Researching and Writing David Millard Today’s plan  Feedback on Proposal  Expert Seminars (reminder)  Researching  Potential sources  How to read so much.

Download Report

Transcript Researching and Writing David Millard Today’s plan  Feedback on Proposal  Expert Seminars (reminder)  Researching  Potential sources  How to read so much.

Researching and Writing
David Millard
Today’s plan
 Feedback on Proposal
 Expert Seminars (reminder)
 Researching
 Potential sources
 How to read so much so quickly
 Plagiarism
 Key Dates Reminder
Your Proposals
 Due in Today
 Lots of guidance will be sent out via email
 Please listen to the advice!
 Lookout for expressions like
 “steer clear of…” / “focus on…”
 “structured comparison”
 “balanced”
 “academic literature”
 Please contact us if you want to talk about your
proposal or what we have said about it
Learning outcomes:
 This lecture will cover the following
topics:
Assembling the evidence
Sources and provenance
How to conduct library research
How to conduct good research
using the internet
 Important processes
 Maintaining an audit trail
 How to avoid plagiarism




Understand:
 The activities you need to
undertake to assemble
research evidence
 Ways in which sources are
acknowledged, and the
reasons and purpose of
referencing papers
Be able to identify:
 The types of evidence you
will need to collect and
present to support your
arguments
Sources of information
 How you would rate the following on a scale of (0=no
authority to 10=high authority):
 Flyer, website, newspaper article, book, textbook, radio
programme, television documentary, academic article,
technical report, manual, standards specification,
magazine article, white paper
 Can you add any other sources of info?
Some example sources
 The Library (http://www.soton.ac.uk/library/)
 Search Engines:
 Google Scholar (http:// scholar.google.com)
 ePrints (http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk)
 ACM Portal (http://portal.acm.org/)
 Conferences:





