Lern, june 2016, digital media slides

New media &digital research literaciesfor legal educators

Professor Paul Mahargpaulmaharg.com/slides

Professor Paul Maharg | CC BY-NC-ND 2.5 SCOTLAND |

previewDigital research literaciesScholarly peer networks: SSRN, Academia, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, LinkedIn, CarbonMadePublishing platforms: blogs, Slideshare, Twitter, BuzzfeedBibliometrics > altmetricsSome researchSome personal conclusions

*


digital media*1

ProConWide dissemination, remains at a more or less fixed place for readers to return & download, etcCan be time-consuming & addictive; are you getting to the people you want to read your stuff?Gathering, sorting, archiving of digital information very usefulApps disappear or go corporateBuilds academic profile through altmetricsCan encourage narcissism & grandiosity if used as vanity projectsFacilitates the Open open access, open education, OE resourcesPrivacy can be an issue (cf Facebook)

Supports knowledge as a public goodDo we want that? Should knowledge always be public?


deeper issuesWhats digital?Specific devices, networks, assemblages? Technical, educational, research affordances, modes of text and search, specific skills, competences, practices, environments?How does digital alter social?Eg distributed communities, socio-material understandings, means of production & modes of useHow does digital (+ social) alter literacies?Eg artefacts and practices, formal and informal contexts of research, visual artefacts, digital curation.How does digital encourage metricization of our working lives, and what can we do about it?*1


transforming features of digitalReplicabilityMutabilityConnectivityInstantaneity (& the nearly now)PortabilityIdentity

(Jones 2013, 162-65)*1


so what about our staff pages?Almost no social sharingStatic pagesNo reference to academic tools or modes of communicationSocial media-freeOccasionally useful for linking to repositories to view versions of record. Or email addresses

*1


scholarly peer networksSSRNGoogle Scholar:http://bit.ly/1umHCmPAcademia:bit.ly/1oaK9hjResearchGate:http://bit.ly/10k3dyELinkedIn:http://linkd.in/1DSQvnnCarbonmade:http://bit.ly/1GfMZY4ZoteroEvernote

*2

*


publishing platforms: blogginghttp://paulmaharg.com17.3.2005 > present. Used for:Dissemination of ideas & researchConstruction yard for sections of papers & articlesSky-writing (Steven Harnard)Identity formationOn Blawg

*3


publishing platforms: blogging

*3


publishing platforms: slidedecks & Twitterhttp://slideshare.net/paulmahargUsed for:Dissemination of slidedecksSet alerts for others presentationsRe Twitter, use third-party apps & aggregators, eg TweetDeck to manage the dataflow

*3


*3publishing platforms: slidedecks & Twitter


*3publishing platforms: slidedecks & Twitter


some slideshare stats3


more Slideshare stats

3


publishing platforms: Buzzfeed(surely not Buzzfeed?)*3


Yes, Buzzfeed*http://bit.ly/1JFKYp0 3


altmetricsSee altmetrics.org: the creation and study of new metrics based on the Social Web for analyzing and informing scholarship

*4


existing impact: how we are judgedExisting filters:Peer-reviewCitation countingeg h-indexJournal Impact Factor (JIF)

*4


existing impact: how we are judged of a journal: A measure of the average number of citations to articles published in science & social science journals in a 3-year period (Eugene Garfield, ISI). Calculated annually for the journals indexed in Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports. Calculation: number of times articles were cited in indexed journals divided by number of items published in journals. Pressure on authors to enter high-ranked journalsPressure on journals to stay high-ranked

*4


existing impact: how we are judgedBUT JIF is easily gamed:http://bit.ly/1uYDPgEAnd gives inaccurate views ofjournal quality: http://bit.ly/1Ddo8Be

*4


hence altmetricsWith altmetrics, we can crowdsource peer-review. Instead of waiting months for two opinions, an articles impact might be assessed by thousands of conversations and bookmarks in a week. In the short term, this is likely to supplement traditional peer-review, perhaps augmenting rapid review in journals like PLoS ONE, BMC Research Notes or BMJ Open. In the future, greater participation and better systems for identifying expert contributors may allow peer review to be performed entirely from altmetrics.Unlike the JIF, altmetrics reflect the impact of the article itself, not its venue. Unlike citation metrics, altmetrics will track impact outside the academy, impact of influential but uncited work, and impact from sources that arent peer-reviewed. Some have suggested altmetrics would be too easy to game; we argue the opposite. altmetrics: a manifesto -- http://bit.ly/1tldeJA *4


what might altmetrics look like?*5Altmetrics: a manifesto http://bit.ly/1tldeJA


ANU page Increasing your research impact*http://libguides.anu.edu.au/content.php?pid=499217&sid=4105636


ResearchGate stats for week ending Jul 12 2015* Publication PublicationCitationsViews downloads views


Citation analysis differences between tools?Web of Science should not be used alone for locating citations to an author or title. Scopus and Google Scholar can help identify a considerable number of valuable citations not found in Web of Science; Scopus and Google Scholar can help identify a considerable number of citations in document types not covered by ISI citation databases; Scopus and Google Scholar may assist in providing a more comprehensive picture of the extent of international and interdisciplinary nature of scholarly communication of and among researchers; and Google Scholar has several technical problems that users should be aware of in order to accurately and effectively locate citations. The selection of the database(s) for locating citation is field-dependent.

