187 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. Literature, philosophy, film, music, culture, politics, history, architecture: join the circus of the arts and humanities! For readers, writers, academics or anyone wanting to follow the conversation.
  2. Nov 2022
    1. However, knowledge production isnormally only an intermediate aim: the ultimateobjective of most medical research is to improvehealth and prosperity.

      Exactly! Measuring citation counts doesn't help us understand whether research actually helped people

    2. Much broad and shallow evaluation is based onbibliometrics (examining the quality of researchpublications) to assess the amount and quality ofknowledge produced

      here the authors are discussing the fact that a lot of analysis/evaluation of research is done via bibliometrics (citation-based impact metrics) and they consider this kind of evaluation to be "broad and shallow"

    1. hcommons.social is a microblogging network supporting scholars and practitioners across the humanities and around the world.


      The humanities commons has their own mastodon instance now!

    1. Elicit is really impressive. It searches academic papers, providing summary abstracts as well as structured analyses of papers. For example, it tries to identify the outcomes analysed in the paper or the conflicts of interest of the authors, as well as easily tracks citations. (See a similar search on “technology transitions”. Log in required.)

      https://elicit.org/ - another academic search engine

    1. As the British prime minister WilliamGladstone put it at the time in the Edinburgh Review, speaking of the remarkablePrussian success in the Franco-Prussian War: ‘Undoubtedly, the conduct of thecampaign, on the German side, has given a marked triumph to the cause ofsystematic popular education.’
  3. Oct 2022
    1. academic law libraries pool resources, through a consortium, to create a centralizedcollection of legal materials, including copyrighted materials, and to digitize thosematerials for easy, cost-effective access by all consortium members. For the sake ofexpediency, this proposal will be referred to here as TALLO (Taking Academic LawLibraries Online) and the proposed consortium as the TALLO consortium.

      Coining "TALLO" (Taking Academic Law

      Libraries Online)

      The [[Controlled Digital Lending]] theory was first proposed as a way for academic law libraries to form a consortium to share the expense of collection-building.

    1. Deutsch himself pointed to criticswho called him a ‘chiffonier’ or historical rag-picker, though he defended his ‘incon-venient though undeniable facts’ (Deutsch, 1916). A number of contemporaries recog-nized the limits of his interest in individual facts. ‘I get the impression’, one figure put it,‘that the charm of the facts of history, was so great for Deutsch, he lost himself socompletely . . . in the study of them, that he was never altogether able to say he is throughwith studying them and that he is ready for writing’ (Schulman, 1922). One review ofDeutsch’s Scrolls (1917), which collected some of his scattered articles, reflected thatthe articles lacked organization. ‘In order to obtain value,’ the reviewer insisted, ‘factsmust be organized . . . Isolate a fact as one isolates a germ in the laboratory, such a factbecomes worthless for historical purposes’ (Leiber, 1917).

      Just as people chided Niklas Luhmann for his obtuseness in writing based on his zettelkasten, Gotthard Deutsch's critics felt he didn't write enough using his.

    1. certainly surrounding oneself with acircle of people who will listen and t a l k - - a n d at times theyhave to be imaginary characters--is one of them

      Intellectual work requires "surfaces" to work against, almost as an exact analogy to substrates in chemistry which help to catalyze reactions. The surfaces may include: - articles, books, or other writing against which one can think and write - colleagues, friends, family, other thinkers, or even imaginary characters (as suggested by C. Wright Mills) - one's past self as instantiated by their (imperfect) memory or by their notes about excerpted ideas or their own thoughts

      Are there any other surfaces we're missing?

  4. Sep 2022
    1. @BenjaminVanDyneReplying to @ChrisAldrichI wish I had a good answer! The book I use when I teach is Joseph Harris’s “rewriting” which is technically a writing book but teaches well as a book about how to read in a writerly way.

      Thanks for this! I like the framing and general concept of the book.

      It seems like its a good follow on to Dan Allosso's OER text How to Make Notes and Write https://minnstate.pressbooks.pub/write/ or Sönke Ahrens' How to Take Smart Notes https://amzn.to/3DwJVMz which includes some useful psychology and mental health perspective.

