A Coalition for Social Learning Across Content : Hypothesis

“Today we’re announcing a coalition, Social Learning Across Content, of educational content creators, technology platforms, service providers, and stakeholder groups that are coming together in support of cross-platform social learning. Moving forward, this coalition will work together to establish user-friendly, interoperable best practices and solutions to bring social learning to all content….

Coalition members will work together to identify the technical challenges standing in the way of interoperability, and to propose and prototype solutions for those challenges. They’ll also work to ensure that solutions are accessible and remain so as different technologies are brought into contact with different contact platforms. A set of technical recommendations that characterize the solution set will be published, including any recommendations for how existing standards like Learning Tools Interoperability (LTI) could be extended if need be….”

A Coalition for Social Learning Across Content | Hypothesis

Today we’re announcing a coalition, Social Learning Across Content, of educational content creators, technology platforms, service providers, and stakeholder groups that are coming together in support of cross-platform social learning. Moving forward, this coalition will work together to establish user-friendly, interoperable best practices and solutions to bring social learning to all content.

In Review: a new way to open up the submissions and peer review process – Research in progress blog

“That’s why we’ve created a new service, In Review. Powered by Research Square, In Review offers authors a personal dashboard to easily track the status of their manuscript, and the opportunity to share it with the wider community earlier in the submission and peer review process. In the first instance, this service will be available across four BMC journals….

By using In Review authors will be able to:

  • Share their work while it is under review and engage the wider community in discussion (through the Hypothes.is open annotation tool)
  • Track the status of their manuscript on a more granular level – including number of reviewers invited, number of reports received, and immediate access to reviewer reports
  • Demonstrate the integrity of their work with a transparent editorial checklist
  • Benefit from early sharing, including potential for earlier citations and collaboration opportunities…”

Hypothesis Awarded $2M of New Funding From The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation – Hypothesis

“Hypothesis is pleased to announce that it has recently been awarded $2 million in new funding from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. This is our sixth grant from the Mellon Foundation, and we are grateful for their continued endorsement of our mission and work to scale the use of open, standards-based web annotation and the Hypothesis annotation tool suite in scholarship and research. Specifically, the focus of this multi-year grant, Scaling Annotation in Scholarship and the Humanities, will be to support feature enhancements and program development for Hypothesis’ annotation software and services, with an emphasis on the arts and humanities. With the support of the Mellon Foundation, Hypothesis has made substantial progress in adding important features such as group functions and moderation, realizing a W3C standard for web annotation, building the Annotating All Knowledge Coalition to bring together major publishers and scholarly platforms around open annotation, and growing our user base in the arts and humanities through outreach in publishing and education. This new round of funding will enable us to capitalize on our previous work and current trends in scholarship, publishing and education to accelerate growth in annotation and execute our business strategy for long term sustainability….”

How to improve Wikipedia citations with Hypothesis direct links – Jon Udell

“Wikipedia aims to be verifiable. Every statement of fact should be supported by a reliable source that the reader can check. Citations in Wikipedia typically refer to online documents accessible at URLs. But with the advent of standard web annotation we can do better. We can add citations to Wikipedia that refer precisely to statements that support Wikipedia articles….”

Open science in action! | EurekAlert! Science News

“Public health emergencies such as the currently spreading Zika disease might be successfully necessitating open access for the available biomedical researches and their underlying data, yet filtering the right information, so that it lands in the hands of the right people, is what holds up professionals to bring the adequate measures about. Submitted to the Open Science Prize contest, the present grant proposal, prepared with the joint efforts of scientists affiliated with Hypothes.is, ContentMine, University of Cambridge, Cottage Labs LLP and Imperial College of London, suggests a new scholarly assistant system, called amanuens.is, based on the existing ContentMine and Hypothes.is prototypes. Its aim is to combine machines and humans, so that mining critically important facts and making them available to the world can be made not only significantly faster, but also less costly. Through their publication in the open access journal Research Ideas and Outcomes (RIO), the scientists, who are also well-known open access and open data proponents, are looking for further support, feedback and collaborations. While Hypothes.is is a mixture of software and communities, which together annotate the available literature, ContentMine are building an open source pipeline to extract facts from scientific documents, thus making the literature review process cheaper, more rigorous, continuous and transparent. The role of amanuens.is is meant to bring these two systems together …”

Annotating the scholarly web : Nature News & Comment

Would researchers scrawl notes, critiques and comments across online research papers if software made the annotation easy for them? Dan Whaley, founder of the non-profit organization Hypothes.is, certainly thinks so.  Whaley’s start-up company has built an open-source software platform for web annotations that allows users to highlight text or to comment on any web page or PDF file. And on 1 December, Hypothes.is announced partnerships with more than 40 publishers, technology firms and scholarly websites, including Wiley, CrossRef, PLOS, Project Jupyter, HighWire and arXiv.  Whaley hopes that the partnerships will encourage researchers to start annotating the world’s online scholarship. Scientists could scribble comments on research papers and share them publicly or privately, and educators could use annotation to build interactive classroom lessons, he says. If the idea takes off, some enthusiasts suggest that the ability to annotate research papers online might even change the way that papers are written, peer reviewed and published.  Hypothes.is, which was founded in 2011 in San Francisco, California, and is supported by philanthropic grants, has a bold mission: ‘To enable conversations over the world’s knowledge.’ But the concept it implements, online annotation, is as old as the web itself. The idea of permitting readers of web pages to annotate them dates back to 1993; an early version of the Mosaic web browser had this functionality. Yet the feature was ultimately discarded. A few websites today have inserted code that allows annotations to be made on their pages by default, including the blog platform Medium, the scholarly reference-management system F1000 Workspace and the news site Quartz. However, annotations are visible only to users on those sites. Other annotation services, such as A.nnotate or Google Docs, require users to upload documents to cloud-computing servers to make shared annotations and comments on them.  Hypothes.is is not the only service that wants to make it easy for users to leave annotations across the entire web. A competing offering is a web annotation service from Genius, a start-up firm that began as a site for annotating rap lyrics. In April, it launched services such as browser plugins to help users to annotate any web page. But unlike Hypothes.is, the Genius code is not open-source, its service doesn’t work on PDFs, and it is not working with the scholarly community. On the scholarly side, the reference-management tool ReadCube makes it possible for users to annotate PDFs of papers viewed on a ReadCube web reader — but that software is proprietary. (ReadCube is owned by Digital Science, a firm operated by the Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, which also has a share in Nature’s publisher.) …”