Tag Archives: research

Open Access – an ongoing issue for academics

Glyn Moody has published a fascinating essay on the history of Open Access publishing and the present challenges it faces. It’s really worth reading.

Glyn Moody: Open Access: All human knowledge is there - so why can't everybody access it? (click the image...)

Glyn Moody: Open Access: All human knowledge is there – so why can’t everybody access it? (click the image…)

The article focuses primarily on the natural sciences, rather than on the humanities (acknowledged by him in the comments, which are worth reading too). A key point of the OA movement is academics trying to find ways to circumvent the parasitic private companies that “earn” their huge profits by extorting vast sums from either the academics or the readers – or both.

Most academics, I think, write because we want to be read. I don’t write anything just so that it is published but inaccessible. I want people to read my work, not for self-aggrandisement, but because I am excited by what I research and write, and I would like others to share in that excitement. Also, if people read what I write, they can engage with and comment on it – if they like it, that’s great, but if they want to criticise it and help me improve my arguments, that’s even better. All this can only happen if people can easily access it. This is why, since 2012, I will only work with OA journals.

Moody’s article notes that websites like Sci-Hub are growing in popularity, even amongst people with institutional access. It’s obvious why this is – it’s very simple and straightforward, and it mostly just works, whereas needing special logins and authentications and so on via libraries is a hassle. Of course, not having institutional access to libraries makes things like Sci-Hub even more attractive. I find the Sci-Hub Twitter account a useful thing to have bookmarked to keep up with the changing domains it uses, which at present appear to be:

The other similar site I find fantastically useful is bookfi.net, a repository of e-books (again, I’d recommend using this over Tor). In the humanities monographs are perhaps more important than journal articles, and this site has, it claims, more than 2,230,000 e-books available – more than many university libraries can offer! Of course, it’s not necessarily as systematically organised as a university library, but it is very easy to use. I am pleased to see that at least one of my books is there (go on, read it, and let me know what you think: it’s now 10 years old and my thinking has developed, but I’m still keen on comments!). Personally, I prefer printed books, as many people do, and I continue to spend far more money than I should on books (and I consequently suffer a serious shelf-deficit in my house…), but there are times when an e-book will suffice, and in terms of furthering knowledge, I’d rather my work was read in some form.

Personally, a key aspect to my interest in having other people read my work is that it is mostly about European missionaries in the Middle East. Many people in the Middle East have been affected in some way by European Protestant missionaries: parents or grandparents went to missionary schools, they ‘converted’ and grew up in Protestant churches and communities, they attended missionary-inspired universities (the American Universities in Beirut and Cairo, for example), and so on. I would be particularly delighted if such folk engaged with what I have written and countered my own white, male, Euro-centric views (saying this simply points to a realistic reflection of my positionality), offering their own comments and reflections from the postcolonial context. The furtherance of knowledge, that is what I want! Open Access is about that, and it should be encouraged.

Journals aside, the next step is meaningful publication of OA monographs. I am working on a book on transnational history at the moment, and I would love that to simply be freely available and therefore read widely. I will, in due course, hope to identify some appropriate venue for this – there’ll be more information on that here as and when the book nears completion.

New research project – Scottish Women On A Mission (SWOAM)

Together with two colleagues – Alison Jasper and Rajalakshmi Nadadur Kannan – I am embarking upon a new research project, called Scottish Women On A Mission (or SWOAM).  We will be studying the work of Scottish women who went overseas as missionaries in the years 1918-48.

There is a small website now available, and this morning I posted a blog outlining some of our aims and objectives.  Do take a look, and follow our work there (we’re on Twitter and Facebook, and you can also follow us by subscribing to the website).


Over the last months there has been considerable interest in what is happening to the Religion programme at Stirling University.  Earlier today I tweeted a photograph from my third year undergraduate class – and since then I have received a substantial number of queries about the current situation.

The following statement is the extent of the comment I can make on this matter:

Dr Tim Fitzgerald and Dr Michael Marten will be leaving the University at the end of December 2015. Dr Andrew Hass and Dr Alison Jasper will continue to contribute, with colleagues, to the delivery of programmes in Religion.
This statement has been agreed by all parties.

Please note that comments on this blog posting are closed.

Securing research data through encryption and related issues

I am occasionally asked what all the encryption stuff on my Contact/PGP page is about.  For some time I have been meaning to write about the importance of data encryption for researchers, but it is quite a daunting task to write a thorough blog post on such a topic.

