Page Tree:

Child pages
  • Exercise 6a Flipcharts

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

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Group 1b-A

(1b-6a-1 - 2)

-Using social networks -> Facebook, MySpace
-Graduate work <-> social movements/community activism
-Multi-tasking abilities, academic work w/ social networking
-Working in new/inventive forms
-"Thinking through technology" as opposed to technologist & those who use technology
-Information flows - reorganized in ways that are much more dynamic than 30 yrs. ago
-Discursive productivity
-How can a social network be *geared* towards academic fields/pedagogies
-Google Open Social
-Irreverence towards technology - DON'T FORGET IT

Back to top.

Group 1b-B

(1b-6a-3 - 5)

New hires/grad student practices
-More open to using tech, closer to "I'm OK - You're OK"
-Teamwork, collaborative environment
-More open to exposing own ideas
-Expect solutions to be technical
-Comfortable with online/virtual collaboration
-Do they leverage social networks?
-Believe and value *team* project
-Job needs to be done, no hierarchy
-Libraries collaborating with faculty, partner not just service provider
-Assume electronic form is better, cutting edge vs. practical
-Consumers of technology less *critical thinking* about tech/task
-Need to understand relational database
-Newer faculty find easier to communicate with students
-Need training in academic prose
-More social writing
-Mimic what they read, not mastering
-Always looking for short-cut, reuse code
-Plagiarism on the rise
-The law is wrong, ethics of downloading music

Back to top.

Group 1b-C

(1b-6a-7 - 9)

New Hires: Practices
Grad students
-No real advancements
-Take for granted digital medium & comfort level but no real new ideas
-Evolution: research doing now could not be done in 70's - computational dependency
-Whose research would be crippled w/o tech tools in Humanities?
-Counter: Loud cry when servers go down
-Linguistics scholarship HAS changed
-EEBO has changed everything
-English: no value given to negative evidence
-Research differences? NONE
-Finding materials -> Using computer, dumbest way - speeding up access
-Social Networking? TONS!
-Services - 0 network of discipline support
-(Do scholars truly *collaborate* -> research?)
-"recipe for laziness"
-High quality bugs (question) - Language Log
-Classrooms are different
-Students want Twitter Bulletins on research
-Signal to ...(question)
-Problem of alienation - soul deadening vs. We don't have anything to say about
-Agree: different approach
-Integrate many many different forms of communication

Back to top

Group 1b-D


Practices of new hires/grad students
-More ability/comfort with the web
-"This is part of what I do."
-More engines, online research - start with search
-More fearless/experimental
-More cautious in general (because of job market). Less risk-taking on the large scale
-More networking via the net - checking out scholars, contacting them.
-Experimentation is taking place at institutional "fringe" -> blogs, community sites. Prestige is now occurring *there*

Back to top.

Group 1b-E

(1b-6a-11 - 14)

Practices of new hires/grad students
-(Including capturing & sharing conference info)
-Professional importance, which may have happened by accident
-Willingness to be iterative
-Tolerance for smaller failures
-Divergence of sensibilities
-About process & risk taking
-Searching aids
-(CI example)
-Candidates who look @ grassroot uses of digital tech
-...who use digital recording technologies themselves
-...who share w/ interviewees digitally
-[Bitechnical] analog/digital divide
-Socioinformatics: how groups can mobilize technology
-[Technology + civic engagement]
-[Older styles of thinking have something to teach, too!]
-Easier engagement w/ new tech
-More instinctual sense of groupness [there's a flip side to this]
-[The subversive-minded aren't always new hires]
-Interviewing through avatars
-[Challenge to older IRB models]
-[Also possible to get carried away]
-Using net/e-mail/cellphones to do old Bohemian things in new ways
-e.g. hitchhiking cross country
-[Let's not presuppose new people = new practices]
-Flattening effect on respect for authority & hierarchy
-Big impact w/ small means
-[Social tagging]
-Making public what's usually private

Back to top.

Group 1b-F


-Hiring packages
-Dedicated tech people
-Server space
-Lab space
-New librarians have social networking skills
-Intensely networked
-More interest in gen. context
-Willing to design webpages + blogs
-Open to collaboration across disciplines
-Consider newly tenured as well as new hires

Back to top.

