public engagement – Frances Ryan

My new “academic” Twitter: @FrancesRyanPhD

Frances Ryan/ 10 September 2017

I have recently started a new Twitter account that is dedicated to my professional or “academic” self (@FrancesRyanPhD). It wasn’t something I was desperate to do, and it isn’t something I’m completely happy about. However, it is something that I felt I should do.

The decision to start a new account was not taken lightly. Because I started my @CleverFrances account as a personal space, my followers reflect my personal interest. But as I began tweeting more and more about my PhD, I started to gain more academic followers—especially when I attended conferences where I was tweeting quite a bit with the conference hashtag.

However, I noticed that my increased academic following was making me feel unsure about what or how to post. I feared that people were following me based on a series of research-related posts at a conference and that they might feel cheated or conned when I started tweeting about whisky and running the following week. Because, if I’m honest, I tweet more personal stuff than research stuff.

The uncertainty soon led me to lose a bit of joy when I was tweeting. I felt obligated to my academic followers to be more academic. But I also felt that I needed to be true to myself and the original intent of my Twitter account, which meant I had to continue tweeting rubbish.

And so, I’ve decided that I have to maintain two accounts: One, @CleverFrances, to represent the full-on Frances and one, @FrancesRyanPhD, to represent the academic Frances.

I will continue to tweet at least some academic stuff from my personal account because my PhD is part of the whole me. However, I will stick to academic tweets on my academic account. I may even find that I am tweeting more academic stuff on that account than I have in the past as I won’t worry about inundating my non-academic followers with academic stuff.

And so:

If you are on Twitter and want to follow my academic journey there, please do find me @FrancesRyanPhD.

If you want to follow the full-on crazy version of my life (which includes academics), you can find me @CleverFrances.

(And please feel free to follow both if you wish. I’ve nothing to hide. Or at least I wouldn’t dare tweet about something I wanted to hide!)

Connecting people, connecting ideas: Keeping the conversations going beyond #CPCINapier

Frances Ryan/ 26 June 201714 July 2017

Last week I ran a one-day research symposium at Edinburgh Napier University, along with Professor Hazel Hall. The symposium, “Connecting people, connecting ideas” (CPCI), focused on research priorities in Information Science as related to everyday life information seeking and information behaviours in online environments. This event was held at our Craiglockhart campus and was geared towards UK academics, with an emphasis on ECR and 3rd-year PhD student participation.

The symposium was an opportunity for participants to consider how to prioritise themes, and develop ideas for, their future research projects. This was done in three stages as explained below.

The first stage took place prior to the symposium. Here, delegates were provided with an opportunity to share key themes that they felt should be priorities within the field using Well Sorted. Before the symposium, those themes were categorised to create working groups for the day of the event.

The second stage was implemented during the morning session where delegates broke into groups related to the categories determined by the Well Sorted exercise. During the morning session, groups determined the key themes that should be priorities from the larger categories. The morning session also helped us to further concentrate our work, leaving us with just three working groups in the afternoon session.

The final of the three stages took place in the afternoon session. At this point, the delegates discussed the key themes they had previously identified to further develop the ideas with an aim towards future research. Groups worked through potential next-steps that would be needed to bring the ideas to reality.

It is hoped that the knowledge and inspiration gained from the day’s outcomes will be used in a range of future activities including grant proposals, future publications or conference papers, and calls for participation in conferences and seminars. Participants will also be able to continue the relationships they establish with other researchers at the event, which could potentially lead to future research collaborations.

Over the next few days, I will work to format the day’s artefacts into a format that will allow all of the CPCI delegates to access them and interact with them—and interact with other delegates. Whilst I am not able to facilitate these conversations, nor am I able to “force” others to continue the conversations, I am hopeful that these post-symposium tasks will help to encourage others to keep moving forward with the ideas generated during the day.

I know that others are working to share their learnings from the day’s event on other social media channels, so I will share another update sometime in July with links to those posts. In the meantime, you can review the day’s Twitter hashtag (#CPCINapier) to see what people had to say on the day.

Online identity at #NapRes17

Frances Ryan/ 22 June 201723 June 2017

Yesterday was the Edinburgh Napier University’s Research Conference. Based at our Craiglockhart campus, the conference was designed to bring together research active staff and research degree students from across the university. (Read up about the event on the Twitter hashtag #NapRes17.)

My contribution to the conference was an academic poster (full-size version). The poster was part of my larger doctoral study that investigates how online information is used in the management and evaluation of personal reputations. This work follows the tradition of research into everyday life information seeking (ELIS). My doctoral investigation considers four research questions (below). This poster addressed the first of these questions “How do individuals use information to build identities for themselves online?”.

Research Questions:

RQ1: How do individuals use information to build identities for themselves online?

RQ2: How do individuals use online information to build and manage their reputations?

RQ3: How do individuals evaluate the identities and reputations of others based on the information available to them online?

RQ4: To what extent do individuals actively practise identity and reputation building and evaluation online?

