Basics of Paper Writing and Publishing in TEL (JTEL 2014 Workshop)
-
Upload
michael-derntl -
Category
Science
-
view
429 -
download
20
Embed Size (px)
description
Transcript of Basics of Paper Writing and Publishing in TEL (JTEL 2014 Workshop)

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
1 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Basics of Paper Writing and
Publishing in TEL
Michael Derntl, Milos Kravcik, Ralf Klamma
RWTH Aachen UniversityAdvanced Community Information Systems (ACIS)
{derntl,kravcik,klamma}@dbis.rwth-aachen.de
10th Joint European Summer School on
Technology Enhanced Learning (JTEL 2014)
April 28 – May 2, 2014
Malta

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
2
Managing Expectations
What we will tackle today
– Paper structure
– Organizing a piece of text
– Commence mini conference for the week
What we will tackle on Friday
– Discuss the mini conference reviews
– Elaborate a publication strategy in TEL
– Identify landmarks in your thesis field
– Mistakes to avoid

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
3
Scientific Texts –
Intentions vs Expectations
Intentions (authors)
– Communicate with peers
– Protect intellectual property
– Gain reputation
– Get promoted
– Progress science
– Remember
– Understand
– Gain perspective
[BCWi95] [Stoc00] [Ocon05] [PEBK02]
Expectations (readers)
– Standard form (sections,
paragraphs, sentences)
– Audience “coverage”
– Quality (relevance,
significance, soundness)
– Discussion (limitations,
embedding in existing
findings, implications, …)
– Correct language
All it takes is structure and practice!

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
4
Paper Structure
Hourglass Model [Swal93]
Introduction
Body
Conclusiongeneral
specific
specific
general
Section Theme

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
5
Paper Structure
“King Model” [Dern14]
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
6
Paper Structure:
Title
Very important part – why?
Rules of thumb:
– Fewest possible words that
adequately describe the paper
content
– Avoid waste words
– Nouns over verbs
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
7
Paper Structure:
Title
Types of title– Descriptive: Investigating the role of
academic conferences on shaping theresearch agenda
– Declarative: Academic conferencesshape the short-term research agenda
– Interrogative: Do academic conferencesshape the research agenda?
– Compound, e.g. separated by ? or :
Impact of title type:– Interrogative: more downloads, fewer
cites
– Compound with colon: longer; fewerdownloads and cites
– Long titles: fewer downloads
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References[JaNi11]

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
8
Paper Structure:
Title
Title checklist
– includes main topic
– unambiguous
– specific
– attractive
– short
– accurate
– adequate
– no abbreviations
– consider audience
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
9
Paper Structure:
Title
Title checklist
includes main topic
unambiguous
specific
attractive
short
accurate
adequate
no abbreviations
consider audience
Examples titles:1. Report of the results of an IMS Learning Design
expert workshop
2. Educational Technology and Culture: The Influence of Ethnic and Professional Culture on Learners' Technology Acceptance
3. A New Framework for Dynamic Adaptations and Actions
4. CAMera for PLE
5. Go To Statement Considered Harmful
6. Users in the Driver's Seat: A New Approach to Classifying Teaching Methods in a University Repository
7. Considering formal assessment in learning analytics within a PLE
8. HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
10
Paper Structure:
Abstract
Task:
– Read the four abstracts on the
handout
– Identify strong and weak points
– Identify criteria for good
abstracts
– Rank the four abstracts on the
ranking sheet
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
11
Paper Structure:
Abstract
Types
– Informative: what content is in the paper
– Indicative / descriptive: how is the content presented
Checklist, ~1 sentence each
– Motivation
– Problem definition
– Solution
– Results
– Implications
No go
– Exact title phrase
– Copy & paste from text
– Figures or tables
– Sources (depends)
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
12
Paper Structure:
Abstract
Low detail
No references
General example
Overview
High detail
All references
Specific examples
Reproducibility
Abstract Full text
A good abstract [ElseXX]:
Is specific and precise
Can stand alone
Uses little technical jargon
Uses no or few abbreviations

