[conference: foundations of information science]

Conference Date:
August 20-23, 2010

Deadline of Paper Submission:
May 20th, 2010

Notification of Acceptance:

 June 20th, 2010

Location:

Beijing

Continuing the series of FIS Conferences (Madrid 1994, Vienna 1996, Paris 2005) a new venue will be held in Beijing 2010. In our times, an increasing number of disciplines are dealing with information in very different ways: from information society and information technology to communication studies (and related subjects like codes, meaning, knowledge, and intelligence), as well as quantum information, bioinformation, knowledge economy, network science, computer science and Internet, to name but a few. At the same time, an increasing number of scientists in the East and the West have been engaged with the foundational problems underlying this development, to such an extent that the integration of disciplines revolving around information seems an idea whose time has come. A new science of information can be envisaged that explores the possibilities of establishing a common ground, of constructing a new scientific perspective that connects the different information-related disciplines and provides a new framework for transdisciplinary research.

Topics:

1.  The Impact of a New Science of Information on Society

2.  The Position of Intelligence Science in Information Science

       a. Information and Intelligence

       b. Intelligence Science as an Engineering Informatics in Information Science  

3.  The Role of Other Applied Information Science Disciplines (Computer Science, Human Computer Interaction, Computer Mediated Communication, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Information and Communication Technologies and Society, Library and Documentation Science, …)

4.  The Basis of a New Science of Information

       a.  Feasibility of a single generic concept of information

       b.  Concepts, Principles, and Methodology of a “General Informatics” or “Theoretical Informatics”

       c.   Knowledge Structure of a Unified Theory of Information 

5.   Philosophy of Information

       a.   Information Ethics

       b.   Epistemology (Information and the Scientific Method, …)  

       c.   Ontology of Information   

       d.   Information and Philosophy of Science (Information and the System of Sciences – Transdisciplinarity – Consilience, …)

6.   Science of Information in Real-World Systems

       a.  Science of Information in Physical and Chemical Systems (Quantum Information, Molecular Recognition, …)

       b.  Science of Information in Living Systems (Biosemiotics, Systems Biology, Bioinformation, …)

       c.   Science of Information in Human / Social Systems

              i.  Science of Information in Human Cognition (Mind-Brain Theory, Consciousness, …)

              ii.  Science of Information in Human Communication (Linguistics, Social Networking,Communication Studies, …)

              iii.  Science of Information in Human Cooperation (Collective Intelligence, Knowledge Management, Advanced Intelligence, …)

7.   Science of the Information Society / Age (Information Society Theory, Internet Research, Social Informatics, New Media Studies, …)

Read more about the conference here.

[your amazing brain]

I came across this inspiring video via @ontarioliteracy on twitter:

[new media & innovative curriculum]

Via New Media Literacies Blog:

New Media Literacies Newsletter NML Announces its Monthly Webinar Series

Webinar Series NML has recently partnered with New Hampshire's Department of Education to facilitate a year-long professional development initiative using the new media literacies as a springboard for developing innovative curriculum. Our goal is to help foster a broader perspective of what it means to be media literate in the digital age, and offer tools for translating the social skills and cultural competencies outlined in the white paper Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century (Jenkins et al., 2006) into meaningful and engaging learning experiences in the classroom and beyond. These NH educators are exploring the urgent challenges that 21st Century learners face by expanding their own learning experiences using a participatory, digital model of professional develmopment. In this context, educators are able to practice their own skills as teachers by creating, collaborating, connecting, and circulating with one another in an interactive, multi-media environment. Not only are they developing new materials for their own schools and districts, but also an 8-part webinar series focused on a comprehensive, practical understanding of the NML skills for the larger educational community. The 8-part series will begin on February 11th and share the framework of social skills and cultural competencies which shapes the work of New Media Literacies, and illustrate the skills by looking more closely at learning through such cultural phenomenon as computer game guilds, youtube video production, Wikipedia, fan fiction, Second Life and other virtual worlds, music remixing, social network sites, and cosplay. Each webinar will examine closely new curricular materials which have emerged from New Media Literacies, Global Kids, Harvard's GoodPlay Project, Common Sense Media, the George Lucas Foundation, and other projects which are seeking to introduce these skills into contemporary educational practices and leave participants with plenty of opportunities to take the material, information and methods back into their classroom. We will host the first webinar on Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 7pm EST and focus on the new media literacies, judgment and appropriation as well as copyright, fair use, and creative commons. Our special guests will be Flourish Klink, a graduate student at MIT's Comparative Media Studies Program, and Erin Reilly, NML Research Director. See the full listing of upcoming webinars and get information on how to join the sessions at http://projectnml.ning.com/page/nmls-monthly-webinar-series.

