[ba-ohs-talk] Fwd: Re: CG: Re: SUO: Negotiation Instead of Legislation
The story continues, this time with a web collaboration project associated
with education... (01)
http://participatoryGlossaurus.editthispage.com (02)
Jack (03)
>From: Bob Parks <bobp@lightlink.com>
>
>Greetings:
>I am an educator and lexicographer rather than a logician, but I have an
>interest in John's notion of negotiation of ontologies - or, from my
>perspective, negotiation of meanings we may want to link to the available
>terminology. Last year I proposed a process called "participatory
>glossaurus", based on a discussion group linked with the WebGrid II
>program for developing personal construct maps. I would appreciate any
>reactions to this proposal, and to my more general educational vision of a
>"Participatory Lexipedia":
>http://www.wordsmyth.net/doc_lexipedia.html. Below is one statement of
>the proposed process, to be found also at
>http://participatoryGlossaurus.editthispage.com.
>Best regards,
>Bob Parks
>________
>The Participatory Glossaurus (Glossary-Thesaurus) Development Process: An
>Outline
>
>This is an initial and tentative description of a collaborative process
>for developing an integrated and multipurpose glossary and thesaurus. (See
>FAQ) The procedure and tools mentioned are very tentatively proposed. The
>entire process is intended as a reflective process, involving both content
>creation and a software design process. In other words, we are taking the
>tools at hand, and using them both to develop glossary materials, and to
>discuss the design of a software environment more suited to collaborative
>knowledge development.
>
>1. Initial Phase of Glossary and Thesaurus Development.
>
>(a) Word list development
>
>(b) Concept mapping for initial classification and word list expansion.
>
>(c) Proposed glossary entries are written/edited/revised by participants
>
>(d) Refine initial concept maps for use as thesaurus classifications
>
>2. Use "Knowledge" Acquisition Tools for Comparison
>
>* Expert Systems are designed to reflect the particularistic knowledge of
>an "expert"
>
>* in collecting "expertise", knowledge acquisition software treats
>differences in perspective and absense of common terminology as stumbling
>blocks
>
>* RepGrid is an application of George Kelly's Personal Construct
>Psychology to knowledge acquisition. It involves the elicitation of the
>expert's own classification of objects and attributes
>
>* WebGrid allows collection of personal concepts, as well as comparison of
>concepts by WebGrid's "Socio" function
>
>* Experts conceptual-terminological systems can be compared: (1) consensus
>= same concepts, same terminology (2) conflict = different concepts, same
>terminology; (3) correspondence = same concepts, different terminology;
>(4) contrast = different concepts, different terminology
>
>* Delphi-like processes are possible, involving the feedback to a group of
>experts, with the successive revision of grids, using others' ojects and
>attributes
>
>* consolidation of dimensions of consensus, conflict, correspondence and
>contrast
>
>3. Preserving Perspective With the Participatory Glossaurus Project, the
>aim is not to eliminate the conceptual and terminological differences.
>Instead, the aim is to clarify conceptual differences, and to document
>these differences as important for preserving as well as coordinating
>distinct perspectives for research.
>
>* Experts can create annotations for their concepts and terminology
>
>* if clarification is possible, a consensual glossary and thesaurus entry
>will be recorded. If not, the points of divergence will be preserved. The
>Participatory Glossaurus thus preserves the richness of interpretation
>represented by differences in perspective.
>
>* In the process of discussion among participants, links are to
>quotations, articles, etc. are created
>
>4. Expansion of ParticipationOpen the initial glossary-theasurus process
>to a successively larger group
>
>* Email list/Discussion board for open discussion
>
>5. Terms of Discourse. Develop terms of discourse for the editorial
>process that are sensitive to reflective interpretations, and maintenance
>of difference. (What terminology should be used to propose distinct
>meanings and minor distinctions, register agreements and disagreements,
>etc?) (see Participatory Glossary Template?)
>
>6. Participatory Design Develop a process for evaluating the initial
>collaborative environment, using Manila, an email list, and WebGrid (or
>whatever software we begin with), and proposing specifications for a new
>software environment for collaboration. (04)