Group items tagged

This article represents the popularization of the #transformDH movement following ASA 2011. The article highlights the launching of the #transformDH Tumblr, as well as containing a section at the end with a collection of articles written by digital humanists related to the concerns of the #transformDH movement. The remainder of the article discusses the sessions the article writer personally participated in, as well as the people met related to the #transformDH movement.

This article by Elexis Lothian is partly a response to another article, "Does DH Really Need to be Transformed?" by Roger Whitson. The article argues that although people in the field may have had good experiences with regards to acceptance, that there is still room for growth in areas such as queer studies, critical race studies, feminist studies, etc. The article also illuminates a little on the process behind choosing the tag #transformDH as well as some of the groups, such as HASTAC, which have collaborated to support the project.

This short article for the 2012 American Studies Association Annual Meeting represents a call for digital humanists to collaborate and propose ways in which American Studies and Digital Humanities can be transformed to be better address concerns such a marginalization. Provided proof that this is possible, the article highlights such "digital collectives and social movements" such as Crunk Feminist Collective, "shit [people] say" and artists offering a "productive [exploration] of digital productions and methods." The article also highlights in particular the #transformDH movement, and provides links to some of the articles and websites utilized by the group.

Tim Hitchcock begins this article by stating that books are dead. He goes on to explain his statement, qualifying that the process of creating a 'book' is lengthy and redundant, especially in the digital age. In our current state, we still think of data in reference to standard book form (book, chapter, page, line). He also criticizes modern humanists' approach/integration of scholarship and technology. Hitchcock believes that many utilize technical shortcuts (such as Google Books), but refuse to recognize it. Or they reference an article that they found online, but cite the paper version. His greatest criticism is the path that he believes digital humanities is going. He beleves that it is following the progress of the book too closely and that in an attempt to make things accessible, they have not utilized the versatility of digital publishing. He notes that how we currently view books depends on how digital humanities progresses. At the end of the article, Hitchcock describes his original tone and intention of the article. He also describes the editing and peer-review process.

It is in this article that the authors Shao Jufang and Shew Huiyan try to find out the outflow of excellent papers and then take measures to stem this flow. They illuminate the academic reward structure in place in China and its most interesting details. While Shao and Shen do not report the salary ranges of Chinese scientists they do describe how the payments work as incentives for publishing. The Shao and Shen article helps Phil Davis the author of Does the Chinese model make sense build his counter argument. This is why this article can also be referenced throughout Davis article.

This is the main page of O'Reilly's website. He is a member of PeerJ's board and has contributed to many open access journals. His focus within DH seems to be the technical aspects, but he his a huge advocator for open access. There are many videos on this page of interviews he has give, videos of his lectures, articles written about him, and articles he has written. His main page also spot lights workshops, conferences, and articles concerning the future of open access, technology, ethical uses of technology, and technological business philosophy. O'Reilly is an extremely active member in the technological world, and is also instrumental in developing the tone for open access.

This article discusses the economic nature of publishing from the viewpoint of an author and editor of the works of others. The author explains the legitimacy of publishing companies' practices in the past, but calls into question those of modern for-profit publishers. He rejects the current model, in which his readers would pay more for a day's use of his article than for either of his books, and supports a billable-hours system like that of lawyers or psychiatrists.

This article expands on the subjects discussed in Dan Cohen's earlier article on The Social Contract of Scholarly Publishing. He breaks the supply and demand model, introduced in the previous article, into four influential categories that need focus to better both sides. He argues for impartiality when approaching a text, passion for the subject, shame for the lack of sharing compared to other fields, and the shift from narcissistic desires for compensation to a desire for communal knowledge.

"In Defense of Data" presents two articles, "The Digital Inhumanities?" by Scott Selisker and "Imaginary Targets" by Holger Schott Syme, in response to an article by Stephen Marche, "Literature is Not Data: Against Digital Humanities." Selisker's essay focuses primarily on dismantling the idea that digitization removes the human element from interpretation and enforces a quasi-authoritarian view of literature. Syme's essay addresses both Marche's misunderstanding of the motivations of the movement against Google Book's digitization efforts as well as Marche's inaccurate depiction of modern literary research in the wake of digital humanities.

Beginning with the explanation of how algorithms have changed technology in many different aspects, this article discusses how Digital Humanities came to be. Also, the "resistance" of literature to data can affect the use of algorithims and why it is seemingly not always accurate. The article also talks about the start of turning literature into data and why the digitization of books is going to be important. The idea of having a completely accessable, professionally reviewed, open access library is any scholars dream. The unlimited access to any written work would change the way people research. Although there are still some changes that need to be done with the algorithims, digital humanities is a huge developmental project.