Thankfully, someone else has done this!  A colleague gave me a link to a blog posting by Jonatan Kurzwelly that covers questions of email and file encryption and much more, and I would strongly echo all of the points here:

Encrypting Ethnography: Digital Security for Researchers

I first encountered the issue of encryption in the mid-1990s, when working as a lobbyist for the UK churches on issues related to Israel/Palestine, Iraq and Sudan.  Email was just beginning to be used in academic circles, but was not yet something that the UK churches used much.  In fact, although I was based at the Church of Scotland offices, I was given an email address through the University of Edinburgh’s Centre for African Studies to help with the work on Sudan.  Several of the informants for my human rights work in Sudan had access to email because they were attached to the university in Khartoum, and very quickly it became necessary to find secure ways to communicate if my informants were to stay safe.  This soon also became an option used by Iraqi informants.

I was therefore one of the early users of Phil Zimmermann’s Pretty Good Privacy software, also known as PGP – in those days it was all command-line stuff in DOS and pretty complicated for a non-cryptographic specialist like me.  However, none of my informants were endangered, and we were able to do some important work, lobbying in the Westminster parliament for the rights of disadvantaged people in these countries.  I have continued to use PGP over the years as it has become simpler to use, and now it is available in easily accessible form through GPGTools etc.

GPG Keychain Access App

I strongly encourage the use of GPGTools and all the other myriad security methods outlined in Kurzwelly’s blog posting.  As the recent leaks by Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and others have shown, data is not secure unless you make it secure.  You need to begin with the premise that ALL email and communications are being read (because they are, even if just by a machine) – and then the need for secure communications becomes immediately apparent.  Data stored on servers etc. is also insecure, as Kurzwelly’s blog posting makes clear. Researchers are not exempt from this – particularly if their sources may be putting themselves in danger through what they reveal.  No research outcome is worth putting other people at risk.

So that is what the PGP key data on my Contact/PGP page is about.

Secure your data!

Sources: building on circles of trust

I completed my undergraduate degree in Aberdeen and Erlangen; in the period that I was in Aberdeen, I was active in the radical left-wing Student Christian Movement and in that context met a philosophy student at Edinburgh, Clare Thornley, who was active in the Edinburgh branch of SCM. We kept in touch after our graduations, and a few years later we both found ourselves returning to academia to write PhDs: Clare wrote her thesis at Strathclyde University (in philosophy and computer science, on questions of meaning in e.g. search terms – I think!) whilst I wrote mine in Edinburgh. We’d meet every six months and moan about how awful it was to be writing our PhDs, whilst being very clear that there was probably nothing we’d rather be doing. 🙂

Clare is now living and working in Ireland, and we are still in touch. She recently contacted me as she is a researcher for an international project looking at how academics use sources, in particular electronic ones, and how trust in sources is established. She came to visit and interviewed me about my usage of sources, asking general questions and then using references in an essay I had recently published as a case study. This was an interesting experience, and I want to offer some reflections on my usage of sources: being interviewed by Clare not only helped her research, but also has also helped me to reflect on these questions.

Firstly, many of my primary sources are manuscripts and are not stored electronically. Digitisation of manuscripts makes little sense for most institutions: there are simply not enough readers of most of these sources to warrant the cost of digitisation. Some archives, such as the Israel State Archives, are pursuing this, but mostly for sources that are used far more frequently than, for example, the hundreds, nay, thousands of pages of church mission committee minutes and other documents that I have used for much of my work. There is also a problem with digitisation, in that it doesn’t necessarily capture everything that is important. This might involve studying signs of wear (the way a document was folded can be of significance, but there are also more prosaic examples of wear), or less visible marks: in February I was in Aberdeen University Library examining a passport issued in the late 19th century, permitting the bearer travel to the Ottoman Empire. Being able to see the physical document meant I could see the embossed receipt, which provided me with interesting information about when the fee for the passport was paid. This is not something that a digitised version could easily capture – in fact, it took me some time to even notice the receipt, and I had the passport in my hands! Of course, archivists have long dealt with such matters, and perhaps solutions exist that I am not aware of. And yet: there is something tangibly intangible that is added to the experience of working with a manuscript that has, in the case of this passport, travelled from London across Europe to Egypt (and probably Turkey) and back to London and then to Scotland – and that was more than 130 years ago. Perhaps I’m just a hopeless romantic?! 🙂 Another issue that arises with digitisation is understanding size: where digitised versions of documents exist, they don’t always have indications of size: even placing an archaeologist’s centimetre ruler next to the document when it is photographed would help, but my sense is that this rarely happens and so a ‘feel’ for the document is lost. There are further issues that arise around the digital indexing of documents, but I won’t go into that here.

