Skip to main content

syllabus

Collaboration Seminar Syllabus

(a living document; see the most current document)

 

This is a collectively-built, in-progress syllabus for a faculty seminar on the topic of collaboration at Swarthmore College, Spring 2016. Topics include competing definitions of collaboration across disciplines, formal and informal collaboration, rich descriptions of collaboration, metrics and measures of collaborations, digital and analog tools for collaboration, literary and historical forms of collaboration, cost/benefit analyses of collaboration, cross-institutional collaborations, institutional versus individual collaborations, collaboration narratives, failed or tragic collaborations, and teaching collaborations. Seminar members include statisticians, historians, psychologists, visual artists, literary critics, physicists, philosophers, engineers, education studies researchers,  linguists, art historians, and computer scientists.  Our format will accommodate both discussions of readings based on the syllabus as well as small experiments, and planning for possible future related projects.

 

Dates: Friday, January 29th; Friday, February 12th [change to the 19th?]; Friday, February 26th; Friday, March 18th; Friday, April 1st; Friday April 15th

Location: Science Center 102

Conveners: Rachel Sagner Buurma

(rbuurma1@swarthmore.edu)

Department of English Literature

LPAC 302

610-328-8666

 

Lynne Steuerle Schofield

(lschofi1@swarthmore.edu)

Department of Mathematics and Statistics

SC 148

610-328-7896



Acknowledgements: Thanks to the Aydelotte Foundation for financial and administrative support for the seminar.  Specific thanks to Pam Shropshire, Eric Jensen, Tim Burke, and Grace Ledbetter, Mike Kappeler, the Department of English Literature, the Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Ayse Kaya, Philip Jefferson, Sunka Simon, Mike Reay, Allen Kuharski, Barbara Milewski, Jim Lovelace, and the members of the seminar.  

 

Week 1: Introduction

 

Topics

Definitions and types; tools and practices (writing, materiality); description and narratives, intra-, extra-, and inter-disciplinarity; what is non-collaboration?

 

Required Reading

 

Short blog post on “former art school Black Mountain College as an example of collaborative academic practice” indebted to the ideas of John Dewey.

 

  • Bozeman, Barry, Daniel Fay, and Catherine P. Slade. “Research Collaboration in Universities and Academic Entrepreneurship: The-State-of-the-Art.” The Journal of Technology Transfer 38, no. 1 (November 28, 2012): 1–67. doi:10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8.

Lit review of recent work on academic research collaborations in the sciences. Written from a public funding perspective, but useful to us generally as an overview of existing work on this subject. Long but skim-able, with useful chart of work on research collaboration. Attached.

 

  • Inge, M. Thomas. “Collaboration and Concepts of Authorship.” PMLA 116, no. 3 (May 1, 2001): 623–30.

A brief overview history of literary collaborations and how we think about them. Attached.

 

  • Wilkins, Jon. “E. O. Wilson is Wrong Again - Not About Math, but About Collaboration.”

http://jonfwilkins.com/2013/04/e-o-wilson-is-wrong-again-not-about-math-but-about-collaboration

Short blog post describing the necessity of a common language when a biologist and a mathematician collaborate, drawing an example from the collaborative translation of poetry.

 

  • Wuchty, Stefan, Benjamin F. Jones, and Brian Uzzi. “The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge.” Science 316, no. 5827 (May 18, 2007): 1036–39.

Bibliometric analysis of collaboration and coauthorship comparing differences across the disciplines. Attached.

 

As you read these pieces, keep in mind the following questions that we will use (and modify, and rewrite) to guide our discussions over the course of the semester.  You may find it useful to jot down notes about the readings that you might share with the group.

 

  1. How might what you’ve read for this week help you think about how you might collaborate differently - or reaffirm one of your existing practices - in your research and/or in your teaching?

  2. What further questions about collaboration did this reading open up?

  1. Thought experiment: what next steps you might you take to try to answer these questions?

  2. What does this reading cite that you to want track down and read? (Add those readings to our Zotero library!)

  3. What doesn’t this reading cite that you think it should have?

  4. How did you take notes on this reading when you read it yourself? How did you share your notes and thoughts with the group?

  5. Imagine you are teaching this reading(s) in your own class, what discussion questions would you pose to your students about this work?



