Re: Off topic - Dagstuhl and research in general - was Re: Trip Reports on Dagstuhl Seminar on Knowledge Graphs

+1

Hugh hits the nail on the head. The wonderful thing about Dagstuhl (and also the Banff KA workshops in the 90s) is that it provides an informal-agile-no-strings-attached venue for senior researchers to openly discuss hot topics.

Reports/gantt charts/formal-road-maps are extras or for other venues.

I also don't buy the 96-percent-of-research-is-rubbish argument or that research is wasting a lot of public funds.

At least in the UK our research contributions/expenditure compares very favourably to e.g. the contributions/expenditure of our politicians currently. Researchers are pretty much constantly measured (for sure in the UK) through our regular Research Excellence Framework; funding acquisition and paper citations. Not many other publicly funded servants are scrutinised in the same way.

John


On 29/08/2019, 12:27, "Steffen Staab" <staab@uni-koblenz.de> wrote:

    +1

    > Am 29.08.2019 um 13:12 schrieb Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org>:
    >
    > Sorry to go a bit off-list-topic, but I think that is where we have got to.
    > Although there is discussion of the nature of KR, KG, etc., the deeper issue here is about research culture, and the Schloss Dagstuhl seminars in particular; along with Paola's criticism of this one.
    >
    > I first went to one of these amazing meetings in 1990 (in fact it was only the third held there).
    > At that time, it was such a refreshing event to attend.
    > Already the cold wind of proposal gantt charts, outcomes, measurements, and mandating of practical results had blown through academia and research labs, so that the freedom of scholarship that such places had been built to nurture was well on the way to destruction.
    > And these requirements have been monotonic increasing since then.
    > So I can only imagine how exceptional a Dagstuhl seminar must feel for current academics.
    >
    > I was going to try to describe how they differ from workshops, conferences and research meeting, but that turns out to be a really big essay.
    > So I will spare myself that - and you, dear reader.
    >
    > However, what I want to do is firmly reject the suggestion in this thread that a research meeting should always have written outcomes.
    >>
    >> On 29 Aug 2019, at 01:21, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> So, Alex  Valentina and all, if I am allowed, the main criticism for me remains":
    >> ...
    >> 1. very limited publicly accessible proceedings for a publicly funded workshop (the report, which as you say is just a  short summary but no other more comprehensive resource is provided)
    >> ...
    >>
    >
    > In fact, looking at the web page for this meeting, I am even disappointed to see extensive reports from the break-out sessions.
    > No!
    > This meeting was just a community of scholars meeting together to try to understand a particular topic in which they were all interested.
    > A requirement to document that discussion is a distraction from the discussion, and makes it less productive.
    > Worse still, a requirement to produce an agreed outcome would seriously undermine the nature of the discussion.
    > And the need to produce such documents can discourage attendance, as they mean attendance may be a bigger commitment than otherwise, and the amount of time for proper discussion is reduced. The idea of a week away is challenging to busy researchers, so limiting the commitment to exactly that is very attractive.
    > An abstract from each speaker which can be written at the seminar (by hand?), indicating what views they may have, and what they spoke about seems perfectly adequate.
    >
    > Yes, if detailed reports and proposals and outcomes come naturally from the activity, that is helpful; but if there is no such thing, then that should be perfectly acceptable.
    >
    > Schloss Dagstuhl was, and still seems to be, a beacon of light in an otherwise dreary, paper-grinding, results-driven and -oriented research world.
    >
    > If only we could have a lot more like it, and even reflect more of it in our own institutions and funding councils.
    >
    > Best
    >
    > --
    > Hugh
    > 023 8061 5652
    >
    >




-- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). The Open University is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in relation to its secondary activity of credit broking.

Received on Thursday, 29 August 2019 12:07:38 UTC