      Other similar examples are Umberto Eco's How to Write a Thesis (MIT, 2015) or Gerald Weinberg's The Fieldstone Method https://amzn.to/3DCf6GA These may be some of what we're all missing.

      I'm reminded of Mark Robertson's (@calhistorian) discussion of modeling his note taking practice and output in his classroom using Roam Research. https://hyp.is/QuB5NDa0Ee28hUP7ExvFuw/thatsthenorm.com/mark-robertson-history-socratic-dialogue/ Perhaps we need more of this?

      Early examples of this sort of note taking can also be seen in the religious studies space with Melanchthon's handbook on commonplaces or Jonathan Edwards' Miscellanies, though missing are the process from notes to writings. https://www.logos.com/grow/jonathan-edwards-organizational-genius/

      Other examples of these practices in the wild include @andy_matuschak's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGcs4tyey18 and TheNonPoet's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sdp0jo2Fe4 Though it may be better for students to see this in areas in which they're interested.

      Hypothes.is as a potential means of modeling and allowing students to directly "see" this sort of work as it progresses using public/semi-public annotations may be helpful. Then one can separately model re-arranging them and writing a paper. https://web.hypothes.is/

      Reply to: https://twitter.com/BenjaminVanDyne/status/1571171086171095042

  5. Aug 2022
    1. The Hypothesis Project is a 501(c)(3) with a mission to enable a conversation layer over the world’s knowledge. We envision a universal capability, native to browsers and other applications, allowing notetaking, collaboration, conversation and community over all forms of content– all without needing implementation by
    1. The academic research that was footnoted in the Wikipedia articles was found to be cited more often in subsequent academic publications, as well.

      Academic research used in Wikipedia articles drives more citations

  6. Jun 2022
    1. there is clear evidence that explicitly teaching reading strategies to students improves their overall academic performance, such instruction is often limited to developmental reading or study skills courses (Saxby 2017, 37-38).

      Teaching reading strategies to students improves their overall academic performance, but this instruction is often limited to developmental reading or study skills courses.

      ref: Saxby, Lori Eggers. “Efficacy of a College Reading Strategy Course: Comparative Study.” Journal of Developmental Education 40, no. 3 (2017): 36-38.

      Using Hypothes.is as a tool in a variety of courses can help to teach reading strategies and thereby improve students' overall academic performance.

  7. May 2022
    1. Senior colleagues indicate that I should not have to balance out publishing in “traditional, peer-reviewed publications” as well as open, online spaces.

      Do your colleagues who read your work, annotate it, and comment on it not count as peer-review?

      Am I wasting my time by annotating all of this? :) (I don't think so...)

  8. Apr 2022
    1. Open Knowledge Maps, meanwhile, is built on top of the open-source Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, which boasts more than 270 million documents, including preprints, and is curated to remove spam.

      Open Knowledge Maps uses the open-source Bielefeld Academic Search Engine and in 2021 indicated that it covers 270 million documents including preprints. Open Knowledge Maps also curates its index to remove spam.

      How much spam is included in the journal article space? I've heard of incredibly low quality and poorly edited journals, so filtering those out may be fairly easy to do, but are there smaller levels of individual spam below that?

  9. Mar 2022
    1. practices that skirt the institutional structures and roles by which formal learning has been organized for generations.

      This would make it a para-academic practice. See: http://hammeronpress.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/PHA_Final.pdf

    1. Based on the ISO 12913-2, albeit with small changes, the most appropriate causal/sematic classifications found here with respect to heritage could therefore be ‘social communal, ‘electro-mechanical, ‘voice and instrument’, ‘transport sounds’, and ‘other’ sounds. The accessibility of these classifications could then lead to a framework with a view to determine potential heritage importance of sounds.

