Book of Abstracts - phase 14 - elektroninen.indd - Oulu

Recommendations

Info

Digital Humanities 2008 _____________________________________________________________________________ DH2008: ADHO Session ‘Digital resources in humanities research: Evidence of value (2)’ Chair Harold Short harold.short@kcl.ac.uk King’s College London, UK Panelists David Hoover david.hoover@nyu.edu New York University, USA Lorna Hughes lorna.hughes@kcl.ac.uk King’s College London, UK David Robey d.j.b.robey@reading.ac.uk Arts and Humanities Research Council, UK John Unsworth unsworth@uiuc.edu University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA This takes further the issues discussed at the ALLC session at DH2007. While most of us who do humanities computing need no convincing of its value, academic colleagues - including those on appointment and promotion panels - still need to be convinced, and even more so funders. If we want backing for the use and further development of digital resources, both data and processes, we need to collect more extensive concrete evidence of the ways in which they enable us to do research better, or to do research we would not otherwise be able to do, or to generate new knowledge in entirely new ways. Since the value of humanities research as a whole is qualitative, not quantitative, it is qualitative evidence in particular we should be looking for: digital resources providing the means not simply of doing research, but of doing excellent research. The DH2007 panel session discussed a wide range of general issues arising in the discussion of the value of humanities computing, both in terms of its impact and results, and in terms of the intrinsic structures and qualities of digital objects created for research purposes. The present panel session takes this further one the one hand by presenting recent work in the UK that has systematically tried to capture the value of humanities computing support activities, of digital tools development projects, and in general of the impact of of digital methods on research in the arts and humanities. Lorna Hughes and David Robey will discuss the results of the evaluation process at the end of the AHRC ICT Methods Network at King’s College London, and of related work on a set of resource-development projects funded by the AHRC ICT in Arts and Humanities Research Programme. John Unsworth and David Hoover will take a somewhat more anecdotal approach, and one that emphasizes North America rather than the UK. They will focus on a variety of ways of assessing and enhancing the value of digital humanities research in the areas of access, analysis, and advancing one’s career. What kinds and levels of access to digital material have the most impact? What kinds of analysis and presentation, and what venues of publication or dissemination are most persuasive and effective? How does or can the exploitation of digital materials enhance the career of the (digital) humanist? We hope that participants from other countries will contribute their points of view in the discussion. _____________________________________________________________________________ 31
Digital Humanities 2008 _____________________________________________________________________________ The Building Blocks of the New Electronic Book Ray Siemens siemens@uvic.ca University of Victoria, Canada Claire Warwick c.warwick@ucl.ac.uk University College London, UK Kirsten C. Uszkalo kirsten@uszkalo.com St. Francis Xavier University, Canada Stan Ruecker sruecker@ualberta.ca University of Alberta, Canada Paper 1: A New Context for the Electronic Book Ray Siemens The power of the book has preoccupied readers since before the Renaissance, a crucial time during which the human record entered print and print, in turn, facilitated the radical, crucial social and societal changes that have shaped our world as we know it. It is with as much potential and as much complexity, that the human record now enters the digital world of electronic media. At this crucial time, however, we must admit to some awkward truths. The very best of our electronic books are still pale refl ections of their print models, and the majority offer much less than a refl ection might. Even the electronic document – the webpage mainstay populating the World Wide Web – does not yet afford the same basic functionality, versatility, and utility as does the printed page. Nevertheless, more than half of those living in developed countries make use of the computer and the internet to read newspaper pieces, magazine and journal articles, electronic copies of books, and other similar materials on a daily basis; the next generation of adults already recognises the electronic medium as their chief source of textual information; our knowledge repositories increasingly favour digital products over the print resources that have been their mainstay for centuries; and professionals who produce and convey textual information have as a chief priority activities associated with making such information available, electronically – even if they must do so in ways that do not yet meet the standards of functionality, interactivity, and fostering of intellectual culture that have evolved over 500 years of print publication. Why, then, are our electronic documents and books not living up to the promise realized in their print counterparts? What is it about the book that has made it so successful? How can we understand that success? How can we duplicate that success, in order to capitalize on economic and other advantages in the electronic realm? This introductory paper frames several responses to the above, centring on issues related to textual studies, reader studies, interface design, and information management, and framing the more detailed responses in the areas below. Paper 2: ‘Humanities scholars, research and reading, in physical and digital environments’ Claire Warwick It may initially seem strange to suggest that research on what seems to be such a traditional activity as reading might be a vital underpinning to the study of digital resources for the humanities. Yet, to design digital resources fi t for research purposes, we must understand what scholars do in digital environments, what kind of resources they need, and what makes some scholars, particularly in the humanities, decline to use existing digital resources. One of the most important things that humanities scholars undertake in any environment is to read. Reading is the fundamental activity of humanities researchers, and yet we have little knowledge of how reading processes are modifi ed or extended in new media environments. In the early to mid 1990s, many humanities scholars expressed excitement about the possibilities of electronic text, predicting that the experience of reading would change fundamentally (e.g., Bolter, 1991; Landow, 1992; Nunberg, 1996; Sutherland, 1997). Such prophetic writings, however, were not based on and rarely followed up by studies with readers, particularly readers in humanities settings. Through the last fi fteen years critical interest within humanities circles with respect to reading has waned and little progress has been made in understanding how electronic textuality may affect reading practices, both of academic and non-academic readers. We are, however, beginning to understand the relationship between reading in print and online, and how connections may be made between the two (Blandford, Rimmer, & Warwick 2006), and how humanities scholars relate to information environments, by reading and information seeking. In this paper we will discuss our research to date, undertaken as part of the UCIS project on the users of digital libraries, and on the LAIRAH project, which studied levels of use of a variety of digital humanities resources. (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/slais/ research/circah/) Research has been based on a use-in- context approach, in which participants have been interviewed about their preferences for the use of digital resources in a setting which is as naturalistic as possible. We also report on the results of user workshops, and of one to one observations of the use of digital resources. As a result of these studies, we have found that humanities researchers have advanced information skills and mental models of their physical information environment, although they may differ in that they fi nd these skills and models diffi cult _____________________________________________________________________________ 32
Page 2 and 3: The Association for Literary and Li
Page 4 and 5: Digital Humanities 2008 ___________
Page 98 and 99:
Digital Humanities 2008 ___________
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309:
show all

Book of Abstracts - phase 14 - elektroninen.indd - Oulu

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?