54 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2020
  2. Sep 2020
  3. Sep 2017
    1. The results were less clear, however, concerning the relative importance in writingof fact and interpretation. By this point in the course both ‘arts’ and ‘science’ studentsseemed to be aware that essays in the history of science involved the evaluation ofdifferent views. ‘Arts’ students, however, more often indicated that they had expecteda more factual course, preferred writing about facts than opinions and considered‘getting the facts down’ as the most important criterion. This orientation towardsfacts in the ‘arts’ students’ questionnaire responses appears surprising, given that intheir writing they were more likely than ‘science’ students to represent ideas as provi-sional and mediated rather than factual.This apparent discrepancy may perhaps be resolved by distinguishing betweenstudents’ perception of an issue as problematic and their actual performance withrespect to that issue. ‘Arts’ students’ views of the role of fact and interpretation mayindicate an awareness that the representation of reality is not straightforward and thatessays require a sophisticated discussion and evaluation of different points of view.They may deal more effectively with these issues precisely because they realise thatthey are problematic. Interviews with ‘science’ students suggested that they were notalways conscious of the significance of this type of discussion and might perceive it as‘waffle’ or ‘padding’.

      very interesting. I don't find her account of the counter-intuitive part of the arts students interviews and surveys convincing though as there's no evidence (it sounds like an attempt to make the data fit hypothesis, frankly). But I do wonder if it isn't the fact that it is a History of Science course that we're talking about here. Maybe that makes them more focussed on facts?

    2. Kuhn (1970, p. 167) commented that science education tends to elide the processthrough which knowledge has been constructed, whereas students of other subjectsare exposed to varying interpretations over time. As a result, he suggested, sciencestudents are blind to the history of their subject, seeing it only as unproblematicprogress. The interview data suggest that this is indeed a point of difference betweenthe ‘arts’ and ‘science’ students in this sample. While both of them tend to have adualistic view of science itself, the ‘arts’ students seem to be more at ease with arelativistic view of knowledge in history.

      Kuhn on lack of training science students receive on how knowledge is constructed.

    3. Seven of the ‘arts’ students described a process of this sort, compared with only twoof the ‘science’ students. There was, however, another approach to revision, involvingonly one revision cycle. This was mentioned by five interviewees, four of whom werefrom ‘science’ backgrounds. Um ... rewriting? No. I can probably, once I’ve got the, I’ve got the feel of it, it probablytakes me a couple of hours to write, and then, shuffling stuff around, ... it’ll probably takeme, I don’t know, a morning or something to do a fair draft of it. (Ewan, 2002, science)Only one ‘arts’ student mentioned using a single revision cycle, and he had originallygraduated in science before starting his OU arts study

      science vs arts revision cycles: science students one draft; arts multiple moving things around.

    4. Although some ‘science’ students reported similar problems, it was only ‘science’students who talked in terms of ‘padding out’ their answers in order to reach therequired length: I’m more this, get all the facts down, yes it’s only three hundred words, but that’s it in anutshell. And it’s a lot harder then to flower it up to say either five hundred words or athousand words. (Larry, 2002, science)I’m not used to waffling I think that’s the problem. A lot of the art students say oh I’vewritten too much, ... and I have the opposite problem I kind of write down what Ithink the answer’s and I’ve only got like 200 words and I have to pad it out. (Ruth,2003, science)The tendency for some ‘science’ students to write relatively short essays may berelated to their conceptions of knowledge. If it is seen as factual, then once the factshave been stated, the student might see the task as complete; as Larry said, ‘that’s itin a nutshell’. If knowledge is relativistic, however, then competing views are equallyworthy of consideration and greater elaboration is needed to make a case

      how science students see "waffling"

    5. While the ‘arts’ students frequently described a strug-gle to make their essay ‘flow’, the ‘science’ students did not talk about textual struc-ture as problematic

      science students don't see structure as an issue; arts students do.

    6. North, Sarah. 2005. “Different Values, Different Skills? A Comparison of Essay Writing by Students from Arts and Science Backgrounds.” Studies in Higher Education 30 (5): 517–33. doi:10.1080/03075070500249153.

