As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've
recently become interested in the story of the Confederate commerce
raiders during the American civil war, and I've been
using QueryPic to search the Australian and New Zealand
newspapers of the time.
Of course, I'm not a historian, I'm a
dilletante, in fact I'm a digital dilletante.
And in the course of searching for
newspaper articles one thing that is amazingly useful is the ability
of the Trove newspaper database to create a pdf of the article, and
that of evernote to grab the pdf and upload it to a notebook with my
own folksonomy of tags.
Now, of course, Evernote is not the
only game in town, Zotero is also a pretty good product, but Evernote
is what I use and know.
One of the problems I face in these
amateur projects is the 'big heap of everything' problem – when one
starts with an idea, clips a few things of interest, the odd jpeg
without any clear of idea of what you're doing or even whether it's
going to turn into something half serious.
When I was a psychophysiology
researcher – yes I was a proper scientist once – I had the same
problem – except then it was differentiating the interesting from
the relevant, but again it was all down to categorisation and
organisation.
I've talked to enough researchers in a
range of disciplines to know that this is a common problem.
The problem comes down to the
accumulation of material and then its organisation and
reorganisation, at which point it becomes a body of evidence to
support what we rather grandly these days call 'scholarly outputs'.
In the old days people would file their
material in old envelopes, write something relevant on the envelope
and if they were very organised write some relevant stuff on an index
card and file it. Basically they saved the data and created some
metadata around the article.
Resources have of course now gone
electronic, and this is where tools
like evernote come in – they allow us to capture and organise
material, and annotate it – and we can organise it and reorganise
it to our heart's content.
So, when we come to repositories or
data archives we tend to think of places to put finished outputs, be
it a conference paper or a dataset. We don't tend to think of work in
progress stuff, like my Evernote notebook of 1860's press cuttings
about Raphael
Semmes, yet of course it is just this work in progress material
that enables scholarly outputs.
Any work in progress storage is
necessarily an active
filestore as the material is subject to reorganisation –
something that has implications for its backup and management.
As a data manager the real question is
how to support this activity. As I said, Evernote and Zotero do it
well, but should we also be trying, on an institutional basis, try to
provide some sort of workspace to allow people to accumulate and save
material, while marking up tags.
As Evernote and the like already do a
good job, trying to replace them is probably a waste of time and
money, but being able to provide a general mechanism to allow users
to export the material once they are happy with it to a local archive
server is probably a good thing as it ensures that the data is backed
up and available for reuse.
The other thing is that recently we
looked at data management practices in a cohort of beginning Arts and
Humanities researchers. Frighteningly, a lot of them were jst storing
material on their laptops and dumping it out to a usb disk. Some did
use Drobox, but none made meuch use of Evernote or Zotero.
So as well as helping provide a
reseource for the organised we also need to consider what to do with
the less organised. Training would help, and training focunsed on
managing your data rather than simply backing it up, but again there
is a need for a work in progress archive solution.
The question is what to provide and how
best to do it – probably some sort of relaxed content management
solution would provide a starting point ...
3 comments:
The other thing is that recently we looked at data management practices in a cohort of beginning Arts and Humanities researchers. Frighteningly, a lot of them were jst storing material on their laptops and dumping it out to a usb disk. Some did use Drobox, but none made meuch use of Evernote or Zotero.
I'm by no means starting out--moe like finishing--but that describes me very well. I have many backups, because I work on any of three different machines and synch them all by using a friend's linux box as an FTP dropbox. I've only been introduced to Zotero as a bibliographical engine, for which my experience is that it sucks, or at least doesn't do what I want such an engine to do, which is pick up data I already have in citation format and incorporate it. I have all my citations in a massive Word file I started before this sort of software became common-place; that file also tells me which folder my (paper, longhand) notes on the citations and if I have a full text somewhere. This is not data I want to have to retype. I do random thinking-in-text in a shareware program called TextPad, but only because I am old enough to remember carrying files round on a floppy disk and still think of Word as `heavy' when plain text is all one needs. (Also TextPad has a *far* more powerful search-and-replace.)
So, does all this make me a problem user or just an old person?
It makes you normal - it fits with my experience of how a lot of researchers in the Arts and Humanities work - scientists tend to have piles of old notebooks and research diaries ....
Frighteningly, a lot of them were jst storing material on their laptops and dumping it out to a usb disk.
I guess it was that bit that caught my conscience, because I do that too. I suppose the difference is that the laptop is paired up with a desktop and the USB stick is only a backup in case I get to work or wherever and find the linux box is unavailable, but... I could save myself a lot of time with a reference manager, though, if I made enough time to make it useful in the first place. Anyway: I shall think out loud at my own blog. Thanks for the reassurance of normality!
Post a Comment