Scheduled DB Maintenance: January 21st - 8:00 AM to 10:00 AM. Confluence will be unavailable during this time.

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

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Share (from Informal to Publication)

Definition

Sharing the results of research (datasets, notes, formal written synthesis)  via informal means (blog posts, conference presentations, workshop discussions, deposit in a repository or archive, etc) or formal means (peer reviewed journals, monographs, or other "authoritative" forums). 

"Present, Publish, Perform" might be a special case of Share, in that it covers the possibly formal delivery of research materials and results, especially finished products of scholarship or creative endeavors.  Submitting a peer-reviewed journal article or book to a scholarly society journal or university press is an example, as is delivering a paper at a conference, staging the world premiere of a new dance choreography or composition, putting up a museum exhibition around a newly-curated theme, discussing research results materials in a seminar or colloquium, posting a video summary on the Research Channel or YouTube, posting papers and associated materials to a disciplinary or institutional repository for open access, or simply putting results on the departmental website.  While promotion and tenure issues don't currently seem to value the Publishing of assembled research materials per se (as in releasing a formal curated digital library of assembled materials), this seems to be another instance of this case.

This theme is a merger of Communicate and Publish and Share (includes Present, Publish, Perform).


 

Name(s)

Institution(s)

Proposed/originated by:

Mike Furlough ("Communicate and Publish")

Penn State University Libraries

Proposed/originated by:

Jim Muehlenberg ("Share")

Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison

Current facilitator(s)

Facilitator_Name_Here_(optional)

Facilitator_Institution_Here_(optional)


Back to Identify Themes page...


What tools, standards, organizations, or efforts exist in this area of scholarly practice?

Item

Description - what is it?

URL or other reference

Peer review

Formal discussion and vetting of research results.  Standards and practices vary by outlet and discipline.  Can and does take place prior to or after publication or dissemination.  Historically has not included a look at the technology used to develop the research. (Mike Furlough)


Google Docs

Google Docs allows scholars to share documents with others, inviting those others to be viewers or collaborators.  Google Docs also keeps a history of revisions allowing users to role back to earlier versions. (Alex Chapin)

http://docs.google.com/

MediaWiki

MediaWiki is the software package behind Wikipedia.  Some scholars have used this to share their work. MediaWiki is great for allowing a large, relatively unrestricted groups of users to collaboratively create and edit articles. (Alex Chapin)

MediaWiki

Confluence

Confluence is an "enterprise" wiki where scholars can share work within an institution or project (such as Project Bamboo).  Confluence adds better content management than the traditional wiki, allowing "pages" to be organized hierarchically and by tags. Confluence has more granular access control, making it possible to create "spaces" that are accessible to a particular group of users.  As well it has support for blogging, file sharing and email archives and "integrates" with Microsoft Office and OpenOffice and Microsoft SharePoint. (Alex Chapin)

Confluence

Segue

Segue is an open source curricular content management system that also has functionality for wikis and blogging and the organization of content by hierarchy and tagging.  Segue may have even more granular access control than Confluence, allowing roles to be defined at the level of "microcontent" or individual posts within a page.  Segue also allows individuals to manage their own namespace, allowing users to create any number of personal sites, assign other users/groups roles in those sites and efficiently move/copy and soon reference content across those sites. (Alex Chapin - disclosure: I am one of the developers of Segue)

Segue


What tools, standards, organizations, or efforts are missing from this area of scholarly practice?

Item

Description - what is it?

URL or other reference

sound_byte_name_or_description (your_name)

summary_description (your_name)

http://www.interesting_thing.org


What part of this area of scholarly practice is within Project Bamboo scope, and why?

Item

Description - what is it?

Why is it in scope?

sound_byte_name_or_description (your_name)

summary_description (your_name)

explanation_of_why_in_scope (your_name)


What part of this area of scholarly practice is outside Project Bamboo scope, and why?

Item

Description - what is it?

Why is it out of scope?

sound_byte_name_or_description (your_name)

summary_description (your_name)

explanation_of_why_out_of_scope (your_name)


References

References (e.g., material from Workshop 1 notes or flipcharts)

Contributor

In seeking themes centered on scholarly activities undertaken against research materials, a related set of themes that emerged for me might best be summarized as "Share."  The Minnesota study uses this term as one of its four Primitives for tools of analysis and ways of thinking.  To me, "Share" has the connotation of providing Gathered or Analyzed research materials to colleagues or other interested parties, either through open access methods or controlled release methods (as in sending a resource via email to someone, or posting resources on a limited-access web site or server).  Understandably, Sharing has lots of potential IP concerns for the person who has the research materials under their control.  Sharing typically would presume the presence of a content Store from which Sharing can occur, and typically is at the end of the basic research life cycle for a project.