*Yang, Kiduk and Meho, Lokman I. Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science., 2006 . In 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST), Austin (US), 3-8 November 2006. [Conference paper], http://eprints.rclis.org/8605/


which is also related to the Open movement, in data & scholarshipEg DataciteDASH (Harvard)CaselawRavel Law

Further reading:http://bit.ly/1LgPtbo

*


https://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2014/12/03/natures-fauxpen-access-leaves-me-very-sad-and-very-angry/#comment-473695

*


So why digital research literacy? For all these reasons & moreQuantify and document research impactJustify future requests for fundingQuantify return on research investmentDiscover how research findings are being usedIdentify similar research projectsIdentify possible collaboratorsDetermine if research findings are duplicated, confirmed, corrected, improved or repudiatedDetermine if research findings were extendedConfirm that research findings were properly attributed/creditedDemonstrate that research findings are resulting in meaningful health outcomesDiscover community benefit as a result of research findingsProgress reportsPromotion dossiers

*Adapted from the Becker Model, @ https://becker.wustl.edu/impact-assessment/model5


results from analytical literature?Social network analysis revealed that discipline was influential in defining community structure, while academic seniority was linked to the position of nodes within the network.The survey revealed a contradiction between academics use of the sites and their position within the networks the sites foster. Junior academics were found to be more active users of the sites, agreeing to a greater extent with the perceived benefits, yet having fewer connections and occupying a more peripheral position in the network.

Jordan (2014)*5


Using data from the Teaching, Research, and International Policy project on peer-reviewed publications between 1980 and 2006, we show that women are systematically cited less than men after controlling for a large number of variables including year of publication, venue of publication, substantive focus, theoretical perspective, methodology, tenure status, and institutional affiliation.Articles authored by women are systematically less central than articles authored by men, all else equal. This is likely because (1) women tend to cite themselves less than men, and (2) men (who make up a disproportionate share of IR scholars) tend to cite men more than women. This is the first study in political science to reveal significant gender differences in citation patterns and is especially meaningful because citation counts are increasingly used as a key measure of research's quality and impact.Maliniak et al 2013

*results from analytical literature?5


metrics and REF?The aim of this work was to assess the extentto which bibliometric indicators correlatedor predicted the outcome of the REFpeer review assessment.

Result?*5


metrics and REF?*5


metrics and REF?*5


metrics and REF?

*


what can legal education researchers do?Acknowledge the ceaseless emergence of technology, and engage with it as widely as our time & energy allows Base our practices on community and collaborationBe open to diverse, global voicesBe Open in teaching and research

*6


referencesBIALL Legal Information Literacy Statement, http://www.biall.org.uk/data/files/BIALL_Legal_Information_Literacy_Statement_July_2012.pdfCheston, C.C., Flickinger, T.E., Chisholm, M.S. (2013). Social media use in medical education: A systematic review, Academic Medicine. 88, 6, 893-901.Holmes, K. (2014). Going beyond bibliometric and altmetric counts to understand impact. http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/articles/2014-05/going-beyond-bibliometric-and-altmetric-counts-understand-impact#sthash.4stanFFN.dpufJones, C. (2013). The digital university: a concept in need of definition. In R. Goodfellow, M.R.Lea, eds, Literacy in the Digital University. Critical Perspectives on Learning, Scholarship and Technology. SRHE, Routledge, London, 162-172.Jordan, K. (2014). Academics and their online networks: Exploring the role of academic social networking sites. Available at: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4937/4159 Konkiel, S. (2014) Playing with altmetrics. http://theresearchwhisperer.wordpress.com/2014/10/21/altmetrics-services/#more-3175 Maliniak, D., Powers, R., Walter, B.F. (2013). The gender citation gap in International Relations. International Organization, 67, 4, 889-922. http://bit.ly/1yYFxym SCONUL Seven Pillars of Information Literacy (2011). The Core Model.http://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/coremodel.pdf Veletsianos, G. (2013). Open practices and identity: Evidence from researchers and educators social media participation. British Journal of Education Technology, 44, 4, 639-51.*


Email:[email protected]:paulmaharg.comSlides: paulmaharg.com/slides*

*

Lern, june 2016, digital media slides

Law

Transcript of Lern, june 2016, digital media slides