Building a Better Back End: Editor, Author, & Reader Tools for Scholarly Multimedia

Transcription

1 Building a Better Back End: Editor, Author, & Reader Tools for Scholarly Multimedia ENHANCING THE HUMANITIES THROUGH INNOVATION Scholarly multimedia (also called webtexts) are article- or book-length digital pieces of peer-reviewed scholarship designed using media-rich elements to enact the author s argument. They incorporate interactivity, digital media, and different argumentation strategies such as visual juxtaposition and associational logic and are published in online, peer-reviewed journals (e.g., Kairos, Vectors) and presses (e.g., Computers and Composition Digital Press). Scholarly multimedia cannot be printed and retain the author s argument because such texts are composed with webpages with links, animations, images, audio, video, scripts, databases, and other multimedia elements, including but not limited to written text. These publications are unique in that each webtext is individually designed, which makes basic editorial processes such as reviewing, copy- and design-editing, publishing, and indexing significantly more complicated than print-based or linear (e.g. PDF-like) scholarship. To show what scholarly multimedia looks like and how it functions, see Figures 1 and 2, which are semi-representative screenshots (i.e., they don t show the interaction, animation, or audio in this piece) from a recently published webtext in Kairos (see Figures 1 & 2: Susan Delagrange's (2009) "Wunderkammer, Cornell, and the Visual Canon of Arrangement" Figure 1 includes the title, author, and graphical navigation system that uses the visual metaphor of wunderkammern (curiosity cabinets). This navigation is representative of the author s main argument, which states that by juxtaposing multimodal, archival materials using a wunderkammern metaphor, students invention strategies and writing practices can be improved. A reader can click on any of the 36 thumbnail images, which are enlarged as examples and illustrations later in the text (as in Figure 2), to arrive at a corresponding node within the webtext. In Figure 2, the theme of the thumbnail navigation used on the opening page is repeated in the visually abstracted series of small, multicolored boxes across the top of the screen once readers are inside the wunderkammern/webtext. Thus, the navigation, design, and written content of this webtext in combinations that are unique affordances of web-based multimedia publishing all work together to make the author s scholarly argument in innovative, creative ways. However, this snapshot of scholarly multimedia does not do justice to the obstacles of submitting, editing, and publishing such innovative work, and an editorial system is needed that will help authors, editors, and readers more easily edit and distribute scholarly multimedia through open-access venues. This Level II Start-Up proposal will build plug-ins for the only editorial-management system for online journals the open-source Open Journal Systems (OJS), created by the Public Knowledge Project. OJS currently cannot accommodate editorial processes or reader tools that are unique to scholarly multimedia. Building PHP-based plug-ins for scholarly multimedia will help this area of scholarship, which has grown significantly in the last 15 years, overcome its obstacles and become more widespread and sustainable. 4

2 A brief history of scholarly multimedia journals in the humanities The oldest, continuously publishing, scholarly multimedia journal is Kairos: Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy ( which will serve as the test-bed journal for this editorialsystem prototype. Rhetoric and composition graduate students 1 at several U.S. universities started the peer-reviewed journal in 1996 to serve as a venue for scholars who wanted to implement the growing body of hypertext theory in their scholarship. Kairos is an open-access, independent journal with no university affiliation and no subscription fees. Its mission is to publish scholarship that examines digital and multimodal composing practices, promoting work that enacts its scholarly argument through rhetorical and innovative uses of new media (see Kairos>About page). Kairos publishes at least two issues a year, with an average of 5 webtexts per issue, and has a 10% acceptance rate. Its server hosts over 25,000 media files for the more than 500 webtexts the journal has published. Based on analysis of its server logs, readership has increase from 10,000 per month in late 2000 to 45,000 unique readers per month from over 180 countries in early 2006 (at which point we upgraded servers and are working to analyze the recent data). Authors typically design their own scholarly multimedia webtexts, and revisions are done in consultation/mentorship with the editors. Self-design and mentorship reinforces the journal s do-it-yourself (DIY) ethos inherent in writing studies pedagogy, and/but this ethos has also meant the staff uses whatever technologies are easily available with a low learning curve to manage its editorial processes. The journal s volunteer staff works completely at a distance from each other and, thus, has had nearly 15 years of experience in online collaboration in digital publishing. Due both to its low acceptance rate and collegial mentorship of authors, Kairos is considered the preeminent scholarly multimedia journal in writing studies. Other prominent scholarly multimedia journals in the humanities include Computers and Composition Online (published from and 2001 present) and Vectors (published from 2006 present). In addition, some online journals have sections that include scholarly multimedia such as In Media Res, Digital Defoe, and International Journal of Learning and Media. Finally, there is an emerging group of digital book presses that publish content exclusively for web-based viewing MediaCommons Press and Computers and Composition Digital Press (CCDP; affiliated with Utah State University Press). CCDP is the first, online-only, academic press to exclusively publish scholarly multimedia. (The founding editor of CCDP has written a letter of support for this proposal.) All of these publications are peer-reviewed, although some (as described below) use unique but highly effective review systems that differ from traditional print-based peer reviews due to their multimedia, web-based content. With the exception of IJLM (run by MIT Press and subscription-based), all of these journals and presses are free and openaccess, and most run on dispersed volunteer efforts provided by tenure-track professors. This grant, to create scholarly multimedia plug-ins that can be implemented into Open Journal Systems, will update these journals and press s submission and review processes, copy- and design-editing, and access (via readers tools, better incorporation of metadata, and indexing) so scholarly multimedia publications can continue to grow, and do so more sustainably through streamlining of workflows. Editorial workflow issues in scholarly multimedia The Wunderkammer piece shown in Figures 1 and 2 is technologically representative of many scholarly multimedia webtexts that the journals listed above publish. This piece is comprised of nearly 50 linked files: 41 plain text (.txt) files that contain the short pieces of written text for each screen 1 HTML page in which the main Flash animation is embedded 1 The staff is no longer primarily graduate students. As the field of digital writing has grown up, the staff demographics have also changed, although working with and publishing junior scholars is still a fundamental component of the journal s mission. Currently the senior ranking editors are advanced assistant professors, with the lead editor (and PI on this grant) having just received tenure. 5

3 2 Flash/Shockwave files (.swf) files, one of which functions as the interface for the piece and thus draws in the other media files 3 Flash video (.flv) files that are animations/illustrations within the main argument 1 javascript file All of these files need to be transferred to the journal and remain linked/connected in the way the author intended. But before it is transferred, the piece needs to be reviewed. At Kairos, this webtext would follow a peer-review process similar to print or print-like digital journals, with some major exceptions: 1. Blind reviews are nearly impossible in scholarly multimedia because authors often use media elements such as video headshots that are integral to their arguments and removing them for review purposes would essentially undermine the function and purpose of the webtext. Also, authors typically submit URLs instead of zipped files for review (for many reasons that space prevents me from detailing), and most often the webtext resides on a server whose URL points to the author s identity (e.g., because this is the only location the author has to host the piece while it is being composed and reviewed. 2. Due to the multiple disciplinary and technical literacies that go into producing and evaluating scholarly multimedia, such work often requires collaborative reviews from an editorial board that needs to physically interact with a text and synchronously comment on each other s reviews. For instance, in the Wunderkammer piece, two board members might comment specifically on the technical issues in how the ActionScript in Flash is working (offering suggestions for the code). Another three reviewers might comment on several of the embedded animations, suggesting changes that would better reflect the author s argument. Finally, two or three reviewers might focus only on improvements in the written argument, its organization (in the navigation sequence), and/or theoretical points that need support. Each reviewer has their area of expertise and due to the multiplicity of expertise needed to evaluation scholarly multimedia, these reviews need to be done collaboratively to be done best. 3. Once a webtext is accepted for publication, the copy-editing process includes additional stages specific to scholarly multimedia, including usability/accessibility testing and design editing (e.g, checking for alt-tags or long descriptions on images and animations, ensuring that transcriptions are provided for video-only or audio-only portions, and making sure the CSS works across platforms and browsers). Editors, authors, readers, and publishers need media-specific tools to help them engage with and promote scholarly multimedia, but the unique editorial processes for scholarly multimedia, such as those listed above, inhibit this growth. For instance, current review board interactions are limited to asynchronous listserv discussions where participation is increasingly harder to garner because the review tools (e.g., writing about an interactive piece) are too time consuming for time-crunched reviewers. Creating tools that would display a webtext submission within a review system (instead of downloading it for offline review, as OJS does) would allow editors to offer reviewers the opportunity to synchronously chat about a webtext as they interact with it, put sticky notes on areas of the design that may need attention, dis/agree with other reviewer s comments in a similar manner to Facebook s like (and the much-called-for dislike ) button, vote to Accept/Accept with Revisions/Revise and Resubmit/Reject, and track which reviewers receive feedback from their co-reviewers (using a game-like badge-system for their logins/avatars to promote the creative play inherent in scholarly multimedia) and to see which kinds of webtext content they prefer responding to, which would help editors further support reviewers disciplinary and technical expertise when assignments are needed. This scholarly-media-specific review process (see the Appendix for a spec of this review plug-in) is just one of the open-source features we plan to create for the already available, widely distributed, and wellregarded open-source platform, Open Journal Systems, which houses a Plug-ins Gallery with over 40 additional resources that support the main system, built in In addition to the above example, we 6

4 would also create plug-ins for increased implementation of metadata for media elements, better indexing and bibliography management tools (i.e., cross-support of scholarly multimedia with Zotero), and citation tools for individual media elements or portions of elements (e.g., citing a 30-second clip from within a 2-minute podcast), among others. ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN According to its website, Open Journal Systems ( assists with every stage of the refereed publishing process, from submissions through to online publication and indexing. The open-source system offers features that are instrumental for the 5,000+ journals that have already adopted it features such as online submission and management of all content, configurable workflows for journals with multiple sections each with their own review processes, comprehensive indexing, and built-in notifications for stakeholders (including authors) at each stage of the submission and review process. However, OJS does not support scholarly multimedia a growing subset of digital journals that readers, authors, and editors desire 2. Instead, OJS only provides these robust and necessary features for linear/print-based publications that migrate online. However, what is useful about OJS is that the system is modular. The OJS Plug-In Gallery ( contains 40 plug-ins that extend what OJS is capable of. These plug-ins range from including RSS feeds for journal issues to adapting OJS to a SWORD Repository. But none of the current plug-ins accommodates multimedia content. The plug-ins we create for this grant will extend current OJS features (e.g., OJS s review system where readers download word-processing documents and upload completed review letters, or its editorial workflow that moves linearly from copyeditor to layout-editor to proofreader) to accommodate multimedia-specific workflows (e.g., Kairos s 8- stage copy-editing process that includes multiple and recursive copy-editors and design editors, or the collaborative review process mentioned earlier). Other than OJS, some writing studies journals and digital presses use Drupal as a content management system, but feedback from these editors suggests that the software is more work to install and maintain than it s worth, and few humanities professors have the expertise to support a system that poses a constant security concern. One final system, Hyperjournal ( is an open-source program that seems similar in concept to OJS and allowed multimedia content and online peer-review. However, Hyperjournal s development seemed to have stalled in 2007, when the last news items was posted on its website (on which nearly all internal links are broken). HISTORY AND DURATION OF THE PROJECT Discussions about building a better backend for scholarly multimedia journals have been ongoing since early 2006, when Kairos began work on redesigning its reader interface. (Preliminary discussions about a redesign happened as early as 2004, but Kairos lacked the staff to implement it until 2007.) The redesign team, led by volunteer staff members Douglas Eyman, Katherine Gossett, and Karl Stolley, created a three-phase roll-out of a whole redesign, including the front-end (reader interface, which was to include reader tools), an author upload system, and an editorial back-end. In the initial stages of the redesign process, Gossett performed an extensive, qualitative survey of the staff to get a sense of its diverse editorial needs. For instance, most communication between section editors and their staff happens via , and webtexts are transferred from author-accessible server locations to editor-accessible server 2 See Digital Defoe ( the first online journal in 18 th century literary studies, whose editor an assistant professor pushed to make sure scholarly multimedia components were included. Also surprising but commendable is the editor s choice to include undergraduate scholarship the relation of which to scholarly multimedia becomes more evident as students learn to produce digital media more each year. As undergraduates continue to produce such work and assistant professors move up in their fields, scholarly multimedia will only become more prominent. See the Final Product section for more on the pedagogical impact of scholarly multimedia and this plug-in project.) 7

5 locations via FTP. Editorial reviews are still being conducted in a YahooGroups listserv, since that was the best available (archival) technology when the journal began, and the editors did not want to migrate to yet-another supposedly temporary system until the new editorial system could be built. This ambitious three-stage project was initially planned for a three-year period, starting with the reader interface, which the redesign team created and implemented in early The interface is standards compliant, extensible, and flexible so that the journal could easily add editor, author, and reader tools. A brief report about the reader interface redesign was published in the August 2008 issue of Kairos (see The reader interface won the internationally recognized Council of Editors of Learned Journals Design Award for 2008, about which the usually austere, print-based editors called the redesign awesome and innovative. One of this project s first goals is to test compatibility of our new interface with the OJS system. However, momentum on the editors, authors, and reader tools came to a halt in late 2008 because each member of the redesign team had started a new tenure-track job, and as a result, Kairos lead designer (Karl Stolley) resigned to focus on his own scholarship. However, in the last year, the PI of this grant received tenure, the reformed team (Doug, Kathie, and Cheryl) found a PHP programmer (Steve) to work on the project, and we have brainstormed new specs for a back-end that should connect with OJS. Although our original idea was to create our own custom system using Ruby on Rails, we have chosen to build on OJS instead because it has proven to be extensible and durable, which will help our plug-ins to be more durable and useful for other editors and into the future. Also, using PHP one of the most-used programming languages currently available for this kind of work to create these plug-ins means that more programmers will have to skills to tweak them after release. WORK PLAN The timeline for building plug-ins for an editorial system that supports scholarly multimedia lasts from September 2010 to February 2012, for a period of 18 months. Evaluation of the prototype will be through several stages of usability testing (performed with user-centered design methods) in online and face-to-face test settings. The completed prototype will be implemented in a test case at Kairos, allowing the editors and staff to test the prototype s functionality through an actual production/editorial cycle. Timeline September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 Dec 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May June 2011 July August 2011 Sept Dec 2011 January 2012 February 2012 Coordinate grant administration with Research and Sponsored Programs office; Plan travel to consultant location for project kick-off Kick-off meeting with consulting staff (coordinate with DC/NEH trip?); Spec plug-in options Purchase new server & install virtual machine and basic OJS software Build editorial plug-ins; Hire graduate student for following semester Train graduate student to fill database & implement back-issue DOI registration; Build author plug-ins Meet with redesign team to finalize editorial & author plug-ins Beta testing of editor & author plug-ins with selected staff and editorial board members at CCCC Build reader plug-ins Full alpha test to solicit reader, author, and staff feedback at C&W conference (i.e., primary conference for Kairos readers & staff) Implement beta version of full OJS install with plug-ins for use with Kairos; Writing training documentation for plug-ins Test implementation & training docs in copy-editing cycle of Kairos Publish January issue of Kairos; Attend Modern Language Association to present on project; Write white paper Release/distribution of completed plug-in set; Complete white paper. 8

