00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,000
Because we spend a lot of time that's unrecognized and energy that's unrecognized producing and working on those things.
00:00:04,000 --> 00:00:07,000
We should have
00:00:07,000 --> 00:00:12,000
00:00:12,000 --> 00:00:26,000
thing is, and this is something that I think we are starting to think about a little bit with an upcoming issue, a little bit, and some stuff, but it allows us to think sort of beyond
00:00:26,000 --> 00:00:31,000
00:00:31,000 --> 00:00:49,000
Metropole and we know I apologize, today because we're doing a terrible job of it in practice right now but we recognize the need to think about how sharing data could open up possibilities for connections across different language communities and different
00:00:49,000 --> 00:00:53,000
academic communities and other national context.
00:00:53,000 --> 00:01:11,000
On top of that, and this probably Houston closer to some traditional Open Data way of thinking and the national science and medicine is that having access to other people's data insights and other forms of work could lead to different perspectives on
00:01:11,000 --> 00:01:24,000
on that data. And the last thing and I think for me this is particularly interesting for Emily, I think as well, is that by making certain different kinds of contributions visible.
00:01:24,000 --> 00:01:35,000
And by making different kinds of contributions recognized, then that means that we have different things that we can draw on to make visible the work that we do in for pedagogical purposes.
00:01:35,000 --> 00:01:44,000
How do you report and do an interview what kinds of questions do you ask, what kinds of analysis, do you do when you read an article, what kinds of questions do you ask of it.
00:01:44,000 --> 00:01:59,000
And so what are the sort of interstitial layers of analysis that can really help an undergraduate student writing center somebody else who wants to learn about how to do the stuff we do but also maybe change how we do things as well, but dot dot dot because
00:01:59,000 --> 00:02:06,000
we've had in there probably others and we'd love to hear what you think, and and explore them.
00:02:06,000 --> 00:02:23,000
And one of the things that we've started thinking about early on, especially with a workshop that I think we did for Toronto yesterday. Yeah, and those two years ago, years ago, what is time is, is that we have to start thinking about data as as sort
00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:40,000
of something else, as an admin of relations rather than sort of this commodity as a thing as a property that can be passed around that we have to bring out relationships that are sort of contained and embodied in data, and also data as a kind of doing
00:02:40,000 --> 00:02:57,000
like by turning into data, or by drawing on or analyzing data, we think about it as something and movement, which is also related to making different forms of engagement with each other and with with stuff in the world, visible.
00:02:57,000 --> 00:03:09,000
And I will say this builds on a lot of your work. For example, so you know I think this is why we are really excited to have you on conversation with us because we believe that we share a lot of similar ideas around this in particular, and thank you for
00:03:09,000 --> 00:03:12,000
00:03:12,000 --> 00:03:23,000
Okay, well I think this one I was just going to speak to some of the floor, so some of this work you know I think there's like how we're conceptualizing this and then it's like okay well how do we actually like do it.
00:03:23,000 --> 00:03:37,000
Like how do you put it into practice and so this is where Tim and and the work that James, and the peaceniks have done around thinking about how do we actually now start implementing it how do we actually build the metadata is how do we customize or tweak
00:03:37,000 --> 00:03:50,000
what peace already offers and functionality for this specific genre of publishing open data. And so we've started experimenting I think we don't feel like we have it like perfected or maybe we never will.
00:03:50,000 --> 00:04:03,000
But this is the beginnings of how we imagine is could look like. And so again we would invite your feedback we would love to hear how it sits as an end user as a someone who is seeing it.
00:04:03,000 --> 00:04:06,000
And what a potential places for improvement.
00:04:06,000 --> 00:04:10,000
This is what those who may be less familiar with ease.
00:04:10,000 --> 00:04:26,000
This is kind of a struct these are the FAA structures and the way PS operates as you can have nested essays, so essays within essays. And so this is kind of the bigger essay in which, for this issue 8.2, we actually published three research articles that
00:04:26,000 --> 00:04:40,000
had associated data with them. And so here you can see each article has its own update. And this is an example of when you play USA which hopefully will do in live.
00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:55,000
This would be what you see. So it's a nesting within that within this now at the article specific ethic, you can actually then do the source data that the author decided to share, either audio clips, you know, no more than maybe two or three minutes as
00:04:55,000 --> 00:05:09,000
a way to kind of make them bite size, and also to think in a very nuanced way you don't have to share your whole three hour long interview with Jeff Tucker, who you know who knows what was covered actually I do know it was covered and all of that is not
00:05:09,000 --> 00:05:23,000
appropriate to share, perhaps, so you can actually chunk it up and this is part of like how do you share in a very context nuanced aware way you often it's talked about and then it's a binary you share everything or you share nothing but part of what
00:05:23,000 --> 00:05:30,000
this is is also thinking about what are the different artifacts or pieces or traces from our research that we can.
00:05:30,000 --> 00:05:35,000
And not to say you have to fear it or you don't hear anything.
00:05:35,000 --> 00:05:38,000
Next slide. I don't know what's next.
00:05:38,000 --> 00:05:44,000
I think next I think that's pretty much it. So that was our presentation.
00:05:44,000 --> 00:05:54,000
We can take a couple questions and then I think we'll move into you all talking to each other. I
00:05:54,000 --> 00:05:57,000
mean, Maybe these essays.
00:05:57,000 --> 00:06:16,000
It seems obvious now, but we didn't know, and it took, Angela to actually do it and figure it out, that you could do essay this essays within essays, which was like, regulatory, when Angela first did it, I was like, Oh, yeah, that's right.
00:06:16,000 --> 00:06:32,000
So, it is. It was meant to be experimental and to do things that we didn't know it could do so, we're always looking for that kind of foolish, and there's still capacity there, we think to do things, unexpected with it.
00:06:32,000 --> 00:06:37,000
So maybe supply. So some of you will figure that out too.
00:06:37,000 --> 00:06:44,000
So that is an open invitation to be involved with Keith as you would like to be
00:06:44,000 --> 00:06:48,000
until you break it, but yeah.
00:06:48,000 --> 00:07:08,000
Question from a different direction in in figuring out how to lay it out this way, even look at the way journals that are closest in time to us. They present and share their sorts of supplemental data, and if so, did you feel it was appropriate just to
00:07:08,000 --> 00:07:25,000
follow them lead the course using peace rather than else their technology, or did you realize that there were things in the presentation that you also wanted to change from the mostly the commercial representations of data.
00:07:25,000 --> 00:07:28,000
I think that everyone online here the question.
00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:40,000
Not so much I think the question from Kim was about, you know what kind of landscaping we did as part of peppering preparing for our own dive into this world.
00:07:40,000 --> 00:07:53,000
And what we learned and why we decided to go with peace, and I think the short answer yes we did actually work perna for a short period of time to actually look at the different ways that groups were doing, you know, groups like Sage publishing groups
00:07:53,000 --> 00:08:10,000
like Elsevier Wiley, the big five commercial publishers and a lot of spaces are really leading in a lot of the building of this infrastructure in a lot of the policies that accompany how this work is shared, and a lot of the data that's currently being
00:08:10,000 --> 00:08:27,000
shared was not really ethnographic kind of material and so I think the paradigm of open data sharing is especially big in the quantitative sciences in the quantum more quantitative leading social sciences, and so often, you know, and there are integration
00:08:27,000 --> 00:08:38,000
with various server services and you know there is a whole ecosystem, designed to kind of help researchers and it's growing, to help research, be able to quickly kind of publish their data.
00:08:38,000 --> 00:08:59,000
But I think that the dirt that we found was that especially for a our understanding of what data is which we presented data as a verb data as relations like these systems were not designed for that in any in any way they were imagining data as a static
00:08:59,000 --> 00:09:00,000
Yeah, I think one way to think about it for us was that the data sharing practices and say the big publishers do have very particular understanding of the context for the data that usually gets captured into something like a data availability statement,
00:09:00,000 --> 00:09:16,000
that you know is designed to be kind of very.
00:09:16,000 --> 00:09:30,000
I think, and this ties into the essays within essays kind of thing, but it feels like a piece gives you more flexibility and how to enact the context but the data, whether in terms of the critical commentaries, when in terms of the tagging or whatever
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:47,000
else metadata you want to put. So it gives you a different way to shape the context in which the original contributor for the data wants to replace that piece of data, and that helps bring out the different relations that come out of it, other, you know,
00:09:47,000 --> 00:10:01,000
separate from researcher and subjects for instance, and I think that's always the kind of practices and especially policies that we've developed have shadowed what a lot have learned from you know what these groups are doing like the data availability
00:10:01,000 --> 00:10:14,000
statement which you'll see, which we actually asked them require each author to writes in order to publish their data we also ask them for kind of a data agreement to really make clear what we are able to offer the authors and what the authors should
00:10:14,000 --> 00:10:27,000
expect from us, and also what we expect of the author is this is in terms of copyright, you know there are a lot of various legal political entanglements that we find ourselves in as we think about sharing data that we need to be mindful of because as
00:10:27,000 --> 00:10:41,000
a scholarly render no we don't want to get sued and then like collapse and then be nothing because we tried this right so we have to be very smart. As we still try and put forth, you know, ways of doing this a little differently.