Group 1b-G

(1b-6a-16 - 17)

1) Much greater interdisciplinary, orthogonal cuts through existing academic divisions -> guidance problems
-More trajectory, work in progress -> shared
2) Ubiquitous networking, but doesn't equal tech savvy, skilled in new methodologies; e.g. how wikis work
3) IT perspective: Faculty want customized, central (question) help; e.g. host my Drupal site. Also
i) overwhelmed -> Beowulf clusters
ii) irrelevant -> (???) (webmail)
4) Imaging + visualization

Back to top.

Group 1c-A

(pb1c-075, 077-080)

    *  People want to keep everything
          o Need for metadata
          o Enormous storage/e-mail
    * Engagement with rich media + social networks
    * Increased collaboration
    * Frustrated in non-digital formats
    * Heavy learning curve for older returning post-graduates
    * Blogs
    * Facebook
    * Social Networking
    * More courses on training on building rich media for pedagogy
    * "Talking" while you are in the library
    * Desire to push scholarly communication in new directions
          o Fear
    * Less skilled in the traditional methodology
    * Don't use / Can't get a seat in a library
    * Want things electronically
    * More imaginative + investigative to see what the tool could do for me
    * Instructors having difficulty teaching how to do work individually
    * Collaboration vs. Plagiarism
    * Collaboration space has changed + is ill-defined
    * Nascent scholars fear their idea will be stolen
    * Social networks is scholarly networking
    * Students holding student conferences

Back to top.

Group 1c-B

(pb1c-083 - 089)

    * Push for early focus (completion time)
    * Timeline starts earlier
    * Gov't driven, "draconian" (failure)
    * Lots of material
    * Less "mastery"
    * (Push for tenure)
    * Different Questions
          o Resist boundaries
          o Know video, digitizing, PPT
          o Connect with cyberspace
    * Mastery question
          o Much more material vs. blissful ignorance
          o Findable materials have grown
    * Broader sophistication with technology
    * Tech + material flood
          o Prozac!
    * "Bad" tools > -dead ends
    * New media/tech -> time intensive!
    * Library as a source of information literacy courses
          o Enjoyable?
          o Useful?
          o Timely/up to date?
    * Different learning style
          o Learn from each other
    * Digital-savvy scholarship
          o More rigor
          o A plus on the vitae
    * Student-run activities, events, conferences, "summer school" intensives

Back to top.    

Group 1c-C

(pb1c-090 - 093)

    * Knowledge of tools (eg. ProSound)
    * Little knowledge of specialized tools (eg. in literature)
    * Experience varies!
    * Social tool use doesn't equal scholarly tool use
    * Use of printed resources is in decline
    * Interdisciplinary tendency in ascent
    * Interdisciplinary training, tool/tech interoperability are key needs
    * Variable knowledge of basic tech (eg. HTML) - a problem when dig. Hum = content provision or search tool or algorithm governs search results
    * Time!
    * Need a staff of several to organize & preserve materials
    * Better standard interfaces that hide complexity
    * High resolution/quality of images
    * Copyright exceptions for scholars in all media - and a tool to get the stuff
    * Conceptual search - computing that rises to thinking/scholarship
    * Digitized publication alongside print
    * Search everything through one interface (intelligent aggregation, great filtering)
    * All tools & archives available for assembly & organization tailored to individual need & interest
    * Research discovery service: what's happening within institution (implies research description ontology)
    * Collaborative research tools - citation of contributed parts (to trade "credit")
    * Collaborative private space (not Google)
    * Easier interfaces for database creation, markup, etc - reduce need to learn lots of tools, languages, etc.
    * A1
          o ID genres
          o Learn [through] (lit) embodied practice
          o Divide labor
    * A2
          o ID issues
          o Communities in any of ways
          o Disseminate findings to
    * A3
          o Talk to/within communities
          o Rely on a
          o Use technology
    * A4
          o Gather data
          o Assimilate info
          o Comm. more or less compute
    * A5
          o ID what makes difference
          o ID of where
          o ID to whom
    * A6
          o Form relationship to achieve goal
          o Get f. back on some written formula; comments
          o Give back/negotiate value
    * A7
          o Form networks
    * A8
          o Read, write + publish papers
          o Analyze data + info
          o Read stuff