This article, titled Humanities in the Digital Age by Alan Liu and William G. Thomas III, addresses the hard times that have fallen upon higher education. One solution and innovative way to combat these financial cuts, the writers claim, is to make a movement into the digital humanities in higher education. The article continues on to highlight the best parts of digital humanities and how it can be a huge help to struggling universities both public and private.

Like the open access websites reviewed in class, Sage is an open access journal that publishes original research and review articles in an interactive, and access format. These articles span the full spectrum of the social and behavorial sciences and the humanities. The articles are very informative and they can be utilized in classrooms so that students can better understand the purpose of digital humanities and why it can be affective in their everyday learning environment.

In China scientist are rewarded with cash for publishing an article in a prestigious general. The more prestigious the journal, the larger the sum. So because of the limited international circulation of Chinese journals, there is a real push to have one's work appear in an international index, such as the science citation index, Engineering index, or the index to scientific & technical proceedings. The author of this article Does the Chinese Model Make Sense, Phil Davis, questions wither or not this model is authentic. He believes that the need for money will eventually exceed the need to produce valid, and original work. Davis is able to justify is argument by mentioning previous works that were written by the chinese that had an extreme amount of plagerism and unoriginal work. From this evidence he was able to persuade readers that the Chinese Model did not make sense nor did it have any valid points. His commentary was a critque of the article The outflow of academic papers from China: Why it happening and can it be stemmed, written by Shao Jufang and Shen Huiyun.

The UA article introduces a collection of humanities professors, with a focus on Africana studies assistant professor Bryan Carter, who have worked to integrate modern technology such as smart phones with their course. The article provides multiple examples of how these technologies have been specifically integrated into the classrooms, such as iPhones reading out lectures from the syllabus, as well as how online courses have attracted a new group of students who might have otherwise been uninterested in the course. The professors interviewed in the article all agree that integrating new forms of technology with the classroom is important to opening access to education to new students.

This article covers the upcoming launch of a Digital Humanities website/collective, Ars Liberalis. According to the article, Ars Liberalis intends to be a tool for facilitating communication between students within the digital humanities, as well as between the digital humanities community and the outside world. Students will be able to begin discussions about lectures, submit materials to Ars Liberalis, etc., all with the goal of fostering interest in the digital humanities and communication within the community. Ars Liberalis will host both news articles or related essays as well as creative submissions from students.

Adrianne Wadewitz is featured as a guest writer in this article. She shares with us details about her position as a Digital Humanities postdoc at Occidental College. The freedom provided by her position seems to be her favorite aspect of her job. Wadewitz includes in this article a four point list of her planned tasks and activities for October 1st. This includes working on an article discussing teaching with Wikipedia.

I linked this page from ADHO. It is a descriptive article of Gregory Chatonsky's project (?), The Subnetwork. A majority of the article focuses on the abstract relationships that Chatonsky uses to connect many aspects of his work, including participants' interaction (passive and active), animation, and general presentation of the work. It also notes that Chatonsky use of 'metaphor' goes beyond the accepted academic definition of the term, and uses it as an active 'member' or 'tool' to connect the text/concept to the presentation.

Marche's article criticizes digital humanists for a perceived failure to adequately address the human and interpretive nature of literature by treating it as data. Two core issues identified by Marche is that literature, unlike statistics, is terminally incomplete - that parts frequently are missing or shifting - and that data mining efforts fail to account for context in literature. Marche argues that current data mining efforts are flawed because "algorithms are inherently fascistic" and that "meaning is mushy." Marche does not oppose digitization efforts and in fact welcomes the translation of texts into digital formats, rather Marche argues that literary meaning cannot be as readily quantified as numbers - that "insight remains handmade."

This article explains the use of curating early modern texts and how the process of doing so has advanced over the past few years. This new style of curating and archiving is organized to make the digital archive design and the use of the sites much more easy to navigate and explore for certain content. The author of this article believes that archiving and open access is a public service but not all works need to be available.

This article discusses Microsoft's departure, for lack of potential business, from the digitization of books. He argues that Google's vast lead in this area will allow them to continue to dominate it with its competitors failing to find sufficient outside funding. The article concludes hoping for a joint funding by leading institutions like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.