Publishing screen media practice research: evolving processes of contextualisation, peer review and future proofing in Screenworks

ABSTRACT

This article outlines current publishing practices in the field of academic filmmaking through a detailed discussion of the development of Screenworks, a peer-reviewed online publication of practice research in screen media. The imperative for academics working in creative disciplines to publish and articulate their practice as research has increased in recent years, driven by research evaluation exercises such as the UK REF and Australian ERA. Screenworks has been at the forefront of defining the field of peer-reviewed publication of practice research. As editors of the journal, the authors draw upon their experience, alongside personal correspondence with contributors and academics working on other practice-based publications. The article examines how and why current editorial processes have developed and outlines the opportunities and challenges facing online publication of screen media practice research. The article offers several case studies which demonstrate the unique value of dialogic peer review for evolving practice researchers, helping them not only to contextualise their practice as research in the written statement, but also amending and editing the practice itself. The issue of sustainability is also explored, namely the distinct problem of indexing and archiving audiovisual practice research outputs that is essential to ensuring both their longevity and visibility.

KEYWORDS:

• Practice research
• peer review
• publishing
• academic filmmaking
• Screenworks

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge additional current members of the Screenworks editorial team: Dr Jimmy Hay, Dr Elan Gamaker, Lucy Leake, Dr Nariman Massoumi. Thanks are also due to Jon Dovey, Mandy Rose and Nick Triggs at the Digital Cultures Research Centre (UWE Bristol) and Neal White and Julian McDougall (Bournemouth) for supporting the journal and Dr Steve Presence (associate editor 2011–2017). We particularly want to thank Screenworks contributors Kelly Zarins, Paola Bilbrough, Guli Silberstein, and reviewer Tony Dowmunt for agreeing to be used as case studies. Acknowledgment must also go to Catherine Grant for input in framing this article and encouraging it to be written, and to Joanna Callaghan and Susan Kerrigan for leading the way with the Filmmaking Research Network.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Charlotte Crofts http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2847-5302

Alexander Nevill http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2382-2053