[end of term marking!]

This is just too eloquent:





NB: I found the image included in Richard Haswell's article "The Complexities of Responding to Student Writing" and he references the image as: Composition Chronicle: Newsletter for Writing Teachers 8 (3), April 1995, p. 11.

[social networking conference: wolverhampton uni]

Wolverhampton Internet and Technology Society (WITS) together with the Statistical Cybermetrics Research Group are hosting the 1^st Social Networking in Cyberspace conference in April, 2010. We welcome contributions from scholars in the social and behavioural sciences and media and information disciplines, regardless of theoretical orientation.

The conference, which is to be sponsored by the Research Centre in Applied Sciences (RCAS), will be a one-day event and will take place on Friday the 23^rd of April, 2010. The Venue for the conference will be the Lighthouse Media Centre in Wolverhampton (Please click here for Map).

Call for papers

We invite potential presenters to submit an abstract (no longer than 300 words) for peer-review. The deadline for submission of the abstract is October 30^th, 2009. A decision on this abstract will be made by November 20^th, 2009 and authors will be notified via email soon after.

Abstracts should be submitted to SNIC@wlv.ac.uk

Subsequently, all presenters will be invited to prepare a paper for publication. The International Journal of Internet Science will be publishing a peer-reviewed selection of the best papers from the conference.

Papers should be submitted to SNIC@wlv.ac.uk by the 28^th of May 2010.

Postgraduate poster competition

We will be running a postgraduate poster competition on the day of the conference. Prizes will be awarded for the best posters on the day (further information to follow). We invite postgraduate students to submit an abstract by October 30^th 2009 for consideration.

Keynote Speakers

The following have been confirmed as keynote speakers at the conference:

Professor Mike Thelwall: University of Wolverhampton – “Detecting and analysing emotion in social networking sites”

Doctor Monica Whitty: Nottingham Trent University.

Fees

£80 standard rate

Discount rate for presenters (£60)

Discount rate for students (£50)

The fee includes morning and afternoon coffee and lunch.

Registration

Conference registration opens in January 2010

Important dates

Abstract submission deadline: 30^th October 2009

Notice of acceptance deadline: 20^th November 2009

Conference date: 23^rd April 2010

Full papers deadline: 28^th May 2010

contact us

If you have any enquiries or would like to contact us regarding the suitability of your research for the conference, please email us on SNIC@wlv.ac.uk

[financial crisis :: humor]

[open access journal pilot project]

Via Jacqueline Wilson, CDL Senior Associate for Shared Content:

"This ground-breaking agreement enables UC-authored articles accepted for publication in most of the 2000+ Springer journals to be published through Springer Open Choice, allowing full and immediate access to all readers. These articles will also be fully accessible through UC’s eScholarship publishing platform. UC authors pay no additional publication fees to support this open access model."

A task force appointed by the Scholarly Communications Officers (SCO) worked with the California Digital Library (CDL) to prepare information on the UC/Springer Open Access Journal Publishing Pilot, originally announced in January, for distribution to UC authors on each campus. The information can be found on the Reshaping Scholarly Communication site at http://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/alternatives/springer_faq.html. This site includes a FAQ, a link to the Springer journals covered by the pilot as well as a short list of titles excluded from the program. It is expected that campuses will customize the information to suit their local audience.

As was noted in the original message about this arrangement, it will be important to the success of the pilot that as many UC authors as possible know about this open access opportunity. Scholarly Communications Officers and others will distribute information about this agreement to appropriate faculty and other authors on their campus as part of the local publicity plans that they have developed.

Final versions of the Springer journal articles published during the pilot will be available in the eScholarship Repository beginning in the fall.

CDL is pleased to have made this ground-breaking arrangement with Springer on behalf of UC authors and the Task Force is looking forward to assessing the results of this experiment as it unfolds over the next two years.

UC/Springer Open Access Journal Publishing Pilot Task Group:

Ivy Anderson (CDL)
Catherine Mitchell (CDL)
Margaret Phillips (Berkeley)
Jacqueline Wilson (CDL, Chair)

[cognitive leadership for transdisciplinary research]

Reading "Enhancing Transdisciplinary Research Through Collaborative Leadership" by Barbara Grey.