00:10:41,000 --> 00:10:54,000
I haven't had enough time you know to look good. This is amazing and then we will be going into that in a second. And I love the whole kind of missing element, but one thing that I did notice very quickly was, it seems that you've made a choice to have
00:10:54,000 --> 00:11:07,000
the data, separate from the text and I was wondering what the choice was that, did you think about maybe kind of integrating bits of the data more into to kind of have done together like a selection of a text that would fit nicely within the narrative,
00:11:07,000 --> 00:11:21,000
for example, or I was just wondering what the choice was very much so I think that as part of our as we were trying to figure out so we were in. So the journal has been on OJS open journal system since its founding, if I'm not mistaken, and when we took
00:11:21,000 --> 00:11:37,000
over as the editorial collective we were at a moment where it was necessary to upgrade. And so at that moment we really were like, We want to stay with us, or do we want to transfer it to something else pub pub, you know, what are the opportunities where
00:11:37,000 --> 00:11:39,000
are the different platforms that are available.
00:11:39,000 --> 00:11:51,000
Do we want to go all in and just do sex infrastructures, because part of the beauty of peace is that actually and we've been playing with this separately, you can actually, you know, write a narrative form so similar to this where you could have the whole
00:11:51,000 --> 00:12:06,000
actual, like narrative right here and pieces designs also I published on my dissertation, you know, and then have experimented with this on piece itself but that said you know there is this kind of, I don't know it's a legacy but there is the utility
00:12:06,000 --> 00:12:18,000
of the journal for some folks, especially those who need it for, you know, maybe tenure track position who needed a kind of credibility and legitimacy that i think you know platforms that were been experimenting with maybe don't have that yet.
00:12:18,000 --> 00:12:30,000
And so there was some of those considerations as we were figuring it all out So currently, you're right, the narrative text is the main text, if you will, is on the OJS side, which is yes yes journal.org.
00:12:30,000 --> 00:12:46,000
And what we've been playing with is how do we build pathways to this other data layer, and the inviting ways to kind of seduce people to go into the data, you know, and then once they're there, how do we keep them engaged, How do we get them to like keep
00:12:46,000 --> 00:13:16,000
keep playing around there. So, this is a question that we would love your feedback. Are we doing it well are we not how could we do it better, like this is exactly the feedback we would love your, your input on
00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:42,000
the time. And also, like that you can imagine that people are picking up, and it gets might have other relations and others knowledge creation. So one question yes now.
00:13:42,000 --> 00:13:49,000
And that's the right person.
00:13:49,000 --> 00:13:50,000
00:13:50,000 --> 00:13:53,000
And on the other hand like fish.
00:13:53,000 --> 00:13:57,000
Governance today though, who am I today.
00:13:57,000 --> 00:14:08,000
Also on the relational and changing over time. Have you thought about this, or is it already, somewhere in there, yes and yes,
00:14:08,000 --> 00:14:16,000
we have all the answers but just to promote the transition in a small group discussion.
00:14:16,000 --> 00:14:28,000
Love to document all of this and so please help us. And maybe that's my first request is like we're I have lots of thoughts. But, yes, we do have a full agenda so let me not spend a whole time.
00:14:28,000 --> 00:14:37,000
So please like, maybe in your groups we can start like documents in front of these questions, and this is part of a longer discussion.
00:14:37,000 --> 00:14:52,000
Please, maybe, either hand right or like open up a doc in for these small groups, and we will be like, we would love you to add us so that we can have this documentation for us this is almost like our own like user research that we did like improve on
00:14:52,000 --> 00:14:58,000
a lot of what we've started complete yet.
00:14:58,000 --> 00:15:01,000
Or are you saying like,
00:15:01,000 --> 00:15:14,000
if they don't want to do it online, they can email it to us later, though, take notes and whatever format you would like, if it's like an offline word doc that's fine and just smell it so I found through words but if you want also to write stuff on the
00:15:14,000 --> 00:15:19,000
whiteboard, and hope that it's like a clear.
00:15:19,000 --> 00:15:32,000
I will answer that short, the short because I know it feels like many people have this question though, this is part of why having the SDS infrastructures which a we have Tim, as the Open Data editor to help those who may find it technically difficult
00:15:32,000 --> 00:15:42,000
to get in and do it, but everyone can actually create an account. And over time, we would love for authors and contributors to be able to do it themselves and then just share us a link and say this is where I started putting it.
00:15:42,000 --> 00:15:56,000
So the idea is that everyone can start to engage with it and build skills to do this work as well. And the other answer on the essays is we have source data, which we kind of credential if you will and we are working on peer review processes around that
00:15:56,000 --> 00:16:11,000
and all of this, but we also have the category of supplemental data, in which anyone can you can keep adding, you can keep creating more engagements, you can like, add maybe more gray materials, that's, you know, maybe under fair Fair Use agreements you
00:16:11,000 --> 00:16:23,000
know things like this so, so much of this is great gray areas and so it's about figuring out how do we just build flexible structures to allow for that so I don't think we're good we're we're in sort of discovering your own state of things to see where
00:16:23,000 --> 00:16:37,000
to see where you can notice traces of people's actions or activities with particular data or effects. There are a bunch of different ways that people can add their own contributions to things that other people have posted.
00:16:37,000 --> 00:16:48,000
They can refer them to them and save them and a couple of different ways so as you're wandering around, try to see if you can notice those sort of links.
00:16:48,000 --> 00:16:55,000
Okay, so I know there's lots to further discuss let's take those questions into our session, which is a small groups.
00:16:55,000 --> 00:17:11,000
So please take notes on what you end up discussing, we would love to have some prompts questions that we will leave up on the screen. So the first is asking you to think about, either as an individual, or in your research group or in your lab.
00:17:11,000 --> 00:17:13,000
I know some of you are affiliated with labs.
00:17:13,000 --> 00:17:16,000
What do you intend.
00:17:16,000 --> 00:17:24,000
How do you currently or intends to and maybe in the future tense care for your project data.
00:17:24,000 --> 00:17:38,000
So thinking about what kinds of data, you work with them produce, who what could you imagine sharing with who how, when and where does this data currently physically actually materially sin.
00:17:38,000 --> 00:17:42,000
And so, if you want, let's see, did we say how many.
00:17:42,000 --> 00:17:57,000
This can be one group online one group maybe we can have a Spanish speaking one group if that's okay. And then so that's like, how many other people do we have many groups of 433 groups plus the online group.
00:17:57,000 --> 00:18:10,000
So we'll have maybe the Spanish speakers if you not to bucket you but if you would like to, you can, you don't have to be ok though. free free don't feel limited by our language.
00:18:10,000 --> 00:18:18,000
Okay, thank you so much. And then we'll have another group of maybe three or four.
00:18:18,000 --> 00:18:24,000
But get rid of these parallel lives
00:18:24,000 --> 00:18:36,000
break up the lions
00:18:36,000 --> 00:18:49,000
den and a lot of workshops they're trying to help to facilitate the facilitators.
00:18:49,000 --> 00:18:58,000
Yeah. Can you bring the prompts back, or else we can just do a screen grab of them. If you need the computer.
00:18:58,000 --> 00:19:03,000
Yeah. Great. Thanks, up got it.
00:19:03,000 --> 00:19:15,000
00:19:15,000 --> 00:19:23,000
So it sounds like you have a lab, is that right where do you want to sort of take a swing at this.
00:19:23,000 --> 00:19:31,000
This question I'm kind of the data that you're that you're producing.
00:19:31,000 --> 00:19:35,000
I was trying to capture that from your from your intro.
00:19:35,000 --> 00:19:38,000
Yeah, ya know that drives.
00:19:38,000 --> 00:19:43,000
My god, I don't know,
00:19:43,000 --> 00:19:50,000
actually trying to do some data mapping ourselves but it's
00:19:50,000 --> 00:19:54,000
extremely complex so where we so so.
00:19:54,000 --> 00:19:56,000
Okay, let me just see you again.
00:19:56,000 --> 00:20:00,000
Oh, we lost the questions to me.
00:20:00,000 --> 00:20:02,000
I was just
00:20:02,000 --> 00:20:11,000
so, like, how you intend to care for it and then kind of like, where it sits now I think was the crux.
00:20:11,000 --> 00:20:16,000
Now what kind of data we care for in with it, I think.
00:20:16,000 --> 00:20:19,000
00:20:19,000 --> 00:20:23,000
So kinds of data.
00:20:23,000 --> 00:20:27,000
00:20:27,000 --> 00:20:38,000
Interviews notes. Just so so like field nouns this are memos etc.
00:20:38,000 --> 00:20:47,000
but also documents that we collects photos
00:20:47,000 --> 00:20:52,000
audios am think we have any videos.
00:20:52,000 --> 00:20:57,000
So we. Yeah, so this is the kind of data I guess that we have.
00:20:57,000 --> 00:21:01,000
00:21:01,000 --> 00:21:06,000
00:21:06,000 --> 00:21:14,000
let me say talk to first a little bit about how we how we how we go about and how we share data.
00:21:14,000 --> 00:21:22,000
And so recently we started working with obsidian is that is that from you familiar with obsidian.
00:21:22,000 --> 00:21:25,000
Okay, it's just just.
00:21:25,000 --> 00:21:34,000
It's just an interface actually that kind of has the good.
00:21:34,000 --> 00:21:46,000
Yeah, it's a new interface an interface to your cure to to text messages really and but you can also
00:21:46,000 --> 00:21:58,000
make links etc so we try at least two in obsidian to write all on mock up all our memos to
00:21:58,000 --> 00:22:10,000
have text references text excerpts, and you know, all these kinds of things that which. The question is, I mean, are they data as well. The texts for instance, right.