ACM Hypertext (http://www.ht05.org/)
ACM Multimedia (http://acmmm05.comp.nus.edu.sg/)
ACM Web (http://www2006.org/)
ACM CHI (http://www.chi2005.org)
ACM Ubicomp (http://ubicomp.org/ubicomp2005/)
 Magazines (better as inspiration that sources):
 The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk )
 Slashdot
(http://www.slashodot.org)
What to do
 have a research plan
 do good work
 record your work
 analyse the results
 do you have enough sources?
 are they good sources?
 capture the whole process
 make your own notes
 using the wiki will help others
 the wiki may help you too
 meet your deadlines
What shall I do with it?
 Skim reading vs. deep reading
 Skim reading (2-10 min)
 Quickly check Abstract, scan for
important information
 Read Introduction and Conclusion
 Note key points in case you want to
come back to it later
 Deep reading (30-60 min)
 Read full article thoroughly
 Read again and make decent notes
so that you have your own
understanding of the arguments
I know what
its about
I could argue
its case
citations and references
 write your bibliography as
you go
 always get full references
 record how and when
 collect to a standard
format
 (see our paper template)
 ensure that all your
references are complete
– could a reader go to
the source unaided?
 some tools enable
automatic formatting of
citations
 EndNote is a bibliographic
database which works with
MS Word (on uni
workstations)
What is Plagiarism?
Plagiarism is using someone else’s work
without indicating that it is not your own
 In some countries/cultures students may expect to copy
 Teachers may want students to repeat exactly what is in text books or
lecture notes.
 In our university this is called "plagiarism" and is the
wrong thing to do.
 Plagiarism is what you do when you copy without acknowledging your
sources
 We have clear university regulations against plagiarism
What is Plagiarism? - Example
The most recent generation of Web applications and Web
sites have been considered by some to be
fundamentally different from the ones found on the
early Web, these have been grouped together under
the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably
misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete
evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable
insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The
Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid
classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction, community and
openness.
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?.
In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia
2006, Odense, Denmark.
Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core
competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective
scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that
get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND
business models
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the
Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/whatis-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
Imagine we want to write something that
defines Web 2.0, and that we have found
these two examples…
Plagiarism – Wrong (Fail!)
The most recent generation of Web applications and Web
sites have been considered by some to be
fundamentally different from the ones found on the
early Web, these have been grouped together under
the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably
misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete
evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable
insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The
Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid
classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction, community and
openness.
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?.
In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia
2006, Odense, Denmark.
Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core
competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective
scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that
get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND
business models
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the
Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/whatis-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too
intangible for a solid classification,
however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction,
community and openness. Web 2.0
systems have the following
characteristics:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with costeffective scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data
sources that get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer selfservice
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development
models, AND business models
Quoting – Acceptable (2.2)
The most recent generation of Web applications and Web
sites have been considered by some to be
fundamentally different from the ones found on the
early Web, these have been grouped together under
the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably
misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete
evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable
insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The
Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid
classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction, community and
openness.
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?.
In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia
2006, Odense, Denmark.
Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core
competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective
scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that
get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND
business models
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the
Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/whatis-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
“The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too
intangible for a solid classification,
however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction,
community and openness.” [1]
Web 2.0 systems have the following
characteristics (taken from [2]):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with costeffective scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data
sources that get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer selfservice
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development
models, AND business models
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any
Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on
Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark.
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business
Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by
the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09
/30/what-is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
Own Words – Better (2.1)
The most recent generation of Web applications and Web
sites have been considered by some to be
fundamentally different from the ones found on the
early Web, these have been grouped together under
the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably
misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete
evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable
insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The
Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid
classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction, community and
openness.
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?.
In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia
2006, Odense, Denmark.
Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core
competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective
scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that
get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND
business models
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the
Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/whatis-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
It is not yet possible to classify Web 2.0,
although we can say that Web 2.0
systems do encourage interaction, and
they foster communities through
participation and open standards [1].
Web 2.0 companies tend to offer services
rather than packaged software, they
control data sources that get richer as
more people use them in order to harness
the wisdom of crowds, they leverage the
long tail, and have lightweight user
interfaces/models and agile business
models [2].
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any
Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on
Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark.
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business
Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by
the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09
/30/what-is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
Analysis – Best (1st class)
The most recent generation of Web applications and Web
sites have been considered by some to be
fundamentally different from the ones found on the
early Web, these have been grouped together under
the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably
misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete
evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable
insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The
Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid
classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0
approach emphasises interaction, community and
openness.
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any Other Name?.
In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia
2006, Odense, Denmark.
Let's close by summarizing what we believe to be the core
competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective
scalability
Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that
get richer as more people use them
Trusting users as co-developers
Harnessing collective intelligence
Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
Software above the level of a single device
Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND
business models
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the
Next Generation of Software, Published by the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/whatis-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
Millard and Ross argue that it is not yet
possible to fully classify Web 2.0, although
they say that Web 2.0 systems do
encourage interaction, and foster
communities through participation and
open standards [1].
O’Reilly does attempt such a classification,
but by focusing on the commercial
characteristics of Web 2.0. He suggests
that Web 2.0 companies tend to offer
services rather than packaged software,
control data sources that get richer as
more people use them in order to harness
the wisdom of crowds, leverage the long
tail, and have lightweight user
interfaces/models and agile business
models [2].
[1] Millard, D. and Ross, M. (2006) Web 2.0: Hypertext by Any
Other Name?. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on
Hypertext and Hypermedia 2006, Odense, Denmark.
[2] Tim O'Reilly, What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business
Models for the Next Generation of Software, Published by
the author 09/30/2005,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09
/30/what-is-web-20.html (accessed Oct 2006)
Summary
 Consider what are the best sources
 Use lesser sources as inspiration
 Peer reviewed conferences or journals are best
 Try to avoid opinion pieces
 Learn to skim and deep read
 Record your research
 Avoid Plagiarism
 Have fun creating your paper – Find your story!