I'd like to let you know about a project I'm currently working on. Over the summer I began to create a GPS-enabled poetry and literature journal. It took form, after four months, as a mobile application for iOS and Android that I'm currently calling Chicago Poets.
Now, that's a mouthful, I know. Users of Chicago Poets (Working Name) can plot their creative pieces on a Google Map of Chicago. When a user walks by one of the plotted points, their phone will vibrate notifying them that they're near a piece of art. They'll then be able to slide open the notification to read, listen, or watch whatever the creative plotted at those coordinates.
Authors, for the first time ever, can influence what a reader sees when they look up from the last page. Moments captured by photographers can inspire others passing through a photo's hotspot. The creative possibilities are really limitless when you combine time, event, location, and a creative piece. It becomes possible to track creativity.
These remarks were presented October 25, 2013 at the Michigan State University Cyberinfrastructure Days conference. I have removed and modified some comments which were relevant to the local context of the conference, and I have removed some of the explanatory footnotes.
The Feminist Digital Pedagogies Conference features Anne Balsamo, Alex Juhasz, Adeline Koh, Sesh Venugopal, the Crunk Feminist Collective, the Online Certificate Program in Women’s Global Health Leadership, and the Douglass Residential College Distributed Online Collaborative Course on Race, Gender, and Technoculture.
It seems like scholarship has always been enriched by being able to keep in touch with other scholars in both formal and informal ways. I don't use Twitter because I still can't figure out how, but it seems like it is another way to do what scholars have long tried to do: share our work and ideas, hear from others and occasionally benefit from serendipity. And it could be a way to practice "public" history, couldn't it? Translating ideas/significance of our work for a more general audience?
The editors of Web Writing: Why and How for Liberal Arts Teaching and Learning invite readers to comment on a new digital book in-progress during its open peer review phase, now through October 30th, 2013. In the first week, general audiences and four designated expert reviewers already publicly posted 175 comments to shape the direction of the final manuscript, under contract with Michigan Publishing. The book responds to current debates over massive online courses by arguing for the thoughtful integration of web-based authoring, annotation, editing, and publishing tools into what the liberal arts do best: teaching writing and clearer thinking across the curriculum. Read the full manuscript online at http://WebWriting.trincoll.edu.
I just got a complementary copy of La macchina nel tempo: Studi dei informatica umanistica in onore di Tito Orlandi (The Time Machine: Studies in humanities computing in honour of Tito Orlandi) which I blogged about before. This got me wondering how much of Prof. Tito Orlandi’s writings are available online and what his legacy is. It turns out that Orlandi has put together a list of his publications with links to online versions where possible. There are even some in English like the excellent Is Humanities Computing a Discipline?
I'm breaking my summer blogging hiatus by reflecting on the class I taught during Spring quarter. It was mentally and emotionally overwhelming in a lot of ways and has taken some time to process, but I'd like to present the more organized thoughts I've had about the class here. UCSB's Department of English has given…
The transition from analogue to digital archives and the recent explosion of online content offers researchers novel ways of engaging with data. The crucial question for ensuring a balance between the supply and demand-side of data, is whether this trend connects to existing scholarly practices and to the average search skills of researchers. To gain insight into this process we conducted a survey among nearly three hundred (N= 288) humanities scholars in the Netherlands and Belgium with the aim of finding answers to the following questions: 1) To what extent are digital databases and archives used? 2) What are the preferences in search functionalities 3) Are there differences in search strategies between novices and experts of information retrieval? Our results show that while scholars actively engage in research online they mainly search for text and images. General search systems such as Google and JSTOR are predominant, while large-scale collections such as Europeana are rarely...
Among these questions is a larger one that gets at the heart of some of the contentious and meta debates with which the DH community grapples: who is a DH-er? Yet, in the context of the job market, the question is less about how any of us define “DH” and really how search committees, many of which will be composed of non-specialists, will identify and legitimate who and what “counts” as DH. If the current ads on the JIL are any indication, academic hiring and the sources where we find jobs are engendering very specific (and limited) definitions of what a DH-er is: a field-specific literary scholar with a secondary interest; a Rhetoric and Composition specialist with digital or technical leanings; and only rarely, the DH specialist.
The University of Lausanne and the EPFL will welcome the DH 2014 (6-12 July 2014). Program Chair: Melissa Terras (UCL, London, ADHO/EADH) Vice-Chair: Deb Verhoeven (Deakin University, Melbourne) Local co-chairs: Claire Clivaz (Unil, LADHUL) and Frédéric Kaplan (EPFL, DHLAB) PC committee (ADHO): John Bradley (EADH), Jieh Hsiang (Centernet), Jane Hunter (aaDH); Aimée Morrison (CSDH/SCHN), Dan…
My father has an expression that he loves to use around me. If anything gets long-winded, too technical, or redundant, he dismisses it?—?usually with a florish of the hand?—?by saying “it’s all academic.” By that, I think he means “the explanation is irrelevant, so I won’t bore you with those details.” I will admit, academics do sometimes get caught up in the esoterica, sacrificing clarity for moot details and tautological play. I can hear my father: “It is what it is, son.”
As a programmer, I don’t human very well, so I genuinely believe that interacting with humanities scholars can help provide context for my research (since educational research is necessarily interdisciplinary). I don’t see it as dabbling. But facing this reality is a necessary step in recognizing how my field enables me to do the research I’m doing. There is essentially no threat to my ability to graduate and get a job by interacting with other fields, while collaboration from the other side, the so-called “digital humanities”, doesn’t have the same luxury. The publishing model, the tenure model, and even respect within the field is at risk after “selling out” and acknowledging beliefs that some happen to hold that objective scientific research is in some way superior to the work they are doing.