    7. Geisler (1994) and Russell and Yañez (2002) discuss a comparable situation in theUSA, where to fulfil general education requirements, undergraduates take a numberof disciplinary courses in fields which are not their major. They note the contradic-tions involved in conflating the aims of general education and disciplinary encultura-tion, with lecturers using a disciplinary discourse that is not only unfamiliar tostudents, but also seen as irrelevant to their individual aims and aspirations. Similarly,Moore (2000) discusses the tension between integration and disciplinarity in an inter-disciplinary foundation course in South Africa, voicing concerns that the attempt topromote generic competences risks undermining the disciplinary basis of academicperformance (p. 192).

      research and bibliography on the mismatch between gen ed or breadth students and the rhetoric of instructors who are intending to socialise people in their field.

    8. The distinction between hard and soft fieldsrelates to the extent to which knowledge is constructed on the basis of a frameworkof shared assumptions. The pure sciences (hard) typically maintain a degree ofinternal unity over aims, methods of investigation and evaluation criteria, which maycome to be seen as derived from reality itself, rather than constructed by disciplinaryconvention. The humanities and social sciences (soft), in contrast, tend to becharacterized by internal discord, encouraging a view of knowledge as a matter ofinterpretation.

      disciplinary differences in the construction of knowledge

    9. ‘However’ is a textual theme with the function of indicating the relationship of theclause to the preceding text; ‘it is apparent’ is an interpersonal theme with the func-tion of indicating the writer’s stance towards the proposition that follows; ‘during thesecond half of the sixteenth century’ is an experiential theme providing informationabout circumstances surrounding the event or situation. In the discussion that followsI refer to these three types of non-subject theme as orienting themes. Unlike thesubject, none of them is grammatically compulsory and their use reflects a choicemade by the writer about how to frame the proposition presented within the clausecomplex.These orienting themes were consistently more common in the ‘arts’ students’essays, and the difference between the two groups was highly significant (t= 2.865,p < 0.006). ‘Arts’ students used on average 31.50 textual and 15.14 interpersonalelements in every 100 clause complexes, compared to 24.28 textual and 9.75 inter-personal elements for the ‘science’ group. They also tended to use more clausecomplexes containing an experiential orienting theme, although this difference wasnot significant. Since essays which used more orienting themes were also significantlymore likely to receive a higher mark (t= 2.336, p< 0.023), it is clearly worth investi-gating further the differing ways in which these were deployed by ‘arts’ and ‘science’students.

      Very interesting. This agrees with my experience that Science students have a lot of trouble with signposting!

    10. Research suggests that students majoring in hard fields with a high degree ofdisciplinary consensus are more likely to subscribe to beliefs in absolute knowledgethan those majoring in soft fields, and that these beliefs may be encouraged byaspects of the disciplinary context in which they work (Paulsen & Wells, 1998;Schommer-Aikins et al., 2003). Neumann (2001) reviews evidence of disciplinarydifferences in a number of aspects of teaching and learning, noting that soft disci-plines tend to emphasize critical thinking, oral and written expression, and analysisand synthesis of course content, while hard disciplines tend to emphasize skills indealing with facts and figures, with little writing required beyond the exposition ofexperimental results. In a large-scale undergraduate survey Entwistle and Tait(1995) found that students’ learning styles varied between different disciplines in linewith the demands of their course. Students of science and economics, for example,were more likely to use surface strategies, perhaps encouraged by assessmentpatterns that emphasized the reproduction of facts. In contrast, markers in historyand English were likely to penalize a reproducing orientation and a serialist (listing)style (Entwistle & Tait, 1995, p. 96).

      How disciplinary differences affect approach to knowledge and grader expectations.

    11. Such tutor comments suggest that ‘science’ students are less ready to criticallyevaluate source material, a feature that can be related to the tendency already notedin their writing to downplay the role of human interpretation in the construction ofknowledge

      This whole section so agrees with my read on this! What an amazing bit of research to show specifically what the hunch was.

  4. Jun 2017
    1. p. 5 My questioning had thus brought me to conclude first that computing fits into scholarship as a rigorously disciplined means of implementing trial-and-error, second that its purpose is to help the scholar refine an inevitable mismatch between a representation and reality (as he or she conceives it) to the point at which the epistemological yield of the representation has been realized.

