new at ⌘f
|
Remember back when I was sad about the demise of Ebsco’s visual search? I got over it, but I never replaced it with the beginning composition students. They still explore in Wikipedia, and a lot of them have fun with that, and I still talk about news browsing tools like newsmap in the advanced composition [...]
Filed under: cognition, glanceability, information literacy, tools, undergraduates | 1 Comment »
but not really because I think that the doodling article was about better attention – not about better notetaking. And this post is about notetaking – conference notetaking to be precise – conference notetaking that even those who weren’t at the conference might get something out of to be even more precise. I thought I [...]
Filed under: libraries | 1 Comment »
A little more than a month ago, I saw a reference to an article called Complexity and Social Science (by a LOT of authors). The title intrigued me, but when I clicked through I found out that it was about a different kind of complexity than I had been expecting. Still, because the authors had [...]
Filed under: academia, glanceability, information literacy, peer review, scholarship | Leave a Comment »
In a lot of disciplines, the peer reviewed literature is all about the new, but while the stories may be new, they’re usually told in the same same same old ways. This is a genre that definitely has its generic conventions. So while the what of the articles is new, it’s pretty unusual to see [...]
Filed under: criticism, peer review | 2 Comments »
Which I missed, because I was off campus that day. But I totally, 100% supported this action from afar — we adopted an open access mandate! Appropriately, it lives in the institutional repository. Comment from Peter Suber at Open Access News. More comments from my colleague Terry Reese. This was made a little more meaningful [...]
Filed under: academia, scholarship | 1 Comment »
I have been reading peer-reviewed articles. LOTS and LOTS of them. But the last two left me unclear on the concept – as in, I thought I understood the value of reflection and revision and I thought I liked thoughtful, academic writing but these went through the process and yet provided none of those things [...]
Filed under: academia, digital culture | Leave a Comment »
I haven’t figured out why there are some things I just like hearing about on Twitter – but the new posts on ResearchBlogging.org are some of those things. I used to keep the RSS feed – which is the same information – in my reader, and I just didn’t look at it the same way [...]
Filed under: academia, reading, scholarship | Leave a Comment »
willing to help me and a colleague test a survey? It’ll probably take a little bit of time – we’re guessing 20-30 minutes, but that’s one of the things we’re testing. ETA – Covered! Thanks all, so much. Keep your eyes open for Peer-Reviewed, um, probably Wednesday.
Filed under: libraries | 5 Comments »
Actually, it doesn’t. But more on that later. I might have to rethink the peer-reviewed Monday thing because sometimes there are Mondays when I just don’t have anything exciting to talk about. I knew I should have saved the doodling thing, but I just didn’t want to. So today found me searching. And look what [...]
Filed under: libraries | 3 Comments »
This was weird. I followed the link from Catherine’s excellent comment on my last post over to her excellent instruction-focused blog and while I was browsing the archives to check it out, I came across this post, which I knew that I was going to share. It’s a nifty tip on how to force Google [...]
Filed under: scholarship, search, thing i learned | 3 Comments »
