Software


23
Feb 09

Twitter as Courseware

David Silver is using Twitter in his media studies classes (check out the amazing “Eating San Francisco”).  Twitter is the class’ main mode of communication, and he writes that Twitter has replaced three classroom technologies:

twitter has replaced the class listserv. for years, i’ve used a listserv (alternatively called a mailing list or discussion list) to extend our discussions beyond the classroom. these days, when we want to continue conversations, the 12 students in DMP, the 17 students in ESF, and i use twitter.

twitter has replaced email announcements. in the past, if something’s come up, or i want to add a reading, or we have a location change, i would send all the students in class an email. these days, when i have something to announce, or when my students have something to announce, we use twitter.

twitter has replaced the cardboard box i used to bring to class on due dates. in the past, my students would print out their papers and bring them to class; i’d collect them in a box and take them back to the office to grade. these days, my students write blogs, design flickr sets, upload video, and post works-in-progress. when finished, they tweet about it so that i – and, more importantly, their peers – can check it out.

This is instructive for designers of educational technology.  The “traditional” trajectory of educational technology is specialization and feature-creep.  For example, a class must have an email list, a forum, website/CMS, each with its own space and identity.  When I log into BlackBoard, I see about 30 different things I can do, and for each I have to click a link and go to a page to do the action.  Twitter strips away the features, instead using an inherently flexible textual space to facilitate communication, accomplishing the same goal of other feature-ridden “course technology.”

I see Twitter’s artificial limit on post size as an important factor in classroom success.  First, it keeps the information space managable, meaning information is economized and easily retrievable.  Second, and this is pure speculation, but I see Twitter’s short form as a communication equalizer.  In any class, you’re going to have verbose individuals and quiet individuals – the same applies online.  Twitter forces the verbose to be concise, and it makes it easy for the quiet/reluctant to contribute “normally.”  To illustrate this point, let’s imagine a traditional class forum.  Our verbose individuals may contibute multi-paragraph posts.  Our quiet individuals may look at those long posts, struggle to replicate them, and end up not enjoying or participating in online communication.  We’ve lost “communication” because a student struggled to replicate a “form.”  In the case of Twitter, the difference between the verbose and the quiet is 140 characters.  Form goes away, more or less, and the forum focuses primarily on the communication of raw ideas.  Again, this is just speculation – but there’s plent of research in CMC on media richness and form effects that might provide theoretical basis for this sort of research question.

In my class, we’ve used Facebook groups for discussions with (in my opinion) great success.  We’ve also experimented with Ning, where that success was not replicated.  I believe that Ning suffered from the problems endemic to BlackBoard and other CMS – too many functions, too many buttons to push, too many markup styles to remember.  This “overfunctioning” leads to a segmentation of communication, and in an online discussion where communicants may be reluctant, segmentation is death.  Twitter is the opposite of segmentation, forcing all communication through a single, flexible channel.  This creates the impression of activity, again stimulating discussion.

If I were going to build a CMS (Course Management Software), I would start with Twitter as the prototype, and only add features to the dashboard screen.  In this sense, the CMS would only have one page, and everything would tie into and key off the communication sream (i.e I would join Twitter with something like Facebook’s News Feed).  If I were to employ Twitter in my classes, one thing I might ask for is “Groups” or “Rooms.”  It would be a challenge for me to keep track of all of my student communication (though a second Twitter account would probably suffice).


20
Feb 09

BibTex and Word Documents

Via Academic Productivity, I’ve been looking for this forever:

BibTex4Word is an add-in for Microsoft Word that allows the citation of references from a BibTex database. BibTex4Word will insert a bibliography into your document using your choice formatting style.

It is intended for three types of user:

1. LateX users who need to use Microsoft Word. BibTex4Word allows you to use your existing BibTex database and favourite bibliography style.

2. Word users who can’t afford a commercial bibliography package but need to insert citations and bibliographies into their documents. Everything you need to manage references is available free.

3. Word users who have a commercial bibliography package but who don’t like it. BibTex4Word is lightweight, transparent and doesn’t mess up your documents. It is also free.

I’m completely married to Bibdesk as my reference manager, but the lack of Word integration has always caused headaches.  I’m very excited to have found an answer.