00:22:10,000 --> 00:22:32,000
So, we try it. So this is what we're trying at the moment to kind of keep aza to work together, because I mean one thing all the other data. So we have, we store our so like have text documents or like transcripts or field notes or recordings.
00:22:32,000 --> 00:22:50,000
Those are stored in a university cloud somewhere but that's not I mean that's that's the least of it. So we tried. So, the next step is how they're sorted, how they're ordered so that we can find them.
00:22:50,000 --> 00:23:02,000
But then the most important things is really all our memo so commence on the mall our thoughts on them all our, how we develop analysis and stuff. I don't know if she's.
00:23:02,000 --> 00:23:10,000
If that is part of it but I guess it is part of it is that because that's kind of part of sharing data.
00:23:10,000 --> 00:23:30,000
I think that's an interesting question like, so the like the work of analysis that's happening, and whether that, like, yeah, whether that happens in the same place as sort of stored and shared, or whether it's sort of time off right and what you have
00:23:30,000 --> 00:23:46,000
is sort of, yeah, the data as this kind of like snapshot and then all of the analysis happened somewhere else. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah man because we collaborate quite closely on our stuff that we need to arm.
00:23:46,000 --> 00:24:04,000
We need to try to combine all this the data with our thoughts with our interpretations memos and notes, etc. And that's what we are currently experiencing experimenting with obsidian to do that because, yeah, that seems to be to be a challenge really
00:24:04,000 --> 00:24:24,000
and, and the special way for me because I'm not, not the youngest is that I'm used to a very strong hierarchy so I'm used to when I store stuff on my computer, I have a hierarchy and I know the hierarchy of folders and I find things by going like 10 layers
00:24:24,000 --> 00:24:45,000
down something, or levels down and, but an obsidian you don't really, you can work with folders but that's not really the idea of it. The idea is that you, you can search so you search for for your documents you just search for anything that like, keywords,
00:24:45,000 --> 00:25:00,000
but also words in them in the, in the text hash tags etc etc so for me that is kind of a very different way of thinking of relationship between data and memos, etc.
00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:16,000
Yeah, so that's, but that's interest but I mean it's just I'm kind of rambling now because it's it's really large lights questions, and I guess I mean, I mean I guess it probably the answer as well to the second question is about caring because it's like
00:25:16,000 --> 00:25:30,000
caring for the data I mean in order to keep it alive and be able to work with it, you need to you need to be able to find it and to comment on it and to keep it kind of July.
00:25:30,000 --> 00:25:32,000
00:25:32,000 --> 00:25:40,000
Yeah. but that's just within the lab itself i don't know i mean if we would go outside the lab.
00:25:40,000 --> 00:25:48,000
People who have no idea about the data so I don't know that would be something entirely different
00:25:48,000 --> 00:25:53,000
interesting that the tools that
00:25:53,000 --> 00:26:08,000
well from you, so I know a little about obsidian but you're the first person I've talked to who sort of using it for this kind of, you know, sort of collaborative data management for other for Yeah, which is super cool, but yeah just thinking about kind
00:26:08,000 --> 00:26:32,000
of, like, yeah, it often feels like for folks who do research, the way that we do you sort of pick a stack, right you pick a kind of tool family, and then, you know, invest a lot into kind of like, yeah, finding a way to sort of put your data into it.
00:26:32,000 --> 00:26:48,000
And because I think we work with data with many different types right so if I'm comparing this with like a, you know, a big spreadsheet, right at you know that other kinds of researchers might be working with, which is, you know, structured in this very
00:26:48,000 --> 00:27:04,000
clear way. Yeah, then I think the risk of kind of like you know you you you are locked into a platform once you've chosen it, and the idea of sort of ever exploiting it into any other format it just feels really overwhelming.
00:27:04,000 --> 00:27:06,000
00:27:06,000 --> 00:27:21,000
And I you know, I think that's something that I've heard like the big qualitative data analysis software companies like in vivo kind of criticized for right is that they have a lot of incentive to get people into the ecology and very little incentive
00:27:21,000 --> 00:27:32,000
to sort of help people ask where data or sort of you know make make that work interoperable.
00:27:32,000 --> 00:27:35,000
That happens every.
00:27:35,000 --> 00:27:46,000
The nonprofit I I work with, they're like, we want to use this stack of, sort of digital infrastructure. And so we like try to force everybody to learn it.
00:27:46,000 --> 00:27:56,000
And so some did and became productive, but others just would not. And so we ended up ended up having to just dispense with it all.
00:27:56,000 --> 00:28:03,000
And we just went to cobbling everything together through Google Docs, because Trello was kind of a headache.
00:28:03,000 --> 00:28:16,000
For some, but then we had so much stuff in Trello, and we were trying to figure out how do we exactly to be exported. So we ended up hiring a programmer to basically.
00:28:16,000 --> 00:28:25,000
Lift the data off of Trello and put it into a different format, which is absurd.
00:28:25,000 --> 00:28:38,000
Yeah, the, the, the Open Data still needs standards, I guess, which is kind of hilarious because then it means that there is hierarchical control over even the standards themselves.
00:28:38,000 --> 00:28:53,000
Well yeah, I mean, I think there's on the one hand, that kind of the interoperability question and like, who is interoperability for right like is it for for the, for our benefit as researchers, is it for the benefit of sort of other folks who might want
00:28:53,000 --> 00:29:08,000
to reuse the data is, you know, for the community is to sort of CO owners of the data, because yeah I think it's fair to ask like, you know, is maximal interoperability, always the goal.
00:29:08,000 --> 00:29:23,000
And if not, right, like, where are the trade offs, and like, yeah, how am I, optimizing for interoperability slow us down in other ways right or sort of prevent us from making progress on other friends.
00:29:23,000 --> 00:29:34,000
Yeah, because I mean it also feels like the standards thing I mean, from what I know about, you know, open data in our corner of the research landscape.
00:29:34,000 --> 00:29:50,000
Like, it can work well within a project right where you you know certainly if you have folks who are coding or sort of gathering data from different sites right and you need some way to kind of make that data speak to itself to each other.
00:29:50,000 --> 00:30:08,000
Yeah, I think it's rare, from what I've seen in kind of cultural anthropology STS, to sort of really have standards that allow us to travel across projects, um, you know, but certainly that happens in archaeology I mean in other areas that I mean I you
00:30:08,000 --> 00:30:23,000
know I have to admit I'm a bit envious right like it seems quite cool right like if I mean it to make your day to travel in that way, but yeah it does seem like how we construct our objects is such that, it's, it's less likely that someone else is going
00:30:23,000 --> 00:30:33,000
to buy into a meditative scheme that we create.
00:30:33,000 --> 00:30:54,000
Can I ask what's that standards envy or view or not, am I am I would say that again. You just kind of standard envy of sort of, you know, that in other fields perhaps having sort of standard makes data more portable and but yeah i mean i want to interrogate
00:30:54,000 --> 00:31:14,000
that right and like is that is that standards and the useful or is it I don't know yeah, or, or is it just that the kind of work we do doesn't lend itself to that and so that's okay and we just need to sort of embrace that.
00:31:14,000 --> 00:31:17,000
What sort of data, do you tend to work with.
00:31:17,000 --> 00:31:19,000
00:31:19,000 --> 00:31:28,000
Yeah, so I mean, I mean I think yeah interview field notes like I mean no I think those are good cases to think with.
00:31:28,000 --> 00:31:48,000
Most recently, I guess I was struggling to share, like, three response survey data right which even that is already sort of, you know, fairly structured, but like I just shared a data set of survey data, where we basically lopped off all of the free
00:31:48,000 --> 00:32:03,000
responses and sort of said well on some rainy day and we'll go back and identify them and we'll post a version to where we include the free responses, but like we're in a rush, we need the data set out to support the pre friend, and so yeah will will
00:32:03,000 --> 00:32:21,000
will port in the free responses at some point in the future, and like I hope do that. I like to think we're going to do that but like also like we're going to be busy doing other things then as well.
00:32:21,000 --> 00:32:25,000
So you know I suppose that speaks to sort of
00:32:25,000 --> 00:32:40,000
what Angela was saying about you know, not yet like this binary of sharing everything versus nothing, and I quite like the idea of like the interview snippets as a way to think with kind of partial data shared right to say, these are the pieces that maybe
00:32:40,000 --> 00:32:53,000
were the most instructive, but they're also the pieces were Jeff isn't like gossiping about, you know, he went to grad school with right it was like yeah we probably don't want to share and that's okay.
00:32:53,000 --> 00:33:11,000
I'm okay. Can I just ask you one thing about standards. So what I'm talking about when you talk about standards so i. So, so we're not talking about standard formats because I guess so data elements because I guess that we just using really run standard
00:33:11,000 --> 00:33:20,000
formats really text formats and audios etc so you're talking about annotations and meta data right.
00:33:20,000 --> 00:33:37,000
Yeah, so I mean like, So, in archaeology for instance right like that is a field that really does have some you know yeah how deep you know how deep the layer something was found at right and that like, different archaeological data sets could sort of
00:33:37,000 --> 00:33:43,000
share or kind of notation for that.
00:33:43,000 --> 00:34:00,000
Yeah, in a way that that is presumed to be useful for most archaeologists right to know the answer to that like that, at what at what depth, was this sort of artifact found, but I do think it's harder for us as an OG refers or SDS scholars to sort of
00:34:00,000 --> 00:34:17,000
figure out what those attributes would be right like are there attributes of many are all of our data sets that are in common enough that it would be useful to sort of link them to each other in that way, I don't, I don't know the answer.
