Resilience and Engagement in an Era of Uncertainty – CNI Midwinter Meeting

I posted to my work blog an overview of Clifford Lynch’s address to the CNI Midwinter Meeting in Washington, DC December 11-12, 2017. Lynch is the Executive Director of the Coalition of Networked Information and his speech was titled “Resilience and Engagement in an Era of Uncertainty.”  Lynch outlined a number of challenges that are facing digital scholarship.

The full address can be found on YouTube:

Source: Resilience and Engagement in an Era of Uncertainty – University Libraries

Advertisements

PARTHENOS — training humanities researchers to manage, improve and open up research data

PARTHENOS has released a new training module to help humanities researchers manage, improve and open up research data.

“The module, which can be accessed at
http://training.parthenos-project.eu/training-modules/,  addresses concepts
such as the FAIR Principles, Open Science, and Data Management Plans, with a viewpoint specific to the Humanities. As Open Science becomes increasingly important to researchers in all disciplines, it is important that
researchers ensure that their data is compliant with good practice
guidelines and robust enough to facilitate sharing knowledge.”

Other training modules include:

  • Manage, Improve and Open Up Your Research Data
  • Introduction to Research Infrastructures
  • Management challenges in Research Infrastructures
  • Collaborations within Research Infrastructures
  • E-Humanities and E-Heritage webinar series

The training materials–such as videos and presentation slides–are available for lecturers and trainers to adopt in their own courses.

PARTHENOS stands for “Pooling Activities, Resources and Tools for Heritage E-research Networking, Optimization and Synergies”. Its goal is “strengthening the cohesion of research in the broad sector of Linguistic Studies, Humanities, Cultural Heritage, History, Archaeology and related fields through a thematic cluster of European Research Infrastructures, integrating initiatives, e-infrastructures and other world-class infrastructures, and building bridges between different, although tightly, interrelated fields.”

Source: Training Modules – Parthenos training

Imposter Syndrome: Everyone has it!

Just finished reading a great article by Dr. Valerie Sheares Ashby in the Chronicle of Higher Education, “How a Dean Got over Imposter Syndrome–and Thinks You can Too!.” This is a theme that I pointed out to my digital humanities students in a post in May, 2014, as much of the DH work involves becoming comfortable in one’s ‘uncomfortableness’ while exploring new terrains and risking failure in projects. Dr. Ashby narrates her own awareness of IS and mentioned other individuals, some high achievers, who also ‘suffer’ from it. She also provides a link to a guide to help folks overcome IS: “10 Steps to Overcome the Imposter Syndrome” by Dr. Valerie Young. doll

Expect IS to become an even larger issue as exponential technologies such as AI, machine learning, deep learning, etc. become engrained in our culture and ways of life.  Managing responsibly one’s approach to new things is going to be increasingly important.

 

The Doll, Hans Bellmer (German (born Poland), Katowice 1902–1975 Paris), 1934–35.  Metropolitan Museum of Art

A Genealogy of Open Access: negotiations between openness and access to research | hc:15701 | Humanities CORE

An interesting article by Samuel Moore on the history of the meaning of open access:

Open access (OA) is a contested term with a complicated history and a variety of understandings. This rich history is routinely ignored by institutional, funder and governmental policies that instead enclose the concept and promote narrow approaches to OA. This article presents a genealogy of the term open access, focusing on the separate histories that emphasise openness and reusability on the one hand, as borrowed from the open-source software and free culture movements, and accessibility on the other hand, as represented by proponents of institutional and subject repositories. This genealogy is further complicated by the publishing cultures that have evolved within individual communities of practice: publishing means different things to different communities and individual approaches to OA are representative of this fact. From analysing its historical underpinnings and subsequent development, I argue that OA is best conceived as a boundary object, a term coined by Star and Griesemer (1989) to describe concepts with a shared, flexible definition between communities of practice but a more community-specific definition within them. Boundary objects permit working relationships between communities while allowing local use and development of the concept. This means that OA is less suitable as a policy object, because boundary objects lose their use-value when ‘enclosed’ at a general level, but should instead be treated as a community-led, grassroots endeavour.

Source: A genealogy of open access: negotiations between openness and access to research | hc:15701 | Humanities CORE

Why Beall’s List Died — and What It Left Unresolved About Open Access – The Chronicle of Higher Education

“Universities still have a long way to go to create systems for researchers to share and collaborate with one another, evaluate one another’s work, and get credit for what really matters in research.”

 

Source: Why Beall’s List Died — and What It Left Unresolved About Open Access – The Chronicle of Higher Education