5
Feb 09

Freedom in the Chronicle

The Chronicle of Higher Education’s Wired Campus blog writes about Freedom today:

Fred Stutzman, a Ph.D. student and teaching fellow at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s School of Information and Library Science, may not have had Rousseau in mind when he created the “Freedom” application. But he does believe that to escape the siren song of social media, scholars might need to freely impose restrictions on themselves. “When there’s wireless everywhere,” he told The Chronicle, “how do we really escape the Internet?”

Mr. Stutzman’s answer is to relinquish one’s right to surf the Web to the supervision of a sort of robotic schoolmarm. Freedom is a shareware application that users instruct to disable their computers’ network adapters for a fixed period of time, leaving them unable to browse the Internet for up to eight hours.

Mr. Stutzman created Freedom as a tool for researchers and writers such as himself who, like many Internet users, have become so restless that they must exile themselves from cyberspace in order to concentrate on their work. “As a doctoral student, it’s something that we’re all familiar with,” he said. “Anybody who needs to do long writing or Internet research … it’s hard to draw the line between work and time-wasting.”

Freedom’s current version is 0.4.1, and you can download it here for free (thanks to iBiblio for the hosting!).  I also enjoy reading feedback or feature requests on blogs and Twitter, or you can email me privately.  Windows users, I’m sorry, but there are no plans to develop a Windows version.


28
Jan 09

Steven Johnson on Research and Writing

Erik Marshall points to an essay by Steven Johnson on his research and writing techniques.  Steven is a brilliant writer; it is interesting and humanizing to see the extent to which he uses technology.  I use BibDesk is a manner similar to how Johnson uses Devonthink, but I think I would benefit from the more unstructured approach in Devonthink.  Any readers use it?

The first stage, which is crucial, is a completely disorganized capture of every little snippet of text that seems vaguely interesting. I grab paragraphs from web pages, from digital books, and transcribe pages from printed text — and each little snippet I just drop into Devonthink with no organization other than a citation of where it came from. This goes on for months and months; I read in a completely unplanned and exploratory way (increasingly online, thanks to Google Books and other sources) and just drag anything that seems at all interesting into Devonthink.

….in the last stage before I actually start writing, I create a little folder in Devonthink for each of the chapters. And then I sit down and read through every single little snippet that I’ve uncovered over the past year or so of research. And as I’m reading them on the screen, I just drag them into the chapter folder where I think they will be most useful. Some snippets get dragged to multiple folders; most don’t make it into any folder. But I read through them all, and in reading through them all, I have a completely new contextual experience of them, because I’m at the end of the research cycle, not at the beginning. They feel like pieces of a puzzle that’s coming together, instead of hints or hunches.

Read the full article: DIY: How to write a book – Boing Boing.


22
Dec 08

Announcing Freedom v0.4

I’m pleased to release Freedom v0.4, a major update to the Freedom software.  This new version is a fresh rewrite, incorporating the ability to access local networks, an extended time period, and many significant bug fixes.  Particularly, Freedom’s authentication mechanism has changed (fixing the password-timeout bug) and Freedom will now appropriately handle suspends and sleeps.

Freedom v0.4 remains Mac only, and it is tested through OS 10.5.6.  This new version was paid for (thank you!) by those who have donated in the past.  I strongly recommend that all users upgrade as soon as possible.

Download Freedom directly (.dmg)

Freedom’s website.

If you run into any problems/have suggestions please leave them in the comments.  I do not plan on developing a Windows version, sorry.

Previous posts about Freedom:

Productive Unit Structures: Introducing Freedom
New Version of Freedom: v0.3
Freedom in the Telegraph


2
Dec 08

Hacking Google Scholar

If you connect to Google Scholar through a proxy (for example, through your library’s proxy), you’ll find that GS is unable to remember your preference settings.  Although Google seems to forget my preferences far too often, in the case of Google Scholar it isn’t their fault.  When you connect through a proxy you appear to Google as a different user every time, and until preferences are tied to your Google account (and not a session/cookie), Google is simply unable to remember them.

To “solve” this problem, I’ve found that you can set a bookmark that will set your preferences each time it is clicked.  While this doesn’t solve the problem of Google forgetting preferences between sessions, it will save you the time and effort of having to reset your preferences each time.  You will need to custom-craft your bookmark.  Here’s mine:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_setprefs?num=50&scis=yes&scisf=4&submit=Save+Preferences

As you can see, in with I’m passing some options to “scholar_setprefs” – i.e. the mechanism that sets your Google Scholar preferences.  I’m manipulating two options, Number of Results (num=50) and Bibliography manager (scis=yes&scisf=4).  I could also directly manipulate the interface and search language, library links, and if the results opened new windows or not (I don’t because I’m happy with the GS defaults).