Researcher Profile Assignment:

Bring a short (100-200 words) written description of a (failed)(successful?)(moonshot?) collaboration to share with the group.

Week 2: Histories

 

Topics

Epistemology, teaching, history of technology, digital vs analog, artists' workshops, co-creation

 

Required Reading

 

Bibliography Building

Find and engage with two or three additional pieces (other than the required reading) of scholarship on the topics listed above. Add them to the seminar’s collective Zotero library[link]. Come prepared to describe and discuss them with your group members.

 

Discussion Questions

  1. How might what you’ve read for this week help you think about how you might collaborate differently - or reaffirm one of your existing practices - in your research and/or in your teaching?

  2. What further questions about collaboration did this reading open up?

  3. Do a thought experiment about what next steps you might do to further research your questions.

  4. What does this reading cite that you to want track down and read?

  5. What doesn’t this reading cite that you think it should have?

  6. How did you take notes on this reading when you read it yourself? How did you share your notes and thoughts with the group?

  7. Imagine you are teaching this reading(s) in your own class, what discussion questions would you pose to your students about this work?

 

Tagging Assignment:

As a group, discuss what tags are appropriate for each reading. Once you’ve agreed (or disagreed!) on a set of tags, add them to the seminar’s collective Zotero library for the entire seminar to see based on the instructions given during the Week 1 meeting.

 

Researcher Profile Assignment:

Research your partner and engage with their scholarship in some way (e.g., read an article or two that they’ve written, examine some of their artwork, read some reviews of their book). Write a few paragraphs or a set of notes on their research and the questions their work raises for you.




 

Week 3: Measurement, Value, and Representation

 

Topics

Authorship, subauthorship, hierarchies, bibliometrics, tenure, responsibility, formal vs. informal, ethics, lone genius and other creator/authorship myths, myths, materiality, intellectual property, assessment, dyadic + triadic

 

Required Reading

  • Bonilla, Jesús Zamora. “The Nature of Co-Authorship: A Note on Recognition Sharing and Scientific Argumentation.” Synthese 191, no. 1 (December 20, 2012): 97–108. doi:10.1007/s11229-012-0238-0.

  • Wolfers, Justin. “When Teamwork Doesn’t Work for Women.” The New York Times, January 8, 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/upshot/when-teamwork-doesnt-work-for-women.html.

  • Cronin, Blaise. “Collaboration in Art and in Science: Approaches to Attribution, Authorship, and Acknowledgment.” Information & Culture: A Journal of History 47, no. 1 (2012): 18–37. doi:10.1353/lac.2012.0005.

  • Lander, Eric. “The Miracle Machine.” Transcript of talk at the National Math Festival. 4/16/2015

 

Recommended

 

Bibliography Building

Find and engage with two or three additional pieces (other than the required reading) of scholarship on the topics listed above.  Add them the seminar’s collective Zotero library.Come prepared to describe and discuss them with your group members.

 

Discussion Questions

  1. How might what you’ve read for this week help you think about how you might collaborate differently - or reaffirm one of your existing practices - in your research and/or in your teaching?

  2. What further questions about collaboration did this reading open up?

  3. Do a thought experiment about what next steps you might do to further research your questions.

  4. What does this reading cite that you to want track down and read?

  5. What doesn’t this reading cite that you think it should have?

  6. How did you take notes on this reading when you read it yourself? How did you share your notes and thoughts with the group?

  7. Imagine you are teaching this reading(s) in your own class, what discussion questions would you pose to your students about this work?

 

Tagging Assignment:

As a group, discuss what tags are appropriate for each reading. Once you’ve agreed (or disagreed!) on a set of tags, add them to the seminar’s collective Zotero library [link] for the entire seminar to see based on the instructions given during the Week 1 meeting.

 

Researcher Profile Assignment:

Give and record a 20-minute interview with your partner to learn about their work (teaching, research, career). Write a 100-200 word profile possibly including links to their work and teaching. Share it with your partner and other group members.

 

 

Week 4: Expertise and its opposites

 

Topics

Teaching, epistemology, crowdsourcing vs. expertise, interdisciplinarity, interspecies, posthumanist, unintentional, w/o shared goals

 

Required Reading

 

  • Brabham, Daren. Introduction and Chapter 1, Crowdsourcing. MIT Press, 2013.