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
13
ABSTRACT RANKING

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
14
This paper presents rhythm reading, one of the elementary ear training
exercises, as a pedagogical software application of PWGL. We use
different kinds of stochastic and mathematical models to generate a
rhythmic database. The database is divided into several categories,
including, binary or ternary, euclidian, afro-cuban, corpus-based, and
contemporary. Our musical constraints systems is used to define a rule
set, which, in turn, can be used to automatically generate graded rhythm
reading exercises. The user is then presented with a musical score, and
he or she can perform a reading with any percussive instrument or voice
and a microphone connected to a computer. Our novel signal processing
system is utilized to analyze the reading. Finally, visual feedback and
statistics are displayed directly as a part of the exercise. In this paper we
present our rhythm reading application, and discuss the details of its
implementation.
This paper presents rhythm reading, one of the elementary ear training
exercises, as a pedagogical software application of PWGL. We use
different kinds of stochastic and mathematical models to generate a
rhythmic database. The database is divided into several categories,
including, binary or ternary, euclidian, afro-cuban, corpus-based, and
contemporary. Our musical constraints systems is used to define a rule
set, which, in turn, can be used to automatically generate graded rhythm
reading exercises. The user is then presented with a musical score, and
he or she can perform a reading with any percussive instrument or voice
and a microphone connected to a computer. Our novel signal processing
system is utilized to analyze the reading. Finally, visual feedback and
statistics are displayed directly as a part of the exercise. In this paper we
present our rhythm reading application, and discuss the details of its
implementation.
Motivation Problem Solution Results Implicationsmixed
4th Place: Abstract A
M. Kuuskankare, V. Norilo (2013). Proc. EC-TEL 2013 (pp. 165-177) © Springer Verlag

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
15
3rd Place: Abstract C
Motivation Problem Solution Results Implications
Y. Jiang, Z. Wu, Z. Zhan, L. Xu (2010) Proc. ICWL 2010 Workshops (pp. 195-206) © Springer Verlag
This paper proposes a strategy to personalized the Internet
searching, which would help to filter, extract and integrate
the massive information from the web based on the specific
user requirements in the hopes that it can relieve them from
the tedious process of manually selecting and retrieving the
relevant information as well as the confusion caused by the
inconsistencies of the information. The strategy proposed in
this paper has been applied to the searching of the laptop
product information and the result shows a much less
human effort involved and a much more accurate price
range.
part of the solution descriptive informative

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
16
2nd Place: Abstract D
Motivation Problem Solution Results Implications
C. Alario-Hoyos et al. (2013) Proc. EC-TEL 2013, pp. 5-18 [best full paper] © Springer Verlag
informative informative mixed descriptive
MOOCs have been a disruptive educational trend in the last months. Some MOOCs just replicate traditional teaching pedagogies, adding multimedia elements like video lectures. Others go beyond, trying to engage the massive number of participants by promoting discussions and relying on their contributions to the course. MOOC platforms usually provide some built-in social tools for this purpose, although instructors or participants may suggest others to foster discussions and crowdsourcing. This paper analyses the impact of two built-in (Q&A and forum) and three external social tools (Facebook, Twitter and MentorMob) in a MOOC on educational technologies. Most of the participants agreed on the importance of social tools to be in touch with their partners and share information related to the course, the forum being the one preferred. Furthermore, the lessons learned from the enactment of this MOOC employing social tools are summarized so that others may benefit from them.

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
17
Motivation Problem Solution Results Implications
Y. Mor & O. Mogilevsky (2013). Proc. EC-TEL 2013 (pp. 233-245) © Springer Verlag
Recently we are urged to transform education into an evidence based profession,
and promote scientific standards or practice. These calls are not new – they seem
to emerge every few years. We do not argue with their goal, but we contend that
the suitable frame of reference is the paradigm of design science, rather than the
common metaphor of medical research. This paper proposes Design Inquiry of
Learning as a projection of educational design science into a professional
domain, and offers the Learning Design Studio as a pedagogical manifestation of
this approach. The learning design studio is a collaborative, blended, project
based framework for training educators in effective and evidence-based use of
educational technology. We present its theoretical underpinnings, note its
fundamental principles and structures, and review three independent cases where
it has been trialed. The results show that this model is effective in developing
learners’ theoretical knowledge as well as their practical skills, and allows them to
link the two. However, it requires a considerable commitment of both learners and
tutors, and may not be applicable in more casual settings.
informative informative mostly informative
1st place: Abstract B
informative informative