The options accept a range of values, which I’ll describe briefly:

Number of results (num), accepts:

  • 10
  • 20
  • 30
  • 50
  • 100

If you’d like 100 results to be displayed, you’d change the url so that num=100.

Bibliography manager (scis=yes&scisf=4).  Google Scholar supports a number of different export formats, and to change their default, you’ll need to change the scisf value.  Here are the corresponding values:

  • 4 (Bibtex)
  • 3 (EndNote)
  • 2 (RefMan)
  • 1 (RefWorks)
  • 5 (WenXianWang)

If you’re a RefWorks user, you’d change the string so that it looked like this scis=yes&scisf=1.

Putting it all together, if you’re a RefWorks user who wants 100 results displayed, you’d set your bookmark as follows:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_setprefs?num=100&scis=yes&scisf=1&submit=Save+Preferences

Finally, if you’re accessing GS through your library proxy, you’ll need to add the proxy information into the URL. In the case of UNC we place the proxy information directly in the url. Therefore, my proxied bookmark looks like this:

http://scholar.google.com.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/scholar_setprefs?num=50&scis=yes&scisf=4&submit=Save+Preferences

As you can see, I’ve added .libproxy.lib.unc.edu to the beginning of the URL. This will vary by library, so you’ll want to look at other proxied URL’s at your institution to get a feel for where the proxy information goes.  As I noted above, there are a bunch of other options you can change directly. If you’d like to change those, simply view the source of the Google Scholar preferences page, look for the option and value pairs in the form, and tack them into the URL (making sure to add & before the option/value pair).


3
Sep 08

Chrome’s reconfiguration of the web’s geography

I’ve really enjoyed Chris Messina’s two recent posts on Chrome.  His background (Mozilla, Flock) and experience thinking about next generation UI’s and UE’s is on fine display; I particularly enjoy his reconcpetualization of the browser and its experience.

Factory City: Google Chrome and the future of browsers

Factory City: Musings on Chrome, the rebirth of the location bar and privacy in the cloud

In the second, more recent post, Chris discusses the cognitive break inherent in Chrome’s vision of the web.  In removing the URL bar in favor of a single search interface, the web transforms from one spatially and locationally grounded (in URL’s, permalinks and bookmarks) to a fully-mediated, amorphous zone of information.  In this new web, there are no wrong answers or incorrect URL’s, because the algorithm always has information relevant to the intent of our information need.

As Messina notes, the tradeoff is such “that our fundamental notions and expectations of privacy on the web have to change or will be changed for us. Either we do without tools that augment our cognitive faculties or we embrace them, and in so doing, shim open a window on our behaviors and our habits so that computers, computing environments and web service agents can become more predictive and responsive to them, and in so doing, serve us better.

That is, in embracing the mediated web, we trade (to some extent) our agency, any sense of privacy, and most importantly, our extant strategies of finding and reminding for new, less conceptually transparent ones.  To embrace the web in Chrome’s model, we must embrace the algorithm, and essentially invite it into our minds.  This new lens is all-or-nothing, and it casts away our strategies of past, those operationalized in pre-web design patterns.

On one hand, one might be able to argue that the web is so vast that inviting the algorithm home might make sense.  Perhaps it is better to browse with Google on your shoulder, assisting your navigation and selecting your best information choices.  Where I run into difficulty with this model is that Google is placed at a meta-layer above the web; it becomes the lens through which the web is experienced.  This model is troubling at many levels, but I particularly resent the idea the web should be mediated.  Slightly repurposing JPB’s Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace:

We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.

Of course, this isn’t a question of morals; the web is a market, and there will always be a choice to opt-out or not participate in Google or anyone else’s schemes.  The gray area emerges when we consider Google’s place in the market, and the sheer power they exert in the configuration of consumer preferences.  Thinking as an educator – we lament the so-called death of the book.  In five years, will we lament the death of the URL, in an age in which all authority is conferred through the end-product of a citation-based algorithm?

All of this comes with a grain of salt.  Personally, I believe our current spatial metaphors of the web will exist for the imaginable future.  As revolutionary as these ideas seem, we change slowly, and the browsing and searching patterns of billions of web users are already well-established.  Further, this sort of change is essential – we’re constantly reconfiguring the web and our experience of the web – I just question how much we need to do that with Google looking over our shoulder.