00:34:17,000 --> 00:34:20,000
00:34:20,000 --> 00:34:32,000
think it's not just the meditator though, I mean if you're thinking about, let's say you collect an interview, and you want to share that interview, you don't want to have anybody else to be able to access it, and download it and mess with it.
00:34:32,000 --> 00:34:45,000
Because last thing that I want to have happen is some sort of intense relationship that I've developed with the community group and I want to interview them and I want to share their story but then like Facebook grabs it and they use it for their AI training
00:34:45,000 --> 00:34:47,000
00:34:47,000 --> 00:35:01,000
Is that a huge risk, not really, but I also don't want to adult be commodified In which case, there's a layer of like DRM on top of it that that allows the data set.
00:35:01,000 --> 00:35:07,000
This thing to be portable up to a point. And
00:35:07,000 --> 00:35:23,000
like a machine readable license could accomplish that. Right. Yeah, in theory, like you could say you know if this is for non commercial use right then, then, you know, Facebook's crawler should sort of, you know, find that and then sort of say okay this
00:35:23,000 --> 00:35:29,000
is data that I can't ingest in. I mean, or maybe they would anyway but, yeah, yeah.
00:35:29,000 --> 00:35:48,000
Well, it's actually funny, the STS infrastructure site. And I think the disaster sts site crashed. Well, that's not true. That's not the real term but so many spiders, were trying to sift through the site's artifacts and because all the artifacts are
00:35:48,000 --> 00:35:57,000
sort of like linked out. It was just basically like a DD attack.
00:35:57,000 --> 00:36:10,000
couldn't manage it couldn't manage it so we had to block the spiders from going anything beyond like the first level. And so, like, that's a, that's just not a metadata standards question like that's a resource question.
00:36:10,000 --> 00:36:16,000
How system tolerate to be as open as possible.
00:36:16,000 --> 00:36:25,000
Right, a million users costs, like you're hosting it on a cloud service or something.
00:36:25,000 --> 00:36:34,000
Because I had a colleague Channel Islands that produced some,
00:36:34,000 --> 00:36:47,000
who was coastal erosion data, and it was like a really big data set, and hosted on AWS, so that anybody could grab onto it, and rapidly exploded beyond their budget.
00:36:47,000 --> 00:36:53,000
So they had like 10 grand set aside and it ended up being 30 in the span of like six months.
00:36:53,000 --> 00:37:05,000
And so they're like, we want to do the right thing, but like this date this data sharing this open data costs something and who's going to bear that burden.
00:37:05,000 --> 00:37:24,000
So where did the two of you fall on the kind of like, you know, a one feature of piece that is quite cool right is the kind of different permissions layers right so that in addition to, you know, sharing partial data, as an example, pull of like the inner
00:37:24,000 --> 00:37:38,000
snippets. There's also kind of, you know, artifact level permissions that aim, so that you could share something within a team you could share something, you know, truly publicly or yeah I mean I sort of different layers so I guess I'm curious like for
00:37:38,000 --> 00:37:43,000
for the data that you work with, like, I mean effort to take your example yeah like.
00:37:43,000 --> 00:38:02,000
It sounds like your whole team is working with this data in obsidian. But then, like, if you were to open it up, would you be drawn to the idea of doing that in a kind of like, yeah, having some middles jH between just your team and like everyone in the
00:38:02,000 --> 00:38:22,000
world. Yeah, definitely. So we actually do have a group and investors infrastructures. we have a, we have an ongoing project slow Well, one of our tiny projects that we call coding coding the lab, which is more like cut working and endless working on
00:38:22,000 --> 00:38:34,000
a code of conduct right it's the first never to never end because it's a reflective piece. So, and we first we had to just as a Word document and we're working on it.
00:38:34,000 --> 00:38:48,000
And then at some point was, we uploaded it to assess infrastructures, one because we thought, then we can keep working just reworking the different essays.
00:38:48,000 --> 00:39:02,000
As it reflects to work, and secondly because we thought of sharing it at some point, and actually still private because, because we haven't come around really to decide on.
00:39:02,000 --> 00:39:20,000
I mean the idea would be great to share it with the community but it's still I mean, it's kind of ongoing self analysis in a way, and it's a, it's something that would be I think it would be great for the community to share, but then it's also sensitive,
00:39:20,000 --> 00:39:34,000
you know, so it's I don't think we would bit make it public public, but we might make it a public to the SS infrastructures to two members of the ministers.
00:39:34,000 --> 00:39:52,000
So that like if someone has an account on the platform of another is that is that they would be able to see it.
00:39:52,000 --> 00:40:01,000
not true. I'm I just haven't been lucky. I don't know, that's a good yeah maybe that's a good.
00:40:01,000 --> 00:40:06,000
Kevin my, or, or, or even if grant and Angela would know.
00:40:06,000 --> 00:40:21,000
Because it seems that I mean, then I'm just question is if that was actually a right is cool to have a group on SS infrastructures is cool to see that there are a lot of other groups have have have have sites there, but if you cannot enter them really
00:40:21,000 --> 00:40:29,000
see much then it's like okay, well, just, you know, you know that they're there.
00:40:29,000 --> 00:40:43,000
00:40:43,000 --> 00:40:49,000
So are you not using, are you using us this infrastructures.
00:40:49,000 --> 00:40:52,000
00:40:52,000 --> 00:40:54,000
I've used it.
00:40:54,000 --> 00:41:14,000
I started using it to do this multi sided collaborative ethnography work with a colleague who is looking in, was working in Taiwan and China on sort of smart city stuff and then I was working for us, and we wanted to find a way where we could share especially
00:41:14,000 --> 00:41:24,000
past the sort of Great Firewall, and it's SDS infrastructure as a sort of like not on anybody's radar and so it wasn't on some sort of like blacklist.
00:41:24,000 --> 00:41:36,000
Funny. And also, we were sort of intrigued by the whole notion of this experimental space and had bumped into him at one of the conferences, so we started using it for that.
00:41:36,000 --> 00:41:54,000
And we bumbled around for a while and got busy with other things and then we decide we started doing this global classroom where we have students working directly with one another doing sort of peer to peer sharing, or shared research projects.
00:41:54,000 --> 00:42:05,000
But again, learning management systems aren't ubiquitous. They're not interoperable you can't just live in there so everybody had different platforms that they were using.
00:42:05,000 --> 00:42:17,000
Zoom would work in one place but not in other and then we eventually are using WebEx of all things, it's like the only thing that is sort of can jump from us Korea, Taiwan and Mainland China.
00:42:17,000 --> 00:42:35,000
And that's with VPN firewall, sort of challenges, but peace is sort of facilitating these students to sort of work on their research projects and share, share their ideas we wanted to encourage them to sort of do that professionalize and produce something
00:42:35,000 --> 00:42:49,000
that could go public, get used to the like discomfort of knowing that somebody else is going to read this. And so as a good, good starting point, it's really interesting to think about peace as an lm as like I've never thought of it that way.
00:42:49,000 --> 00:42:57,000
But my big question for this session, I'm going to try to force that upon, everybody. Yeah.
00:42:57,000 --> 00:43:05,000
Because I don't know I don't know, the sort of data repository analysis space.
00:43:05,000 --> 00:43:23,000
I think it's pretty good for them. I think it can get better. I'm on the design team I wanted to get better, but I don't know if it's adapted as a pedagogical even Kim it said like beyond 12 students I'm not doing it.
00:43:23,000 --> 00:43:42,000
We're going to use an lm s, or we're going to use Google spaces and then we're going to port, sort of a distillation of that work to peace, but that's it, which I'm like well that that's a problem because a lot of us do our research on our classrooms,
00:43:42,000 --> 00:43:56,000
or we do pedagogical education, research, or we work with our students on research projects and so like that, I can have them be separate.
00:43:56,000 --> 00:44:05,000
Yeah, I use SS infrastructures for course as well that I did together with colleagues in in Frankfort another city in Germany.
00:44:05,000 --> 00:44:10,000
And so we did online, an online course.
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:22,000
And, and then use the platform and I think it worked quite well though it was letting you all decide how you would want to what topics you might want to take forward.
00:44:22,000 --> 00:44:26,000
So Grant has gotten this oh sorry wasn't muted this whole time.
00:44:26,000 --> 00:44:27,000
00:44:27,000 --> 00:44:30,000
00:44:30,000 --> 00:44:35,000
It's okay, this is bio break time, essentially is what I was saying.
00:44:35,000 --> 00:44:47,000
So, and now I'm talking about the unconference and we'll figure out a way for remote participation but so Grant has started us off here where he had said that you know.
00:44:47,000 --> 00:44:54,000
So this is just an idea for a possible discussion that I take this overhearing when people are talking about.
00:44:54,000 --> 00:45:10,000
We talked about pedagogy, being driven by data but I thought it also can work the other way because in pedagogy, we're always already sharing a whole lot of data and not conventional forth with students on very particular platform with their own politics.