Back to top

Group 1d-A

(pb1d5-01 to -02)

-Decrease in disciplinary boundaries significance
-Digital surrogates expected to have added value/access (digital tools can be brought to bear, any time 8 place access)
    -digital reading is different, leads to different focuses on the objects
    -explore non-traditional modes of scholarship
    -teaching applications
-Greater anxiety about getting published - demand for publications increased by competition inherent in long pre-tenure periods for post-grads

-Younger libraries impatient w/administrative boundaries/"tradition"
-"Should one blog about one's work?": different valences -
    -comfort with visibility/publicness skews(question) young (facebook/flikr effect)
    -willingness to stumble in public
    -desire to establish a niche early (much ground already staked (question) out)
    -networking modes move faster
-different modes of discovering content
    -search via browser (keywords) vs. library search (collocation)
-more nimble about "mashups" - combining tools & materials

Back to top.

Group 1d-B

(pb1d5-05 to -09)

?What possibility most calls to you?
-greater scholarly notice and greater enthusiast's notice
-lowering cost and complexity of producing such projects
-central IT more involved in Arts research...collaborate on infrastructure and collection building; free independent researchers from that distraction
-situational awareness - collaborate on and contribute to efforts underway

-modularize digital workflow and facilitate re-use
-sustain project by moving to service (w/tech infrastructure)
-sustain in ways local resources don't allow
-allow broad collaboration and independent scholars to be able to collaborate
    -providing "walled garden" of safety

-How collaborate/expose/support faculty without a lot of dedicated support
-Deep engagement with web 2.0
-Greater shared awareness of tools and models
-Format-blind enquiry
-Lower cost and barriers
-Models from ex. - WordPress to lower cost and barriers

-How are younger scholars working in new ways?
-More collegial
-More nimble presentation
    -more fluid/live web connection
    -active learning style
-embrace Web 2.0...hosted elsewhere
-"Shadow IT Dept." - using/exploiting
-collaboration across domains/institutions
-Graphical tools

-Use more multimedia/less text in presentations
-instantaneous communication
-release early and often
    rapid development(question) cycle <-> scholarly discourse
-tenure gun-forces(question) traditional scholarship
    -therefore structures for reward(question) must change
-experiment with gaming

Back to top.

Group 1d-C


-open journal
-open id
-vufind (villanova)

Back to top.

Group 1d-D

(pb1d5-19 to -20)

-new grads, new?
    -nada (but many come from Europe)
    -MySpace yes, search no
-new hires
    -no old faculty
    -Library and Information Science: seeking, mixed success
    -Library and Digital Humanities is a marker for applicants
    -LMSs in classroom

-online reading undermines deep reading
-differs by discipline
    -tech readiness
-tech competence good for teaching
    -detriment for research (gets boxed in)
-need training program for tech skills for research
    -and reward system
-libraries as pumps for infusing deep tech skills into disciplines
    -mentoring and leadership issue
    -and Digital Humanities centers
    -still need physical infrastructure, some places

Back to top.

Group 1d-E


-heavy social network (not necessarily technologized)
-"very connected" in/outside discipline
-not getting credit for primarily online work/non-formal venues

Back to top.

Group 1d-F


-text encoding

-flexible and agile
    -no depth of tech knowledge

-Social networking

Back to top.

Group 1d-G


Future scholarly practices
-tech savvy
    -but not trained in traditional tools
-faculty led by students
Faculty - New
-tech savvy, but:
-tenure/evaluation pressure discourage digital humanities scholarship
-perceived as "too risky"
"Narrowing of what counts as research."

Back to top.

Group 1d-H

(pb1d5-31 to -32)

New hires and grad students


-seem to have a preference for digital information (opposed/as opposed to printed)
-notions of authority seem broader

New hires and grad students


-seem to get tech issues quickly
-instant communication (chat) seem more common
-seem to have different views of intellectual property
-seem to have greater comfort and support for digital publishing

Back to top.