Making Web2.0 Researchable Web2.0 and Scholarly Communication innovation and use - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Making Web2.0 Researchable Web2.0 and Scholarly Communication innovation and use PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 6fe1bb-OTM1N



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Making Web2.0 Researchable Web2.0 and Scholarly Communication innovation and use

Description:

Making Web2.0 Researchable Web2.0 and Scholarly Communication innovation and use James Stewart – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:77
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 29
Provided by: JamesS190
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Making Web2.0 Researchable Web2.0 and Scholarly Communication innovation and use


1
Making Web2.0 Researchable Web2.0 and Scholarly
Communication innovation and use
  • James Stewart

2
(No Transcript)
3
Scholarly Communication
  • Conducting research, developing ideas and
    informal communications.
  • Preparing, shaping and communicating what will
    become formal research results.
  • The dissemination of formal products.
  • Managing personal careers, and research teams and
    research programmes
  • Teaching and communicating scholarly ideas to
    broader communities.(based on Thorin (2003) )

4
What is Web2.0?
5
Characterised by example
  • Technical and content forms
  • E.g. blog, wiki, social networking tool, social
    bookmarking, peer to peer filesharing, etc
  • Particular Branded Service or Resource
  • Facebook
  • Skype
  • OpenWetWare
  • Sharepoint
  • Wikipedia

6
Web2.0
  • Way of describing certain post-dot.com bust
    businesses
  • Technological definition Web 2.0 encompasses a
    variety of different meanings that include an
    increased emphasis on user-generated content,
    data and content sharing and collaborative
    effort, together with the use of various kinds of
    social software, new ways of interacting with
    web-based applications, and the use of the web as
    a platform for generating, re-purposing and
    consuming content. (Anderson 2007)
  • The way technology is being driven by
    individuals and communities seeking to manage the
    explosion of information, and the move to
    networked society

7
Qualities of Web2.0
  • Openness
  • Usability
  • Light structures
  • User creation and contribution
  • Massive data
  • Power of the crowd
  • Network effects
  • Problem None unique to Web2.0

8
How to describe a Web2.0
  • Tool
  • System
  • Service
  • Community
  • Organisation
  • Collection
  • etc

9
Approaches to Web2.0
  • Technology
  • Business model
  • Organisational approach
  • Individual and social practices for information
    use and interactions
  • Structure of knowledge
  • Expectations

10
Academic archaeology
  • Many of communicative and information practices
    characteristic of Web2.0 are characteristic of
    scholarly communication.
  • However, some of these forms are rather ossified!
  • Many earlier internet tools used in Web2.0 way
  • Many more well established trajectories of
    socio-technical change. What does Web2.0 add?

11
e.g. Collaboratories
  • Shared instruments
  • Community Data Systems
  • Open Community Contribution Systems
  • Virtual Community of Practice
  • Virtual Learning Community
  • Distributed Research Centre
  • Community Infrastructure project
  • Bos et al. (2007)
  • Issues of
  • Tacit knowledge
  • Independence of scholars
  • Information Standards
  • Institutional and national barriers
  • Sustainability

12
Working model
  • services for discovering and maintaining
    relationships
  • services for sharing research objects and
    components
  • services for sharing, annotating and commentating
    on publications and presentations
  • services for documenting and sharing experiences.

13
How do you use Web2.0?
  • How might you define it?
  • Is it useful or distracting?
  • Is the idea of qualities useable?
  • Does Internet Web2.0 now?

14
Framework Social Shaping of Technology
  • Technologies emerge from complex processes of
    invention, implementation, failure and success
  • Many different social and technical players and
    objects effect outcome
  • Sources of innovation included user communities
    as well as producer groups
  • Non-linear process involving changes in
    practices, knowledge, structures and
    relationships

15
Framework Social Learning in Innovation
  • Changing relationships between players in
    innovation as they interact and learn in the
    processes of invention and implementation.
  • Importance of visions and theory in promoting and
    aligning expectations
  • Importance of intermediaries in bringing together
    innovations from different communities
  • Emergence of new intermediaries

16
Factors shaping Web2.0 in SC
  • Ownership and control of scholarly products, both
    by scholars and institutions such as universities
    and publishers
  • Institutional, individual and cultural factors
    shaping collaboration
  • Technical implantation of support for
    Standardisation, IPR and security
  • Epistemological issues arising in creating and
    implementing computer-based communication tools.

17
Principal issues governing the Dynamics of
socio-technical change
  • Disciplinary differences
  • Scholarly knowledge production
  • Structure, economics, maturity and culture.
  • Institutional differences
  • Non-academic influences individual and broader
    social appropriation of Web2.0 practices and
    ideas
  • Many different innovation pathways

18
Academic Approaches
  • Science Studies
  • Sociology of Knowledge
  • Information Science/ Library Studies
  • Organisational Science (IT implementation)
  • Technology Studies
  • Innovation Studies
  • Economics

19
Visions and Empirical change
  • Open Access
  • Open Science
  • Library 2.0
  • Collaboratories and CSCW
  • Data-driven scholarship
  • Globalisation

20
Disciplinary Differences
  • Empirically
  • Use of different types of formal outputs
  • Speed of knowledge production
  • Disciplinary cultures
  • Collective working and competitiveness
  • Uses of online systems such as preprint servers
  • Theoretically
  • Cultures of knowledge production
  • Type of knowledge produced
  • Types of primary materials/sources
  • Maturity of discipline esp. development of
    knowledge standards
  • Interdependence of scholars
  • Interdsciplinarity

21
Disciplinary Differences
  • Musicology
  • Music
  • High Energy Physics
  • Theoretical Physics
  • Economics
  • Cultural studies

22
Institutional differences
  • Institution Status
  • Access to publish high ranking journals
  • Institutional resources and management
  • Other activities teaching, commericalisation
  • Local network effects critical mass

23
Individuals and groups
  • Experience with use of existing technologies
  • Experience with technical change
  • Age and Career stage
  • Reward structures and motivations
  • Gender
  • Ability to influence technological change
  • Community and institutional support
  • Collaborations and work practices
  • innovativeness

24
Preliminary questions and issues
  • Does the openness and emergence of
    information and knowledge standards favour
    emerging and interdisciplinary research, or is
    Web2.0 primarily taken up in areas with well
    established, but older IT infrastructures
  • Does Age, as a proxy for career stage play a role
    in adoption of Web2.0, and it is biased to youth
    and early career, or older and more established
    researchers
  • Gender is traditionally a factor in technology
    adoption, and is clearly an factor in
    disciplinary participation. Are there any unusual
    patterns in Web2.0 adoption

25
RIN Web2.0 Study
  • Objectives
  • Who is using what, where?
  • What is shaping that use?
  • The implications for Scholarly Communications.

26
RIN Web2.0 Study
  • Methods
  • Quantitative and representative survey of UK
    scholarly community to discover basic use and
    awareness
  • 50 in dept interviews on scholarly communications
    and Web2.0
  • 5 case studies of promoters, developers and users
    of specific web2.0 services

27
Issues
  • Many different sorts of scholarly communication
  • e.g. information searching, publishing formal
    outputs, coordinating
  • Web2.0 such a vague term, and not well known
  • Use of much Web2.0 maybe very limited
  • BUT
  • Web2.0 not a step change
  • Ask about personal changes in pratices and
    institutional change
  • The experiences and efforts of innovation
    intermediaries to stimulate change

28
What do you want to know?
About PowerShow.com