Jim Muehlenberg

  • Write a text ... represent one's knowledge ... how to do this in a way that is related to the underlying data one has assembled in the course of research. (Ex. 2 scribe notes, 1b-C)
  • Who will use data, potential uses. ...  How to share & reuse resources. ...  distributing the end results. ...  Articulate data to colleagues. ...  No way for outsiders to get access to information stored in internal system. ...  Send for review.  Revised based on editor, reviewer.  Publish. ...  Blogs, wikis, twitter.  (Ex. 2 scribe notes, 1c-A)
  • Video tools can last if it gets published formally, i.e. in broadcast.  Broadcast as different form of publication.  Video, until recently, kept on a machine, copied and then watched.  Increasingly video is streamed.  Likely to become a dominant paradigm of interaction with video.  (Ex. 2 scribe notes, 1c-B)
  • R1 ... I want a safe place to collaborate.  I only want to share with the people I want until I'm ready to publish.  I want to decide when I'm ready to move it to an archival space with metadata; decide what's worthy.  A2 Scholars only want to put out the finished product; want to hide all failures along the way.  One interesting thing about blogs, etc. is it makes the "marginalia" of the research process more visible.  Provide more exposure of the working process.  R1 Blogs are like going back to an earlier form of journals. Wonder what kind of changes we'll see in 20 years, where young people have lived in collaborative open when all their lives. They document everything.  W1 have been putting together scholar maintained communities; participation evaluated by peers.  Researcher driven collaborative space.  Have graduate level of access - "increasing levels of less and less trusted readers."  P1 as an archivist, most of what I deal with is paper. "digital archive" doesn't exist. Mostly work with undergrads or K-12 who need materials for class assignments.  M1 in museum, good deal of scholarly work goes into exhibitions, but most of the viewers are non-scholars.  (Ex. 2 scribe notes, 1d-G)
  • Manifestation of your work... a deliverable (e.g. book & chapter).  Publish an article.  Create an edition, for instance a modern edition of ancient music.  Transformational work.  Present at a conference or seminar.  Write grants.  Teaching, project-based learning.  Teach your research to your students. ...  Making the underlying data available.  (Ex. 2-3 flipcharts, 1a-A)
  • Send to colleagues for review/comment.  Obtain copyright permissions? ...  Find a publisher - for every publication.  (Ex. 2-3 flipcharts, 1a-G)
  • Communicating knowledge derived from research & teaching (sticky 66). ... Re-presenting research for the scholarly audience (sticky 66).  Planning a syllabus that reflects/communicates research knowledge (sticky 66). ...  Creating online communities (sticky 66).  Building a formal/informal community of readers, commentators, advisors (sticky 66). ...  Becoming known in your field - creating and maintaining a reputation (sticky 66). ... Problem: Credit for reporting data developed in research (sticky 66).  (Ex. 2-3 flipcharts, 1b-F)
  • X1:  New hires want to communicate w. students via blogging, IM.  Faculty is posting everything teaching related.  Closely related to research, as in sharing research via content mgmt system, but then also use it to share work. Z5: We're seeing blogging for workflow management.  X2: Seeing much more focus on transparency.  X3: More social networking savvy among new folk.  (Ex. 6a scribe notes, 1a-D)

Jim Muehlenberg

  • If a requirement of a dissertation is to prove novelty, there's a disincentive to share. (Ex. 6a scribe notes, 1a-D)
  • Important to get what you're doing out there ASAP - but why expose your work to competitors (Ex 2 & 3 flipcharts, 1a-G)
  • Establish a pre-print archive to let people know what research is being worked on, the methodology & general approach (Ex 2 & 3 flipcharts, 1a-E)
  • Better citation standards; Chains of credit in remixed data (Ex. 6b scribe notes, 1a-G)
  • conference in may on supplementary materials for journal articles, talk of trying to get data sets out of cancer researchers, faced resistance about turning over data sets.  journals should require turnover of datasets for publication.  code of best practices proposed.  as editor, do i have to edit datasets now? (Ex. 6b scribe notes, Ex 1d-D)
  • publishing was in two forms, books and articles.  now there's creation of databases.  story of a colleague with db of 5000 women writers in china, with references to the writings.  new librarian decides "we don't want to support this".  what's the clearinghouse to support dissemination if a project loses support?  we need to solve the dissemination problem. (Ex. 3 scribe notes, 1d-F)
  • A tool that would allow easy exchange of info, in support of collaboration (e.g. a wiki on steroids) (Ex. 7 flipcharts, 1a-B)

Steve Masover

Steve Masover

  • More transparent support for the scholarly process; e.g., embed data and methods inside papers to support replication and model the scholarly process as part of the work product. Increase campus awareness of new humanities; Increase competitiveness of humanities w/natural sciences in campus allocation decisions (Ex. 1 scribe notes, 1b-G)
  • Recreating past methodologies: i.e. rediscovering historical ways of looking at what is now primary material. (Ex. 3 scribe notes, 1b-F)
  • Does methodology documentation 'count' as research? (Ex. 4 & 5 flipcharts, 1c-C)
  • Tracing production and reception history. Find out how others have regarded object before you approach it. (Ex. 2 scribe notes, 1a-B)
  • Represent research.  Could be a written record, an animation or other visualization - some way to present it to others; not just sharing data, but sharing one's particular take on the data; Archives of conference papers, electronic working papers like the sciences do; Registry of research activities as part of this social networking activity - pre-print, awareness of area of work and particular argument, approach, methodology. (Ex. 2 scribe notes, 1a-C)

Steve Masover

Cathy Marshall's paper From Writing and Analysis to the Repository: Taking the Scholars' Perspective on Scholarly Archiving"focuses on the kinds of artifacts the researchers create in the process of writing a paper, how they exchange and store materials over the short term, how they handle references and bibliographic resources, and the strategies they use to guarantee the long term safety of their scholarly materials. The findings reveal: (1) the adoption of a new CIM infrastructure relies crucially on whether it compares favorably to email along six critical dimensions; (2) personal scholarly archives should be maintained as a side-effect of collaboration and the role of ancillary material such as datasets remains to be worked out; and (3) it is vital to consider agency when we talk about depositing new types of scholarly materials into disciplinary repositories."

Steve Masover

Back to Identify Themes page...