Basics of Paper Writing and Publishing in TEL (JTEL 2014 Workshop)

Click here to load reader

  • date post

    23-Aug-2014
  • Category

    Science

  • view

    413
  • download

    19

Embed Size (px)

description

Workshop delivered at the 10th Joint European Summer School on Technology Enhanced Learning (JTEL 2014), April 26 - May 3, 2014, in Mellieha, Malta

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 University Advanced 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 Conclusion general 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 the research agenda Declarative: Academic conferences shape the short-term research agenda Interrogative: Do academic conferences shape the research agenda? Compound, e.g. separated by ? or : Impact of title type: Interrogative: more downloads, fewer cites Compound with colon: longer; fewer downloads 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 Implications mixed 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 modelIndicate 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 (particularly empirical 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 publishers 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 you wrote the abstract!) If not available take your summer school submission, your current state of the thesis, or any other piece of research youre 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 quality depends 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 quality depends 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 be first 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 conference expect 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 key conferences (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 whats 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 cant 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 (its not a conversation); (Self) plagiarism Use one paper for different conferences without customization Simple typos and grammar errors -> check the language Forget or dont 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 venues 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. Unpublished manuscript, 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) 88:653661 [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., Umstatter, W., eds.: Wissenschaftsforschung Jahrbuch 1998. Verlag fur Wissenschaftsforschung, Berlin (2000) 239-282 [Swal93] Swales, J.M.: Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (1993)