      A well thought out set of categories for urban sounds, designed for the preservation of heritage

    1. PLE = Personal Learning Environment PLN = Personal / Professional Learning Network LMS = Learning Management System OLN= Open Learning Network

      Important acronyms to take note of - mentioned often in online learning and can be overwhelming to students and 'newbie' academics

  10. Feb 2022
    1. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1494322378142359554.html

      from https://twitter.com/NeilLewisJr/status/1494322378142359554


      Some news: yesterday I learned that, by faculty vote, my bid for tenure/promotion was not approved.<br><br>I feel many things, but not shame or regret. I am so proud of our work during our time at yale, and angry that this version of that work will come to an end, this end.

      — Michael W. Kraus (@mwkraus) February 16, 2022
      <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
  11. Jan 2022
    1. Depuis longtemps, je suis d’avis que la rigueur d’un cours ne se mesure pas à la quantité de connaissances dont l’enseignant fait étalage, mais aux apprentissages que les étudiants font.

      Which can lead to an assessment of pedagogical efficacy. It's funny, to me, that those who complain about "grade inflation" (typically admins) rarely entertain the notion that grades could be higher than usual if the course went well. The situation is quite different in "L&D" (Learning and Development, typically for training and professional development in an organizational context). "Oh, great! We were able to get everyone to reach the standard for this competency! Must mean that we've done something right in our Instructional Design!"

    2. mauvais indicateurs comme gages de rigueur

      Yes! Therein lies the rub. Sounds like arguments for Competency-Based Learning, which is officially what we have in Quebec's Cegep system.

    3. baisser les attentes
    4. L’un des thèmes récurrents pendant les discussions a été celui de la rigueur.

      Not too surprising. It's an important consideration for the Academe. Almost part of the definition. And it's useful that learning pros are tackling such issues instead of jumping to conclusions. In a way, it's an extension of work done in the Sociology of Education since 1918.

    1. 在選詞上一開始會有過於主觀或是太日常的詞彙出現,降低了論文
    2. 課上多次強調Plagiarism, quotation, paraphrasing的差別,也在課程中了解到Quotation和Paraphrasing的使用方法與時機,明辨這三種的區別在往後無論是報告、中英論文或是撰寫任何的文章都十分重要,畢竟學術不端是一件嚴重且不道德的事,須極力避免。
    3. The adjective “well-known” seems to be too subjective and exaggerative. The modified statement is more objective and realistic, which is more suitable in academic writing.
    4. The “academic flavor” tastes different from our daily communication and literary works. I can still remember I used the word “at the first brush” in my RA, however, this word is an informal expression. I was advised to remove the word. What I learned is that the words in the paper need to be formal and rigorous to give the paper an academic flavor.
  12. Dec 2021
    1. The professionalisation of academic writing has forced us “to substitute the more writerly, discoursive forms, such as the essay, for the more measured and measurable –largely unread and unreadable – quasi-scientific journal article”

      I wonder if it would be useful to distinguish between research and scholarship, where formal research is but one type of scholarly practice?

      If we look at a journal as a channel for promoting scholarship then there's no reason that we can't include essays as a category of writing.

  13. Nov 2021
  14. Oct 2021
  15. Sep 2021
    1. R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E

      Found on Wiley Journals Audience: Wiley Open Access journals are supported by a network of authoritative journals and societies as well as internationally renowned editorial board members. All research articles published in Wiley Open Access journals are immediately freely available to read, download and share. Wiley Open Access publishes a number of online journals across biological, chemical and health sciences.



  16. Aug 2021
    1. therefore in practice it's a bit academic to worry about which lines inside that block the compiler should be happy or unhappy about. From falsehood, anythihng follows. So the compiler is free to say "if the impossible happens, then X is an error" or "if the impossible happens, then X is not an error". Both are valid (although one might be more or less surprising to developers).
  17. Jul 2021
  18. Jun 2021
    1. that sometimes we don't give you know uh you know credit to or sort of like survive underneath in the subterfuge of what's happening

      you could kind of go deeper with that is um do the work of like fred moten and stephanos harney's uh black study or radical study in in the undercommons of of this idea of like um there are these molds intellectual practice you know that sometimes we don't give you know uh you know credit to or sort of like survive underneath in the subterfuge of what's happening—Christopher R. Rogers (autogenerated transcript)

      He's talking about work (scholarship) that may sit outside the mainstream that for one reason or another aren't recognized (in this case, because the scholars are marginalized in a culture mired in racist ideas, colonialism, etc.). At it's roots, it doesn't necessarily make the work any more or less valuable than that in

      cf. with the academic samizdat of Vladimir Bukovsky who was working under a repressive Russian government

      cf similarly with the work of Thomas Kuhn in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

      Consensus can very often only be consensus until it isn't.