    2. pp. 4-5 My evolving question had thus succeeded in becoming a very simple one with a very simple answer. It amounted merely to this: first to observe that people learn through an iterative trial-and-error process, then to ask what form this process takes for computing. We know that this process governs the mastery of skills such as riding a bicycle or soldering pipe-joints. If we look at scholarship as what scholars actually do, we can find trial-and-error in it as well, though without the sense of closure that mastery and performance of a practical skill entail. With intelligence, skill and practice, one gets good at interpreting poetry, but interpreting it is not a job that can be completed in the sense that <pb n="5"> can be (one hopes).</pb>

    3. McCarty, Willard. 2005. Humanities Computing. Basingstoke [England]; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    4. pp. 3-4 During most of that time, my thinking was driven by impatience with the discrepency between the potential of computing for scholarship, emerging clearly in the work of many individuals across the huamnities, and various misconstrructions or attempts to turn it aside. The latter I have come to characterize by two related strategies: with dismissal of any basis for humanities computing, on the grounds either of irrelevance, imprecision or trviiality of its problems or its lack of identifiable turf; or deferral of promised solutions to these problems, for which the sarcastic phrase 'Real Soon Now' has become proverbial... The central error of these strategies, I concluded, is <pb n="4">not the demand for relevance, for which some kind of response is reasonable. Nor is it the demand for patience: meaningful results take time. Rather the error lies in the concealed assumption that solving a problem is the end of the matter that generated it. As someone with an earlier background in programming and the arts and crafts, I was prepared to admit that problem-solving skills are required, for example to debug a program or charpen a chisel. Both both the arts and scholarship had taught me that when knowledge is the goal of work, the purpose of soving problems is to get harder, worthier ones.</pb>

  5. Mar 2017
    1. (vs. )

      This looks weird too

    2. the evolution of which is rather emblematic in the development of the Caroline handwriting) and continuing with , , , , , and . It would have been ideal to perform the segmentation and subsequent phases for all characters in the alphabet, ligatures, and, eventually, punctuation. The available version of the software does not allow this at the moment, however.

      This paragraph looks weird

    3. —

      It looks it appears here after or before quotation marks.

    1. ?

      ? mark at the end of every bibliographic entry.

    2. Opening paragraphs of this article as rendered by Freedom Scientific Wynn 3.1 screen reader

      It looks like the image is missing. When I click on it, it says page not found

  6. Nov 2016
    1. "American Idiot" - Green Day

      Green Day's first number one album since 1994's multi-platinum Dookie--which is likely due to the fact that while the lyrics may have a deeper meaning, the hooks are still there, and they are played with the same intensity that made the group famous more than a decade ago. Spin said the title track was "Green Day's most epic song yet.

    2. Now everybody do the propaganda,And sing along to the age of paranoia.

      The work challenges listeners to dig deeper than the high-octane guitars and thundering drums that drive the record's jubilant pop sheen. This is a multi-layered, literate narrative that effectively wields anger, wit, and bombast to expose the ugliness that seeps below the surface of this country's patriotism, commercialism, and nationalism.

    3. We're not the ones who're meant to follow.

      "A lot of rock music lacks ambition. Rock has become stagnant. There are a lot of bands that aren't doing anything differently than what's currently going on in pop music--like issuing a single, putting out a record, making a video, and hopefully getting on a tour with a bigger band. I think the reason hip-hop has become so much bigger than rock lately is because those artists are much more ambitious, and they are making records that have a concept and characters. They sound like a script." ~Billy Joe Armstrong

    4. Television dreams of tomorrow.

      "All my songwriting is about creating a statement and taking action. On American Idiot, it's reflecting on what's going on in the world right now." ~Billy Joe Armstrong

  7. Oct 2016
  8. Aug 2016
    1. We were all about authenticity, but we were also brilliant fabulists. We were the first generation to really be born into the internet. Everybody had sixteen fake accounts on every website. It used to be so easy to lie — all you had to do was log onto the Neoboards and post a message that said “hi im hilary duff” and voila, you were Hilary Duff, at least for the next three hours. I had a sock account that was supposedly my French friend Lucie. I would have two-way “conversations” with myself that I just ran through Google Translate, and nobody ever busted me. We were kids; we were catfishing before catfishing was a thing. Nobody knew how to investigate anything.
  9. Jul 2016
    1. Distant Reading: Performance, Readership, and Consumption in Contempo-rary Poetry, Peter middleton calls close reading “our contemporary term for a hetero-geneous and largely unorganized set of practices and assumptions”

      Discussion of the methodology of close reading: middleton, Peter. Distant Reading: Performance, Readership, and Consumption in Contemporary Poetry. Tuscaloosa: U of alabama P, 2005. Print.

