Monitoring the transformation of a domain-specific portal into a social information hub

1,658 views

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,658
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Monitoring the transformation of a domain-specific portal into a social information hub

  1. 1. Monitoring the transformation of a domain-specific portal into a social information hub Ramón Ovelar Virtual Campus – University of the Basque Country GIEL – ELIT Research Group SIRTEL 08 – Maastricht Pecha Kutcha talk
  2. 2. What is a domain-specific portal? <ul><li>Domain-specific portals are gateways to an integrated collection of electronic resources where complementary services such as internal search, personalization, communication tools and push-technology information services are frequently provided (Martínez, Palacios 2004) </li></ul><ul><li>Horizontal portal (Yahoo, Excite) vs vertical (domain-specific) </li></ul>
  3. 3. Domain-specific portals and dissemination <ul><li>Domain-specific portals have adequate features for displaying and disseminating the outcomes of a systematic surveillance of a domain area </li></ul><ul><li>They are widespread used for fostering R+D and innovation </li></ul><ul><li>3 aspects are relevant: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Technology , that enables new environments for collaborative work and communication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Information , critical in a context of permanent change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Online community , based on participation, affinity </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. THEMATIC PORTALS 1.0 TECHNOLOGY ONLINE COMMUNITY INFORMATION CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ZOPE / PLONE PHP NUKE MAMBO / JOOMLA DRUPAL RESOURCES REPORTS POLITICS BEST PRACTICES E-LEARNING LEVERAGING INFORMATION FILTERING FORESCASTING USERS PARTICIPATION FORUMS AFFINITY SUGGESTIONS 3 main elements: community, technology and information A SENSE OF BELONGING INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES EXPERTS ARE GATEKEEPERS
  5. 5. ¿are domain-specific portal, based on experts gatekeepers, adequate tools for managing information overload in a Web 2.0 context?
  6. 6. WEB 2.0, API MICROCONTENT, SYNDICATION, BARRIERS FOR PARTICIPATION ARE LOWERING A NEW ATTITUDE: DIGITAL NATIVES SOCIAL NETWORKS EMERGE IN THE WEB ARENA ONLINE IDENTITY COMMUNITY: A SOCIAL GATEKEEPER SOCIAL NETWORKS BLOGS, WIKIS, BROADBAND… SOCIAL MEDIA USER GENERATED CONTENT (UGC) WEB 2.0 SOCIAL NETWORKS SOCIAL MEDIA UGC TRANSFORMING THEMATIC PORTALS INTO SOCIAL INFORMATION HUBS A CLOUD OF WEB SERVICES TOOLS THAT USERS SHOULD FIND IN A 2.0 PORTAL <ul><li>RSS FEEDS </li></ul><ul><li>AGGREGATION </li></ul><ul><li>APIs </li></ul><ul><li>PROFILES </li></ul><ul><li>OPEN SOCIAL </li></ul><ul><li>TAGS </li></ul><ul><li>RATINGS </li></ul><ul><li>COMMENTS </li></ul><ul><li>¿MODERATION? </li></ul><ul><li>LIFESTREAM </li></ul>
  7. 7. Features of the Púlsar CMS
  8. 8. Calendar SEP 8 OCT 8 NOV 8 DIC 8 JAN 9 FEB 9 MAR 9 ABR 9 MAY 9 JUN 9 JUL 9 AUG 9 SEP 9 OCT 9 NOV 9 DIC 9 DRUPAL DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 AUG8 JUL8 <ul><li>Only admins contribute content </li></ul><ul><li>Authors can tag content </li></ul><ul><li>Users can rate and comment most of the sections </li></ul>Features phase 1
  9. 9. Calendar SEP 8 OCT 8 NOV 8 DIC 8 JAN 9 FEB 9 MAR 9 ABR 9 MAY 9 JUN 9 JUL 9 AUG 9 SEP 9 OCT 9 NOV 9 DIC 9 DRUPAL DEVELOPMENT FASE 1 FASE 2 AUG8 JUL8 Features phase 2 <ul><li>Users have a profile and can make connections </li></ul><ul><li>Users can contribute to some sections </li></ul><ul><li>Users can aggregate feeds where every post can be managed by the social information retrieval features </li></ul>
  10. 10. Objetive To study and evaluate the performance of the set features added to the portal for building a social information management system in the domain of e-learning Data retrieval Data processing <ul><li>Evaluation of the outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Recommendations for designing a set of features </li></ul>
  11. 11. Questions <ul><li>¿What are the outcomes of adding to our portal features allowing users to contribute, organize and use social information retrieval tools? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>¿Is user generated content improving the portal performance for systematic forecasting and dissemination? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>¿Which are the motivations for contributing content? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>¿Do the social information retrieval features help users to manage information overload? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>¿Which features are more used? ¿Could we appreciate differences between users profiles, motivations…? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>According to the outcomes, what kind of reccomendations can be made to draw a model of SIR features for a domain-specific portal? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Complementary questions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>¿Which are the social networks that we can draw analysing the nodes (users, content…) of the portal? </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Available data sources Not interesting in first and second phase and difficult External applications, using APIs or web scrapers Not interesting in first and second phase and difficult External applications, data provided by administrators of these applications (raw data in dumps) Interesting but difficult Social network analysis Relevant and affordable Logs / Google Analytics Relevant and affordable Questionnaires and interviews
  13. 13. thanks Ramón Ovelar Virtual Campus – University of the Basque Country GIEL – ELIT Research Group

×