      How do these ideas interoperate with those of power (power over and power with)? One groups power over another definitely doesn't make them right (or just) at the end of the day.

      I like the word "undercommons", which could be thought of not in a marginalizing way, but in the way of a different (and possibly better) perspective.

    1. Reflecting on how new digital tools have re-invigorated annotation and contributed to the creation of their recent book, they suggest annotation presents a vital means by which academics can re-engage with each other and the wider world.

      I've been seeing some of this in the digital gardening space online. People are actively hosting their annotations, thoughts, and ideas, almost as personal wikis.

      Some are using RSS and other feeds as well as Webmention notifications so that these notebooks can communicate with each other in a realization of Vanmevar Bush's dream.

      Networked academic samizdat anyone?

  19. May 2021
    1. Getting to grips with structure means keeping your reader in mind.

      Always write with the reader in mind. Good writing isn't a vanity project i.e. it's not about you. If you can't get your message across clearly then you're letting down your reader.

    2. it’s more accurate to say that readers notice the absence of structures, and/or when we shift the logics of one structure to another mid-stream, without saying anything.

      I often see this in my undergraduate and postgraduate students; they make a conceptual move without signalling it to the reader, which leaves the reader feeling discombobulated.

    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2020, November 18). @danielmabuse yes, we all make mistakes, but a responsible actor also factors the kinds of mistakes she is prone to making into decisions on what actions to take: I’m not that great with my hands, so I never contemplated being a neuro-surgeon. Not everyone should be a public voice on COVID [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1329002783094296577

    1. Dr Zoë Hyde. (2021, February 23). I don’t like to dwell on negatives, but something important happened recently that I’d like to make public. Shortly before Christmas, @mugecevik made a complaint to my university about me. When asked for details, she didn’t provide any. My employer took a dim view of the matter. [Tweet]. @DrZoeHyde. https://twitter.com/DrZoeHyde/status/1364184623262048259

  20. Apr 2021
    1. Regardless of an explicit requirement, it is an implication of membership in the academic community that its members have a responsibility, and a right, to contribute to the intellectual corpus of their time.

      So who then is, or isn't, a "member" of the "academic community?" And is it incumbent that members "produce ideas" within their defined fields, or does their membership entitle (require?) them to speak more broadly than that?

    2. I had always understood that academic freedom was associated with job security; however, and forgive my naïveté, I was disappointed to learn that academic freedom was inexorably tied to tenure. Before that revelation, I had always thought of academic freedom as a principle complemented by tenure, not contingent upon it.

      This is the thorny heart of the problem - does the freedom only flow from the power to protect it?

  21. Mar 2021
  22. Feb 2021
    1. Researchers do the actual work: they invent the hypothesis, do the experiments and write the articles describing the results of these experiments. Then they publish this article in an academic journal. They cannot simply put this article online on their blog: to be recognised as research work, it must be published in a respectable peer-reviewed journal. So they send their articles to publishers like Elsevier, Wiley or Springer. Publishers send articles they have received to other scientists for peer-review. Reviewers give their opinion on whether the work should be accepted in a journal or not, or if some additional work must be done. Based on these reviews, the article is published or rejected. Both reviewers and scientists work for free. They do not earn any compensation from the academic publisher. Here, academic publishers work as organisers of the academic community, but not as creators. The work of the academic publisher is organisational and not creative.

      These few paragraphs do a great job of outlining the idea of slavery in an academic setting.

    2. They cannot simply put this article online on their blog: to be recognised as research work, it must be published in a respectable peer-reviewed journal.