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
18
Paper Structure:
Introduction
“Pick up” the reader (and reviewer!)– Some generally known statements
– Motivating example
– Tighten thematic focus
– Mention key literature
– General background info to support understanding
– (Indicate the structure)
Three phases [Swal93]– (Where?) Establish territory
– (What?) Establish a niche
– (How?) Occupy niche
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
19
Paper Structure:
Introduction – Example
Example 1: Computers & Education 59 (2): 182-195
Establish territory / common-sense statement:
Peer review is an instructional method aiming to help
students elaborate on domain-specific knowledge, while
simultaneously developing methodological review skills.Establish niche / tighten thematic focus:
We use the term „assigned-pair protocol“ here to refer to
the class of peer review methods that involve static author-
reviewer dyads.
Occupy niche / arrive at core paper topic:
Our focus was to (a) … and (b) …
Outline paper structure

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
20
Paper Structure:
Introduction – Example
Example 2: Transactions
on Learning Technologies
5 (1): 38-51
Establish territory / common-sense statement:
The concept of Adaptive Hypermedia Systems (AHS)
has existed for years now [19], and it has amply
proved its utility particularly in education …Establish niche / tighten thematic focus:
In fact, authors have to define a domain model …
Indeed, authors have to specify an adaptation model…Indicate existing solutions, point to shortcomings:
Multiple solutions have been proposed …
These works fail to answer the third challenge …
Occupy niche, indicate leap forward
This paper addresses these three challenges …
We perceive an adaptation strategy as a combination of
elementary parts …
Outline paper structure
This paper is organized as follows…

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
21
Paper Structure:
Body
Reports actual research
done to answer research
question/problem
Typically several
(sub)sections
Structure, organization, and
content depend heavily on
the type of paper
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
22
Paper Structure:
Body
Empirical paper– Methodology, data, material, participants,
results, (discussion)
– Goal: reproducibility
Case study paper– Report application of existing methods, tools,
theories
– Goal: abstraction from case
Survey paper– Reviewing and synthesize existing work
– Typically little original contributions
– Goal: Completeness, soundness, …
Theory paper– Principles, concepts or models in the field
– Goals: Originality, soundness, Relevance
Others: methodology papers, review papers, …
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References[CHI98]

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
23
Paper Structure:
Conclusion
Discussion / Conclusion– Counterpart to introduction
– Generalize results
– Sometimes separate (particularlyempirical papers)
– Recap of background and aims
– Summary and discussion / implications of key findings
– Answer your research questions
– Compare results to published work
– Discussion of limitations, shortcomings, significance
– Identification of follow-up research
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
24
Paper Structure:
References
Key rules for reference list
– List all cited references
– Do not list non-cited references
– Cite all used references
– Do not cite references you have
not read
– Make sure the most relevant
references are in the list
– Adhere to publisher’s style
guide
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
25
Paper Structure:
Additional bits
Authors + affiliations– Who is on the author list?
– In what order?
Acknowledgments– Funding source(s), Study participants, Helpers, …
Keywords– Free-text and/or from taxonomy
Classification – ACM classification
Appendix – Detailed tables, source codes, proofs, …
– Author bios
– …

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
26
Task: Mini Conference
Choose one of your recent submissions (where youwrote the abstract!)– If not available take your summer school submission, your
current state of the thesis, or any other piece of research you’re involved in
Rework your submission into a one-paragraph abstract of max. 300 words
Carefully choose a title
Submit by tomorrow (Wednesday) night at http://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=jtelpw2014
Review your assigned abstracts by Thursday night
Check out the received reviews until the Friday session
Task description also available at http://is.gd/jtel2014conf

