AO: The authors write: they are“finding the design problem through participation with the community” but it is very unclear what exactly they are doing that is “collaborative” other
AO: The authors write: “We thus express commitment to an inductive process of research, where the emergence of design problems comes through grounded and participatory inquiry. We
AO: I don’t have an edxo question but the analysts are interested in how to train the next generation of transdisciplinary scholars. They argue that metrics (that are “valid and
AO: The analysts are concerned with examining “ways to categorize and measure collaborative efforts; developing models to conceptualize key aspects of the field; and devising
AO: A discursive risk in this analysis is the assumption of intellectual partners among “elite” communities. I think the example of “professionalized” Kibera research subjects who
AO: The analysts note that the science of team science is currently in its nascent stage and that definitions are being debated. For example, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary
AO: The analysts believe that a shared set of terms is needed for the progress of the science of team science. They note that there is too much variation in definitions used and so
AO: Analysts credited their collaborators “substantial experience in Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques and their willingness to utilise PRA” to make the main research
AO: Like Matsutake group, they explicitly note they are not interested in a division of labor (86)
AO: They give an example of collaboration with “Bert”
