OK. I now understand the question properly, so I have rewritten my response:
I have done this twice with my two research books.
1. In my “How to do Research: Today's Tips and Tools” I combined my own augmented notes, updated CD-ROM, lecturing experience and recent references together with the best comments that I could find on ResearchGate. None of the responses to my own questions on ResearchGate found their way into my E-book however. But reading other ResearchGater's questions and posts revealed to me some of the problems that researchers are hung up on. The 19 best of these appear as quotes or paraphrases in the my E-book and are referenced in my E-book's section References to Communications as either “Personal communication”, which is through E-mail and RGMail. OR as “Public communication”, I.e., an RG post.
2. In our monograph, “Education Skills for 21st Century Teachers: Voices from a Global Online Educators’ Forum”, my main contribution was the collecting, culling, collating and cataloging of responses to a single question posed by a co-author on ResearchGate.
I started a thread, a large number for feedback with objective to write a paper, But later left it for younger people to come up with a weblinked portal or a paper on the thread.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Has_any_one_compiled_a_list_of_software_processes_used_in_the_CADD
@Ravi, thanks for your insight. @Peter, you were not the only one having difficulty in understanding that the context was ResearchGate.
1. The lesson I learned from my first “co-creation” is that the bulk of our knowledge is still in the books, journals, course notes, CD-ROMs and in the head of the lecturer. Some augmentation and interstitial glue was available for use from scattered ResearchGate pages.
2. When I saw the spotting of a profound question on ResearchGate, and the flood of answers. I said to myself: What a waste of resources!” (People's valuable thoughts, and time). I immediately initiated a research monograph with co-authors. What we learned in the production of our monograph is that the responses that were posted agree with the literature. In retrospect, this is not surprising as, in general, the posters were steeped in the the literature. What the dull research literature did not have were the anecdotes that brightened and authenticated our monograph.
3. On a related note, We are today publishing a fun, non-fiction E-book, “True Fennish Humour”. This was as a result of me spotting that the private, speedily written, raw words of wisdom and wit of my cousin was similarly being wasted as each day it drifted to the bottom of his FaceBook page before vanishing to his private world. Again, I collected, culled, collated, and caressed it into a highly readable E-book.
“Co-Creation” is indeed a New Paradigm form of collaboration. However, do not underestimate the time and patience required to sensibly stitch together the disparate accents and viewpoints! https://www.amazon.com/Ian-Kennedy/e/B01I6L09X2
Thank you for identifying the "UNIVERSE OF DISCOURSE for us. It is strictly RG. Thanks for getting past that gate and into the substance which is spot on. Is this a thread.
What does communication depend on?
Any one familiar with '7 Levels' process of identifying true purpose. It starts with why we have certain needs and goals and drill down seven levels of you compelling WHY as your motivation for doing anything.
SAMPLE: L1-I want to save the world. L2- Why do you want to save the world? If I save the world I will be saving myself and all I care about. L3>>>>>>> to L7
Getting past the GATE leads to substantive RESEARCH. The gate is the iinfinite mind. The first step is 'self talk' or thought that is validated by talking to/with others or communication . In the symbols we find meaning says the "SEMIOLOGIST".
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Human-Computer Interaction
- Collaboration