00:45:10,000 --> 00:45:24,000
So, I thought it would be nice to reflect on what data practices we've already habituated ourselves to think critically about those and how they do or don't reflect what we would want to do with other kinds of data, but please feel free to add your own
00:45:24,000 --> 00:45:38,000
topics that you want to talk about and then we'll sort of bigger groups out together, and no pressure at all. So we are going to bow afterwards on only three so you can treat this as a brainstorm and don't feel bad if nobody actually, if it doesn't take
00:45:38,000 --> 00:45:51,000
legs and grow but just put in any ideas you have anything you're thinking about even if it's a very specific project even for your group, maybe you can find someone else who's interested so you can put your topic, and then the person that's you, who would
00:45:51,000 --> 00:45:54,000
write it up and then leave the topic.
00:45:54,000 --> 00:46:04,000
So with that I think any questions on what an unconference is or
00:46:04,000 --> 00:46:06,000
no no no no.
00:46:06,000 --> 00:46:13,000
So what, three to five based on what we got probably three posted a three.
00:46:13,000 --> 00:46:21,000
So hopefully I'll everything that you just discussed in your small group if you have ideas from that you can put that out.
00:46:21,000 --> 00:46:22,000
00:46:22,000 --> 00:46:30,000
Throughout the standards, I will see you in a few, maybe come back within the next 10 minutes.
00:46:30,000 --> 00:46:35,000
Don't get caught up there.
00:46:35,000 --> 00:46:38,000
Stop there in the room and watch him.
00:46:38,000 --> 00:46:40,000
So sorry I was muted.
00:46:40,000 --> 00:46:52,000
Basically we were just explaining what the scavenger hunt is so people are going to go off and take a small break You're all invited to as well. We'll put the link in the chat as you come back.
00:46:52,000 --> 00:47:07,000
Basically we're inviting folks to have like a scavenger hunt online of the different data that is already been published the different materials there, and asking you to kind of develop an idea of what you consider good data or find an example of what
00:47:07,000 --> 00:47:10,000
you personally would define as good data.
00:47:10,000 --> 00:47:14,000
And maybe if there are ways you can identify to make the data. Good.
00:47:14,000 --> 00:47:22,000
As grant said right so he was saying like he was looking at some of the audio clips, and he wished that there was a transcript, so that he could just skim them more quickly.
00:47:22,000 --> 00:47:25,000
So that to him would make the data gutter.
00:47:25,000 --> 00:47:28,000
This was exclusively.
00:47:28,000 --> 00:47:41,000
Um, so, yes, I don't know, does anyone have your hand raised. Yeah. Is this exclusively on one of the various manifestations of peace, or anywhere. Yes, I might be a link right in here.
00:47:41,000 --> 00:47:44,000
This is on SDS infrastructures.
00:47:44,000 --> 00:47:56,000
Yeah, I just didn't know yeah so we are searching within stos infrastructures for quote unquote I'm gonna give you I like put it together so there's actually, I'm going to put it right in the chat and you'll go there and then you'll see the length of
00:47:56,000 --> 00:48:02,000
that kind of little God. Yeah, exactly.
00:48:02,000 --> 00:48:12,000
Okay, but feel free to run for our bio break or, sorry you don't have any of the Mexican coffee here but whatever beverage is appropriate for your time zone.
00:48:12,000 --> 00:48:16,000
Okay, we'll be back in about 10 minutes. Yeah.
00:48:16,000 --> 00:48:23,000
All right, I'm gonna disappear, you all
00:48:23,000 --> 00:48:53,000
00:57:49,000 --> 00:57:54,000
Alright, I think we're gonna wind down our travels.
00:57:54,000 --> 00:58:01,000
So, hopefully there's more that you want to explore the site will continue to be here.
00:58:01,000 --> 00:58:04,000
Do explore after.
00:58:04,000 --> 00:58:12,000
But I think we just want to circle back together now and we'd love to hear some of what you learned some of what you found.
00:58:12,000 --> 00:58:19,000
And I think we've revised our agenda so that you know we're going to just a big group discussion.
00:58:19,000 --> 00:58:26,000
And that will lead into the working lunch so I think we are on time because we have made ourselves be on time.
00:58:26,000 --> 00:58:38,000
So please, I think Marcel has, has put some, some thoughts here in the chat and it'd be nice to have our virtual participants also feel like they can contribute myself you want to get off mute and maybe share some of what you were adding.
00:58:38,000 --> 00:58:51,000
Yes sir I'm having to, um, so part of the discussion we were having in our kind of online breakout group was around standards and ways that standards can can allow data sets to Trump.
00:58:51,000 --> 00:59:04,000
Both, I was confessing that I have a bit of standards envy, in some ways a field that maybe that were that were those seniors are in place and that can be one.
00:59:04,000 --> 00:59:08,000
You know, really concrete way to make day to travel and to see the rewards of that.
00:59:08,000 --> 00:59:14,000
But so just now in the scavenger hunt I was looking at the innovating sts instance.
00:59:14,000 --> 00:59:21,000
And I don't know if anyone else kind of came across those nine shared questions that were generated.
00:59:21,000 --> 00:59:30,000
So all of the kind of essays on that instance were asked to kind of structure themselves around these new.
00:59:30,000 --> 00:59:43,000
A Matic or sort of questions. And so got me thinking about those standards of a kind, right, that are sort of conceptual or sort of problem of standards in nature, and what it would look like.
00:59:43,000 --> 00:59:59,000
I couldn't figure out just in clicking how to sort of look at all of the articulation, or all of the various other schemes that there were, but it made me wonder what would it look like to do that, and and to kind of synthesize some kind of insight, out
00:59:59,000 --> 01:00:11,000
of them right so I could imagine them being displayed as a list just as a sort of tag feature, but then to kind of put them into meaningful relation to one another and say, you know, what are different kinds of articulation is what are different kinds
01:00:11,000 --> 01:00:23,000
how can we produce a kind of synthetic taxonomy, in a way. Yeah, based on the different examples that are there.
01:00:23,000 --> 01:00:26,000
Hi This is Kim fortune.
01:00:26,000 --> 01:00:35,000
One response, and we have a question for you with it is the question set itself. Oh.
01:00:35,000 --> 01:00:51,000
Yeah, so the question self said itself is a data artifact. And then the questions, the individual questions could be treated as data or as metadata for the annotated content.
01:00:51,000 --> 01:01:00,000
But if you click on the question you can see how everybody's answered x question for any given artifact.
01:01:00,000 --> 01:01:06,000
Or you could search to limit it to one artifact like everyone who answered question three for this artifact.
01:01:06,000 --> 01:01:24,000
But importantly to your last point, the things that you generate when you respond to a question are called annotations in the platform. And then those can be pulled out into the kind of shadowbox looking piece essays that at the end so you can do the
01:01:24,000 --> 01:01:33,000
kind of cluster on right around them. So the annotations themselves are like a little nano data artifact.
01:01:33,000 --> 01:01:38,000
Sometimes they're not so Nina. No, no, but, you know.
01:01:38,000 --> 01:01:49,000
So here's an example
01:01:49,000 --> 01:01:59,000
Okay. I'm sorry folks it's like all of the things, maybe I can just. Will they be able to see the screen if I do that, it's probably backwards Sorry guys, I had on.
01:01:59,000 --> 01:02:17,000
I just wanted to show that you can actually so you can see here a list of the annotations as well so this is Lindsay Jolla who reviewed, my essay made several years ago, using the fans can you try and find
01:02:17,000 --> 01:02:26,000
and using the structured analytic question to them review and respond to them, and then ended.
01:02:26,000 --> 01:02:29,000
01:02:29,000 --> 01:02:44,000
and way to start so like, Why do it differently. You can also pull the connotations of Kim was saying I don't know if we have a good example of that into an actual essay as well and have a different view of it so.
01:02:44,000 --> 01:02:55,000
So I actually have this thing or similar level as the older they're not necessarily.
01:02:55,000 --> 01:03:09,000
Yeah, so, Drupal treat everything as a note, so any node can be object and you can be read and treat them differently. No, but then go back to Marcel's question.
01:03:09,000 --> 01:03:28,000
I don't know how you feel about the term structured Marcel but instead of standard, we call them structured analytics. And because they have some structure but they're open ended, so people can add questions to any questions that, and that was intentional,
01:03:28,000 --> 01:03:45,000
and this is an ongoing discussion, it among all of us as to, because when you look, there's the huge list of questions says and then with any questions that there's a huge list of questions, all of which are also open and extensible.
01:03:45,000 --> 01:04:01,000
And so the question is become, how, how can we limit that so that it doesn't look so intimidating, and yet people can still have an are encouraged to add questions of their own and extended and and and keep building it.
01:04:01,000 --> 01:04:11,000
So that's been a tension within, within the project, actually,
01:04:11,000 --> 01:04:27,000
because as he said well can be intimidated, or it's not because I didn't get fella patient function when I thought about food what can energy but then little bit when our happened with them.
01:04:27,000 --> 01:04:31,000
01:04:31,000 --> 01:04:42,000
take a certainty is or invite people directly or is it the mixture of different strategies, I think, annotation is probably the most underutilized function.
01:04:42,000 --> 01:04:54,000
Probably the most exciting, but I think it yeah so Kim was saying, not in her research group so I think many people from what the small group discussion people are talking about and people, people are talking about other smaller research groups, and so
01:04:54,000 --> 01:05:07,000
I think when you're within a smaller research group, you might feel more willing to even just share, I think, for those of us who have publicly annotated, there is a lot of like intimidation like wow, anyone in the hope like are my thoughts valid enough
01:05:07,000 --> 01:05:23,000
Do I really feel comfortable sharing this and how they any person see this, I did my world and attitude in public, and I was like wow, this is variable like well you know and so I think that there is a lot of that barrier if you're allowing people to
01:05:23,000 --> 01:05:25,000
just publicly on it.
