Basics of Paper Writing and Publishing in TEL (JTEL 2015 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, Ḿíłốṩ Ǩŕåṽçïḱ, Ralf Klamma

RWTH Aachen UniversityAdvanced Community Information Systems (ACIS)

[email protected]

11th Joint European Summer School on

Technology Enhanced Learning (JTEL 2015)

July 6-10

Ischia, Italy

http://dbis.rwth-aachen.de/cms/research/MiCIS


http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/





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







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!







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

4

Paper Structure

Hourglass Model [Swal93]

Introduction

Body

Conclusiongeneral

specific

specific

general

Section Theme







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

5

Paper Structure

“King Model” [Dern14]

Title

Abstract

Introduction

Body

Conclusion

References







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







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]







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







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







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

provided ranking sheets

Title

Abstract

Introduction

Body

Conclusion

References







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







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







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

13

ABSTRACT RANKING







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

14

The Kelluwen project implements middle and high-schooleducational activities where the use of Web 2.0 tools isincorporated to improve collaboration construction, sharingand publishing of the learning outcomes. The Worklog tool,a microblogging space within the Kelluwen platform has anactive role in the educational activities. Using probabilistictopic models, correlation analysis and principal componentanalysis (PCA), we analyzed micropost of 85 class groupsparticipating in the Kelluwen project and found interestingrelations of the types of messages posted and other factorssuch as the teacher participation in the microblog, the ruralor urban nature of the schools and other aspects of theeducational experience.

Motivation Problem Solution Results Implicationsinformative

4th Place: Abstract B

J. Born, E. Scheihing, J. Guerra, L. Cárcamo (2014). Proc. EC-TEL 2014, pp. 15-28 © Springer Verlag







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

15

3rd Place: Abstract D

Motivation Problem Solution Results Implications

R. Klemke, S. Ternier, M. Kalz, B. Schmitz, M. Specht (2014) Proc. EC-TEL 2014, pp. 207-220 © Springer Verlag

informative mixed

Serious gaming approaches so far focus mainly on skilldevelopment, motivational aspects or providing immersivelearning situations. Little work has been reported to fosterawareness and decision competencies in complex decisionsituations involving incomplete information and multiplestakeholders. We address this issue exploring the technicalrequirements and possibilities to design games for such situationsin three case studies: a hostage taking situation, a multi-stakeholder logistics case, and a health-care related emergencycase. To implement the games, we use a multi-user enabledmobile game development platform (ARLearn). We describe theunderlying real world situations and educational challenges andanalyse how these are reflected in the ARLearn games realized.Based on these cases we propose a way to increase theimmersiveness of mobile learning games.

informative







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

16

2nd Place: Abstract A


V. Bejdová, M. Homola, Z. Kubincová (2014) Proc. ICWL 2014, pp. 1-10 © Springer Verlag

In the course of several years, we employed bloggingassignments in an obligatory web design course. The assignmentwas able to attract interest of few students only, while the majoritydid not participate, or only very sparsely. It did not help much tomake the assignment part of the course evaluation. The coursereceived mixed reviews from the students. The students who werenot really interested in the subject, or considered it too much work,complained. In last two years we tried to address this problem byintroduction of a tight blogging schedule, and peer-reviews. As wereport in this paper, this step radically improved the participationrate, and also learning outcomes were higher, however thestudent’s opinion of these activities was not amended.

informative informativeinformative informative







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

17


A. Pardo, N. Mirrahi, S. Dawson, Y. & A. Zhao, D. Gašević (2015). Proc. LAK 2015, pp. 255-259 © ACM

The higher education sector has seen a shift in teaching approaches over the

past decade with an increase in the use of video for delivering lecture content as

part of a flipped classroom or blended learning model. Advances in video

technologies have provided opportunities for students to now annotate videos as

a strategy to support their achievement of the intended learning outcomes.

However, there are few studies exploring the relationship between video

annotations, student approaches to learning, and academic performance. This

study seeks to narrow this gap by investigating the impact of students' use of

video annotation software coupled with their approaches to learning and

academic performance in the context of a flipped learning environment.

Preliminary findings reveal a significant positive relationship between annotating

videos and exam results. However, negative effects of surface approaches to

learning, cognitive strategy use and test anxiety on midterm grades were also

noted. This indicates a need to better promote and scaffold higher order cognitive

strategies and deeper learning with the use of video annotation software.

informative informative informative

1st place: Abstract C

informative informative







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







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







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…







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







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]







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







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







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

– …







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 you’re involved in

Rework your submission into a one-paragraph abstract of max. 300 words (strict!)