Secondly, with regard to secondary sources, these fall into two broad categories. Journal articles are almost always now in electronic format, though I often print them out as I find it much easier to read paper items. Regarding books: my university library has taken the (in my view) bad decision to always try to buy ‘ebooks’ if these are available; I much prefer real books. My notes are partly kept on scrap paper in my books (try doing that with an ‘ebook’!), in notebooks, and partly in a digital reference manager system (I use Zotero, which I strongly recommend – it is free, was created by humanities scholars and works well for in that context, and it is very good at ordering all kinds of sources).

When it came to the essay that Clare examined with me, I offered her two or three pieces, and she chose an essay that had recently appeared in an edited collection edited by Hilde Nielssen, Inger Marie Okkenhaug and Karina Hestad Skeie: Protestant Missions and Local Encounters in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. The central theoretical focus of this essay was based on a short article by Michel Foucault entitled ‘Of Other Spaces’(1) that I had first encountered in a presentation in my own department about fashion in a postcolonial setting by Prof. Gen Doy of De Montfort University. As I sat listening to her, it quickly became apparent to me how Foucault’s ideas on heterotopias could help my thinking, and after the presentation I went and read his essay immediately. I then used it to argue my case, deploying examples from my study and knowledge of Scottish missions to the Middle East to discuss historicisation processes. Having explained this context to Clare, she then picked random footnotes that pointed to secondary sources, and asked me how I had located them.

The first reference she picked identified a book I thought I had used in my PhD and several times since (actually, on checking later, I hadn’t used it in my PhD: it had just been published as I was finishing the thesis). This is Ann Laura Stoler’s brilliant Carnal Knowledge and Imperial Power: Race and the Intimate in Colonial Rule. Stoler is a well-known scholar in postcolonial studies, and I know her book well. I have also used other articles and essays that she has written.

The next reference Clare chose referred to an article by Hélène Gill that analysed Foucault’s thesis. This appeared in a French studies journal that I would normally have no reason to peruse: Modern and Contemporary France. I had found this article by searching for “heterotopias” on Google (not Google Scholar); I had to access it through the university library as it appeared in a closed-access journal. Reading it helped explain key points that I wanted clarifying. I do not know the author, but I found her argument convincing.

The next source Clare chose related to an interpretation of heterotopias that enabled me to make a particular point: Foucault lists a number of criteria that constitute heterotopias, and I was arguing that it was not necessary for all of these criteria to be fulfilled for a space to be heterotopic. In a meeting with my then head of department, Prof. Bill Marshall, I mentioned that I was working on an essay about heterotopias. His immediate response was to pick up a book he had written about the film director André Téchiné and say: “I’ve written about that, see this section…” And there he argued precisely my point: that not all of Foucault’s six criteria needed to be fulfilled for something to be heterotopic. Excellent: I could use this to strengthen the argument I was already making.

The next source Clare picked up on related to an example that had been drawn to my attention by one of the book editors, Karina Hestad Skeie. She had noted a similarity between the topic I was seeking to address and a context that she had written about when describing certain aspects of a Norwegian mission to Madagascar; her essay had appeared in an edited book. I read her essay and I found I could further substantiate my argument using her examples – just as she had thought I would be able to do.

Clare and I concluded our meeting with a discussion about canonicity: there are clearly some texts that I use that I think it is reasonable to assume other scholars working in similar fields will have read. Of course, sometimes these are not even texts: I can point to ideas, knowing that other scholars in my field of postcolonial studies will have read the relevant texts. For example, on p312 of the essay I point to opening up ‘‘more authentic’ Spivakian understandings of the periphery, of the subaltern.’ Most of my readers will know what I mean by pointing to Spivak – she wrote a famous essay on the ‘subaltern voice’ and I do not need to cite it directly.

So what am I to make of all this?

Of the sources Clare had chosen to look at:

  • one had come to me via a presentation (Foucault/Doy)
  • one I had used before (Stoler)
  • one had come via a search engine (Gill)
  • one was from a colleague in my department (Marshall)
  • and one came via my editor (Skeie).

So: Gill’s essay was the only one I had “found” myself for writing this essay. Of course, there were other secondary sources in this essay that Clare had not chosen which I had “found” by myself, but it is interesting to note that I had a personal connection to a number of the key sources in my essay.

