A new collaboration between JSTOR and the social annotation tool Hypothesis has seen more instructional uses of content and greater engagement among students with the material.
Annotation is increasingly being recognized as a valuable tool in scholarly communications, enabling increased engagement and collaboration and better metrics, and helping improve the quality of scholarly outputs. In this guest post, Heather Staines (Director of Business Development – Hypothes.is) and Alexander Naydenov (Head of Marketing and Co-Founder – Paperhive) tell us why!
Today’s contribution to Peer Review Week 2016 is an interview with Maryann Martone of Hypothes.is, which examines the important — but often overlooked — role of annotation in peer review.
Peter Brantley of Hypothes.is talks about efforts to bring an open layer of annotation to the Web, and what they mean for scholarly communication.
A meeting about annotation services and software shows how new tools may be on the horizon, and reminds us that our audiences are likely to be the heaviest users once these emerge.
The age of collaboration indicates some adjacent sources of value are emerging. Since adjacency is relative, how can publishers ensure that the central pieces remain?