Group items tagged

Abstract: The purpose of my paper is to explore the meaning and scope of the changes in perspective that occur sometimes either when -viewing things from a theoretical point of view- there is a change of knowledge paradigm or when -viewing things from a practical point of view- there is a change of ...

Are you agree that social media profile becoming as important as your resume?

Actually I don't think so. Personally think Facebook is more about personal use and private, but resume is more professional. For example you wouldn't never put a photo that your friend and you was in a pub on your resume, but you may put this on Facebook. However, LinkedIn do better in professional online profile in terms of social media networking.

I would argue that LinkedIn and Twitter are better indicators of professional accomplishment. I would like to think that as of now Facebook is still relatively private considering its primary function is to serve as a social (more intimate/private) communication tool rather than a networking platform. I have heard employers openly admit to using LinkedIn as a preliminary screening tool. Regardless of the forum, social media will continue to play a significant role in reflecting our personal and professional identities.

A personal view of Open Access Science. It's part of a weekly series on Open Access from Open Access Button, so I will be posting them as they become available ... "We caught up with Graham Steel, a tireless advocate for Open Access who believes in sharing information as widely and as easily as possible. A native of Glasgow, Scotland, Graham works as a property claims adjuster/recovery specialist. After losing his sibling to a rare condition known as variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD), Graham became involved in patient advocacy work, and more recently, in lobbying for open access to published scientific research. He acts in advisory capacities to the Open Knowledge Foundation, the Public Library of Science (PLOS) and Digital Science".

Researchers and academics spend a lot of time documenting the sources of the ideas, methods and evidence they have drawn on in their own writings. But Patrick Dunleavy writes that our existing citation and referencing practices are now woefully out of date and no longer fit for purpose.

I think that LSE is doing a lot of useful work for change the way scholars work and communicate. But the structure of the whole system is solid rock (still).

' ... licensing really does go to the heart of what open access means ...'

Open source and Open Access They are quite similar terms and with a common philosophy, give freedom to the user to use the share as he wills material. Interestingly both the open source and open access are four levels: Levels of open source 1 Level 0: Freedom to use the code 2 Level 1: Freedom of study code 3 Level 2: Freedom to study it and / or modify 4 Level 3: Freedom to redistribute (with or without changes) Levels of free access 1 Reuse all or part of the material for their own purposes 2 Sharing work with other 3 Power revise, adapt, change, and / or translate the shared work 4 Mix two or more existing sources and combine them to create something new As you can see they are very similar and can cause confusion, and believe they are the same. The authors are open access, public and / or private who wish to retain their copyright while the free code can be found that there is so much trouble (at least I think). ---------------- Código abierto y Acceso abierto Son términos bastante similares y con una filosofía común, dar libertad al usuario de usar el material compartido como a él le parezca. Curiosamente tanto el código abierto y el libre acceso tienen cuatro niveles: Niveles del código abierto 1. Nivel 0: Libertad de usar el código 2. Nivel 1: Libertad de estudiar el código 3. Nivel 2: Libertad de estudiarlo y/o modificarlo 4. Nivel 3: Libertad para redistribuirlo (con o sin cambios) Niveles del acceso abierto 1. Reusar una parte o toda del material para sus propios fines 2. Compartir el trabajo con otros 3. Poder revisar, adaptar, cambiar, y/o traducir el trabajo compartido 4. Mezclar dos o más fuentes existentes y combinarlos para crear algo nuevo Como se puede apreciar son muy similares y pueden causar confusión, y creer que son lo mismo. En el libre acceso existen autores, instituciones públicas y/o privadas que desean conservar sus derechos de aut