Some interesting points:

• Groupthink refers to the suppression of differences within a team and its inability to bridge power differences
• the absence of process skills (e.g., decision making, problem solving, conflict resolution, information exchange, coordination, and boundary management) has also been noted as a crucial detriment to collaboration
• Viewing the leadership of transdisciplinary initiatives as a cognitive task means that leadership involves the management of meaning
• Transformational leaders high on charisma,
  for example, are seen as powerful shapers of their followers’ aspirations which positively affects team performance
• In transdisciplinary research, the cognitive tasks of leadership largely consist of visioning and framing
• Transdisciplinary leaders need to be able to envision how various disciplines may overlap in constructive ways that could generate scientific breakthroughs and new understanding
  in a specific problem area
• Structural-leadership tasks address the team’s need for coordination and information exchange— both within the team and between the team and external actors
• Research on brokers (who occupy key positions between others) in transdisciplinary networks reveals they are high on the Big Five Personality factor of openness, displayed an ability to imagine and propose potential collaborations among researchers, and engaged in active transdisciplinary mentoring of junior faculty
• Among the boundary-spanning tasks identified as key for transdisciplinary teams are
  gaining and maintaining sound institutional commitment and support,17 acquiring funds to manage emerging areas of research and training, devoting adequate attention to and securing funds for infrastructure, and building bridges to other centers and new disciplines
• Attending to the process dynamics of a transdisciplinary team demands an especially important set of interpersonal skills that are critical to successful team collaboration

[rim competes with apple's app store]

Copied from Larry Dignan's article on zdnet:

"Research in Motion launched its BlackBerry application store—dubbed App World—and the pricing model will immediately draw comparison’s to Apple’s App Store set-up. That comparison, however, only goes so far.

For starters, RIM’s App World pricing model has raised a bit of a ruckus since it veers a bit from Apple’s scheme (Techmeme). But a business audience isn’t going to sweat a $2.99 application compared to a 99 cent minimum priced app. And RIM’s audience is likely to even pay higher prices if the App World can actually deliver software with a real business use. And there are so many tiers to the App World model that RIM could have said “charge what you want.”

But the biggest takeaway from the App World pricing model is that higher prices mean more for developers (see FAQ). RIM needs more developers on its bandwagon since the iPhone is the shiny object in the mobile world. Simply put, money talks and RIM plans to use it. Matthew Miller notes that RIM’s pricing model shouldn’t be that big of a deal.

Sure RIM does offer free apps, but developers aren’t likely to offer them. Given developers pay an upfront fee why would you pay RIM to distribute a free app? RIM’s message with App World appears to be: Frivolous and fun apps need not apply.

Will RIM’s App World work?

My hunch is that RIM’s App World will do well, but isn’t going to a success as measured by Apple’s store. RIM’s store is likely to be more BlackBerry-ish—the applications will be more business focused, tool oriented and won’t feature hot games.

RIM also has an app management issue on its hands. Apple’s App Store has to support just the iPhone and iPod touch. RIM’s applications will work on these models:

• BlackBerry Bold 9000 smartphone
• BlackBerry Storm smartphone
• BlackBerry Pearl Flip Series
• BlackBerry Curve 8300 Series
• Black Berry Curve 8900 smartphone
• BlackBerry 8800 Series
• BlackBerry Pearl Series

The experience on all of those models will vary. For instance, a game on the Storm will be different than the Bold and Curve. How will RIM navigate that conundrum? As a developer those models mean more complications.

Other takeaways from the RIM App World effort:

• A PayPal account is required with App World for customers and developers;
• Developers from around the world can contribute except for those from Belarus, Myanmar/Burma, China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria.
• To submit an application there’s a $200 fee, which will be refunded if the software is rejected."

[viral video for ai - win some money]

The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour

AISB Video Competition

This is a call to both AISB members and non-members to take part in a competition for an online video clip that will contribute to the public understanding of any aspect of the area known as Artificial Intelligence. The video material should be in English, of three minutes maximum duration, and available online (e.g., on YouTube).

Submissions should take the form of an email with the URL to the videomaterial, contact details of the participant(s), and a free-form statement from all authors stating that the submission is their own work, and that they grant the SSAISB non-exclusive rights to use it as it finds appropriate. Deadline for all submissions is 23:59 GMT on 15 March 2009. All submissions should be sent to video_competition@aisb.co.uk. The submissions will be evaluated by a panel of three AISB members, of which two student members (all selected and appointed by the AISB committee).