In our concluding discussion, I told Clare about an article I had once read about identifying sources. A older professor was quoted, saying that he no longer even tried to keep track of the important new articles in his field: “If it’s important enough, it’ll find it’s way to me.” What he meant was that he could rely on colleagues to forward key essays or book suggestions to him, rather than spend a lot of time searching for things himself, or using the numerous email notifications that virtually every journal seems to offer.

I think there is something to this. The vast amount of information bombarding us each day via email and Twitter and web-services and so on makes it impossible to follow all the developments in our field – especially if we work in more than one field. My own interests cross numerous disciplinary boundaries: mission history, gender studies, conflict transformation, postcolonial studies, theology, political science and so on. This is not unusual, but it does make following new journal articles, for example, very difficult: I have subscriptions to various journal notification lists that I try to scan fairly diligently, but I do find I sometimes have to simply delete them in order to get through the enormous amount of email I receive each day. There are days when I receive notices from three or four journals, and most of the time it is simply not possible to digest all this material (I can’t quite bring myself to unsubscribe from these lists…yet).

It is far easier to let important material “come to me” – and that is the point the afore-mentioned professor was making. I am delighted to receive emails from colleagues around the world saying, even just in a PS at the end of an email, “did you see the new essay/review/book by XYZ?” Better still: “here is a PDF of an article I’ve just published” – whenever I receive such emails, I always check the references and read the text. Of course, I reciprocate and tell colleagues about interesting items that I might have found, and this enables the “virtuous circle” of mutual feedback and encouragement to continue. I know that I can trust my colleagues in this regard, even if we disagree about some things!

Of course, search engines and database search facilities will always be important (I really like the new beta-version search JStor is trialling at the moment): I would not have found Gill’s article without a search engine. However, I think our relationships to other scholars are more important. After all, we belong to a community of scholars, working in related fields, with whom we engage. This community and this engagement happens in conferences, in workshops, in public lectures. We create and nourish this community by email, by telephone, and in face-to-face meetings (some of which will be in university offices, and some of which will be in cafés and pubs). This is what networking really means, and we need to work at this, but not necessarily in the way that universities want to prescribe for us. As neoliberal government decrees are followed ever more closely by irresponsible and ignorant university senior management teams in an attempt to turn universities into marketised competitive spaces of capitalism, such co-operative scholarship is at risk of being lost.(3) Prioritising competition in the name of capital has serious consequences, since, as Marx shows us, capital ‘has to destroy… [such] relationships as independent forms and subjugate them to itself.'(2) Therefore, even when we are engaged in the apparently solitary pursuit of reading, we might want to think about how we came to be reading the text we happen to have in front of us at that moment – did it come from a friend or colleague? In turn, sharing epiphanic moments in our reading with others is key to furthering our connections not only to the new scholarship that is being produced, but also to one another. In that latter sense, it also has the added benefit of subverting the rise of university managerialism that would isolate and negate the co-operative pursuit of learning that we are actually trying to do!


(1) Foucault’s essay is not long, and well worth engaging with. The link provided here is to the original journal, but the text has been reproduced in several other places online if you are interested in it, but do not have access to the journal.
(2) Dipesh Chakrabarty Provincializing Europe: Potscolonial Thought and Historical Difference, Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2000, p64.  I have strong critiques of the latter parts of this book, but the chapter that this is taken from is very helpful.
(3) if this applies to you, I strongly recommend joining the University and College Union and the Council  for the Defence of British Universities if you have not already done so: they are trying to work hard at undoing some of the damage neoliberalism is causing to our sector.

End the hypocrisy! A new academic blog

I have been a terrible hypocrite, and I want that to change.

I am actively involved in two main blogs: one, my personal blog that is mostly about photography and is based on my main website, and the other a joint blog for the Critical Religion Association (I am one of the writers and currently edit the blog).  And yet: despite encouraging (and to some extent demanding) that my research students write a self-reflective blog about their research, I have not done so myself!  So that is what this is going to be – and I will no longer feel such a hypocrite.

At the moment, I expect there to be two kinds of posting:

  1. ongoing reflections about my research, including occasional notes about books and articles I have read;
  2. practical notes about surviving in Higher Education in Scotland/the UK.

My first posting will almost certainly be something about reclaiming email, which sounds tedious, but is very important.  I’ll also write something before too long about the book I’m currently (trying) to write, which might be more stimulating.

I am aware that my schedule will almost certainly mean very irregular posting, but self-reflective writing is important, and it may be that others will be interested in some of my reflections.