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
27
Mini Conference – Results
Best Overall Scores
1. Antonio Balderas: A domain-specific language to
objectively assess generic competences [3.3 / 4]
2. Sandra Buron: A multitouch based learning environment
with a 3D paediatric patient. Does it work? [3.1 / 4]
3. Florian Heberle: Advancement of MOOCs with Learning
Pathways [2.8 / 4]

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
28
Nowadays, the competences assessment is a topic of growing importance in
terms of learning experiences. Unfortunately, assessing certain competences is a
subjective task, being problematic for both the evaluators and the evaluated.
Moreover, when the learning process is computer-supported and the number of
students increases, traditional assessment procedures suffer from scalability
problems. In this paper we introduce a system that supports grading learning
competences according to students' performance in an online course. We
automatically extract different objective indicators about students' work in a
Learning Management System (LMS). Evaluators can use an assessment-
specific query language to express a number of required indicators. Such
indicators are automatically extracted from the activity logs generated by the
LMS. The system has been applied in different courses and the results are
promising. Using these indicators, students can be assessed in their performance
in several generic competences.
Mini Conference – Best Abstract
Motivation Problem Solution Results Implications
A. Balderas (2014). JTEL Paper Writing Workshop 2014 © A. Balderas
informative informative informative unspecific informative?

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
29
Mini Conference – Other Top Scores
Best Title
Nabeela Altrabsheh: The Effect of Ngrams and Preprocessing in Analysing Students Feedback [4.33 / 5]
Best Structure
Antonio Balderas: A domain-specific language to objectively assess generic competences [4.67 / 5]
Best Readability
Florian Heberle: Advancement of MOOCs with Learning Pathways [5 / 5]

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
30
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Publication Outlets
Depends on the primary scientific discipline of your thesis
Journals– High reputation; completed studies; significant original contribution;
lengthy process; no interaction with key people; detailed reviews
– Typical types: long, short, survey
Conferences– Reputation depends on discipline; original contributions; often smaller
delta or WIP acceptable; interaction with key people; review qualitydepends on conference
– Typical types: long, short, poster, demo
Workshops– Focused topic; work in progress, ideas, positions etc. acceptable;
interaction with key people; Reputation not the key point; review qualitydepends
– Typical types: short, long, positions
Doctoral Consortia

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
31
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Situation
TEL is interdisciplinary
Many different publication venues
Venues have different subject focus
Different venue types (journals, conferences,
workshops, exhibits, etc.)
Different paper types (long, short, demo, poster, …)
Different stages / significance of available results

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
32
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Exercise
Questions
– Which factors do/should determine your decision where to
publish a piece of (your) TEL research?
– During your PhD process, what is your publication
strategy?
Task:
– Explore the above questions in a small group [10 mins]
– Pitch your results

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
33
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Exercise
Results
– Formal requirements (national, university-based) should befirst reference (e.g. you need to publish in indexed journals)
– There are indexes – check the impact factor
– Maximum exposure, use social network (e.g. linkedin), participate in competitions (e.g. thesis competitions, internatoinal)
– Interdisciplinary > macro: CS / TEL; micro: not all conferenceexpect the same stuff, depends on the journal/conf focus
– Funding: is there enough travel money for conference travels
– At the beginning need to find your community and keyconferences (connect with other researchers in the field) –criteria e.g. acceptance rate, reputation

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
34
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Venue (Pre-)Selection
Pre-selection– Go to scientific indexes and look for similar work where
was it published?
– Identify the key people in your field where do they publish?
– Subscribe to CFP mailing lists and portals what’s up?
– Follow research blogs, e.g. http://beamtenherrschaft.blogspot.com
Selection depends on
– Formal criteria in your institution?
– Significance / originality of the contribution?
– Affordable risk of rejection?
– Need to engage with community?