01:05:25,000 --> 01:05:41,000
I think there's different you can restrict and annotation where yes small group can see it or only the platform registered for annotation that you don't see because you are not part of that group, right now, but I think what I've learned and this is in
01:05:41,000 --> 01:05:57,000
the last couple of years, is that collaborative project design has to do with these an event usually you know design and the shared analytic to power a collaborative project nicely the project can iterate because you can add questions retire them, but
01:05:57,000 --> 01:06:17,000
it yeah they the social technology around it is important. And so we run a number of collaborative projects, just figure out, you know like, in this.
01:06:17,000 --> 01:06:34,000
because it is like for us doing anthropology, in the open, and like exposed and nobody's really done that before. And so you're again to be commended for your experimental bravery in kind of undertaking that.
01:06:34,000 --> 01:06:45,000
And the other thing is to go back to something that Marcel was saying, We didn't know. So when we set up the end of the analytic structures.
01:06:45,000 --> 01:07:04,000
We had an idea of how they might be used, but until those fields became populated. And until that content got to be on there. We didn't really know like what is it what does it mean to go in as a researcher and use these questions to generate to get new
01:07:04,000 --> 01:07:23,000
materials from all different places and then what do you do with that. We're only now getting to the point where there's enough content in there of different kinds, where we can actually begin to see that and begin a new set of experiments with that.
01:07:23,000 --> 01:07:33,000
Other questions I came up in here seven
01:07:33,000 --> 01:07:49,000
years ago when I was in China and I was broken and like about the challenges are, you know, upcoming geez I'm not so into the kind of IRB that says in the USA so ethics and how you share that.
01:07:49,000 --> 01:07:55,000
So, and most often we're talking here, like what several telling people, an individual level ways. I'm doing interviews, more excited at the end Max, waiting to hear about Norway.
01:07:55,000 --> 01:08:14,000
I'm doing interviews, most excited at the end max Whaley here about Norway. So, I would we were asking him Why did you use any iron music No. No, he doesn't have and I said it was like same page in China when I was about to them.
01:08:14,000 --> 01:08:33,000
And I know in Colombia, often it happens the same so openly individual choice has that kind of even more complex decision should I do this, share, even within my community, if there is not a proper formalized way of saying, I'm going to use that word
01:08:33,000 --> 01:08:52,000
before that term. Anybody can bring even difficulties political political difficulties. When we did that 60s project that I was like, man, I don't know if we can share this on, even though our community, or should like several silly and I was like, I
01:08:52,000 --> 01:09:11,000
biotechnology from Italy and Mexico, completely different topics and, and the ones were talking to me about the same topic, really. So, I don't know how they all these infrastructure can bring up as I go to legal side where it tells people who are not
01:09:11,000 --> 01:09:26,000
be don't have access to these formalities of ethics. What should they do how they can collaborate, but also protect their interview interviews.
01:09:26,000 --> 01:09:49,000
And also just more that we're talking about like how open is it and say, yeah, we need we needed we want to open our data but also very restrictive it alone something, maybe,
01:09:49,000 --> 01:10:03,000
maybe for a day down on the in person they use and I data my famous. What are your purposes, or your intent purposes, using the data or an inquiry right.
01:10:03,000 --> 01:10:24,000
It's something that we don't know and we'll never know. And I think it's important, and also maybe that is counterintuitive with openness, but I think that we need to close out that it wasn't as open as possible.
01:10:24,000 --> 01:10:27,000
Right, so I think it's also with that with that.
01:10:27,000 --> 01:10:38,000
In terms of specifically quantitative data. Yeah, I like that, as open as possible and as close as necessary.
01:10:38,000 --> 01:10:47,000
And I think I'm sorry.
01:10:47,000 --> 01:11:00,000
I was just gonna say that I think that's also why a very expansive idea of what data is important and so I think often even amongst qualitative researchers we think oh interview data transcripts, we think of like a very like narrow, in a way, idea what
01:11:00,000 --> 01:11:15,000
what like the good proper raw data is but like we have an automatic upcoming automatic collections groups that will only predict like share supplementary data and that might be like already public very publicly copyrighted materials that they just want
01:11:15,000 --> 01:11:29,000
a company, or they want, like, there's a wide range of various things like the gray kind of material that you can use and fair use and all of these other ways and so I think it's part of what we're also trying to encourage is like what accompanying material,
01:11:29,000 --> 01:11:39,000
do you think would be useful for readers, or users of your work, that can help them to go in new directions or that can deepen maybe beyond just the narrative form.
01:11:39,000 --> 01:11:54,000
And so I think for us. Data is also an entry point to different ways of thought, yeah so I think we have a very different idea of not just only sharing the audio only showing the things that often are the most sensitive or the most like personally identifiable
01:11:54,000 --> 01:12:07,000
and so forth but like can we think of other other things, even if maybe sharing your IRB form or standard documentation as your data, you know, and having that accompany to maybe be useful to someone else or sharing your instrument, which is comments,
01:12:07,000 --> 01:12:24,000
and other sciences but less common amongst some of us right though like can you share the questions you asked, and so forth so that can be another way to other So, you know, we early on we realize, So when we go to interview a scientist, we get their
01:12:24,000 --> 01:12:25,000
01:12:25,000 --> 01:12:34,000
And that's data. So their publications is data to us. Right. And so, but to put that into the platform.
01:12:34,000 --> 01:12:42,000
Many of most of which are copyrighted articles. Yeah. How so you have to be able to control access to that.
01:12:42,000 --> 01:12:56,000
But, yeah, this, this to becomes a problem so there's lots of PDFs of articles that you know we tried to make sure that people say, you know, make sure that that's copyrighted All rights reserved.
01:12:56,000 --> 01:13:11,000
You know not open access, you know, Creative Commons, but I'm sure that there are things on there that are categorized wrong.
01:13:11,000 --> 01:13:21,000
My question is, how does that come into great. No, no, no, not at all good data driven guy.
01:13:21,000 --> 01:13:39,000
What is the space for it and especially non data from, not from like not tiny but that means, or characters which are, which has their whole paper logical infrastructure around it with other characters.
01:13:39,000 --> 01:13:42,000
So, how to have up.
01:13:42,000 --> 01:13:47,000
You do it or how do we do it. That's right.
01:13:47,000 --> 01:14:17,000
There were limited by dribbles language that's been so we love it and when Rodolfo joined up, we loaded in China, that he could pose things in. In Chinese, but it's a matter of what Drupal makes available or language like, I don't know if they have Campbell.
01:14:17,000 --> 01:14:27,000
everything like that properly especially at the like meta data level but the PDF, I mean it's clunky and not great but like you can actually upload a PDF.
01:14:27,000 --> 01:14:42,000
Pretty much anything, so you know that's one workaround currently that you can actually have it in writing a PDF or handwritten with an image. Yeah, cookie, cookie
01:14:42,000 --> 01:14:48,000
scrappy. Um, one of the things that I kept.
01:14:48,000 --> 01:15:04,000
Just looking at is that one of the pieces of context that I need a lot of times to to read whatever artifact I went down, is to figure out where it is in time.
01:15:04,000 --> 01:15:09,000
And what I mean by that is that most is that research projects.
01:15:09,000 --> 01:15:17,000
Like, there's a lot of decision making that happens in various times. So for instance, when we were talking about the social infrastructure of a research group.
01:15:17,000 --> 01:15:28,000
Often it starts with a closed group, having its own discussions and at some point, the decision is made about what goes on and, and how, and it may be the same artifacts.
01:15:28,000 --> 01:15:47,000
And so it's going to evolve over time. And so for me part of the question is for it for an artifact is where is it in time in a particular project, because that helps me to see how much, how much has been processed, or to place.
01:15:47,000 --> 01:15:58,000
And something that we haven't done that we need to do a year or two ago, My dad.
01:15:58,000 --> 01:16:03,000
Kind of like where you keep your proposal documents.
01:16:03,000 --> 01:16:19,000
One of the things that, and that was a great number of different reasons including keeping up with what else on the platform, trying to get into a discipline of, there's a fine line. So any artifacts, you can pop into the timeline, even, you don't have
01:16:19,000 --> 01:16:22,000
to say anything about it.
01:16:22,000 --> 01:16:38,000
And I think that would be a good practice that field note artifact is timestamp. So that's another mechanism, you can use. And the nice thing about a group is like if we all take field nodes which you don't restrict it, everyone in the group can see everyone's
01:16:38,000 --> 01:16:44,000
Field Notes rolling in. And that's that's really fun.
01:16:44,000 --> 01:16:47,000
I mean it then that
01:16:47,000 --> 01:17:05,000
levels that I think that's a, because if you, it matters, and also making sure every women will see the, making sure every artifact is linked to a project page for the context in which this they are
01:17:05,000 --> 01:17:17,000
under the same Marsala thing that they'll come for research gate before they come for peace.
01:17:17,000 --> 01:17:27,000
I'm gonna see if anyone else. Online maybe Astrid or Sean if you want to throw in any, any comments before I think we'll move into our unconference couple comments in the room.
01:17:27,000 --> 01:17:47,000
Okay, so maybe we'll, we'll see if anyone online and then last few comments and we'll close by 1240, as traditional Anjana for anything and I mean the only other thing I was thinking about I posted a link out from an artifact.
