and negotiation of meaning

Promoting student engagement with teacher feedback through rebuttal writing

Feedback, feedback-on-feedback and re-feedback: effects of written dialogic peer feedback on English as a foreign language writing

“Inside out”: Appraisals for achievement emotions from constructive, positive, and negative feedback on writing

Sharing and Caring: Creating a Culture of Constructive Criticism in Computational Legal Studies

In wood and word, or, a gloss on documents and documentation in the humanities

LETter To the EditoR Standards (LETTERS): Considerations for Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

In praise of the referee