"Just as important as learning these helpful tools, however, is unlearning and avoiding the most common pitfalls of common sense. Reminding us of where society is most vulnerable to those, Sagan writes: In addition to teaching us what to do when evaluating a claim to knowledge, any good baloney detection kit must also teach us what not to do. It helps us recognize the most common and perilous fallacies of logic and rhetoric. Many good examples can be found in religion and politics, because their practitioners are so often obliged to justify two contradictory propositions.He admonishes against the twenty most common and perilous ones - many rooted in our chronic discomfort with ambiguity - with examples of each in action"

The 20 fallacies: "ad hominem - Latin for "to the man," attacking the arguer and not the argument (e.g., The Reverend Dr. Smith is a known Biblical fundamentalist, so her objections to evolution need not be taken seriously) argument from authority (e.g., President Richard Nixon should be re-elected because he has a secret plan to end the war in Southeast Asia - but because it was secret, there was no way for the electorate to evaluate it on its merits; the argument amounted to trusting him because he was President: a mistake, as it turned out) argument from adverse consequences (e.g., A God meting out punishment and reward must exist, because if He didn't, society would be much more lawless and dangerous - perhaps even ungovernable. Or: The defendant in a widely publicized murder trial must be found guilty; otherwise, it will be an encouragement for other men to murder their wives) appeal to ignorance - the claim that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa (e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore UFOs exist - and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we're still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. special pleading, often to rescue a proposition in deep rhetorical trouble (e.g., How can a merciful God condemn future generations to torment because, against orders, one woman induced one man to eat an apple? Special plead: you don't understand the subtle Doctrine of Free Will. Or: How can there be an equally godlike Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in the same Person? Special plead: You don't understand the Divine Mystery of the Trinity. Or: How could God permit the followers of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - each in their own way enjoined to

Wonderful post, Kim! These are great guidelines alongside which to test ideas.

Every now and then a scholarly journal retracts an article because of errors or outright fraud. In academic circles, and sometimes beyond, each retraction is a big deal. Now comes word of a journal retracting 60 articles at once.

Thank you for sharing! The article highlights a problem of Internet where one can create any number of digital identities and use them for various purposes hoping that this will go unnoticed. This time the activity takes place in the settings of a scientific journal peer review.

The author stresses that MOOC's materials for learning may be used for commercial purposes when originally it was available free of charge. She offers some alternatives measures to control ownership of the course

Kat Smith and Richard Freeman argue it's time to start bringing together the diverse and innovative thinking around the complex relationships between science, knowledge and policy.

Although the main purpose of this article is to promote a book series that will explore the disconnect between evidence-based knowledge and public policy, a couple excerpts drive home the importance of open access in creating a more equitable world, a key theme in our course: "'Who gets what, when, how', in Lasswell's phrase, depends very much on who knows what, when and how." "To be knowledgeable is to be powerful."

Sad and interesting situation here, scientist publishes his research, and in the comments, his work is called into question and it costs him a job. Brings into question the integrity of pre-publication peer review, and casts a shadow on the future of comments. Frequently, the comments are made by anonymous users, which itself should be a problem, even if the comment brings to light errors in the research. Now it seems, entire websites have sprung up with the sole purpose of debunking the hard work of others, sometimes needlessly. It's a good read.

Thank you for sharing. The situation with PubPeer actually encounters problems which are common on internet. As long as one comments anonymously, there are many off-topic and offensive comments. As soon as only registered comments are welcome, there are very few of them or not at all. Besides, one can presume that some scientific communities, even world-wide, are quite small and because of different reasons people do not want to comment under their real names... Another interesting resource to explore.

published by Mozilla, covers all sorts of open news. Interesting feature: unlike most news sites the content is actually CC-by-sa. "The Open Standard provides online news coverage of open, transparent, and collaborative systems at work in technology and our daily lives. Our purpose is to showcase the positive global impact of these systems and inspire more people to seek out, support and adopt open principles of accessibility, participation and experimentation. The Open Standard is published by Mozilla, a global community of technologists, thinkers and builders working together to promote openness, innovation and opportunity online. We will disclose and be transparent if we take a position on or promote the products and services of Mozilla or a partner company."

for example, check out this article about companies collecting data on school kids, https://openstandard.mozilla.org/whos-collecting-kids-personal-data-lots-of-people/

That is scary...