There will be 3 prizes of £300, £150 and £75. The panel reserves the right to withhold a prize if no submission is deemed appropriate. All panel decisions are final and cannot be contested.

see more about the call here: http://www.aisb.org.uk/publicunderstanding/video_competition.shtml

nb: image from wired

[literate cities]

Six key elements are analysed in this study to dechipher which city is the most literate (American cities only) in 2008. These include: newspaper circulation, number of bookstores, library resources, periodical publishing resources, educational attainment and Internet resources and are then compared to the population rate (but only in cities greater than 250,000).

Somewhat oddly, the study does NOT include "reading test scores or how often people read, but what kinds of literary resources are available and used."

"Cities that ranked higher for having more bookstores also have a higher proportion of people buying books online, the analysis found, and cities with newspapers that have high per-capita circulation rates also have more people reading newspapers online. Likewise, cities that ranked higher for having well-used libraries also have more booksellers."

The author of the study, Dr. John Miller, makes a very interesting observation:

"While it is too early in this study to draw conclusions, it is nevertheless striking that newspaper readership rates in the US’s global economic competitors are significantly higher than in the US. Since literacy is generally regarded as a barometer of a nation’s social, cultural, and economic health, perhaps these findings are cause for national concern."

According to the USA Today report, "Preliminary results of a related study examining international literacy paint a less optimistic outlook for the USA. It notes that in per-capita paid newspaper circulation, the USA ranks only 31st in the world, far behind other countries, including Aruba, Liechtenstein and Japan."

[social media in education - cfp]

CALL FOR PAPERS

Electronic Journal of Communication (EJC)

Special Issue:

Communication Pedagogy in the Age of Social Media

Over the course of the last few years, social media technologies such as blogs, microblogs, digital videos, podcasts, wikis, and social networks, have seen a dramatic increase in adoption rates. To date, Internet users have uploaded roughly 80 million videos to YouTube and launched approximately 133 million blogs worldwide. Because of their ability to connect people and to facilitate the exchange of information and web content, social media technologies not only provide a powerful new way to interact with one another, but they also present exciting new pedagogical opportunities.

Earlier this year, the New Media Consortium and the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative released the 2008 Horizon Report, which seeks to identify new technologies capable of affecting the way we teach and learn. Among the critical challenges outlined by this year’s report is the need for universities to equip students with new media literacy skills and to develop curricula that “address not only traditional capabilities like developing an argument over the course of a long paper”, but also “how to create meaningful content with today’s tools.” (The New Media Consortium, 2008, p. 6).

Considering that these tools center around the ideas of collaboration, participation, and conversation, they should hold special interest to communication researchers and educators alike. As a result, this special issue seeks to examine the pedagogical applications of social media technologies, especially with regard to the communication classroom. Examples of best practices in social media adoption in all areas of communication education are welcome, as are case studies or empirical research analyzing the effectiveness and/or effects of incorporating social media technologies into the communication classroom. Research examining the role these technologies play in the social construction of a collective knowledge pool would also fit within the scope of this special issue.

The special issue is scheduled for publication in the first half of 2010. Deadline for completed manuscripts is April 1, 2009. Submissions should be electronic (.doc or .rtf format) and must conform to the specifications of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th ed. Place author’s contact information in an email to the editor only, not on the title page of the submission.

Issue Editors:
Corinne Weisgerber, Ph.D. and Shannan H. Butler, Ph.D.
St. Edward’s University

Send inquiries and submissions to: corinnew AT stedwards DOT edu


via: Social Media for PR Class.

[transdisciplinarity and knowledge cartographies]

As I discuss research projects, aims and future developments with IOCT researchers and affiliates, I'm realising more and more that we're often talking about the same (or at least similar) things though we're using a different language to describe our systems and processes. A recent paper by Josianne Basque, Gilbert Paquette, Beatrice Pudelko and Michel Leonard on "Collaborative Knowledge" suggests the use of a mapping tool as a way of tracing where knowledges crossover and supports the "externalising" of knowledge. Although this tool (MOT) is primarly discussed in terms of sharing knowledge between experts and novices, something like this visual mapping would be useful in the sharing of knowledges between disicplines too.



There are loads more interesting papers in the edited collection Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques including ones that focus on knowledge mapping and curriculum development.

