Peer Reviewed Journal via three different mandatory reviewing processes, since 2006, and, from September 2020, a fourth mandatory peer-editing has been added.
Elsewhere (N. Callaos and B. Callaos, 2014)1 we have
shown the conceptual necessity and the pragmatic
importance of including Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in any
systemic methodology for Information Systems
Development (including software-based systems) and for
the design and implementation of informing processes.
This is the first article of a planned series in which we
will try to apply what has been shown and concluded in
the mentioned article to the specific case of Academic
Informing or Academic Information Systems. Research
activities include informing processes, which should
address the respective Ethos. Our purpose in this article is
to address one of the issues involved in this aspect. With
this article we are trying to make a step forward
according to the recommendations we included in the
conclusions of the referred article (N. Callaos and B.
Callaos, 2014). To do so, we will briefly abridge previous
work, provide some facts via real life examples, give few
opinions and ask many questions. Few of these questions
will be rhetorical one while most of them are oriented to
generate reflections in the respective issue and potentially
some research, intellectual enquiry, or practice based
position papers.
