Page Tree:

Child pages
  • Narrative Review Process

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

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Program Document section has been moved here:
Contribution to Program Document (Section 3.2)

Narratives are collected by the Scholarly Narratives working group. A template for documenting and cataloguing a narrative has been created, as well as a repository for storing submissions. Regular calls are made to the Bamboo community to contribute narratives. Anyone can contribute by filling in a template and submitting that template to the repository.

Once a narrative is collected it is subject to review by various groups within the Bamboo Project. First the narratives are reviewed by the Scholarly Narratives workgroup. As curators of the repository this workgroup is responsible for reviewing contributed narratives to ensure completeness and quality. Issues taken with any submission are raised with the contributor in order to improve the submission. Once accepted into the repository a narrative is analyzed by members of the community seeking to identify tools, content and activities within each narrative which might be supported by Bamboo.

The initial analysis of a narrative seeks identifiable recipes within the text. A recipe is a concept borrowed from the TAPoR Project ( TAPoR documents recipes for textual analysis ( A recipe is a familiar metaphor to most participants. It provides a list of ingredients which must be present, and a series of steps for transforming those ingredients into the end product. For Bamboo, the ingredients in a recipe are the tools, resources and content a scholar uses in her work. The series of steps are the process she follows for completing her work.

For Bamboo the recipe fills a critical role in linking narratives to technology. Within a narrative will be processes for research, composition, review, communication, creation and publication within the scholar's field. Bamboo seeks to abstract these elements as recipes such that the commonalities and differences between scholars, fields and processes can be understood. Understanding these common processes and the sensitivity to individual differences between scholars, organizations and fields provides analysts leverage in identifying services which can best support scholarship. Recipes are stored in a separate repository as derivative artifacts linked back to the narratives in which they were identified.

With a catalog of recipes in hand, the analytical activity diverges into two domains. The Tools and Content Providers workgroup uses these recipes to understand what systems and what sources of material are needed by artists, humanists and social scientists. At the same time the Shared Services workgroup derives an abstract inventory of activities from across the recipes gathered. These activities are given a definition and are linked back to related recipes. Activities then become an artifact which can be used to model shared technology services.

The Bamboo Community process for analyzing scholarship can be seen to form a chain from the descriptions of scholarship to the definition of technologies. This articulation identifies the relationshp between the world of the scholar and the world of the technologist and helps members of the Bamboo Community understand how their contribution advances our work. Further, a portfolio of services is defined, we are able to show our supporters the linkage of those services back to the work of real scholars in our community.

  • No labels