The findings consider three areas of identity building. The first is related to the creation and use of online personas and identities. This includes an examination of three broad information behaviours that participants use for the portrayal of online identities. The second area investigates the use of anonymity and pseudonyms through information sharing – or concealment – practices, as well as some of the motivations behind these behaviours. The third and final area presents the ways in which the blurring or merging together of participants’ private and professional selves, as well as their online and offline environments, are used for building identity online.

I provided handouts to the people who engaged with me during the poster session. I was also very pleased that even more people approached me after the session to speak about my research. (They were provided with a copy of the handout, too.)

Whilst my poster was only showcasing a small snapshot of a small part of my thesis, the conversations the poster prompted were wide-reaching. I spoke with other conference-goers about my larger doctoral investigation, online reputation and management practices in general terms, and the idea of altmetrics—which I’ve given two talks about in recent weeks. My poster also served as a conversation starter about my post-PhD plans (still in flux), potential public engagement activities, and even possible grant opportunities.

Personally, I feel that these wider conversations are one of the best reasons to present an academic poster. Yes, it’s about the actual research presented in the visual artefact. But it is also about the conversations and connections that visual artefact creates in a wider sense. And for me, this one little poster made the conference a huge success—because I connected with others.

The rest of the conference was very interesting, too. It included a selection of staff and student presentations, breakout working groups, networking, and a research showcase at the end of the day. Sadly, I didn’t win any amazing prizes (as I did last year) but I did win a bit of confidence about my PhD research and my academic future.

I’ll end there as I have just finished delivering a research symposium and I’m a bit tired after the excitement of the day. But I’ll share a post about that shortly… followed by tales from next week’s conference in Aberdeen.

But if you would like to ask any questions about my poster or my larger doctoral investigation, please feel free to comment below or contact me privately.

Workshop: Building your academic reputation online

Frances Ryan/ 13 June 201718 June 2017

Last week I delivered a half-day workshop at the Scottish Graduate School for Social Science’s Summer School. The workshop, “Building your academic reputation online”, was designed for PhD students at any stage of their studies. There were two primary goals for the day: (1) to get students thinking about the impact of online information on their academic reputations and (2) to provide students with a basic understanding of not only how to use social media to build and manage their reputations but also why they should.

The desired outcomes of the workshop included:

An increased awareness of how online information impacts professional and academic reputations—including how it may relate to job seeking and career development
A stronger understanding of how different social media platforms work, and what role they may play in the building and maintenance of academic reputation
A better understanding of online profile management, including potential benefits and risks

The first half of the workshop considered what reputation meant as well as how academics build reputation. The second half was then dedicated to discussing the different platforms that could be used for building reputation. If I had it to do all over again, I would have agreed to a full-day workshop. That would have allowed for more time on the practicalities of using social media platforms. It also would have provided more time to get into questions about privacy issues and the blurring between private and professional lives. Still, I think that the students found (at least some of) the workshop valuable.

You can view the slides from the workshop below or on my SlideShare account here. And please feel free to get in touch if you have any questions about the workshop or want to discuss academic reputation in more detail!

Academics online: Presentation slides

Frances Ryan/ 10 May 201710 June 2017

Last week I spoke at the “Academics Online: Building your research profile in the digital age” workshop to be held at Edinburgh Napier University’s Craiglockhart Campus. The event was organised by Dr Ivana Rihova and Dr Nathalia Tjandra, thanks to support from the Research and Innovation Office (RIO) and the Researcher Development Fund 2016/17.

I was the first of four speakers and shared an overview of how academic reputations are built—including the use of altmetrics. When I prepared my presentation, I worried that the altmetrics portion might be too basic, but it seems that most of the delegates were unfamiliar with what they were (or how to use them). It made for some interesting questions and discussion at the end of my talk though—and hopefully, it has given the audience something to think about as they continue to build their own reputations online.

In addition to altmetrics, my talk shared information about different tools that can be used to create online profiles and why they should be used. I also tried to make the point that you don’t have to use all of the tools. And, in fact, it is better to use fewer tools well and with confidence than it is to use every online tool under the sun with uncertainty.

The other speakers at the workshop were:

Nick Blackbourn, Content Officer at Edinburgh Napier University, who discussed practical ways and specific tools for building an online audience. He talked about using a “work out loud” approach and encouraged participants to tweet along as he spoke.

Vanessa Heggie, University of Birmingham, talked about the risks and rewards of social media. She shared some insights into different tactics, hacks, and coping mechanisms we could use to make sure we present ourselves (and our research) well in public—whilst having the most positive experience online that we can.

Steven Vass is the Scotland Editor of The Conversation, an original and essential outlet for comment and analysis. He was the last speaker of the day and shared with us ideas of how to turn our research into articles that will open eyes and reach the widest possible audience. He encouraged short, 100-word pitches to start with—and got me personally thinking about my own submission. (Which won’t happen until after I submit my thesis!)

You can view the slides from my presentation below or on my SlideShare account here.

Be social:

Be social:

Be social:

Be social:

Be social: