COST-ARKWORK is a new network funded by the COST scheme that brings together the multidisciplinary work of researchers of archaeological practices in the field of archaeological knowledge production and use. COST-ARKWORK was launched in November and will run four years until October 2020.
What comes after interpretivism, dichotomisation of the social and technological, is sociomaterialism, ANT, activity theory, or something else the answer to the theoretical headache of trying to figure out what happens out there with different types of things, independent of them being something or non-something, or attempting to hold back the lure of making dichotomies, merely something.
Information science researchers and practitioners discuss information activities using a large number of different terms. A concept that often appears in colloquial discussions of information activities but that has received less systematic attention in information science research is that of information work.
Prof. Ian Ruthwen (University of Strathclyde) held an interesting keynote at 2016 edition of the ISIC - Information Behaviour Conference in Zadar, Croatia. He talked about information behaviours (sic!) related to significant life events and made broadly remarks on what is significant in significant life events and how these aspects have possible repercussions on how people deal with information.
I am glad to be part of the team together with Meena Daivadanam (Nutritional Science, Uppsala University), Åsa Cajander (Department of IT, Uppsala University), my colleague from the DOME consortium, and others, organising a workshop Empowering positive behaviour change in complex food environments at Uppsala Health Summit.
Last week was a tough one but, at the same time, a very successful one. I was organising two conference with my colleagues in Uppsala, the 9th international conference in the Conceptions of Library and Information Science on methods, theories, concepts and conceptions of and in information studies, and the Archaeological Information in the Digital Society 2016, 3rd Centre for Digital Heritage conference organised by the ARKDIS research project.
Three new articles from the ARKDIS project have come out in the beginning of the summer discussing respectively the archiving and management of archaeological information in Sweden, the paradox of the how archaeological primary research data is considered highly important but only seldom used and properly archived and how archaeological documentation is changing in the digital society. Abstracts and links to the papers can be found below. Huvila, I. (2016).
This year's ARIADNE Summer School in Digital curation of archaeological knowledge and Expert forum: The future of archaeological knowledge curation 2021-2026 (organised by prof. Costis Dallas and the DCU of Athena research Centre in Athens) took some interesting steps in explicating the current state and developing insight into the future of archaeological information management. It is still highly obvious that we don't know enough about archaeological practices and knowledge work.
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to have an enjoyable discussion with Johanna Lahtinen about her doctoral thesis Information specialists’ roles and activities in collaborative development projects between education and working life: a case study of the formation of knowledge practices and innovative knowledge communities (summary is available in English) at her public viva.
ARKDIS project held a workshop on Digitisation and communication in Kalmar this week in association with the recently started Graduate School in Contract Archaeology (GRASCA) at the Linneaus University in Kalmar. The invited speakers included prof. Vincent Gaffney (University of Bradford) and Dr. Henry Chapman (University of Birmingham) ARKDIS project visited in spring 2014 in Birmingham, and Dr. Lorna Richardson (Umeå University) together with members of ARKDIS project and GRASCA.
A little bit of (self-)promotion. The article Situational appropriation of information published in 2015 in the AsLib Journal of Information Management 65 (5) was awarded the Outstanding Paper Award of 2016 of the same journal. The paper is freely available to download for one year on the Emerald Insight website. Preprint of the text is available on this site.
From Uppsala University website http://uu.se/jobb/detaljsida/?positionId=99705 : Uppsala University hereby declares the following positions to be open for application One or two PhD student positions in Library and Information Science at the Department of Archival Science, Library and Information Science, Museology and Cultural Heritage Studies (ALM) with starting date September 1, 2016 at the earliest.
Many of the discussions at this year's edition of the Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology CAA 2016 conference held earlier this week in Oslo were directly or somewhat less directly related to anxieties (and occasional optimism) about the impact of various types of technologies (and social arrangements related to technologies) on archaeological (information) work and practices.
Last week, one of the big issues in the Finnish social media landscape was Jenny Lehtinen's piece on the gender inequalities of metawork (fi. metatyö). It tends to be women, in families the mom, who tends to be the one who does most of the coordination, checking of schedules and finding out details for everything that needs to be done. As an example, she writes on how it works to take children to swimming lessons (something a dad might do).
I recently received an invitation to participate in a survey on attitudes on the societal relevance and utility of research conducted by a somewhat well-known Swedish consultancy Demoskop. It is obvious that research without relevance whatsoever is total waste of time but the survey is an excellent example of the difficulty and shear impossibility of asking "general" questions about this topic. The survey will undoubtedly will produce useful results for those who have paid for it.
People hate complex information systems for a good reason. Why on earth anyone should use a really annoying and difficult to grasp library catalogues when you have learned to appreciate the simplicity of the Google interface.
Uppsala University is an international research university focused on the development of science and education. Our most important assets are all the individuals who with their curiosity and their dedication makes Uppsala University one of Sweden’s most exciting work places. Uppsala University has 41.000 students, 6,500 employees and a turnover of SEK 5,900 million.
I have been planning for some time to participate in the Organisational learning, knowledge and capabilities (OLKC) conference and finally managed to do it in the 2015 edition of the event organised at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan, Italy.
The Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology conference was held this year in Siena. Conference had gathered approximately 500 delegates and a very impressive number of papers, posters and roundtables. The book of abstracts was massive and reminded of proceedings volumes of the same conference from ten years ago. It is difficult to pinpoint particular themes at the conference because of the very large variety of contributions.
One of the hottest buzzwords of business research is gamification. Similarly to many other terms from Web 2.0 to BPR, and well yes, knowledge management, it is offered as a miracle cure to problems organisations are facing today and a recipe for success to make a day tomorrow. In a similar way than many other buzzwords, there is something in it (of course) but things are perhaps not that simple that gamification can be taken and made to work like a new hammer.