8 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2020
    1. I've been meaning to remind readers that I do read the comments. Some time ago, one disappointed commenter mused that others' reflections seemed to go (as I recall) "into a void," because I remained silent to each. Perhaps I was ignoring readers' remarks? I assure you that is not the case. I read them all — although on this site, for some reason, "all" means somewhat sparse — and I find them nearly all remarkable in their perceptiveness. I especially welcome, and enjoy, intelligent disagreement. I choose not to respond, however, only because of my editorial philosophy, which holds that the comment section is, rightfully, for commenters — and commenters alone. I've already had my say, and it seems to me rather rude to take another whack in reply. Whenever I'm so substantively shaky or incoherent as to make my case unpersuasively the first time around, I figure I should live with the consequences. And whenever I find criticism flawed, I figure readers — perceptive as they are — will see the flaw as well, therefore there's no need for me to rub it in. So, I beg you not to take my silence personally.
  2. Mar 2018
    1. I want to suggest that undergraduate students do not care about digital humanities

      I find it interesting that the author chooses to make this claim. As a student at the University of Oregon, I disagree with this sentiment. Before enrolling in my first digital humanities class, I had never even heard of the term "digital humanities". I have found, through discussions with my peers, many students find the concept of digital humanities to be intriguing, new and even exciting.

    2. To brag that our humanities (or our liberal arts) are digital is to proclaim that we’ve met a base requirement for modern communication. It would be like your bank crowing that you can check your account online. Of course you can. At this point, you would only notice if you couldn’t.

      While this is true, I don't think it is unimpressive to introduce digital humanities. While most undergraduate students are immersed in the digital world, English and humanities classes in schools have always focused on analog practices. Bringing together the familiar digital world into the dry, (oftentimes boring) world of academia is a good way to bridge the gap for students.

    3. The idea that our students must have innate technological skills because they’ve grown up in a computer-saturated world is equal, to my mind, with assuming all drivers must be excellent mechanics or auto designers because they’ve spent so much time behind the wheel or, perhaps more germanely, to assuming all students must be innately gifted writers because they’ve grown up around books and paper.

      A valid point, however I think students that have grown up with lots of interaction with digital platforms are more likely to easily integrate digital humanities into their lives. For me, taking notes on my laptop is much more efficient than handwriting notes. I attribute this to my high school's use of iPads for notetaking and textbook access. I became skilled in taking notes digitally and still being able to absorb the information. In contrast, my mother could never take digital notes and feel as though she was absorbing the information. This is because she has not had the practice and training to do so because she grew up handwriting notes.

    4. “Texts, Maps, Networks” a more productive and stimulating class than its immediate predecessor, “Doing Digital Humanities.”

      From a student's perspective, I agree that naming specific software or platforms within class titles is helpful for students to image what that class has to offer when picking courses to take.

    5. relatively isolated liberal arts college and the second a medium-sized research university

      Coming from personal experience (having attended a small, liberal arts college for the first two years of college & just recently transferring to a large research university), I understand how with bigger universities it can be extremely challenging to implement new curriculum. These difficulties can arise from funding, qualified faculty, board of trustees, traditional administration, etc.

    6. digital humanities”—had just been declared “the first ‘next big thing’ in a long time” by William Pannapacker in his Chronicle of Higher Education column.

      It is interesting to me that Digital Humanities is such a new subject. I think the fact that DH is still so new (as compared to other subjects, like English) makes it that much more complicated to implement in schools.

  3. Aug 2015