01:17:47,000 --> 01:18:09,000
That's, it's really beautiful it's it's a story of sts in July. And I was like, it's really pretty like aesthetically pleasing and I wondering, is it something that we should be caring about, because the piece platform is a bunch of blocks, and it doesn't
01:18:09,000 --> 01:18:27,000
necessarily lend itself to like layering artifacts on top of one another, they can be juxtaposed with one another, but I was just thinking about the functionality of other digital platforms and blue and also do we care, I mean it.
01:18:27,000 --> 01:18:31,000
This could be a simple email archiving.
01:18:31,000 --> 01:18:48,000
Yeah, that was an early eye opener for us because I we initially, were going to do what we call, what would be called peace collages where you could just like start putting things in overlapping rearrange them, and then realize it's like, oh, Drupal doesn't
01:18:48,000 --> 01:18:50,000
let you do that.
01:18:50,000 --> 01:19:03,000
And so we ended up with a piece essay, which is kind of blocky, and we're working within that as best as we can. But ultimately, yeah I still want that collage.
01:19:03,000 --> 01:19:04,000
01:19:04,000 --> 01:19:18,000
And the other thing is we realized we wanted a collaborative document maker and at that time, I think it's changed a bit. But it also has to be open source, if we're going to incorporate it into our platform to are.
01:19:18,000 --> 01:19:26,000
So, that's another thing we had to give up on so people work in Google Docs and then transfer stuff over.
01:19:26,000 --> 01:19:36,000
But that's I think we've made kind of peace with.
01:19:36,000 --> 01:19:50,000
There are many times that registered as TFR also had two quick observations about that. One was that I really liked the narrative metadata forum where instead of having kind of like metadata field codes, you get the narrative about the circumstances of
01:19:50,000 --> 01:20:05,000
production of the artifact, like, again, that there's drawbacks to unstructured data, but I think that unstructured meta data or qualitative artifacts, is just really useful, and it's worth it to give up on structure does make an observation was most
01:20:05,000 --> 01:20:16,000
of the kinds of things that I looked at I was sort of surprised to see that for me, I was thinking of going to being more of a level of interviews or guilds and to me they were worth the level of memos, in the sense of it had already been structured by
01:20:16,000 --> 01:20:29,000
by somebody else's conceptual schema. And so when I think about data reuse and qualitative data what I'm typically thinking about is reading against the grain of what the original artifact was to try and extract some of my older semantic analysis from
01:20:29,000 --> 01:20:44,000
it. And the way that the data was submitted worked against that kind of reduce intention that I had, bringing to it. So I you know obviously the authors are choosing what participant their data in but if they're thinking of the data as being a deepening
01:20:44,000 --> 01:20:54,000
practice, whereas I'm thinking of it as a reuse practice there's a bit of a conflict there and that they're trying to help you drill down on the themes that they're presenting, whereas my interest is more settled life.
01:20:54,000 --> 01:21:02,000
Well, you know, what's the sort of theme that they were not interested in their analysis but your mind.
01:21:02,000 --> 01:21:20,000
One thing to add to that is the third type of deep and reuse annex is a borrowing. Because, for example, profile of an organization. You know my department of environmental protection in China.
01:21:20,000 --> 01:21:38,000
You wouldn't have all the dirty detail in your article, but if you had a memo on it. I would click through to it. And so it really is I don't want to reinterpret you know all the during the challenge it makes it really like allows you to work and you
01:21:38,000 --> 01:21:54,000
know in the spaces where there's like 1000 organizations are supposed to know something about, and that's just one example but I think actually developing a language around what you're trying to accomplish and sharing day or what you're trying to enable
01:21:54,000 --> 01:22:09,000
sure with this language of deepening use really bad that we need to develop that language in practice, and teach ourselves and our students.
01:22:09,000 --> 01:22:18,000
Yeah, and it may not always be comfortable asking people to make sure our background be quite difficult.
01:22:18,000 --> 01:22:32,000
The original Mmm. Oh, yeah, sure you comment
01:22:32,000 --> 01:22:50,000
So that's like in that I would love to discuss. In the end, but in between this inequality scavenger hunting question, I was mainly interested in the metadata, and I ended up looking quite a lot on the text, and how the detection system worked, because
01:22:50,000 --> 01:23:04,000
that's the way that I would navigate a site like this, because it's very difficult to reach out to all the different journals and look through all the articles, so I would, I would prefer having some attack structure but to get me interested in administer
01:23:04,000 --> 01:23:19,000
methods and then I would click on the tab, which I can, and then I can see what articles are there, but then I will have to go one step further and I would love to talk to me about this able to extract that data, and to make some sort of a network mapping
01:23:19,000 --> 01:23:30,000
mapping exercise for myself, to understand what is on this journal and so for me open data is also about what format, can I get it. How can I get it out of your platform, get it.
01:23:30,000 --> 01:23:42,000
My old structures. Yeah.
01:23:42,000 --> 01:23:43,000
01:23:43,000 --> 01:23:47,000
01:23:47,000 --> 01:24:04,000
Example of holding ourselves accountable to data practices of the people who study, like an environmental data like bad practice is to make available data available in a way where it's not electronically, where people can access it and reuse it several
01:24:04,000 --> 01:24:06,000
like, why do we care about.
01:24:06,000 --> 01:24:07,000
01:24:07,000 --> 01:24:22,000
stand yeah practice. Yeah, like just as an example of that while I'm here this week I have my breath level STS, and methods class, looking at the program and they get back to the program to try and understand the contemporary field of SDS and sort of
01:24:22,000 --> 01:24:28,000
interest is, but all academic as a frickin flat on my back.
01:24:28,000 --> 01:24:51,000
Right, it's a giant pain in the butt. And so they can have the PDF program and if they've got skills they can use the text they're in but there's no especially good way for those that are trying to do a quantitative mapping and pull out that data to be
01:24:51,000 --> 01:25:05,000
If you have suggestions for alternative platforms I know control numbers would be very happy to hear, I don't have any, like, I, i, this is not a sort of, you know, knock on right just saying that it was really hard nut to crack.
01:25:05,000 --> 01:25:18,000
The last questions and then I think people might be getting a little any any last points, these are all incredible I hope that I'm happy I think we've documented a lot of the conversations that have gone on, please do send them.
01:25:18,000 --> 01:25:31,000
I think you've got our emails, but otherwise we'll write them up. Then, in any form Don't worry about perfecting it. And we'll figure out how we kind of just synthesize it all and we will be sharing it back to the whole group actually if we don't have
01:25:31,000 --> 01:25:40,000
your email and you would like to receive further communications from us please make sure that we do have them, so that we can kind of keep you posted on like what emerges out of this.
01:25:40,000 --> 01:25:55,000
And with that I think we're going to go into voting for our unconference. So, thank you for everyone who put in, if you have anything that we just discussed that you want to throw up here maybe I can leave faith we got we can make more space.
01:25:55,000 --> 01:26:10,000
Does anyone have anything beyond this that they, let's see what we have and then we can see if there's any other topics that people might want to add random thoughts about this but maybe just for other people
01:26:10,000 --> 01:26:15,000
out there can reflect on those critically information.
01:26:15,000 --> 01:26:16,000
01:26:16,000 --> 01:26:37,000
Perfect. Yes, let's do like a quick pitch like a one minute pitch so I think this was from you. I'm sorry I got it so small I got Rita, Do you mind giving a quick, just like about discussing how to sort of bypass all the structural problems in getting
01:26:37,000 --> 01:26:38,000
01:26:38,000 --> 01:26:50,000
Okay, goes on, and also on sort of what is the significance, like not Roman like Reagan in it.
01:26:50,000 --> 01:27:09,000
That is so lovely. Thank you. Thanks. And then to now. If you want to just 111 32nd pitch for your topic
01:27:09,000 --> 01:27:23,000
Thought it was just interesting and like discussing how do we set or set ourselves up from the start, towards open data like really kind of ethical considerations going to go to forums and all these things that have been mentioned, even think about that
01:27:23,000 --> 01:27:32,000
that then what also, what are the consequences of recruiting and informing our informants about this.
01:27:32,000 --> 01:27:34,000
Ever heard that I hope, yeah.
01:27:34,000 --> 01:27:43,000
Article prophecy is forms maybe potentially a template that can be shared and like built off of things like this kind of onboard into those processes.
01:27:43,000 --> 01:27:46,000
Okay. And last but not least for now.
01:27:46,000 --> 01:27:48,000
Tim and James night Yes.
01:27:48,000 --> 01:28:01,000
So the idea here was like, so in an ethnographic archive you know there's also the trace of all these decisions that you made and how you made these data sets available, then you know the selection of like whether it was an artifact texts artifact or
01:28:01,000 --> 01:28:17,000
memo or what you used in the platform, at least in ours that enables opens it up, or what we call in the past archive reviews, which then enables you to sort of like create community around these metal layer of like best practices for rendering an archive
01:28:17,000 --> 01:28:21,000
more amenable to reuse for debugging projects so on and so forth.
01:28:21,000 --> 01:28:38,000
So we wanted to sort of discuss more about that.
01:28:38,000 --> 01:28:40,000
say about it so that we haven't been talking about.
01:28:40,000 --> 01:28:43,000
01:28:43,000 --> 01:29:06,000
I was thinking about other Marcel has been doing some work on, because his methods developments valid sure the beginnings of this the dark started working more in terms of what happens when you publish your protocols,
01:29:06,000 --> 01:29:15,000
or can't remember the site, there's a couple of places where you can actually submit your methods that people build on those methods and review those numbers.
