Difference between revisions of "IAT810:Community Portal"
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
MA: First draft | MA: First draft | ||
− | + | '''December 7th LAST DAY OF CLASS: PAPERS DUE''' | |
+ | |||
+ | ''FINAL PAPER ADVICE - DGr 23NOV2010'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | In order to situate your position or perspective, | ||
+ | it is most useful to know what other perspectives | ||
+ | are out there. | ||
+ | How do you find them? | ||
+ | |||
+ | In the sciences, finding a meta analysis is the most straightforward approach. | ||
+ | |||
+ | science: meta analysis | ||
+ | Example: Immersive VR is used for many different | ||
+ | therapeutic purposes. Instead of finding 20+ papers | ||
+ | that deal with this issue, it is better to START with | ||
+ | a "meta analysis." That is, someone who has read those | ||
+ | 20+ papers, categorized them, and has something to | ||
+ | say about them. Think of it as an overview. | ||
+ | |||
+ | When you read the diversities of approaches, one will | ||
+ | probably strongly resonate with your idea, AND you | ||
+ | have alternate ideas ready to cite. Obviously, you'd need | ||
+ | to then hone in on the approach you have identified with | ||
+ | in more depth. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ----- | ||
+ | In the arts & humanities, it is more difficult. | ||
+ | Wikipedia is only moderately useful, and often has | ||
+ | incorrect or dubious information. Nonetheless, you | ||
+ | may want to look at the bibliography at the bottom | ||
+ | of the entry, and see if you recognize any authors. | ||
+ | Use a very critical eye. | ||
+ | |||
+ | meta analyses? | ||
+ | These are less common; it is usually easier to find them in book form. | ||
+ | Note: It is easier to start with an art or humanities database, not google. | ||
+ | |||
+ | If that doesn't work . . . | ||
+ | the next thing to try is to find an encyclopedia of your topic, | ||
+ | published by a reputable press (Oxford, Routledge, UMinnesota, MIT, etc.). | ||
+ | The book Meehae showed us about art, for example, was Methodologies of Art. | ||
+ | For Parjad, that might be an Encyclopedia of Performance Art or | ||
+ | Performance: Critical Concepts in Literary and Cultural Studies, | ||
+ | Philip Auslander (Routledge). | ||
+ | More to the point would be: | ||
+ | The Potentials of Spaces: The Theory & Practice of Scenography | ||
+ | & Performance, Intellect Press, or | ||
+ | The Cambridge Introduction to Scenography. | ||
+ | (Intellect Press is okay, but the table of contents reveals that | ||
+ | this book would be more useful in providing specific examples. | ||
+ | It doesn't seem to cover a wide range of perspectives. | ||
+ | The Cambridge book does seem to cover a wide range of perspectives, | ||
+ | so I'd go with that one first.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Or, you can hone in more specifically on your topic. | ||
+ | For Erin, that would be, say, self & subjectivity. | ||
+ | Some examples would be: | ||
+ | Virtual Anxiety: Photography, New Technologies and Subjectivity, Sarah Kember, (Manchester). | ||
+ | However, Manchester is a publisher I am unfamiliar with, | ||
+ | the author is someone I am not familiar with, | ||
+ | it was published in 1998, and I cannot search inside it. | ||
+ | So this would be a pretty serious gamble & potential waste of time. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Instead, I'd look at: | ||
+ | 1. Concepts of the Self, Anthony Elliott (Polity). | ||
+ | only vaguely familiar with the publisher, but seems to have a wide range | ||
+ | 2. Subjectivity: Theories of the Self from Freud to Haraway, Nick Mansfield, NYU Press. | ||
+ | Pretty good publisher, AND, since it mentions Haraway, | ||
+ | issues of technology are likely to be covered. | ||
+ | 3. Self and Subjectivity, (Blackwell). | ||
+ | Reputable publisher, table of contents seems to cover a broad range. | ||
+ | So, this might be useful to scan/look over, but | ||
+ | doesn't cover any pomo/posthuman ideas or technology per se. | ||
+ | 4. Digital Technologies of the Self, Yasmine Abbas & Fred Dervin, (Cambridge Scholars). | ||
+ | Seems okay -- covers the ideas + technology, but seems oddly too specific. | ||
+ | Nothing about photography per se. | ||
+ | 5. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, or | ||
+ | The Second Self, Sherry Turkle (MIT Press). | ||
+ | Good publisher, canonical books on the self & the Internet. | ||
+ | However, Turkle pretty much comes from one point of view, | ||
+ | and these books are a bit old. Moderately useful. | ||
+ | 6. Self/Image: Technology, Representation, and the Contemporary Subject, Amelia Jones, (Routledge). | ||
+ | Stellar publisher, title suggests it may cover all the issues, well-known author, | ||
+ | has the bonus of covering many kinds of art. | ||
+ | If it were me and the clock was ticking, I'd go with this one. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --------------------------------------------- | ||
+ | |||
+ | Be sure to set time limits -- in this case of basic identification, | ||
+ | I'd limit your search to 20-30 minutes. If you are getting | ||
+ | closer to what you need in that amount of time, continue. | ||
+ | If not, bail & try another route. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Also, don't forget that we have experts in SIAT, so asking | ||
+ | one who is an expert in your topic area is a good idea. | ||
+ | In Computer Science, there is a lot of agreement. | ||
+ | In other fields, there is more multiplicity of contesting ideas. |
Revision as of 18:08, 24 November 2010
FINAL PROJECT MILESTONES
November 9th
JV: basic structure & bibliography
EA: outline & references
DOC: I plan to have a rough draft in which a few ideas are fleshed out and I have something to work with.