    1. But this was before Facebook. It was before we all started merging our online and offline lives. The internet hadn’t gone corporate; websites were ephemeral things. Your friendships on a site existed only within the space of that site; if you lost one, you lost the other.
  10. Sep 2015
    1. The crisis we face is less to make research more relevantto local concerns of practitioners, or to revamp once more a set of coreclasses or accreditation standards, but to demonstrate our authority as aprofession in dealing with information issues at both theoretical and practi-cal levels, within academia and beyond.

      Don't you need to demonstrate this in the context of the local needs of practitioners?

    2. overly concerned with influencing professionals ratherthan other faculty

      How about influencing students. Heresy, I know.

    3. This lack of attention to quality considerations runs deeper than manywould admit.

      The whole topic of quality seems so contentious. Why even bring it up?

    4. While accreditation is considered the bulwarkfor ensuring standards, there exist significant discrepancies between thequality of research and educational experiences offered across accreditedprograms. Similarly, there exist considerable discrepancies in quality ofstudents admitted to and graduated from LIS programs. It is difficult toquantify these issues, however, since discussions of quality and admissionsstandards are among the most divisive topics raised in faculty deliberationsor practitioner discourse, and there is almost no vehicle for their formaltreatment in the literature and conferences of the field.

      So now Dillon gets off the empirical train and starts acting like Gorman? What's going on here?

    5. the formal positioning oflibraries apart from information science is a rhetorical displacement activ-ity, taking our attention from the important issues and into an argumentover labels.

      Well said!

    6. step was to determine if a conceptual core of knowledgeand skills existed for the field.

      Reminds me of what we were talking about in the context of DH In MITH's classes.

    7. educators were out of touch

      Dillon was arguing earlier that they needed to be a bit out of touch to keep their academic prestige.

    8. The implication is that females are contributing to the development of LISeducation by teaching both library science-oriented courses and inforina-tion science-oriented courses

      Well, that's interesting. Are they needing to do this because if they don't they're out?

    9. To explore the magnitude of gender division within curricular offerings,we sampled and evaluated the male to female teacher ratio of a collection ofcourses categorized as either male or female in their orientation. Thecourses chosen reflect only conventional assumptions and findings re-ported by Hildenbrand on course-gender relations, cross-referenced withGorman's article and a review of curriculum components we conducted in2004.27

      I don't really understand what this means.

    10. Notwithstanding any possible glass ceiling effects,we anticipate that greater equalization of gender at all ranks should occurover the next decade

      I wonder if this has come to pass.

    11. educe scholars to consultants and threaten the status of LISschools in the eyes of the academy

      I wonder, would it threaten academic status to show that your research is being used in the world? If that's the case it's a pretty sad critique of academia.

    12. Thiscasting of the field into two divided camps is nothing new, but it is no longerclear that this division reflects the reality of many LIS programs."

      Reminds me of Saracevic's two camps: systems oriented, human oriented.

    13. The argument is based on a belief that the field hasshifted from a focus on libraries as spaces, where ordered collections areoverseen by skilled professionals who serve as guides to users, to a focus oncomputational aspects of retrieval, where digital access interfaces peopledirectly, and remotely, with unfiltered information.

      Again the physical space is important for the argument.

    14. For present purposes wewill treat librarianship as being a commonly understood label for the workof credentialed practitioners involved in management and provision of ser-vices within a library or similar setting.

      Interesting use of "within" here ; if it wasn't there there would still be question of what a library is. But since it is within we know it is people within something, presumably a physical building of some kind that houses a collection.

    Tags

    Annotators