Screen captures of existing solutions
By Rebecca Cober, Stian Håklev, and Lixia Lin
Our design will address the challenges and opportunities faced by the junior researcher, specifically graduate students who are writing a major research paper or dissertation. Although our primary objective is to develop a workflow solution that will enable a graduate level university student to become more organized, efficient, and productive, we hope that our design will be generalizable to all students, including those at the secondary school level.
The junior researcher undertakes many difficult tasks throughout the lifecycle of the research process. These challenges include the dilemma of how to effectively organize a growing collection of electronically formated articles, the problem of how to efficiently acquire accurate citation data to match to these articles, and the question of how to aggregate and organize highlighted text, notes, email correspondence, tweets, and ideas. Although it is easier than ever for students to build their personal libraries of academic papers, and to share ideas through social media, the sheer volume of information can be distracting and overwhelming. Staying focused and on track, at the same time as strengthening connections with colleagues to further research interests, can be a challenging task.
Currently, there are many resources available to the junior researcher that help to facilitate these tasks. For example, Papers uses an iTunes-like interface to aid in the organization of a student's electronic library. SciPlore is the first software tool that allows users to organize PDF and metadata using mind maps. A unique feature is the ability to add manual reference keys on the fly. DevonThink is a so-called "everything bucket" which lets you easily capture, store and organize PDFs, notes, and other files relevant to your research. However, there is no one solution that addresses all of the requirements of the junior researcher. Most graduate students have assembled a suite of software and social media tools that allow them to accomplish their research tasks.
Mindmapping tools can help the junior researcher to conduct research such as literature reviews and case studies. These tools support better understanding and interpretation of the research materials because they allow researchers to keep track of ideas articulated through brainstorming sessions. Potential areas of study that are overlooked or obscure can easily be identified and organized. To more fully interconnect and interrelate ideas being discussed, the tools facilitate the synthesis of raw data into coherent arguments, and allow authors to prune erroneous points from body of research, to unify and emphasize the main point, or to balance elements in a harmonious fashion.
Our goal is to propose an integrated design solution that addresses the knowledge management challenges faced by the junior researcher, at the same time as encouraging the exchange and growth of new ideas among colleagues. We are calling our design idea "Researchr."
Our investigative approach has been twofold: first, we wrote a future scenario of what our dream workflow solution looks like, and second, we researched and tested existing software solutions. By writing a future narrative, we were able to think deeply about the features that are most important to us for our solution; it helped us to imagine how these features could be seamlessly integrated together, Similarly, by considering the strengths and weaknesses of existing software solutions, we were able to experience first hand how software can transform workflow. We started by capturing screenshots of existing solutions. Our preliminary notes page describes our thinking process in more detail, and lists the strengths and weakness of each tool we reviewed.
For our final design solution, we have created two design artefacts: a diagram that provides an overview of our proposed integrated workflow and a screen cast showing highlights of our ideal workflow scenario.
To demonstrate our design solution more concretely, constructed a screencast to show a part of our ideal solution. We created a screencast using ScreenFlow, and interleaved this with some video footage. The screencast was created using four different applications: Papers, DevonThink Pro, Tinderbox and Skim, all of which embody some of the features that we would like our ideal system to have. Through editing and sleight of hand, we made the four programs seem like one integrated program, and simulated functionality that does not exist.
The video can be seen here.
Student downloads academic articles to read for a graduate course, KMDI2003.
The files are downloaded into the download folder, but have meaningless file names, making it difficult to organize and prioritize readings.
The files are imported into "Researchr", but not all of the metadata associated with each file, such as citation data, is evident.
The file's "fingerprint" is sent to an online repository of academic papers and matched with a file that contains the correct citation metadata. The metadata is attached to the original file and returned.
If the citation metadata is not available in the online repository, then the student can manually add the citation data to the file.
Researchr will upload the citation data to the online repository, where it will be available for future fingerprint matching.
Once the citation metadata has been added and synced to the online repository, the student can begin to read the articles and highlight important text.
A Kindle or iPad provides the student with freedom of movement. The student may also wish to highlight important information here.
Researchr allows the student to import and consolidate highlighted text into one iTunes-like interface. Each highlight or note is the equivalent of an MP3 file, and these files could be grouped into "playlists." Another way to look at it, is each highlight or note can be tagged. Each highlight or note links to citation metadata.
When a student clicks on a tag, such as Knowledge Building...
...all of the papers linked to Knowledge Building are displayed.
_Additionally, Researchr allows students to see which authors are cited in each paper. In this example, Scardemalia and Bereiter are connected to every paper.
Researchr allows a student to import all of the Scardemalia and Bereiter papers linked to the original papers
Currently, there is no way to match an electronic file with an online repository of citation metadata. For this to change, publishers would have to alter existing practices. Although our design product "Researchr" is just a first pass at thinking about one seamless, integrated research tool, the design process helped us to focus on some important considerations:
This is a list of the software we explored before moving forward with our design idea.
Andrews, S., & Barga, R. (2007). The British Library Research Information Centre (RIC), 1-8.
Cary MacMahon. Using and Sharing Online Resources in History, Classics and Archaeology. Retrieved March 29, 2011, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/hca/documents/UsingandSharingOnlineResourcesHCA.pdf
Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research ? What Path Should We Take "Now." Educational Researcher, 38 (4), 246-259.
Howison, J., & Goodrum, A. (2004). Why can't I manage academic papers like MP3s? The evolution and intent of Metadata standards, UMUC Colleges, 1-17.
Hull D, Pettifer SR, Kell DB. (2008). Defrosting the Digital Library: Bibliographic Tools for the Next Generation Web. PLoS Comput Biol, 4(10): e1000204. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000204
Mark Bernstein. (2006). The Tinderbox Way. Eastgate Systems Inc.
Quesada, Jose. (2007). On metadata, indexing, and mucking around with PDFs. Retrieved March 29, 2011, from Academic Productivity Web site: http://www.academicproductivity.com/2007/on-metadata-indexing-and-mucking-around-with-pdfs/
Rowlands, I. (2010). Social Media and Research Workflow, Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, 1-30.
Suthers, D. (2008). Empirical Studies of the Value of Conceptually Explicit Notations in Collaborative Learning, 1-23.