      Why not? Why couldn't they put their articles on their own sites or even those of the libraries of their institutions where others might read and evaluate them? annotate them? argue over all the fine points?

    1. One study suggests that academics who write daily and set goals with someone weekly write nearly ten times as many pages as those without regular writing habits.

      See Silvia, P. J. (2018). How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing (Second Edition). APA LifeTools.

    1. And if the world is going to grasp what’s happening then our writing needs to be digestible.

      You need to use different language when writing on your blog, compared to writing papers. You don't need references. You should write in first person. Spell checking is optional.

    2. An academic blogger may feel constrained to topics only related to his or her academic research, whereas a blogger who is also an academic is free to explore wider fields of discussion.

      This idea of "identity" is important. Many academics don't even think of themselves as authors let alone bloggers.

    1. The Rights Retention Strategy ignores long-standing academic freedoms

      It’s not entirely clear what is meant by this statement. This is incredibly inflammatory rhetoric for most academics who take academic freedom very seriously - for very good reasons. However, the academic has the freedom not to accept a grant if they fundamentally disagree with the funder’s desired approach to effective dissemination of the research they support. Furthermore, the rights retention strategy (RRS) is in place to give the authors more freedom of choice over what happens to the version of record (VoR). Because of the RRS, the author can submit to the most appropriate journal for the research regardless of whether it explicitly provides a compliant route to publication (assuming the journal takes the submission forwards) or whether or not the author can access funds to pay a publication charge (APC) in a hybrid subscription journal.

  23. Dec 2020
    1. Academic research and teaching often necessitate manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding, etc. This “manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding” — in other words, hacking

      It's not self-evident to me that these activities are the same as those associated with hacking (and I'm not talking about the malevolent/negative connotations of hacking).

      I also think of a hacker as a tinkerer, which can include "manipulation, re-creation, breaking, building, etc." but need not. It feels like there's something fundamental missing here but I can't put my finger on it.

      I don't really have a conclusion here, other than to suggest that the hacker/scholar relationship might need a lot more development than I see here.

  24. Oct 2020
    1. And though flags from this software don’t automatically mean students will be penalized—instructors can review the software’s suspicions and decide for themselves how to proceed—it leaves open the possibility that instructors’ own biases will determine whether to bring academic dishonesty charges against students. Even just an accusation could negatively affect a student’s academic record, or at the very least how their instructor perceives them and their subsequent work.

      The companies are hiding behind this as a feature - that the algorithms are not supposed to be implemented without human review. I wonder how this "feature" will interact with implicit (and explicit) biases, or with the power dynamics between adjuncts, students, and departmental administration.

      The companies are caught between a rock and a hard place in the decision whether students should be informed that their attempt was flagged for review, or not. We see that, if the student is informed, it causes stress and pain and damage to the teacher-student relationship. But if they're not informed, all these issues of bias and power become invisible.

    2. When I asked Alessio whether her work addressed the possibility that proctoring itself could affect scores, she said it’d make for an interesting study.

      Given all the iGen research about the growing amount of anxiety among students, this seems very interesting indeed.

    3. “They can see you, but you can’t see them, which I didn’t feel good about,”
    1. Clicking through to the photo, there is no mention of this image appearing on this important announcement. Perhaps the author privately contact the photographer about using his image. Since Ken Doctor is so incredible with his media experience (i’m being serious), I’m fairly certain someone from his team would have contacted the photographer to give him a heads up.

      I'm sure I've said it before, but I maintain that if the source of the article and the target both supported the Webmention spec, then when a piece used an image (or really any other type of media, including text) with a link, then the original source (any website, or Flickr in this case) would get a notification and could show—if they chose—the use of that media so that others in the future could see how popular (or not) these types of media are.

      Has anyone in the IndieWeb community got examples of this type of attribution showing on media on their own websites? Perhaps Jeremy Keith or Kevin Marks who are photographers and long time Flickr users?

