Proceedings of the Twin Talks Workshop at DHN 2020, co-located with Digital Humanities in the Nordic Countries (DHN 2020)
The old and well-known saying teaches us not to invent the wheel twice. Even though cooperation and knowledge sharing has always been a part of higher education activities, the topic gets never outdated. We tend to think that in order to have fruitful cooperation, it has to be planned and organized well. This often leads to structured and tightly scoped projects and collaboration activities which bring results and answers to pre-defined questions and targets. Open and cross-disciplinary sharing of practices provides another, more experimental-driven approach to cooperation. It offers the sharers the opportunity to describe their experiences and learnings from their own point of view, without the limitation of considering the different interpretations from readers and listeners. It also enables the sharer to use familiar terminologies and expressions and focus on the content. Storytelling has been introduced to the academic field as a valid format of sharing practices, experiences and learnings. Stories appear in multiple formats, and it has to be noted that as storytelling is sharer-driven, the choice of format is also in the hands of the sharer. Stories can be personal or organizational, even multiorganizational. They can be formal or free-form, fact-driven or based on opinions, and the heterogeneity of stories offers the reader and listener a wide choice of interpretations. Learning from stories requires an open mind and the ability to transfer the message from the story to the reader’s own context. While this can be demanding, it is also rewarding, as it does not limit the message transfer in any way. There are no pre-defined targets or expectations for the utilization of the learnings, and each reader can interpret the message of the story according to their own contexts and needs. The demanding side comes with a fact that stories rarely give readymade answers or solutions to the reader’s needs, but require effort in interpretation. While the world around us becomes more and more complex, the solutions and answers to rising challenges and needs also need to be discovered from different sources than before. The best solutions may be found in the most unexpected places and stories. With open eyes, ears and minds.
In this study, we aim to discover Russian “centers of excellence” and explore patterns of their collaboration with each other and with foreign partners. Highly cited papers serve as a proxy for “excellence” and co-authored papers as a measure of collaborative efforts. We find that at the moment research institutes (of the Russian Academy of Sciences as well as others) remain the key players, in spite of recent government initiatives to stimulate university science. The contribution of commercial sector to high-impact research is negligible. More than 90% of Russian highly cited papers involve international collaboration, Russian institutions often not playing a dominant role there. Patterns of national (“intra-national”) collaboration differ significantly across different types of organizations, the strongest ties are between three nuclear/particle physics centers. We draw a co-authorship map to visualize collaboration between Russian centers of excellence.
The article deals with the concept of the development of society as an innovative. The author puts forward the assumption of the formation of discursive anthropocentric economy, new predictive models of innovative communication.
In the article the analysis of the current innovative discourse is given. The author researches the paradigms of innovative PR, media (new models, subjects, objects, etc.) and gives new concepts of researches and define a new paradigm of PR and media as collaborative ones. As a result, the author comes to the conclusion that the ontological status of professional communication in the innovation society changes.
We create collaborative environment for collaborative creation, improvement and promoting bills within public and legislative projects. Enacting a new law means that a community devises out new rules which help it to become more efficient. Below are the principles on which legislative collaboration is based: Public construction of a document aiming at complex cloud issues has high educational value. The practice helps not only produce a quality document and build a community of people interested in its implementation, but promote the innovative document, maintain a new level of its understanding and perception by the society. 518 Collaborative document creation and voting has a priority over document deliberation. Our technology allows collaboration participants to create their own text versions, that could be voted for by other participants. The value of deliberation is less than the value of collaboration. Contemporary collaboration does not always need discussions. Discussion can take so much time and efforts that participants do not have resources to collaborate. The process of selecting text segments is based on the participants' voting. All the votes should be counted but the weight of each vote depends on the participant's impact and the estimation of this impact by the community. The more is the participant's impact and its estimation, the more is the participant's vote weight.
A continues microelectronics education system has been developed at MIEM. The approach provides all microelectronic products design stages learning and is based on close software/hardware relations and wide collaboration with industry enterprises during education process. The microelectronic products design stages studied inside the microelectronics educational program are considered.
The volume includes scholarly articles and primary documents on the war on the Eastern Front of World War II. Particular attention is paid to everyday life under the Nazi occupation and experiences of ordinary people under different regimes.
In this study, we discover Russian “centers of excellence” and explore patterns of their collaboration with each other and with foreign partners. Highly cited papers serve as a proxy for “excellence” and coauthored papers as a measure of collaborative efforts. We find that currently research institutes (of the Russian Academy of Sciences as well as others) remain the key players despite recent government initiatives to stimulate university science. The contribution of the commercial sector to high-impact research is negligible. More than 90% of Russian highly cited papers involve international collaboration, and Russian institutions often do not play a dominant role. Partnership with U.S., German, U.K., and French scientists increases markedly the probability of a Russian paper becoming highly cited. Patterns of national (“intranational”) collaboration in world-class research differ significantly across different types of organizations; the strongest ties are between three nuclear/particle physics centers. Finally, we draw a coauthorship map to visualize collaboration between Russian centers of excellence.