Advertisement

Tunisian Academics at the Turbulent Times of the ‘Jasmine Revolution’: Publication Challenges and Survival Strategies

Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

This study investigates the range of publication difficulties that Tunisian scholars experience especially in post-revolution Tunisia. It also explores the strategies they have deployed in their struggle with the publication process. 12 Tunisian business and economics scholars affiliated to a Tunisian university were interviewed. The accounts attest that Tunisian academics face a litany of socio-economic difficulties which got worse in the aftermath of the 2011 revolution and the ensuing social unrest. Unfavorable research surroundings included unsupportive research environment and an ad hoc state policy. Compensation strategies included working on mega open access data to fight parochialism. The study has important implications for policy making and instructional planning in Higher Education in Tunisia. It points to a generalized need for a research system overhaul to improve the research surroundings.

Keywords

Peripheral scientists Scholarly publication Visibility 2011 revolution Higher Education 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article is extracted from an MA dissertation under the supervision of Prof. Tahar Labassi, University of Tunis, Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, Tunisia. I would like to thank Prof. Labassi for the patient guidance and precious advice he has provided throughout my time as his student.

References

  1. 1.
    Kwan BSC. An investigation of instruction in research publishing offered in doctoral programs: the Hong Kong case. High Educ. 2010;59(1):55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kuteeva M, McGrath L. Taming Tyrannosaurus rex: English use in the research and publication practices of humanities scholars in Sweden. Multilingua. 2014;33:367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hyland K. The past is the future with the lights on Reflections on AELFE’s 20th birthday. Ibérica. 2012;24:37.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hamilton M, Pitt K. Creativity in academic writing: escaping from the straitjacket of genre? In: Carter A, Lillis T, Parkin S, editors. Why Writing Matters Issues of access and identity in writing research and pedagogy. Amsterdam, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2009. p. 70.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lillis T. Ethnography as method, methodology, and “deep theorizing” closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written communication. 2008;25(3):354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lillis T, Curry MJ. Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practice of publishing in English. New York: Routledge; 2010. p. 5.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mauranen A. ELF: academic english shaped by non-native speakers. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2012. p. 19.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ammon U. Linguistic inequality and its effects on participation in scientific discourse and on global knowledge accumulation—with a closer look at the problems of the second-rank language communities. Applied Linguistics Review. 2012;3(2):340,342,343.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Salager-Meyer F. Scientific publishing in developing countries: challenges for the future. J Engl Acad Purp. 2008;7(2):122.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Salager-Meyer F. Writing and publishing in peripheral scholarly journals: how to enhance the global influence of multilingual scholars? J Engl Acad Purp. 2014;13:79.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Englander K, Uzuner-Smith S. The role of policy in constructing the peripheral scientist in the era of globalization. Lang Policy. 2013;12(3):232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bennett K. Introduction: The political and economic infrastructure of academic practice: the ‘semiperiphery’ as a category for social and linguistic analysis. In: Bennett K, editor. The semiperiphery of academic writing: discourses, communities and practices. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2014. pp. 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Waast R, Rossi P-L. Scientific production in Arab countries: a bibliometric perspective. Sci Technol Soc. 2010;15(2):364.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    SCImago Research Group. SJR-SCImago Journal & Country Rank. (2018). http://www.scimagojr.com/. Accessed March 2018.
  15. 15.
    Schneegans S. UNESCO science report: towards 2030. Paris: UNESCO Publishing; 2015.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schwab K, Sala-i-Martin X. The global competitiveness report 2015–2016, Geneva. In: The World Economic Forum, vol 403 (2016). http://www3.weforum.org/docs/gcr/2015-2016/Global_Competitiveness_Report_2015-2016.pdf. Accessed March 2018.
  17. 17.
