Science vs. science: the complexities of interdisciplinary research

Human-Computer Interaction and Web Science are radically interdisciplinary fields, but what does this mean in practical terms? Undertaking research (and writing papers) that encompass multiple disciplinary perspectives and methods is a serious challenge and it is difficult to maintain conferences that fairly review and host contributions from multiple disciplines. The colocation of the ACM WebSci conference with CHI in Paris, offers an unusual opportunity to bring these two communities together. Previous discussions have considered how to conduct interdisciplinary work that bridges HCI/WebSci with specific areas. Our objective is to provide a space for interested researchers from both communities to share their views and approaches to tackling the tensions and complexities associated with interdisciplinary work, whatever fields are being bridged

Teaching Information Literacy Using the Short Story

Stories are powerful teaching tools because of their potential to stimulate the imagination of students and engage them with the material. The short story gives meaning to abstract concepts, aids memory, makes learning fun, and is time efficient. This article explains the approach to teaching information literacy through the use of short stories, including how to create vivid connections to the Association of College and Research Libraries’ Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Provides course instructors with examples of how the short story can be used as a platform to discuss information literacy standards

Next Slide, Please : An Analysis and Conversation on the Uses and Misuses of Microsoft PowerPoint at Library Instruction Conferences

At professional library conferences, the standard method for making a presentation is to talk about a list of points organized into Microsoft PowerPoint slides projected up on the wall. Critics of PowerPoint have argued that it induces stupidity, turns everyone into bores, wastes time, and degrades the quality and credibility of communication. Yet, PowerPoint remains the primary tool for communicating ideas among librarians specializing in instruction. Instruction librarians have an ongoing concern on understanding and using technology to enhance student learning. This presentation, however, flips that focus and concentrates on how technology is used to enhance and impede librarian learning. Drawing on a variety of academics and presentation consultants, it introduces the major ideas and discussions on the strengths and limitations of PowerPoint presentation software. Through the use of content analysis, it examines and describes the PowerPoint presentations delivered at library instruction conferences such as LOEX, LOEX-of-the-West, and WILU. Some questions raised will be: Does PowerPoint make us stupid? How and why we use PowerPoint? What do we find annoying about PowerPoint presentations? What types of information are best conveyed through PowerPoint? How can we energize our PowerPoint presentations? How can we make slides more readable and effective? What makes a good presentation and conference experience? The program invites all those who use PowerPoint and others concerned with communicating effectively to consider the question: “To what extent, if any, is PowerPoint the right tool for my presentation?” Ideally, participants will improve their skills with this useful but confounding technology and thereby improve their instructional and conference presentation skills

DNA Typing: Emerging or Neglected Issues

DNA typing has had a major impact on the criminal justice system. There are hundreds of opinions and thousands of cases dealing with DNA evidence. Yet, at virtually every stage of the process, there are important issues that are just emerging or that have been neglected.At the investigative stage, courts have barely begun to focus on the legal limitations on the power of the police to obtain samples directly from suspects and to use the data from DNA samples in various ways. Issues such as the propriety of DNA dragnets (in which large numbers of individuals in a geographic area are asked to provide samples voluntarily), the validity of court orders for samples based on a lesser standard than probable cause, and the permissibility of collecting DNA abandoned in public places are being litigated for the first time. Using crime-scene samples to infer racial or ethnic characteristics is emerging as a distinct possibility. Then there are the more than 282 million specimens of human biological material stored by private and public agencies in the United States; in some situations, police may well turn to some of these repositories to obtain samples. There is little or no case law analyzing the constitutional restrictions on these investigative practices.After the filing of charges, an accused sometimes moves to dismiss on the ground of the expiration of the statute of limitations. However, there is a movement to carve out a DNA exception to the statute of limitations in cases in which DNA evidence permits the identification of the perpetrator after the expiration of the normal period of limitations. The argument is that the legislative purpose of the statute is to prevent the maintenance of prosecutions based on stale, unreliable evidence but that DNA evidence is so reliable that its availability should lift the bar of the statute. However, little attention has been given to the difficulties inherent in drafting such a legislative exception that will not be overinclusive.At the trial stage, in a growing number of cases, after the defense attacks the weight of the government\u27s DNA evidence, prosecutors are commenting to the jury that the defense has requested an opportunity to retest the DNA. Do such comments run afoul of the Fifth or Sixth Amendment?The purpose of this Article is to identify and analyze such emerging issues. If the criminal justice system is to realize the full potential of DNA technology while maintaining the essential fairness of the system, it must come to grips with these issues in short order

DNA Typing: Emerging or Neglected Issues

DNA typing has had a major impact on the criminal justice system. There are hundreds of opinions and thousands of cases dealing with DNA evidence. Yet, at virtually every stage of the process, there are important issues that are just emerging or that have been neglected.At the investigative stage, courts have barely begun to focus on the legal limitations on the power of the police to obtain samples directly from suspects and to use the data from DNA samples in various ways. Issues such as the propriety of DNA dragnets (in which large numbers of individuals in a geographic area are asked to provide samples voluntarily), the validity of court orders for samples based on a lesser standard than probable cause, and the permissibility of collecting DNA abandoned in public places are being litigated for the first time. Using crime-scene samples to infer racial or ethnic characteristics is emerging as a distinct possibility. Then there are the more than 282 million specimens of human biological material stored by private and public agencies in the United States; in some situations, police may well turn to some of these repositories to obtain samples. There is little or no case law analyzing the constitutional restrictions on these investigative practices.After the filing of charges, an accused sometimes moves to dismiss on the ground of the expiration of the statute of limitations. However, there is a movement to carve out a DNA exception to the statute of limitations in cases in which DNA evidence permits the identification of the perpetrator after the expiration of the normal period of limitations. The argument is that the legislative purpose of the statute is to prevent the maintenance of prosecutions based on stale, unreliable evidence but that DNA evidence is so reliable that its availability should lift the bar of the statute. However, little attention has been given to the difficulties inherent in drafting such a legislative exception that will not be overinclusive.At the trial stage, in a growing number of cases, after the defense attacks the weight of the government\u27s DNA evidence, prosecutors are commenting to the jury that the defense has requested an opportunity to retest the DNA. Do such comments run afoul of the Fifth or Sixth Amendment?The purpose of this Article is to identify and analyze such emerging issues. If the criminal justice system is to realize the full potential of DNA technology while maintaining the essential fairness of the system, it must come to grips with these issues in short order

How Good is Good Enough?: Expert Evidence Under Daubert and Kuhmo

This essay is a response to Professor Edward Imwinkelried\u27s article, Should the Courts Incorporate a Best Evidence Rule into the Standard Determining the Admissibility of Scientific Testimony?: Enough is Enough When it is not the Best. The authors have two basic points. First, the authors wish to make it clear that they never proposed the best evidence rule that he so vigorously attacks, and they think his suggestion that they did so is strained. Second, they wish to reiterate that courts sometimes should do more than they have to ensure that expert testimony is reasonably sound. The important debate underway in the courts and the law reviews concerns the contours of the better evidence principle that the Supreme Court has placed between experts and the witness stand. The question that needs to be answered is this: How much better is goof enough