Page Tree:

Child pages
  • Ex1, Grp 9

This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Break-Out Group 9

Directions - Group Exercise 1  (We didn't directly address the questions posed. The following is a stream-of-conversation record. No summary attempted.)

Bob Squillace: What was omitted from these directions? I think Pedagogy was.  The division between school and pedagogical tools and infrastructures is not that great, and should be included. Maybe it should be in education/training - but really it fits under everything in 4 -7.

Sian Meikle - earlier comment about "stuff" resonates - maybe it fits under 6.

Alex Wade:  maybe that's the implicit/language issue. From the IT point of view, "stuff" may be assumed. Should it be elevated to a higher level of abstraction?

Philip Thurtle: in the humanities we're more comfortable talking about this, but maybe we need a tie to the services, so we move beyond on our specifics.

Harry Bruce:  Are we talking about practices, or about stuff or services? Maybe the question is whether we should focus on the practices - the project is to support those practices, both stuff and services.

Philip T: missing level of granularity? 

Harry B - pedagogies point: not much attention here to the next generation of scholars use, think about, apply tech in ways very different from those of us here. We need a deeper appreciation of that - tools, services and practices need to be developed for the future. Most of the scholarly practices are going to be fundamentally overturned by the next generation, who expect mobility and instant access.

Alex Wade:  whatever you might define as traditional practices, there's a set of expectations now about connectivity.  The infranstructure is there to support IM and email, etc., but not the kinds of things you might want to do to support connectivity for research.

Philip T:  that then links to advocacy - the promotion/tenure question, how do people

Monica:  copyright issue has to be addressed. There's so much content that is not open. Do we ignore that or grapple with it directly? Can we build

Lucy Appert: also issues of privacy, FERPA. How do you build tools that let people use, share, and yet guard their privacy.

Bob S: identity management. We could use a system that lets scholars from anywhere access material elsewhere.

Philip T:  access is one thing; permission is another significant issue. If you want to work in certain areas of media, you need a huge budget to pay for republishing materials.

Lucy: we do have tools that we use to evaluate information (peer review, etc.) We can offer these rather than simply rely on the

Bob: on how these interrelate --- the cross-institutional questions may have to do with IP, access, identity management, republication rights, etc. Many of these others may be more institution-bound (training, for example.)

Alex:  Technology question are easier to solve than social ones.

Sian Meikle:  Issues of identity is also connected to authority

Harry B:  may not be true for arts & Humanities, but in other fields, institutions are looking for ways for people to work together in cross-disciplinary ways. Traditionally arts & hum is solitary.  We need to change that to enable collaborations, to

Rather than making arts & hum scholarship tools for individual scholars, the outcome has to be creating deep partnerships with other disciplines that enable new scholarship.

Philip T.  tools and services are one thing, but what's missing is what kinds of partnerships. Are we going to train people to work interdisciplinarily.  For me it's really more about the networks and communities that need to come out of this project.

Bob S: This may be related to Jean Ritchie's point about looking out to what's successful elsewhere

Philip: Not only be aware of what we want to accomplish but also the kinds of groups we need to develop to succeed at those accomplishments. Key is to look forward to how we create groups that will facilitate these services/changes. Different groups might work differently for these directions. Advocacy might require a different kind of group than say traning, standards, etc.

Bob/Philip - pedagogy needs to be a bi-directional. Students learning from teachers and vice-versa.

Alex Wade:  Building services as part of the academic project could be a way of thinking about this.; creating as

Lucy: a broad network of communication that lets people find those they are affiliated with.

Sian: is Facebook for scholars too facile? How can you make that communication process something that people use (don't to set up a blog when everybody's on email.)

Lucy: we're finding that people will use a lot of tools and communications as long as there is an aggregator.

Bob: So for the tool groups, are we talking about a facebook that lets IT, libraries, scholars easily communicate about what they're all doing.

Philip - we need more than tools, we need incentives. Career incentives, cycles of credit.


Questions we have regarding how these directions interrelate?


Do these directions include your interests and concerns?


  • No labels