1 / 32

from community website to (social) knowledge base?

from community website to (social) knowledge base?. The Influence and Impact of Web 2.0 on e-Research Infrastructure, Applications and Users (25/03/2009) Dr Torsten Reimer Centre for e-Research, King’s College London. Centre for e-Research. Based at King’s College London

romeo
Download Presentation

from community website to (social) knowledge base?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. from community website to (social) knowledge base? The Influence and Impact of Web 2.0 on e-Research Infrastructure, Applications and Users (25/03/2009) Dr Torsten Reimer Centre for e-Research, King’s College London

  2. Centre for e-Research • Based at King’s College London • The Centre Previously Know As AHDS (Executive) and ICT Methods Network • Main areas of operation: • Contributing to the College wide e-research andteaching agenda; developing a VRE for King's • Research centre: e-infrastructures, e-research methods • Postgraduate teaching and training in digital asset management • Host for national and international projects and services • Provider of consultancy, training, and services for data creation, curation and preservation

  3. arts-humanities.net • A community portal forthe arts and humanities • Mission: advance andsupport digital researchmethods and the useand creation of digitalresources • Web 2.0 technologies / approaches such as user contributed content, wiki, blogs, content aggregation and user profiles

  4. thepast

  5. Origin: Methods Network • AHRC ICT Methods Network • AHRC funded programme, 2005-2008 • Remit, aims, programme: • To promote, support and develop the use of advanced ICT methods in the arts and humanities • To support, and provide a forum for, the cross-disciplinary network of practitioners from the UK • To develop a programme of activities and publications on advanced ICT tools and methods • To ensure the broadest participation by means of an open call for proposals • Funded some 50 seminars, workshopsand conferences • Published case studies, working papers, reports and a book series

  6. Interdisciplinary Network Archaeology History Language Literature Music Performance Media Visual Arts Information Religion Philosophy Law

  7. MN Community Site • Support events and activities (before,during and after) • Keep outputs alive (through contribution) • Virtual support for communities • Facilitate networking => Capture (outputs), expand and sustainthe Network

  8. thepresent

  9. A New World • Simultaneous end of funding for both Methods Network and AHDS • Community and sustainability gone • JISC to the rescue

  10. Merger with ICT Guides • Knowledge base: • Projects • Tools • Training • Methods • Taxonomy of Methods

  11. Statistics • 988 registered users • 17 user groups • 2200+ postings • 200-300 unique visitors per day • Most popular content: • job adverts • events calendar • digital tools (software) descriptions

  12. Cataloguing Projects and Tools

  13. Users and Projects Records

  14. Case Studies etc.

  15. Bibliography etc.

  16. Wiki

  17. Events Calendar

  18. Discussion and Blogs

  19. Methods Taxonomy

  20. vs. Folksonomy

  21. RSS

  22. Networking

  23. User Contributed Content • Members willing to contribute/share • where they see benefit (recognition) • when it is easy (UI) • when ‘encouraged’ • Quality control no issue - quantity is • Almost no spam or ‘misbehaviour’ • Controversial content encourages debate • Activity needs to be encouraged

  24. Sense of Community • Very wide and diverse field, makes common goal on a-h.net hard to define • Closer sense of community among members of centres and with specific communities of practice • Concern about own reputationand (visual) identity • Individual members not visible enough • Community does not ‘happen by itself’

  25. thefuture

  26. Community-built Knowledge Base • Work with and (help to develop) those centres and communities that are actively concerned with the wider field of digital arts and humanities • Develop specific projects and collaborations and build community around it • Improve UI (task oriented and focus on members) and structure (research lifecycle) • Content distribution channel (aggregation)

  27. Community 1: DARIAH

  28. Community 2: NoC • Network of Expert Centres • A collaboration of centres with expertise in digital arts and humanities, in the sense of data creation, curation, preservation, management, access and dissemination, and methodologies of data use and re-use. • Supporting its members in: • the advocacy and promotion of the value, understanding and use of ICT in arts and humanities research • the development and exchange of expertise, knowledge, standards and best practices • awareness raising, dialogue with relevant stakeholders, identifying and representing the needs of the research community. • Participants: ADS; CCH and CeRch; CDDA; HDS; HATII; HRI; OTA; VADS http://www.arts-humanities.net/noc

  29. Project 1: Shared Taxonomy • Methods Taxonomy • Document researchprojects/outcomes • DHO and othernational andinternational partners • Build and develop a shared resource • Exchange of content and mapping between partners

  30. Project 2: Aggregate & Disseminate • Events calendar (automatic tagging and categorisation; avoid duplicates) and event distribution channels • Tie in more closely with social networking services • Collaborate more with thoseproviding relevant resources => Reduce need for (duplicated) user activity

  31. Summary: Lessons on ‘Users’ • Clear benefit of contributing • Clearly structured • UI clearly focused on tasks • Contributors clearly recognisable • Bring together a clear core groupof active contributors

  32. theend

More Related