6 STAFF All staff, except the PI who authored this proposal, wrote letters of commitment, which are attached. Cheryl E. Ball is principle investigator of this grant and editor of Kairos. She will oversee usability testing, create training documentation for the Kairos staff, supervise a graduate student who will be migrating previous Kairos content into the OJS install, and travel to promote the system plug-ins. Douglas Eyman is the senior editor of Kairos and serves as technical and server consultant on this grant. He will implement the OJS install with this project s plug-ins for a test run with Kairos and work with Stephen Potts (programmer) to ensure that the building of the prototype meets the journal s (and other presses ) technical and usability needs. Katherine (Kathie) Gossett is the Kairos redesign project manager working with PHP programmer Stephen Potts to ensure timely completion of the prototype. She is responsible for all specs and coordination between the four staff members. Stephen Potts, PHP programmer, will assess the OJS system for compatibility and build the plug-ins based on the design specs. FINAL PRODUCT RESULTS AND DISSEMINATION Dissemination: Project results will be disseminated through presentations at conferences such as the New Media Consortium (NMC), Modern Language Association (MLA), HASTAC, Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC), Computers & Writing (C&W), and others as possible. In addition, articles drawn from the process of building the prototype and from our results will be published in open-access journals such as the Journal of Electronic Publishing. The prototype will be announced as part of these presentations and articles and will be made available for free download through a link from a suitable location most likely from Kairos and the OJS Plug-In Gallery website. We will also provide links to digital media content, such as training videos for scholarly multimedia editorial staff, on social media sites such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Buzz, etc. Long-Term Maintenance: By placing the plug-ins in OJS s Gallery, others in the open-source publishing community can use, modify, and extend these tools in the future, to suit their own needs. In addition, Kairos can call on a selection of staff members (or hire new ones) who know programming languages to do small modifications for our long-term needs. Future additions of DOIs (see budget narrative) will be funded through minimal research monies or a donate feature, which OJS has. Project s use to the field: This project would benefit current editors, authors, and readers of scholarly multimedia journals already being published because it would offer a way for these journals to streamline their editorial workflow. We have been in touch with most of the scholarly multimedia journal and press editors mentioned in the narrative above, and they have agreed that this project is much needed in the field of digital writing studies as well as related areas of study that publish scholarly multimedia. In addition, current OJS users as well as new journal editors might take up use of these tools to start new scholarly multimedia sections or whole journals once they see that the resources are available. As the landscape and value of digital publishing continues to shift with each new technology, we believe that the white paper for this project will help us to outline best practices in scholarly multimedia publishing, which will be a crucial tool in itself for editors, authors, and T&P administrators. Finally, while the impact of this project will revolutionize scholarly publishing, it is also likely to revolutionize institutional teaching practices, as teachers integrate the production of digital media into their classrooms. Undergraduate journals that publish scholarly multimedia such as The Journal of Undergraduate Multimedia Projects (TheJUMP; which released its first issue on March 15, 2010, and Xchanges ( will grow more rapidly as students, themselves, can start their own scholarly or creative multimedia journals for classes and programs. Moreover, a scholarly multimedia editorial system will help institutions overcome obstacles such as changing forms of graduate education and faculty research and publication by assisting with the open-access collection, archiving, and dissemination of media-rich theses and dissertations, faculty scholarship, and creative works. 9