 

  • Galison, Peter. “The Collective Author” in Scientific Authorship: Credit and Intellectual Property in Science. Edited by Mario Biagioli and Peter Galison,  325-353. New York and Oxford: Routledge, 2003.

 

  • Shulist, Sarah. “Collaborating on Language: Contrasting the Theory and Practice of Collaboration in Linguistics and Anthropology.” Collaborative Anthropologies 6, no. 1 (2013): 1–29. doi:10.1353/cla.2013.0006.

 

  • Donna Haraway, “Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Chthulucene: Staying with the Trouble”, 5/9/14. Accessed December 17, 2015. https://vimeo.com/97663518.

 

 

Recommended

 

 

 

Bibliography Building

Find and engage with two or three additional pieces (other than the required reading) of scholarship on the topics listed above.  Come prepared to describe and discuss them with your group members.




Discussion Questions

  1. How might what you’ve read for this week help you think about how you might collaborate differently - or reaffirm one of your existing practices - in your research and/or in your teaching?

  2. What further questions about collaboration did this reading open up?

  3. Do a thought experiment about what next steps you might do to further research your questions.

  4. What does this reading cite that you to want track down and read?

  5. What doesn’t this reading cite that you think it should have?

  6. How did you take notes on this reading when you read it yourself? How did you share your notes and thoughts with the group?

  7. Imagine you are teaching this reading(s) in your own class, what discussion questions would you pose to your students about this work?

 

Tagging Assignment:

As a group, discuss what tags are appropriate for each reading. Once you’ve agreed (or disagreed!) on a set of tags, add them to the seminar’s collective Zotero library [link] for the entire seminar to see based on the instructions given during the Week 1 meeting.

 

Researcher Profile Assignment:

1.Ten-second research videos! [Link] Working with your partner and drawing on what you have learned about each other’s research, prepare scripts for a ten-second research video (to be filmed next time you meet.)

2. Finalize 100-200 word profile in collaboration with profilee and other group members.




















Week 5: Institutions

 

Topics

Cross-institutional, within-institutional, trans-disciplinary. SLAC collaboration, community college collaborations, teaching

 

Required Reading

  • Baba, Yasunori, Naohiro Shichijo, and Silvia Rita Sedita. “How Do Collaborations with Universities Affect Firms’ Innovative Performance? The Role of ‘Pasteur Scientists’ in the Advanced Materials Field.” Research Policy 38, no. 5 (June 2009): 756–64. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.006.

 

Bibliography Building

Find and engage with two or three additional pieces (other than the required reading) of scholarship on the topics listed above.  Come prepared to describe and discuss them with your group members.

 

Discussion Questions

  1. How might what you’ve read for this week help you think about how you might collaborate differently - or reaffirm one of your existing practices - in your research and/or in your teaching?

  2. What further questions about collaboration did this reading open up?

  3. Do a thought experiment about what next steps you might do to further research your questions.

  4. What does this reading cite that you to want track down and read?

  5. What doesn’t this reading cite that you think it should have?

  6. How did you take notes on this reading when you read it yourself? How did you share your notes and thoughts with the group?

  7. Imagine you are teaching this reading(s) in your own class, what discussion questions would you pose to your students about this work?

 

Tagging Assignment:

As a group, discuss what tags are appropriate for each reading. Once you’ve agreed (or disagreed!) on a set of tags, add them to the seminar’s collective Zotero library [link] for the entire seminar to see based on the instructions given during the Week 1 meeting.



Researcher Profile Assignment:

Ten-second research videos! [Link] Grab a camera and film your 10-second research video.  Do at least three takes each - possibly in different locations or with different props or different styles?

Week 6: Facilitating Collaboration

 

Topics

Tools reprised, teaching, guidelines, productive vs. unproductive practices, value, DH, Peripeteia, student, faculty

 

Required Reading

  • tbd

 

Bibliography Building

As a whole group, discuss the bibliography and its tags.  Discuss process of tagging and taking notes.  What worked? What didn’t work?  How was your group’s collaboration helped or hindered by the tools each of you individually used? What’s your favorite article? What (if any) article did you hate? What article did you find useful that you never would have found on your own? Tweet our bibliography. Drink wine.

 

Researcher Profile Assignment:

 

Read profiles. View 10-second research videos. Drink wine.