Talk:Conferencing: Difference between revisions
From Sustainable linguistics
Jump to navigationJump to search
(problems in conferencing) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Pros of traditional conferencing: | Pros of traditional conferencing: | ||
* may benefit the local economy (travel) - how can this be done without the negative effect? | * may benefit the local economy (travel) - how can this be done without the negative effect? | ||
* possibility to get to know other researchers from the same or different field - creating networks | |||
* promoting the topic of the conference also to public in the area where the conference is organized | |||
* possibility to see the area and engage with local people outside the conference (public) |
Revision as of 16:00, 1 December 2022
Problems in the traditional way of conferencing:
- flying is not environmentally sustainable
- accessibility is not equal (for example some do not afford to travel)
- many of the researchers meeting at the conference already meet each other often
- is not inclusive to researchers (location of conferences and accessibility)
- those who can make it to conferences may get better chances of getting published, and therefore gain prestige
- not inclusive to global linguistics (topics discussed will be focused on those researchers' work who made it to the conference)
Pros of traditional conferencing:
- may benefit the local economy (travel) - how can this be done without the negative effect?
- possibility to get to know other researchers from the same or different field - creating networks
- promoting the topic of the conference also to public in the area where the conference is organized
- possibility to see the area and engage with local people outside the conference (public)