Science 2.0 refers to new practices in science that are supported by new tools. These practices involve broad, intense, and global participation in research through crowd-sourcing ideas and open debate. Mash-ups and language technology can play an important role by supporting networked collaboration and awareness through minimal representations of people, activities, topics and relationships. Recent advances in technology and practices provide new means for open, networked, and self-organized co-construction of knowledge in a Science 2.0.

1. Science 2.0 Fridolin WildKMi, The Open University f.wild@open.ac.uk

2. Before we begin…

3. (96dpi) Knowledge could be the delta at the receiver (a paper, a human, a library). Information could be the quality of a certain signal. Information could be a logical abstractor. Science could be about systematically giving birth to information in order to create knowledge Science, Information, Knowledge

4. Tools that bring together people and content artefacts in activities that support in constructing and processing information and knowledge. Early qualitative research: capturing hunting experiences on the cave walls. ... are probably around us ever since the ‚homo habilis‘ started to use more sophisticated stone tools at the beginning of the Pleistocene some two million years ago. Research SupportEnvironments

5. Actors (people, artefacts, and tools) in various locations with heterogeneous affiliations, purposes, styles, objectives, etc. Network effects can make the network more valuable with growing size (cf. ‘distributed cognition’). To develop a shared understanding is part of the research work because language underspecifies meaning: future ‘cloud’ research will build on it And at the same time: linguistic relativity (Sapir-Whorf hypothesis): language culture restricts our thinking Inherently Networks

7. not a precondition (like data)!

8. Setting up and maintaining a research support environment is part of the knowledge work: future experiences will be made through it

9. knowing tools, people, artefacts, and activities ... enables!Research environments shape research. Environments = Research Outcome

10. Science 2.0 Support Environments

11. In the words of Waldrop (2008), science 2.0 relates to “new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on”. Underwood et al. (2009) postulate even further that science 2.0 offers more potential than mere efficiency optimization (through improved workflows and better sharing possibilities): participation in research can be broadened beyond existing scientific communities. A science 2.0 is about crowd-sourcing of ideas and the refinement of knowledge in an open debate. Shneiderman [4] adds another aspect and sees in Science 2.0 “new technologies [that] continue to reorder whole disciplines”, as “increased collaboration [is stimulated] through these socio-technical systems”. Gillet et al. [1] see in Science 2.0 a concept that federates a variety of communication channels to ease internal communication within an existing scientific network and beyond. 8 Science 2.0 isabout new practices. These practices are supported by new tools. Who cares whether there is a causal relationship between them. Science 2.0 is about broad, intense, and global participation in research. Maybe there is also a methodological change? Science 2.0

13. Long-tail software development: not dozens of markets of millions, but millions of markets of dozens

14. Form of opportunistic design (Hartmann et al., 2008; Ncube et al., 2008; Gamble & Gamble, 2008)New Practices 9

15. Mash-Up Environments

16. how it started: MUPPLE.org { do s.th. } { for an output } share bookmarks { using http://… } using distance.ktu.lt/scuttle Scrutable: shiftcontroltouser Analytics: Tracking: interactions & usage ? RSS feed Recommendations: tools, activities, … Recommendations :patterns summarize papers using stellarnet.eu/d/7/1 find papers using www.objectspot.org

18. Sharing Practices

20. Reflection is creative sense making of the past and enables planning.

21. Monitoring refers to how progress control is performed.

22. Last but not least, the pair acting and interacting group social & collaboration and information & tool competences. Plan Reflect Monitor Act Interact Qualitative Interviews: 15 persons in 5 sessions (each 40 min to 1 hour)

23. MUPPLE-II

24. STELLAR Mash-Up Architecture Users involve in use-cases. Each case deploys widgetsin support of the given task. Widgets use infrastructure services & data(from within the PLE container or from a web 2.0). A directoryserves the management and deployment of the portfolio. Interoperability standards secure the flexible recombination of widgets, services, and data. #16

25. STELLAR Universe grazr RSS simile STELLAR blog transf RSS directory service D1.1 living deliverable http://universe.stellarnet.eu/, stable releases go public on http://www.TELeurope.eu

