Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Tammaro ircdl 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Tammaro ircdl 2013

185

Published on

Evaluation of digital humanities

Evaluation of digital humanities

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
185
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Evaluation of digital humanities: an interdisciplinary approach Anna Maria Tammaro University of Parma IRCDL, Rome February, 1st, 2013
  • 2. Research question Can we evaluate digital products and publications with current quality indicators and the same procedures of printed publications? Do we need alternatives to the peer review?
  • 3. What? Publications with an editorial process (PDF) Hybrid only with documentation NOT publications which are marked, hypertextual, dynamic, multimedia and INTERDISCIPLINARY: − LOM, OER − Blog Website − WIKI − Text analysis − Digital asset
  • 4. WHY? Institutional evaluation − Accountability − Financement − Ranking Individual evaluation − Tenure − Career − Rewarding
  • 5. WHO? Publishers − Reviewers Experts − GEV, Quality Agency Collaborative assessment − Zotero, Citulike, Connotea, Refworks, Mendeley, 2collab, Mekentosj
  • 6. WHERE? Catalogues, Bibliographies, Registries Institutional repositories Open Access Journals Personal or Department Website
  • 7. WHEN? Ex ante Ex post
  • 8. HOW? Peer review − QI based upon affiliation and disciplinar consensu − Cultural barriers, bias Bibliometrics − QI Citations, quantitative measurements − Impact Factors, H-index, Eigenfactor − Examples: Scimago, Latindex, Publish or Perish, Google Scholar Combination of the two − Examples: Mesur, Merlot, Open Edit
  • 9. Collaborative Assessment Tool: KOS Construction of an ontology which evidences the junctions / hubs and relationships existing between digital publications in the Digital Humanities in Italy Construction of a Knowledge Organisation System, as a supporting tool for the choices of quality evaluation. Included in Linking Open Data Project Cloud (LOD), which is at the moment the most important concrete development of the Semantic Web.
  • 10. Conclusions Some solutions can be found to the evaluation of digital products and publications by taking advantage of information and communication technology There is the need to analyze and propose solutions to theoretical, organizational, educational and legislative issues to ensure a virtuous cycle of publications evaluation.
  • 11. Thank you for your attention! Contact:Annamaria.tammaro@unipr.it

×