社会科学教师研究工作流程的定性研究

Sharon Ince, C. Hoadley, P. Kirschner
{"title":"社会科学教师研究工作流程的定性研究","authors":"Sharon Ince, C. Hoadley, P. Kirschner","doi":"10.1108/jd-08-2021-0168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper is a qualitative study of how social sciences faculty construct their research workflows with the help of technological tools. The purpose of this study is to examine faculty scholarly workflows and how both tools and practices support the research process. This paper could inform academic libraries on how to support scholars throughout the research process.Design/methodology/approachThis is a qualitative study case study of ten faculty members from six research universities from the United States and Canada. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded. Atlas.ti was used to code and analyze the transcripts; each participant was a separate case. Descriptive coding was used to identify digital tools used for collaboration; process and descriptive coding was utilized to examine practices in scholarly workflows.FindingsThrough case study analysis the results of this study include the role of technology in faculty research workflows. Each workflow was grouped into four categories: information literacy, information management, knowledge management, and scholarly communication. The findings included scholars creating simple workflows for efficiency and collaboration and utilizing workarounds.Research limitations/implicationsThe study did not observe faculty in the process of doing research and, thus, only reports on what the researchers say that they do.Originality/valueThe research is unique in that there is almost no research on how social scientists conduct their research workflows and the affordances/impasses of this process.","PeriodicalId":402385,"journal":{"name":"J. Documentation","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A qualitative study of social sciences faculty research workflows\",\"authors\":\"Sharon Ince, C. Hoadley, P. Kirschner\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jd-08-2021-0168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThis paper is a qualitative study of how social sciences faculty construct their research workflows with the help of technological tools. The purpose of this study is to examine faculty scholarly workflows and how both tools and practices support the research process. This paper could inform academic libraries on how to support scholars throughout the research process.Design/methodology/approachThis is a qualitative study case study of ten faculty members from six research universities from the United States and Canada. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded. Atlas.ti was used to code and analyze the transcripts; each participant was a separate case. Descriptive coding was used to identify digital tools used for collaboration; process and descriptive coding was utilized to examine practices in scholarly workflows.FindingsThrough case study analysis the results of this study include the role of technology in faculty research workflows. Each workflow was grouped into four categories: information literacy, information management, knowledge management, and scholarly communication. The findings included scholars creating simple workflows for efficiency and collaboration and utilizing workarounds.Research limitations/implicationsThe study did not observe faculty in the process of doing research and, thus, only reports on what the researchers say that they do.Originality/valueThe research is unique in that there is almost no research on how social scientists conduct their research workflows and the affordances/impasses of this process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J. Documentation\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J. Documentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-08-2021-0168\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Documentation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-08-2021-0168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本论文是一项关于社会科学教师如何借助技术工具构建其研究工作流程的定性研究。本研究的目的是考察教师的学术工作流程,以及工具和实践如何支持研究过程。本文可以为高校图书馆如何在整个研究过程中为学者提供支持提供参考。这是一个定性研究案例,研究对象是来自美国和加拿大6所研究型大学的10名教员。进行并记录半结构化访谈。阿特拉斯。Ti用于编码和分析转录本;每个参与者都是一个独立的案例。描述性编码用于识别用于协作的数字工具;过程和描述性编码被用来检查学术工作流程中的实践。通过案例分析,本研究的结果包括技术在教师研究工作流程中的作用。每个工作流分为四类:信息素养、信息管理、知识管理和学术交流。研究结果包括学者们为提高效率和协作创造了简单的工作流程,并利用了变通方法。研究的局限性/意义这项研究没有观察到教师做研究的过程,因此,只报告了研究人员说他们做了什么。独创性/价值这项研究的独特之处在于,几乎没有研究社会科学家如何进行他们的研究工作流程,以及这个过程的启示/僵局。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A qualitative study of social sciences faculty research workflows
PurposeThis paper is a qualitative study of how social sciences faculty construct their research workflows with the help of technological tools. The purpose of this study is to examine faculty scholarly workflows and how both tools and practices support the research process. This paper could inform academic libraries on how to support scholars throughout the research process.Design/methodology/approachThis is a qualitative study case study of ten faculty members from six research universities from the United States and Canada. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded. Atlas.ti was used to code and analyze the transcripts; each participant was a separate case. Descriptive coding was used to identify digital tools used for collaboration; process and descriptive coding was utilized to examine practices in scholarly workflows.FindingsThrough case study analysis the results of this study include the role of technology in faculty research workflows. Each workflow was grouped into four categories: information literacy, information management, knowledge management, and scholarly communication. The findings included scholars creating simple workflows for efficiency and collaboration and utilizing workarounds.Research limitations/implicationsThe study did not observe faculty in the process of doing research and, thus, only reports on what the researchers say that they do.Originality/valueThe research is unique in that there is almost no research on how social scientists conduct their research workflows and the affordances/impasses of this process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信