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
35
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Publication venue decision
Check distribution / subscription of the venue
Check indexing of the venue
Check citations to the venue
Check list of relevant topics of the venue
Consider closed access vs open access vs delayed open
access
Formal requirements: length, deadline, funding, etc.
Tools:
– AERCS Venue Comparison for DBLP: http://is.gd/seriescomp
– Publish or Perish: http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
36
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Some Prominent Venues
See http://www.slideshare.net/mikederntl/the-european-technology-enhanced-learning-lanscape
Artificial
Intelligence
Web /
Hypermedia
HCI

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
37
Publication Strategy for TEL –
Some Prominent Venues
Conferences
EC-TEL
ICALT
ICWL
ITS, AIED
ICCE
CSCL
LAK, EDM
CATE
T4E
WMTE
DIGITEL
…
Journals
Educ. Tech. & Soc. (ETS)
IEEE Trans. Learn. Tech. (TLT)
Comput. & Educ. (C&E)
Int. J. TEL (IJTEL)
Res. Pract. TEL (RPTEL)
Int. J. Emerg. Tech. Learn. (IJET)
Int. J. Dist. Educ. Tech. (IJDET)
Int. J. Know. Learn. (IJKL)
Brit./Austr. J. Educ. Tech. (B/AJET)
Int. J. Artifi. Intel. in Edu. (AIEDU)
J. Comp. Ass. Learn. (JCAL)
Int. J. CSCL (IJCSCL)
…
There are also several institutional lists of “acceptable” journals, e.g. at Open University of
the Netherlands: http://celstec.org/content/advanced-learning-technologies-journal-list
Make sure you know the preferred journals of your department!

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
38
The Landmarks in Your Thesis Field
Hypothesis: If you can’t name the three most important
– Authors and their specific areas of interest,
– Journals, Conferences,
– Challenges,
– Papers that lay or have laid the path,
– Adjacent fields / communities
in your thesis field, then your PhD is doomed.
Task
– Group around similar PhD subjects (max 5 per group)
– Discuss and shortlist the above items [8 mins]
– Pitch your results

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
39
Some Mistakes to Absolutely Avoid
Brainstorm!

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
40
Some Mistakes to Absolutely Avoid
Results– Not asking PhD advisor *before* submitting
– Keeping it as a secret
– Conten things:– Not respect the “rules” of the conference (scope, formatting)
– Inventing a new structure (form)
– Neglect research language (it’s not a conversation);
– (Self) plagiarism
– Use one paper for different conferences without customization
– Simple typos and grammar errors -> check the language
– Forget or don’t care to cite related work, particularly– if the related work is by a potential reviewer
– if it is considered a seminal piece in the field
– Resubmit a rejected paper without – adapting to the new venue’s template
– considering comments in rejection letter

Lehrstuhl Informatik 5
(Information Systems)
Prof. Dr. M. Jarke
41
References
[BCWi95] Booth, W.C., Colomb, G.G., Williams, J.M.: The Craft of Research. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago (1995)
[CHI98] CHI'98 Conference Webpage: Types of papers. http://www.acm.org/sigchi/chi98/call/papers.html#types (1998)
[Dern14] Derntl, M.: Basics of research paper writing and publishing. Unpublishedmanuscript, http://is.gd/paperwriting (2011)
[ElseXX] How to write a world-class methodology paper. http://www.paperpub.com.cn/admin/upload/file/200893103922625.pdf
[JaNi11] Jamali, H., Nikzad, M: Article title type and its relation with the number of downloads and citation. Scientometrics (2011) 88:653–661
[Ocon05] O'Connor, M.: Writing Successfully in Science. Chapman & Hall, London (1995)
[PEBK02] Peat, J., Elliott, E., Baur, L., Keena, V.: Scientfic Writing - Easy when you know how. BMJ Books, London (2002)
[Stoc00] Stock, W.G.: Was ist eine Publikation? Zum Problem der Einheitenbildung in der Wissenschaftsforschung. In Fuchs-Kittowski, K., Laitko, H., Parthey, H., Umst•atter, W., eds.: Wissenschaftsforschung Jahrbuch 1998. Verlag f•ur Wissenschaftsforschung, Berlin (2000) 239-282
[Swal93] Swales, J.M.: Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (1993)