| Original submission元の投稿 : |
発表の題名: Integrating Moodle into a Scholar-BibDesk-Skim academic workflow for researchers on macOS 発表の種類: Presentation (40 mins) プレゼンテーション（４０分） 発表の言語: English 英語 発表のキーワード: academic workflow, BibDesk, Skim, Skim Import, Moodle wiki, PDF files, productivity, efficiency, research, researchers 発表の要約: An efficient academic workflow increases productivity and makes the best use of our time spent on research. In 2011, I started using a (free, mostly open source) user-friendly Scholar-BibDesk-Skim academic workflow for MacOS which solved my problem of too many articles to manage. This is a simple entry-level system that can be integrated with other software and tools. BibDesk is open-source reference management software which has organized my collection of articles, chapters and books (all PDF files) into an efficient, easy-to-use system. Google Scholar provides the BibTeX data that can be quickly copied into BibDesk. PDF files saved in Skim can be easily linked to the BibDesk entry. From there, marking up and annotating Skim PDF files is easy and annotations can be exported. Recently I upgraded my workflow by incorporating the (free, created by Justin Hunt) Skim Import tool to import my Skim annotations into a Moodle wiki to create a collection of core articles. Because the data from so many articles has been streamlined by the workflow process, information is condensed and is very useful to researchers in this form. The Moodle wiki serves as the final destination of the collection and streamlining of data from PDF research articles. This academic workflow is recommended for early career researchers who do not yet have their own workflow and who need to organize a lot of data from a growing collection of PDF files. In this presentation, I’ll introduce the basics of this workflow including Scholar, BibDesk, Skim, Skim Import, Moodle wiki and (not free) PDF Search 2 only, although many other useful tools are available. |
| Abstract要約 : |
An efficient academic workflow increases productivity and makes the best use of our research time. I use a user-friendly Scholar-BibDesk-Skim-Moodle Wiki academic workflow for MacOS which solved my problem of too many articles to manage. BibDesk is open-source reference management software which organizes a collection of articles, chapters and books (all PDF files) into an efficient, easy-to-use system. Google Scholar provides the BibTeX data that can be quickly copied into BibDesk. PDF files saved in Skim can be easily linked to the BibDesk entry. From there, marking up and annotating Skim PDF files is easy. Annotations from important articles can be imported into a Moodle wiki using the (free, created by Justin Hunt) Skim Import tool. The Moodle wiki serves as the final destination of the collection and streamlining of data from PDF research articles. This academic workflow is recommended for early career researchers who do not yet have their own workflow and who need to organize a lot of information from a growing collection of PDF files. |
| Keywordsキーワード : |
academic workflow, BibDesk, Skim, Skim Import, Moodle wiki, PDF files, productivity, efficiency, research, researchers |
|
Peer Review 1| Criteria | Assessment |
|---|
| 8 / | | 10 / | | 10 / | | 9 / | | 8 / | | 50 / | | 95 / |
Feedback I've never encountered a presentation that covers this topic. Highly original and of relevance both within and beyond the Moodle community. A lot of unfamiliar technologies will be discussed, so the presented should stay mindful of the fact that much of this will be new to the audience. Peer Review 2| Criteria | Assessment |
|---|
| 7 / | | 7 / | | 9 / | | 9 / | | 5 / | | 35 / | | 72 / |
Feedback The explanation here is a bit difficult to understand but it seems that this will cover tools used within Moodle to organize academic journal articles such that those articles may be referenced by researchers who write articles for publication. If this assumption is correct, I am sure the information covered here will be of value. I'm not sure, however, if the presentation length is appropriate. It seems a shorter presentation length may be sufficient. Peer Review 3| Criteria | Assessment |
|---|
| 7 / | | 8 / | | 10 / | | 10 / | | 7 / | | 45 / | | 87 / |
Feedback This seems like it will be a very interesting presentation and can demonstrate the power of integrating Moodle with other tools. From the proposal, it isn't clear however what part of the process the presenter plans to focus on. It seems like there could be a lot of material to cover in a 40-minute presentation. The author might want to change to a workshop so that they won't be rushed trying to cover too much material. One final comment is to do some editing because it seems a bit wordy. Just because there is word count max, doesn't mean you need to fill it. |