Carefully choose a title

Submit by Wednesday via Easychairhttp://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=jtelpw2015– There will be an excursion Wednesday afternoon, so please plan for

submitting your abstract by Wednesday noon

Review your assigned abstracts on Thursday

Read the reviews on your abstract on Friday for the 2nd session of our workshop (at 9:45 am)

Task description also available at http://is.gd/jtel2015pw





http://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=jtelpw2015



Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

27

Mini Conference – Results

Best Overall ScoresRange: -3 = strong reject … 3 = strong accept

1. Matthias Heintz. Online Tool Usage Supports Solution-

based Requirements Engineering for E-Learning

Applications [2.3]

2. István Koren. Scalable Design of a Wearable-Enhanced

Learning Case [2.3]

3. Steven White. The practical focus of MOOC media

discourse in HE magazines and institutions [2.3]







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

28

In a traditional e-learning development project setup, the initial user-basedrequirements engineering process and the technical implementation process runone after the other, but time pressure and specific project arrangementsincreasingly lead to settings where those two processes are launched at about thesame time. This paper presents the requirements engineering work conducted inthe Go-Lab project, which aims to improve science education through inclusion ofonline labs and faced the challenges caused by the described parallel instead ofsequential setup of the initial project phases. They were tackled by developing aParticipatory Design approach to gather solution-based requirements, which issupported by PDot, an online tool to gather user requirements and feedback. In thispaper, we present preliminary Usability and User Experience evaluation results ofPDot, showing that the current prototype is already well perceived by the two maintarget groups, students and teachers, but still has some improvement potential, forexample regarding the visual design of the tool. Our results show that the proposedapproach and the PDot tool could be applied by other research projects, developinge-learning applications for teachers and students, to overcome the challengescaused by the same or a similar project setup.

Mini Conference – Best Abstract


M. Heintz (2015). JTEL Paper Writing Workshop 2015 © 2015 Matthias Heintz







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

29

Mini Conference – Other Top Scores

Best StructureSteven White. The practical focus of MOOC media discourse in HE magazines and institutions [4.67 / 5]

Best TitleCarmen Wolf. Improvement of university students’ self-reflection with a self-coaching app [4.33 / 5]

István Koren. Scalable Design of a Wearable-Enhanced Learning Case [4.33 / 5]

Best ReadabilitySteven White. The practical focus of MOOC media discourse in HE magazines and institutions [4.67 / 5]

Matthias Heintz. Online Tool Usage Supports Solution-based Requirements Engineering for E-Learning Applications [4.67 / 5]







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

30

PUBLICATION STRATEGY

IN TEL







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

31

Publication Outlets – Journals

High reputation

Completed studies

Significant original contribution

Lengthy publication process

No interaction with key people

Detailed reviews

Typical types: long, short, survey







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

32

Publication Outlets – Conference

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







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

33

Publication Outlets – Workshop et al.

Workshops

– Focused topic, emerging community

– Work in progress, ideas, positions etc. acceptable

– Interaction with key people

– Reputation not the key point

– Review quality depends

– Typical types: short, long, positions, demos

Doctoral Consortia and others

Edited books







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

34

Current 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







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

35

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







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

36

Exercise

Results

– Main focus of paper should decide which conference to

choose; choose disciplinary conf

– Check cfp for topics

– Think ahead in career, what are you doing after your

PhD?

– Scope of study is important

– Reach for the stars, land amongst the clouds. Go for the

best. Paper trajectories

– Publisher







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

37

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?





http://beamtenherrschaft.blogspot.com/



Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

38

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

– Academic Search: http://academic.research.microsoft.com

– Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com





http://is.gd/seriescomp

http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm

http://academic.research.microsoft.com/

http://scholar.google.com/



Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

39

Some Prominent TEL Venues

See http://www.slideshare.net/mikederntl/the-european-technology-enhanced-learning-lanscape

Artificial

Intelligence

Web /

Hypermedia

HCI





http://www.slideshare.net/mikederntl/the-european-technology-enhanced-learning-lanscape



Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

40

Some Prominent TEL Venues (2)

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!





http://celstec.org/content/advanced-learning-technologies-journal-list



Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

41

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 in trouble.

Task

– Group around similar PhD subjects (max 5 per group)

– Discuss and shortlist the above items [8 mins]

– Pitch your results







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

42

Some Mistakes to Absolutely Avoid

Brainstorm!







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

43

Some Mistakes to Absolutely Avoid

Results

– Being untargeted

– Not citing important grounding work

– Plagiarize

– Bitching on facebook

– Falsify

– Faking results

– Reveal all limitations & future work; ignore limitations

– Send to the same place, ignoring previous reviews

– Piss off people







Prof. Dr. M. Jarke

44

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. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 6(2), 105-123, http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2014.066856(2014)

[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)





http://www.acm.org/sigchi/chi98/call/papers.html

http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2014.066856

http://www.paperpub.com.cn/admin/upload/file/200893103922625.pdf

Basics of Paper Writing and Publishing in TEL (JTEL 2015 Workshop)

Education

Transcript of Basics of Paper Writing and Publishing in TEL (JTEL 2015 Workshop)