[attack racism]

Apparently "Margaret Wente is one of Canada's leading columnists." Apparently "she provokes heated debate with her views... Fine. I think we'd agree that heated debate and discussion are central to the sharing and deepening of knowledge. However, read these statements: "it is simply not permissible to say that aboriginal culture was less evolved than European culture or Chinese culture – even though it's true" and "The fact that North American cultures never evolved further."

I think most open-minded people would agree that there are some huge (unfounded) generalisations being made here. Wente begins her "article" with a nod towards the recent racist comments made by Dick Pound (International Olympic City) [he said: "We must not forget that 400 years ago, Canada was a land of savages, with scarcely 10,000 inhabitants of European origin, while in China, we're talking about a 5,000-year-old civilization."]. While Wente admits that Pound's remarks were "stupid" she explains why, not simply because his line is hugely offensive, but importantly because "The last thing they [B.C. government and VANOC] want is for native protests to "steal the spotlight. Comments about “savages,” in whatever language, are not helpful." Nice. So basically, say what you like, offend whom you like, as long as business can carry on as planned.

As Nick Reo at Turtle Talk notes, "her conclusions are poorly founded, contradictory, and backward-ic."

Wente attempts to support her views by referencing an "academic" text about to be published by McGill-Queenh's University Press called Disrobing the Aboriginal Industry (I won't add a link as they really shouldn't get any more publicity - plus, since when is a culture an industry?). In this book, Wente explains that the authors

"knoc[k] the stuffing out of the prevailing mythology that surrounds the history of first peoples. That mythology holds that aboriginal culture was equal or superior to European culture. At the time of contact, North America was occupied by a race of gentle pastoralists with their own science, their own medicine and their own oral history that was every bit as rich as Europe's.

The truth is different. North American native peoples had a neolithic culture based on subsistence living and small kinship groups. They had not developed broader laws or institutions, a written language, evidence-based science, mathematics or advanced technologies. The kinship groups in which they lived were very small, simply organized and not very productive. Other kinship groups were regarded as enemies, and the homicide rate was probably rather high. Until about 30 years ago, the anthropological term for this developmental stage was 'savagery.'"

and

"Today, “traditional knowledge,” which generally resides among the elders, is sought after by governments, studied in universities around the world, and recognized in environmental assessment processes. But Ms. Widdowson says most of it is useless – a heap of vague beliefs and opinions that can't be verified or tested. Why have the muskoxen drifted west? Because, according to the elders, the animals were “following the people because they missed them and wanted their company.”

The references in the book by Widdowson and Howard also cannot be taken at face-value, as substantiation of their wild views because also those academics and their ideas have been "distorted, taken out of context, and at times used to support conclusions that are diametrically opposed to our own [those of us who have been writing on indigenous oppression and self determination] perspectives." As Deborah Simmons further explains:

"In short, Widdowson and Howard have the temerity to argue that indigenous societies are a throwback to an anachronistic Neolithic stage of social history. In the face of rational modernisation, indigenous people are inherently inferior and constituted by lack: they are illiterate, dysfunctional, dependent and corrupt. The population explosion in their communities is causing serious problems.

Notwithstanding their expanding population, according to Widdowson and Howard they do not qualify for nationhood, dispersed as they are in small communities across the continent. Thus self-determination is not an option. The solution for all their “problems” is for indigenous people to submit to the evolutionary nature of history; to recognize the inherent superiority of scientific methods; to relocate from their traditional territories to urban centres; and to become “socialized” (ie. assimilated) into Canadian capitalism. Widdowson and Howard don’t hold out much hope for this solution to be workable in the near term, given “tribal” superstitions and resistance to progressive innovations. Clearly the only logical solution for the present is to cut funding for indigenous organisations and continue what they describe in positive terms as the “warehousing” of indigenous peoples on the margins of Canadian society."

Matthew L.M. Fletcher offers a response:

"First off, broad generalizations about the hundreds and thousands of North American cultures prior to, say, 1492, are utterly worthless, except for persons trying to make a political point. None of the above statements, taken together, is true for any specific group anywhere in the world. I’m from Michigan, as is my family’s communities, and they weren’t so savage. They had enormous agricultural output, even north of the so-called freeze line in mid-Michigan. In fact, these “unproductive” Indians fed the British (later American) fort at Michilimackinac in the 18th and 19th centuries with surplus corn, sqaush, beans, and other veggies."

Though the article is deeply misinformed, unfounded and largerly generalist, scarily, "we can expect it to have a long shelf life and misinform scores of people." Scary too are the myriad of comments to the Globe article that perpetuate and support these kinds of generalisations and misinformation.