Digging into the Digital Humanities A Guide for

Digging into the Digital Humanities: A Guide for Evaluating DH Projects Caroline Fuchs University Libraries CTL Summer Technology Exploration June 19, 2014

First things first – Defining the digital humanities • Hands-on project based scholarship • Applying technology to research & scholarship • More than repository building and editing

It is also • • • Collaborative Project-based scholarship Exploratory Trans-disciplinary/interdisciplinary Computationally engaged

“Digital Humanities is less a unified field than an array of convergent practices that explore a universe in which print is no longer the primary medium in which knowledge is produced and disseminated. ” from "A Short Guide to the Digital Humanities" p. SG 2

Blurring the lines • • • Humanities Social sciences The arts Natural sciences Technology

In the “print plus” era research is: • • • No longer linear Fluid Faceting Filtering Multiple pathways Process rather than product

Incorporating • Statistical processing (computational linguistics) • Linking (hypertext) • Modeling (architectural and visual displays) • Structured data (XML) • Iterative editing and version control (critical editions, analysis, creative practices) "A Short Guide to the Digital Humanities" p. SG 3

Teaching & Learning • • To learn by making and doing Becoming part of the research community Actively engaging in scholarly communication Sharing knowledge, skills, expertise

Getting involved • • • Create Use Access Navigate Evaluate

So how do we evaluate a digital humanities project?

At the heart • Peer review (impact, intended audience, originality, and excellence) • Original scholarship • Intellectual rigor

Peer review groups for DH projects • NINES (Nineteenth-century Scholarship Online) • 18 th. Connect (Eighteenth-century Scholarship Online) • MLA Committee on Scholarly Editions

Then what’s different? • The media/technology in which the content is realized • Must evaluate the “work” as well as its “environment” • Assess the content and the delivery

Not just about new content – but new ways of engaging with the content A “good” digitial humanities project will allow the student/researcher to interact with the content (i. e. data)

Must also take into account • • • Platform Interface Performance Data structures Back-end database The Code

To begin • Evaluate the work in the medium in which it was produced and published • For websites: authors should include system requirements for optimal use • For virtual simulations: required hardware should be noted and made available

What else to look for • • • Authors/creators Their roles Grants/funding Partnerships Citations Status of the project (i. e. beta, in progress, final, etc)

Ask • How does this DH project advance or contribute to scholarship in the field(s)? • Does it transform the learning environment? • How is this project in “dialogue” with others in the field? • Is it field-specific or trans-disciplinary? • Is it a true “print plus” project, or simply a digitized analog project?

Research questions & digital media • What is being done with this project that could not be done in print-based scholarship? • Is it transformative? Putting something online is not enough – the data must be “usable”

Also consider • How does the “tool” and the “content” interact? • Does the project have a thesis or guiding principle? • Is the content digitized? Born digital? Both? • Is the project transdisciplinary/interdisciplinary?

Sharing • What are the licensing agreements? • Are there intellectual property rights restrictions? • Can content be re-used/re-purposed? • How accessible is the project? • Is it fee-based or free?

Structure & responsibility • Is the interface “user friendly” or “intuitive”? • Does it make sense for the content? • Are collaborators and their roles clearly listed and defined? • Are collaborators’ contributions and expertise clearly articulated? • Are funding sources disclosed?

Don’t forget usability • Is the information appropriately organized? • Is it easy to navigate? • Does the project make use of standards in web design? In metadata? In encoding? • Is the site interoperable with others? • Is the design aesthetically pleasing?

And the nitty-gritty • Where does the data “live”? • Is the project “open source? Is it “proprietary”? • Does the project allow for sharing (or development) of code, tools, applications, etc? • Is it an on-going project or is it complete? • Does the site address digital preservation?

In summary • Evaluate the project in the medium in which it was produced & published • Are roles clearly stated? At each phase? • What is the nature of the newly created “knowledge”? • Does it allow more interaction than its print or analog counterpart?

Remember • In digital scholarship, new “knowledge” is not just content • It is new ways of: – Organizing – Classifying – Interacting This makes web design & coding very important!

Multiple applications • Can be used for research, teaching, service • But ask: – “How has this project transformed the learning environment? ” – “What contributions has the project made to teaching? ” – “How can these contributions be assessed? ”

Peer review • Has the project been peer reviewed? • Has it resulted in a peer-reviewed publication or presentation? • Has it won a prize from a professional organization? • What funding grants has it received?

Digital humanities projects and the bigger picture • Think about critical ethical issues of: – The nature and value of cultural preservation – Public history – Participatory culture – Open access – Digital diversity – Collection curation

Digital Humanities evaluation checklist • • • Is the project easy to navigate and use? Is the purpose clearly articulated? Is it aesthetically pleasing? What is being done with this project that could not be done in print-based scholarship? Who are the authors/contributors? Their roles? Is it a collaborative project? Who is the primary audience? What contribution does it make to scholarship? What are the strengths? What are the weaknesses?

To learn more about digital humanities • Visit our guide http: //campusguides. stjohns. edu/dh • Get involved at SJU http: //stjdh. wordpress. com/ • Publications, blogs, journals, etc http: //campusguides. stjohns. edu/dhpublications Contact: Caroline Fuchs University Libraries fuchsc@stjohns. edu

Bibliography 1. “The Short Guide to the Digital_Humanities, ” an open pdf excerpt from Digital_Humanities, by Anne Burdick, Joahanna Drucker, Peter Lunenfeld, Todd Presner, Jeffrey Schnapp, MIT Press, 2012, pp 121 -136