- Why do these questions arise in the context of digital history?
- Do these calls for change comport nicely with the AHA’s approach to assessing the place of DH?
- Is DH really a continuity with the past of the profession, or something new?
- What’s wrong with traditional publishing? What’s right about it?
- What kind of gatekeeping would you like to have for the stuff you need access to in order to produce your own work?
Alex Galarza, Jason Heppler, and
Douglas Seefeldt, “A Call to Redefine Historical Scholarship in the Digital
Turn,” Journal of Digital Humanities
1 (4) (2012): http://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-4/a-call-to-redefine-historical-scholarship-in-the-digital-turn/.
- Are you persuaded that the digital turn in history is a “revolution”?
- We have talked about obstacles to the acceptance of DH before. What kinds of solutions can you imagine?
- Do you accept the suggestion that coding and building platforms should count as scholarship for historians?
All of the “Hacking Scholarship”
essays in Hacking the Academy: New
Approaches to Scholarship and Teaching from Digital Humanities, edited by
Daniel J. Cohen and Tom Scheinfeldt (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
Press, 2013): http://quod.lib.umich.edu/d/dh/12172434.0001.001/1:2/--hacking-the-academy-new-approaches-to-scholarship?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1
Jason Baird Jackson, “Getting Yourself Out of the Business
in Five Easy Steps”
- What is the criticism of for-profit publishers?
- If you conduct peer review for them, are you really working for free? Is this bad?
- How do you know if you are working with a for-profit rather than a non-profit publisher?
David Parry, “Burn
the Boats/Books”
- What’s wrong with the book?
- What do you think of the phrase “the Gutenberg Parenthesis”?
- What is “librocentrism”?
- How is knowledge a commodity?
- What does he mean by “closed system”?
- Is a PDF really just a book on the web?
- What would it mean if scholars were aggregators and curators instead of producers? What would librarians do?
- Are books locked behind a paywall?
Jo Guldi, “Reinventing the Academic Journal”
- What does she mean by “Web 2.0”? We haven’t talked about this term so far.
- What do you think of her recommendations? We will spend all of our time curating our bibliographies or conducting our research?
- Is she proposing that journals give up publishing and instead become authoritative linkers?
- Would people really spend a lot of time commenting on other people’s unfinished essays? What was your experience with the times we did that this semester?
- Would you indefinitely revise a paper?
Michael O’Malley, “Reading and Writing”
- Is it your experience that the word processor has had little effect on academic writing?
Voices: Blogging
- How does blogging relate to published writing, in your view? Have any of your ideas about this changed over the course of the semester?
John Unsworth, “The Crisis of Audience and the Open-Access
Solution”
- Is it true that no one is reading the scholarly books? Do you write so you can have an audience?
- What is open access?
- Who is going to keep track of all the new publications floating around online?
Kathleen Fitzpatrick, “Open-Access Publishing”
- What are the costs of publishing?
- What is wrong with traditional publishing?
- What are the advantages and disadvantages of open-access publishing?
- Is the claim that the public is not interested in scholarship a straw man or a red herring?
Open Access and Scholarly Values: A Conversation
- Cohen suggests that failure to publish digitally, for free, is a contradiction for scholars who “champion…the voices of those who are less privileged and powerful.” Do you agree?
- Is work published in gated journals really invisible?
- Do scholars actually read their colleagues’ work?
- “Open access—which is an ethically superior form of dissemination on its face, and a moral obligation for public institutions”: Do you agree?
Voices: Sharing One’s Research
Mills Kelly, “Making Digital Scholarship Count”
- To what extent are you as graduate students thinking about the prestige hierarchy of scholarly publishing?
- Definition of scholarship: “In almost any discipline, scholarship has the following characteristics: it is the result of original research; it has an argument of some sort and that argument is situated in a preexisting conversation among scholars; it is public; it is peer-reviewed; and it has an audience response.”
- Is argument essential to counting as scholarship? In Kelly’s Teaching History in the Digital Age, he suggests that mashups make arguments.
- Why is he skeptical of the value of gatekeeping?
Tom Scheinfeldt, “Theory, Method, and Digital Humanities”
- “What humanities arguments does digital humanities make?”
- “I believe we are at a similar moment of change right now—that we are entering a new phase of scholarship that will be dominated not by ideas, but once again by organizing activities, both in terms of organizing knowledge, and organizing ourselves and our work.”
- Is it too early for digital humanities to make arguments? Is that why we have spent much of the semester thinking about websites’ “big ideas” rather than their arguments?
Notice this document:
No comments:
Post a Comment