01:29:15,000 --> 01:29:17,000
And in a sense.
01:29:17,000 --> 01:29:29,000
There's beginning some just because there's ways of sharing bits and pieces open up your analytics, what you're doing, but not exactly a way of developing
01:29:29,000 --> 01:29:32,000
me that it does. Yeah.
01:29:32,000 --> 01:29:34,000
01:29:34,000 --> 01:29:44,000
I would just love to continue the conversation with the use of the data and what they will motivation for pulling out the data in an open source format.
01:29:44,000 --> 01:29:57,000
All right, because it also changes how we how we designing our budget in first place, it's not just advocating an outcome, without data up there but it's also, we have to think about it if it needs to be used.
01:29:57,000 --> 01:30:14,000
It is probably going to look a little bit different, or the style, for me, is painters and artists, DVERS and we don't pronounce the D and then Mike, I don't know, again, what
01:30:14,000 --> 01:30:17,000
01:30:17,000 --> 01:30:29,000
Any other contributions idea that we want to get on board and then we will be voting for three so we can do the rest for us next year. Yeah.
01:30:29,000 --> 01:30:44,000
Alright so everyone decided I know there's a lot of various topics and we're interested in more than one but prioritize choose one only and this will be the one that you're being able to take you to a big wins.
01:30:44,000 --> 01:30:50,000
So first grants idea with your summary.
01:30:50,000 --> 01:30:59,000
Already building practices and reframing them, maybe in different ways. So, Good
01:30:59,000 --> 01:31:02,000
job. Only one.
01:31:02,000 --> 01:31:09,000
Are you in mentioning that we will travel out of this room towards lunch to do this or how was that supposed to be coming to us.
01:31:09,000 --> 01:31:17,000
But perhaps we may have to travel out to lunch, I don't know. Okay. Yes, so I can only stick around for part of it so I won't love it. Yeah, that's okay.
01:31:17,000 --> 01:31:30,000
Yeah, that's okay. Yeah, I think we would then hope we hope that whoever is leading the topic will be a facilitator, and maybe jot some notes if anything comes up, and then share back with us but after this, when you break out we will come out together
01:31:30,000 --> 01:31:36,000
so you are free from this workshop with me for the rest of today.
01:31:36,000 --> 01:31:42,000
So anyone for this. So, again if you suggested it don't go back please everyone is limited.
01:31:42,000 --> 01:31:46,000
I'm actually gonna vote for something. Oh, yeah.
01:31:46,000 --> 01:32:06,000
Yeah. All right, next non rowing charters, and how to think about the infrastructures of that infrastructure for that. Okay, and then consent forms for open data and kind of ethical practices, and how to on ramp into those and think about them for contacts
01:32:06,000 --> 01:32:09,000
here, one vote, to.
01:32:09,000 --> 01:32:16,000
OK, and then how to review and workshop ethnographic archives.
01:32:16,000 --> 01:32:24,000
We only get one book, we only have one book one
01:32:24,000 --> 01:32:28,000
book yourself with a good practice I mean I,
01:32:28,000 --> 01:32:32,000
01:32:32,000 --> 01:32:42,000
your review of data are building up your new data practices and
01:32:42,000 --> 01:32:54,000
methods development and sharing. So thinking about how to further kind of RT. Okay, 123 meals,
01:32:54,000 --> 01:33:00,000
different than the next one which is actually designing for data sharing on the panel.
01:33:00,000 --> 01:33:10,000
I think this take them all of them see but I think it's like taking more of a project focused approach whereas it sounds to me Tim that what you were suggesting here is more foreground and method.
01:33:10,000 --> 01:33:16,000
Marketing month out from grocer.
01:33:16,000 --> 01:33:17,000
01:33:17,000 --> 01:33:26,000
So there's a lot of folks who didn't. Okay, all right.
01:33:26,000 --> 01:33:32,000
Building you this in from project conceptualization and design.
01:33:32,000 --> 01:33:35,000
01:33:35,000 --> 01:33:39,000
01:33:39,000 --> 01:33:43,000
01:33:43,000 --> 01:33:47,000
01:33:47,000 --> 01:33:52,000
group is the winner, are we having multiple.
01:33:52,000 --> 01:33:54,000
Whether we have, guys.
01:33:54,000 --> 01:34:00,000
It was definitely becoming a group
01:34:00,000 --> 01:34:07,000
tiebreaker right, I think, for can maybe go into that discussion we use if that helps.
01:34:07,000 --> 01:34:20,000
Maybe a more explicit, maybe but you want to be in this group is that wire. I mean, it could be part of want to reuse, go for lunch together.
01:34:20,000 --> 01:34:30,000
Okay, uh, how do the two books you voted for this feel about joining this into the idea of like building as part of like building as a product design.
01:34:30,000 --> 01:34:31,000
01:34:31,000 --> 01:34:35,000
01:34:35,000 --> 01:34:47,000
two sections of purity, but we could also eliminate into right archives data. I mean, but can you give me one more time to like picture project agents or what.
01:34:47,000 --> 01:35:00,000
I guess like you know like well something that we could sort of do is work up for like methods conversation questions on how to think about and reviewing ethnographic archives to develop like the best practices, and for like addressing a lot of the questions
01:35:00,000 --> 01:35:09,000
that we have here in archive because I didn't have to use as much today.
01:35:09,000 --> 01:35:14,000
But can you explain how you're thinking about what it what is it.
01:35:14,000 --> 01:35:26,000
So in this context I mean so like that would be sort of like the archive behind certain projects, whether that's your project is like a dissertation or, or, or something like that or if it's like projects that are more collaborative that are working on
01:35:26,000 --> 01:35:42,000
the Eco Gov lab, but like, or even at the platform level something like energy Rights Project has its own instance the piece where like you get into the, sort of like the problems and the questions about the design of the archives and make it accessible
01:35:42,000 --> 01:35:54,000
for different audiences and like what we mean by like developing a structured analytic if you will, like, reviewing and critiquing and creating an idea for best practices.
01:35:54,000 --> 01:35:59,000
So it sounds to me like yes I think we can all these to each other.
01:35:59,000 --> 01:36:11,000
And just given aura, I think we can perhaps Thank you everyone for suggesting idea but they will jot them down and think about how to move this conversation forward, but maybe I need to stay with two groups.
01:36:11,000 --> 01:36:23,000
Each group has enough members and so we'll have, we'll head out and it looks like they're not coming to us out to them and just add a yes possible.
01:36:23,000 --> 01:36:42,000
On Monday, so right after this conference is the other big East Asian SDS is having a workshop at my university but it will be virtual to pass out the editors their ship their editor and to have the kind of provocation sections and one of them is on morphine
01:36:42,000 --> 01:36:57,000
than legalism and gentle publishing and one of them open data. And so, can you circulate to this list, sure, but there's also been a small group of people walking can be this little Working Group on STS publishing.
01:36:57,000 --> 01:37:04,000
Right. Many of these we could convene a 90 minute session.
01:37:04,000 --> 01:37:06,000
They are over there.
01:37:06,000 --> 01:37:19,000
So, I think we'll break out for lunch and dance and here you are now the lead on this group so if you voted for somebody I didn't make its way through.
01:37:19,000 --> 01:37:33,000
And we're going to have two different like lunch discussions, and I think it would be lovely if there is some sort of like next step that perhaps emerges out of that discussion, um, you know as the institution of the journal we can take forward, various
01:37:33,000 --> 01:37:44,000
topics and things that you think are important so we can leverage that we can leverage the piece group. So do feel free to come to us with a very specific concrete things that you think we should move forward.
01:37:44,000 --> 01:37:54,000
So this group will look at what James was explaining around review process he is of the different archives projects data.
01:37:54,000 --> 01:38:05,000
And this group will look at kind of building in the idea of reuse from the beginning, and will include kind of ethical protocols and and other aspects.
01:38:05,000 --> 01:38:21,000
So thank you again so much for being here. We're so excited about your excitement, it's so rewarding I was telling grant that like sometimes especially the last few years we've just been like typing away like having one on ones I hope this works for keep
01:38:21,000 --> 01:38:44,000
reminding ourselves of experiment. So, but to hear you all and all of your feedback is so rewarding and it kind of gratifying for all of the labor and the work that we put into this that like people that are actually excited about this and I'll thank
01:38:44,000 --> 01:38:47,000
And thank you to our online participants.
01:38:47,000 --> 01:38:55,000
Saw sorry that you couldn't be here in person with us hope to meet you and another forum soon.
01:38:55,000 --> 01:39:11,000
Yeah, it's wonderful to.It's hard to do hybrid but it's wonderful that we can have you all here as well.If you happen to both of you.Thank you and we'll be in touch by email.Take care. Bye.
Transcript of the Open Data workshop conference "Open STS Data: Opportunities for Pedagogy, Reuse, Re-interpretation" at the 4S conference in Cholula 2022.
Grant Jun Otsuki and Angela Okune, 7 December 2022, ""OPEN STS DATA: OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEDAGOGY, REUSE, RE-INTERPRETATION" Transcript FROM 4S 2022 CHOLULA", contributed by Grant Jun Otsuki, STS Infrastructures, Platform for Experimental Collaborative Ethnography, last modified 27 April 2023, accessed 8 December 2023. https://stsinfrastructures.org/content/open-sts-data-opportunities-pedagogy-reuse-re-interpretation-transcript-4s-2022-cholula