    Labassi T. Periphery non-anglophone scholarship in English-only journals: conditions of a better visibility. Changing English. 2009;16(2):247–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martín P, Rey-Rocha J, Burgess S, Moreno AI. Publishing research in English-language journals: attitudes, strategies and difficulties of multilingual scholars of medicine. J Engl Acad Purp. 2014;16:58.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Uzuner S. Multilingual scholars’ participation in core/global academic communities: a literature review. J Engl Acad Purp. 2008;7(4):255.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hyland K. Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. J Second Lang Writ. 2016;31:64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Flowerdew J. Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Q. 2001;35(1):121–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Man JP, Weinkauf JG, Tsang M, Sin JHDD. Why do some countries publish more than others? An international comparison of research funding, English proficiency and publication output in highly ranked general medical journals. Eur J Epidemiol. 2004;19(8):813–5.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Belcher DD. Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. J Second Lang Writ. 2007;16(1):3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ibid, 3–20.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leki I. Tangled webs: complexities of professional writing. In: Casanave CP, Vandrick S, editors. Writing for scholarly publication: Behind the scenes in language education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003. p. 136.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hanauer DI, Englander K. Quantifying the burden of writing research articles in a second language: data from Mexican scientists. Written Commun. 2011;28(4):409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gosden H. Verbal reports of Japanese novices’ research writing practices in English. J Second Lang Writ. 1996;5(2):113,119,121.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Canagarajah AS. “Nondiscursive” requirements in academic publishing, material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written Commun. 1996;13(4):466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Curry MJ, Lillis TM. Academic research networks: accessing resources for English-medium publishing. Engl Specif Purp. 2010;29(4):285–93.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Labassi T. Periphery non-anglophone scholarship in English-only journals: conditions of a better visibility. Changing English. 2009;16(2):252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K. Research methods in education. New York: Routledge; 2007. p. 349.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lewis J. Design issues. In: Ritchie J, Lewis J, editors. Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage Publications; 2003. p. 58.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Man JP, Weinkauf JG, Tsang M, Don JH, Sin D. Why do some countries publish more than others? An international comparison of research funding, English proficiency and publication output in highly ranked general medical journals. Eur J Epidemiol. 2004;19(8):814.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Martín P, Rey-Rocha J, Burgess S, Moreno AI. Publishing research in English-language journals: attitudes, strategies and difficulties of multilingual scholars of medicine. J Engl Acad Purp. 2014;16:58.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Waast R, Rossi P-L. Scientific production in Arab countries: a bibliometric perspective. Sci Technol Soc. 2010;15(2):344.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ibid, 345.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mauranen A. Contrastive ESP rhetoric: metatext in Finnish-English economics texts. Engl Specif Purp. 1993;12(1):4–18.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gosden H. Verbal reports of Japanese novices’ research writing practices in English. J Second Lang Writ. 1996;5(2):115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    John MJS. Writing processes of Spanish scientists publishing in English. Engl Specif Purp. 1987;6(2):116.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Geertz C. Local knowledge: further essays in interpretive anthropology. USA: Basic Books; 1983.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Englander K, Uzuner-Smith S. The role of policy in constructing the peripheral scientist in the era of globalization. Lang Policy. 2013;12(3):240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pérez-Llantada C, Plo R, Ferguson GR. “You don’t say what you know, only what you can”: the perceptions and practices of senior Spanish academics regarding research dissemination in English. Engl Specif Purp. 2011;30(1):24.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Belcher DD. Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. J Second Lang Writ. 2007;16(1):19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Flowerdew J. Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Q. 2001;35(1):130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Labassi T. Periphery Non-Anglophone Scholarship in English-only Journals: conditions of a Better Visibility. Changing English. 2009;16(2):253–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Politzer-Ahles S, Holliday JJ, Girolamo T, Spychalska M, Berkson KH. Is linguistic injustice a myth? A response to Hyland (2016). J Second Lang Writ. 2016;34:3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CarthageFaculty of Economics and Management in NabeulNabeulTunisia

Personalised recommendations