      Incidentally I've also mentioned using this notification method in the past as a means of decentralizing the journal publishing industry as part of a peer-review, citation, and preprint server set up. It also could be used as part of a citation workflow in the sense of Maria Popova and Tina Roth Eisenberg's Curator's Code<sup>[1]</sup>set up, which could also benefit greatly now with Webmention support.

    1. and serve as pre-prints to work that may live later on, or always exist in their current format

      Thinking of a personal site as a pre-print server is an interesting concept and somewhat similar to the idea of a commonplace book.

    1. academia is built on the premise (IMHO) of getting a good idea, parlaying that into a job and tenure, and waiting for death. I’ve had a lot of colleagues and acquaintances ask why I would bother blogging. Ask why I share all of this content online. Ask why I’m not afraid that someone is going to steal my ideas.

      Though all too true, this is just a painful statement for me. The entirety of our modern world is contingent upon the creation of ideas, their improvement and evolution, and their spreading. In an academic world where attribution of ideas is paramount, why wouldn't one publish quickly and immediately on one's own site (or anywhere else they might for that matter keeping in mind that it's almost trivially easy to self-publish it on one's own website nearly instantaneously)?

      Early areas of science were held back by the need to communicate by handwriting letters as the primary means of communication. Books eventually came, but the research involved and even the printing process could take decades. Now the primary means of science communication is via large (often corporate owned) journals, but even this process may take a year or more of research and then a year or more to publish and get the idea out. Why not write the ideas up and put them out on your own website and collect more immediate collaborators? Funding is already in such a sorry state that generally, even an idea alone, will not get the ball rolling.

      I'm reminded of the gospel song "This little light of mine" whose popular lyrics include: "Hide it under a bushel? No! / I'm gonna let it shine" and "Don't let Satan blow it out, / I'm gonna let it shine"

      I'm starting to worry that academia in conjunction with large corporate publishing interests are acting the role of Satan in the song which could easily be applied to ideas as well as to my little light.

      [also on boffosocko.com]

    1. There are still some wrinkles to be ironed out in getting the various platforms we use today to play well with Webmentions, but it’s a real step toward the goal of that decentralized, distributed, interconnected future for scholarly communication.

      The fun, secret part is that Kathleen hasn't (yet?) discovered IndieAuth so that she can authenticate/authorize micropub clients like Quill to publish content to her own site from various clients by means of a potential micropub endpoint.

      I'll suspect she'll be even more impressed when she realizes that there's a forthcoming wave of feed readers [1] [2] that will allow her to read others' content in a reader which has an integrated micropub client in it so that she can reply to posts directly in her feed reader, then the responses get posted directly to her own website which then, in turn, send webmentions to the site's she's responding to so that the conversational loop can be completely closed.

      She and Lee will also be glad to know that work has already started on private posts and conversations and posting to limited audiences as well. Eventually there will be no functionality that a social web site/silo can do that a distributed set of independent sites can't. There's certainly work to be done to round off the edges, but we're getting closer and closer every day.

      I know how it all works, but even I'm impressed at the apparent magic that allows round-trip conversations between her website and Twitter and Micro.blog. And she hasn't really delved into website to website conversations yet. I suppose we'll have to help IndieWebify some of her colleague's web presences to make that portion easier. Suddenly "academic Twitter" will be the "academic blogosphere" she misses from not too many years ago. :)

      If there are academics out thee who are interested in what Kathleen has done, but may need a little technical help, I'm happy to set up some tools for them to get them started.

    1. Academic capitalism promotes engaged academics as an empirical measure of a university’s reputational currency. Academic capitalism refers to the ways in which knowledge production increasingly embeds universities in the new economy (Berman 2011; Rhoades and Slaughter 2010).
  25. Sep 2020
    1. Writing in the margins has always been an essential activity for students.

      I never really got into the habit of writing in the margins of books, it was something that never really occurred to me. While I am still hesitant to write in the margins of physical books, doing so digitally does appeal. Something I am starting to get more into, now that I'm on the journey to getting my Arts and Humanities degree.

  26. Jun 2020
  27. May 2020
  28. Apr 2020