THATCamp Texas 2011

Posts Tagged tools

Notes from Pedagogy Sessions

Apr 19

Posted by Rebecca Davis in Post-Camp Sharing | Comments off

During the two THATcampTX sessions on pedagogy, we kept collaborative notes in a google doc. you can find that google doc here: Digital Humanities Pedagogy Assignments.  It contains practical suggestions for ways to integrate technology assignments into courses, as well as a theoretical discussion of what should go into a course on digital humanities.  If you have other suggestions please post them to the doc.  We touched on proposed sessions including:

Student-Generated DH Tool Reviews

DH Pedagogy

 

 

Tags: ,

DH Commons

Apr 12

Posted by Rebecca Davis in Session Ideas | 5 Comments

I’ve been working with a group of digital humanists from a variety of institutional types who are seeking to break down silos between large and small institutions in the world of digital humanities.  We are especially interested in how we can can help the isolated digital humanist connect with the rest of the community.

DHCommons seeks to ameliorate the isolation of digital humanists at colleges and universities without the institutional infrastructure to support digital scholarship. At a number of research institutions, digital humanities centers reduce isolation by providing technology, expertise, and mentoring to scholars. Such resources, however, are not available to many scholars, especially at smaller institutions. Lone digital humanists must independently (and repeatedly) argue for the value of their work. Their disconnection prevents them from learning about standards, resources, and ongoing projects, so that their work may not inter-operate with other projects or may reduplicate efforts. To address these challenges, DHCommons will build an inter-institutional infrastructure for digital humanities collaboration through several related innovations:
  • A new hub at dhcommons.org will help digital humanists discover and contact potential collaborators: to find and join projects.
  • Microgrants to encourage scholars to develop curriculum in conjunction with existing projects, travel to partner digital humanities centers for training or project mentoring, etc.
  • Expertise sharing among schools without digital humanities infrastructure
Groups like CenterNet are helping by connecting centers, and THATCamps certainly help isolated digital humanists build regional ties.  DHCommons hopes to complement these efforts.  We envision a dual audience, both identified and potential digital humanists.
As we develop this idea, we are seeking the following input:
  • How does the technology and human infrastructure relate to one another?
  • Do you know of failed experiments with similar projects? (or successful ones?)
  • How do you compel and encourage participation?
  • How do we launch such a thing?
  • What would be most useful for you?
  • One idea we had was using microgrants to encourage development of curricular modules, e.g., student reviews of Tools in the DiRT wiki (which I proposed as another session)
  • What elements would the technology tool need, e.g., profile lists the tools they use, projects looking for collaboraters,etc.?
  • With what resources or hubs should this integrate, e.g., DHAnswers, etc.?
  • What kind of help would you want from such an effort?
  • What questions are we not asking?

Tags: , ,

Student-Generated DH Tool Reviews

Apr 12

Posted by Rebecca Davis in Session Ideas | 3 Comments

Last month at the TILTS symposium at the University of Texas, the twitter stream generated some discussion around the need for tool reviews, e.g., in the Digital Research Tools (DiRT) wiki.  One suggestion was to incorporate developing reviews into coursework.  I’d be interested in organizing a session that figured out how to do that.  Questions to consider include:

  • What level of student? Graduate? Undergraduate?
  • Are there criteria or templates for a good review?  For example, what projects use this tool? Can we cross-reference it with other resources, e.g., DHAnswers.
  • What methods or process could we establish to help reviewers?
  • How could we turn a review into an individual or group assignment? How do we scaffold this task?
  • Can we prioritize tools to cover?

This idea is connected with another project in which I’ve been involved, DHCommons which seeks to help isolated digital humanists.  It also may connects with some other sessions that I’ve seen proposed, e.g.,

 

Tags: ,

Skip to toolbar