11 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2019
    1. Social annotation supported robust discussion and facilitated productive connections between the content and relevant contexts

      How do you situate this finding in the literature? Is this a new finding, or are you adding nuance to previous findings about the usefulness of social annotations in general? (Could also be interesting in the future to compare the effect of private annotations vs social annotations)

    2. Designing with expansive framing resulted in generative learning

      Would have been interesting to vary the instructions provided to students, to distinguish the effect of using Hypothesis from the specific approach - like expansive framing. Which is distinct from using expansive framing as a framework for analyzing the annotations of course.

    3. asked to

      Did they get any instructions regarding how to respond to other people's annotations, or did they just do that spontaneously?

  2. Feb 2019
    1. Anywhere

      I'm going to leave an annotation here, we'll see if anyone finds it :) So one of the things that was very powerful to me with Marlene Scardamalia's Knowledge Building (video) was how ideas could begin one place, and get reorganized as you developed your (community's) understanding.

      One thing I'm wondering about is how to deal with that with Hypothes.is annotations - that's something we've been trying to experiment with in FROG (example), but I'd love more ideas.

      In addition, and one thing Knowledge Forum also missed, is a forum for "meta-talk" - talk about the process of building knowledge together... Which is why I decided to leave this comment here - didn't know where else to discuss this?

    1. Go back to 1962

      For those of us born 20 years afterwards, I understand that this is "before Internet, before smartphones" etc - but are there other important features of that specific time in human history (and perhaps academia/tech in the US etc) that you think are important for us to understand the context of his ideas?

    2. Engelbart hated our present-day systems.

      I understand the point he is trying to make, but I feel like the conclusion is a bit too strong - what he describes above isn't very different from Skype + Google Docs (with different cursors etc), or collaborative coding, which is how a lot of my work is done these days. I'd like to dig more deeply into his ideas, and see what we have today that can begin to answer the challenges.

    3. "Hypertext"

      There is a whole strand of humanists experimenting with hypertext, like hypertext literature, Mark Bernstein who works on TinderBox has been a great introduction to this area for me.

    4. collective intelligence

      I wonder about the relationship between "private" and "collective" intelligence (and perhaps there are also "group" intelligences etc - anything more than one, but less than public?). How would annotating this article for myself, or for a small trusted group of friends, change what I chose to highlight etc. What is the effect of reading a paper that already has a lot of annotations, vs. being the first to annotate?

  3. Sep 2018
  4. Jun 2017
    1. Connected ideas not trapped in individual discourse spaces

      I would love to see more of this in academia as well. I'll repeat here what I wrote in my personal email to you: Would be useful to set up a small community in LAK or CSCL to read and collectively annotate one paper per week or something? Maybe as part of NAPLES, of DANCE, or just random interested people...

    2. (if not any)

      do you mean "if not all"?