27. Feed transformation services

28. Paper retrieval service (pub.fm)

29. Aggregation services

30. Visualisation service

31. Add-ons:

33. Awareness

34. Tale of two doors (Erickson, 2007)

35. Visibility produces awareness Awareness triggers social norms Mutual visibility triggers accountability Which reinforces social norms Tale of two doors (Erickson, 2007)

36. A social proxy is a minimalist graphical representation that makes people and their activities more visible (Erickson, 2007) An awareness proxyis a minimalist graphical representation that makes researchers and their research activities more visible Proxies

37. Authoring RelationshipS(of Project deliverables)

38. Topic Proxy Two-Mode factor analysis of the co-occurrences in the terminology Results in a latent-semantic vector space

39. The mathemagics behind Meaning Interaction Analysis

40. 2000 Terminology Going to become less important: distance (‐20), web (‐18), hypermedia (‐17), computer (15), internet (15), and multimedia (14). Going to disappear: www(13), medic(ine)(6+5), agent(9), and site(9)

41. 2008 Terminology new: blended (28), ict (27), mobile (25), port‐folio (16), space (16), peer (13), and podcast (12) more important: digital (+33), teacher (31), practice (27), social (26), student (24), game (23), science (17), assess (15), effect (13), implement (12), innovative(12)

42. Field Proxy:project Authors into the space

43. Spot unwanted fragmentation e.g. two authors work on the same topic, but with different collaborator groups and with different literature Intervention Instrument: automatically recommend to hold a flashmeeting Bringing together what belongs together Wild, Ochoa, Heinze, Crespo, Quick (2009)

44. Communities are often not very dense, i.e. not resilient With key persons withdrawing, the network can fragment Recommend to build additional links, cutting out the middleman Creating cohesion Wild, Ochoa, Heinze, Crespo, Quick (2009)

45. Flashmeeting

46. Live Exploring nyx.cti.espol.edu.ec/ectel/

47. … and MORE The Science Table ECTEL observatory More! KU Leuven (Vandeputte, Duval) KU Leuven (Parra, Duval)

48. Networked Collaboration

50. Blogosphere Interaction Standards collaboration

51. Shortcomings No support for active networking & networked collaboration Lack of support for interaction standards

52. The Missing Link: FeedBack OFFER 1 => „Buffered Push“ REQUEST update notifications 2 NOTIFY 3

53. WordPress Plugin

54. Simulation (w/o FeedBack)

55. Simulation (w. FeedBack)

56. Simulation (w. FB & w. structure)

57. Trials

58. Reflection

59. Reflecting on Conceptual Change Reflection is an interactive process of creative sense-making of the past

60. Tying shoelaces Douglas Adams’ ‘meaning of liff’: Epping: The futile movements of forefingers and eyebrows used when failing to attract the attention of waiters and barmen. Shoeburyness: The vague uncomfortable feeling you get when sitting on a seat which is still warm from somebody else's bottom I have been convincingly Sapir-Whorfed by this book. Non-textual concepts things we can’t (easily) learn from language

61. Capturing traces in text

62. Internal latent-semantic graph structure (MIA output)

63. Software Support: Conceptual Inspection Analytics

64. Conclusion

65. Science 2.0 is social and so are the support environments. Environments are outcomes of research activity. Their creation and maintenance is fostered by awareness. They are re-structured in networked collaboration. Mash-Ups & language technologycan play an important role in supporting research. Recent advances in technology and practiceprovide fascinating new means for open,networked, andself-organisedco-construction of knowledge. Up, up, towardsa Science 2.0

67. Development of TEL-related use case scenarios for Research2.0 tools and infrastructures

68. Influence of Research2.0 tools and technologies on scientific practices in TEL

69. Formats and protocols for Research2.0 data exchange (linked data, RSS, BuRST, ...)

70. Ownership and privacy of research information

72. Web 2.0 Dimensions + + MUPPLE-II (Wild et al., 2009b; Wild et al., 2010) #55