Open education is the purpose of MOOC. Obviously, open education is a correct trend of education system. MOOC always is a debatable issue, a new area where no rule to control it. In that case, there are some chaos in Open knowledge including intellectual property, and business model of MOOC and so on. But now, the US government decide to promote it, may will bring a bloom to open education and benefit people around the world

How do I evaluate the quality of websites? How can I teach students to evaluate websites? Where can I find checklists for evaluation? There's lots of good information on the Internet, but you will also find opinions, misconceptions, and inaccurate information. How do you judge the quality of Internet resources?

"Evaluating Internet Resources" has been designed for teachers, but is a good starting point for all who want to enhance their critical skills when using the internet. Three main areas are covered: Instructions on assessing the validity of websites, guidance on educating students in these skills and other website links on the topic. Examples of legitimate and fictitious websites are provided to use for teaching purposes. The website masters should have categorized the different website links into the genuine and bogus sites to facilitate their use for the teacher. Access to some of these websites has been discontinued. Measures to be used for evaluation, including authority, objectivity, authenticity, reliability, timeliness, relevance and efficiency are considered. Indicators to verify the website and exercises to practice student evaluation skills are provided. The layout of this resource is easy to use and well-organised

This is my favorite article and it shows that old fashion publisher represent a barrier for knowledge flow, and they were misusing it. "Introduction:There is concern within democratic societies that a growing number of individuals are disconnecting from their role as citizens (Merritt and McCombs 2004: 47, Turner, G., 2005: 135, Dyrenfurth, N., 2005). Much of the blame for this disengagement has fallen upon the gatekeeping practices of journalism (Schechter, D., 2005: 70). These practices are often held to be counterproductive to journalism's primary purpose, which is to create an inclusive and diverse space for conversation between members of society about issues affecting their lives. Gatekeeping practices have the capacity to create gaps and silences, giving voice only to those already holding power. They give media corporations, politicians and large lobby groups the capacity to set the agenda on their terms and in their own best interests (Schechter, D., 2005: 70). "

This is a really great read for bloggers, freelancers and creative professionals alike. The article outlines a comprehensive criteria for engaging online content providing tips and tricks for publishing purposeful, personal and promotional content.

FREE CULTURE is available for free under a Creative Commons license. You may redistribute, copy, or otherwise reuse/remix this book provided that you do so for non-commercial purposes and credit Professor Lessig. " America needs a national conversation about the way in which so-called 'intellectual property rights' have come to dominate the rights of scholars, researchers, and everyday citizens. A copyright cartel, bidding for absolute control over digital worlds, music, and movies, now has a veto over technological innovation and has halted most contributions to the public domain from which so many have benefited. The patent system has spun out of control, giving enormous power to entrenched interests, and even trademarks are being misused. Lawrence Lessig's latest book is essential reading for anyone who want to join this conversation. He explains how technology and the law are robbing us of the public domain; but for all his educated pessimism, Professor Lessig offers some solutions, too, because he recognizes that technology can be the catalyst for freedom. If you care about the future of innovation, read this book." -- Dan Gillmor, author of MAKING THE NEWS, an upcoming book on the collision of media and technology

Hi Kim, Thanks for sharing this great work by Lawrence Lessig published ten years ago.

So, you need an image for your blog? We've spent some time categorizing our favorite sources for free images and organizing them in such a way as to help you find what you're looking for. Here are the criteria we've examined: Subjects: Does a site focus on specific genres of images, or is it a mass collection of various image types?

Very helpful resource. The categories help to narrow one's search.

Nice! Thanks for sharing. Both useful IRL, and pertinent to the course.

300 million+ members | Manage your professional identity. Build and engage with your professional network. Access knowledge, insights and opportunities.