Progress and Demonstrators
- "boundary object" concept – something scholars & technologists can understand and trace relevance to their interests/concerns
- ongoing evolution - bridge messiness of scholarly discovery with the concrete details an IT person wants when designing a system
- demonstrator tool may evolve to more easily ingest stories and more understandably link stories to the efforts of other PB Working Groups
Report: Proposal and Moving Forward
Discuss charter and scope in reference to proposal. How does the proposal outline impact the scope of this direction? Do the priorities of this direction change given the proposal outline? Is anything in this direction getting lost or overlooked given the proposal outline?
3-year plan: Where is the low hanging fruit? What are the most important priorities for each of the three years?
Workplan through Proposal Submission: What are the primary elements of this direction that belong in the proposal? What is the path toward fleshing out the elements?
- Now "Scholarly Narratives"
- Charter - collect narratives that talk about work of scholars, how it could be facilitated by technology, build a methodology that makes that collection useful to the community and sustainable through implementation
- Already run into things that we want to focus on
- Facilitated by technology
- Structured Bamboo-wide methodology
- Nixing 4/6's from the charter
- "Stories" comes from "user stories"
- Users got dropped-- didn't want to be characterized as a user, or so tech specific
- Came out of a methodology, now it's "Stories"
- We don't want to go to the provost and say we're telling stories
- Scholarly narratives, more accurate, more professional, reflects what we're collecting
- We don't want to keep switching the name-- if you have a different proposal, tell us now
- Intentionality: open-ended narratives, focused "need" statements
- First= scholarly narratives that were broad, hard to analyze into activities and tools
- Second is reaction to getting focused in
- Both were overcorrecting
- Need more concrete goals
- Focus on stories that communicate value proposition, uncover tech needs
- Describing a tool or uncovering a gap or obstacle that exists in someone's work life
- Process needs to reflect collecting narratives to meet these goals
- Tools group and shared services working group touched on this
- A better process needs to revolve around agreement of scope, need some understanding of what's needed
- So when people are collecting stories, they know what sort of input the appropriate work groups need to better prepare the stories
- Identify when a scholarly narrative needs to be refined, so they can go back and refine narratives until there's a quality product
- Ensure that it's representative- who do we represent?
- Continuing calls for pie charts - are we reflecting the needs of the different groups?
- If not, what do we need to do to change that?
- "We need a nudist?" - a tool for annotating narratives with controlled vocabularies
- Suggestions on a tool that we can use for collecting and annotating stories, that would be better than Confluence, let's generate that list and look at those tools soon
- Need to continue using Confluence until we have something new, but any suggestions of tools, please e-mail working group
Q & A
Comment: First thing on Google for 'Nudist' is the tool
Q: Suggestion in filling out the profile; impressed at Berkeley by comets from interactive designer
Should be part of our thinking
- Will be getting more feedback from tools and services groups re: narratives that have been collected
- Sketch out a workflow where, as narrative are collected, back and forth in refining them
Comment: PB has to balance creating glue/services (within the purview) but making a highly specialized tool (maybe not), but maybe Bamboo can delegate and say "you guys go make this thing" - giving endorsements for grants, etc
See also Joint Working Group Meeting