LLC: Approval article format, list of artists, basic concept proposal Leonardo paper
JO: basic structure and argument
BF: Research on the methodology
Leila: close reading and working on basic concept and ideas of paper
November 16th
LLC: clarify current challenges with Diane/Meehae
BF: Still working on proposed methodology
Leila : Write preliminary outline of paper
November 23rd
TF: See Haptic Creature, first draft and bibliography
JV: in-class discussion of concept and publication roots
EA: first draft & editing
DOC: analysis of first draft
JO: present the examples and first draft
LLC: draft & bibliography
BF: Finalizing the new Methodology
Leila: First draft of final paper
MA: First draft
December 7th LAST DAY OF CLASS: PAPERS DUE
FINAL PAPER ADVICE - DGr 23NOV2010
In order to situate your position or perspective, it is most useful to know what other perspectives are out there. How do you find them?
In the sciences, finding a meta analysis is the most straightforward approach.
science: meta analysis Example: Immersive VR is used for many different therapeutic purposes. Instead of finding 20+ papers that deal with this issue, it is better to START with a "meta analysis." That is, someone who has read those 20+ papers, categorized them, and has something to say about them. Think of it as an overview.
When you read the diversities of approaches, one will probably strongly resonate with your idea, AND you have alternate ideas ready to cite. Obviously, you'd need to then hone in on the approach you have identified with in more depth.
In the arts & humanities, it is more difficult. Wikipedia is only moderately useful, and often has incorrect or dubious information. Nonetheless, you may want to look at the bibliography at the bottom of the entry, and see if you recognize any authors. Use a very critical eye.
meta analyses? These are less common; it is usually easier to find them in book form. Note: It is easier to start with an art or humanities database, not google.
If that doesn't work . . . the next thing to try is to find an encyclopedia of your topic, published by a reputable press (Oxford, Routledge, UMinnesota, MIT, etc.).
The book Meehae showed us about art, for example, was Methodologies of Art. For Parjad, that might be an Encyclopedia of Performance Art or Performance: Critical Concepts in Literary and Cultural Studies, Philip Auslander (Routledge). More to the point would be: The Potentials of Spaces: The Theory & Practice of Scenography & Performance, Intellect Press, or The Cambridge Introduction to Scenography. (Intellect Press is okay, but the table of contents reveals that this book would be more useful in providing specific examples. It doesn't seem to cover a wide range of perspectives. The Cambridge book does seem to cover a wide range of perspectives, so I'd go with that one first.)
Or, you can hone in more specifically on your topic. For Erin, that would be, say, self & subjectivity. Some examples would be: Virtual Anxiety: Photography, New Technologies and Subjectivity, Sarah Kember, (Manchester).
However, Manchester is a publisher I am unfamiliar with, the author is someone I am not familiar with, it was published in 1998, and I cannot search inside it. So this would be a pretty serious gamble & potential waste of time.
Instead, I'd look at: 1. Concepts of the Self, Anthony Elliott (Polity).
only vaguely familiar with the publisher, but seems to have a wide range
2. Subjectivity: Theories of the Self from Freud to Haraway, Nick Mansfield, NYU Press.
Pretty good publisher, AND, since it mentions Haraway, issues of technology are likely to be covered.
3. Self and Subjectivity, (Blackwell).
Reputable publisher, table of contents seems to cover a broad range. So, this might be useful to scan/look over, but doesn't cover any pomo/posthuman ideas or technology per se.
4. Digital Technologies of the Self, Yasmine Abbas & Fred Dervin, (Cambridge Scholars).
Seems okay -- covers the ideas + technology, but seems oddly too specific. Nothing about photography per se.
5. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, or
The Second Self, Sherry Turkle (MIT Press). Good publisher, canonical books on the self & the Internet. However, Turkle pretty much comes from one point of view, and these books are a bit old. Moderately useful.
6. Self/Image: Technology, Representation, and the Contemporary Subject, Amelia Jones, (Routledge).
Stellar publisher, title suggests it may cover all the issues, well-known author, has the bonus of covering many kinds of art. If it were me and the clock was ticking, I'd go with this one.
Be sure to set time limits -- in this case of basic identification, I'd limit your search to 20-30 minutes. If you are getting closer to what you need in that amount of time, continue. If not, bail & try another route.
Also, don't forget that we have experts in SIAT, so asking one who is an expert in your topic area is a good idea. In Computer Science, there is a lot of agreement. In other fields, there is more multiplicity of contesting ideas.