AbigailMoreshead

1) Historical GIS is the pairing of the mapping capabilities of geographic information systems with the study of history for the purpose of illustrating or shedding light on historical narratives or phenomena. 2) Robert Churchill identifies four distinct purposes for using GIS in history education. First, he mentions the analytical and problem-solving practice that using GIS provides for students. Next, GIS helps students understand the power and potential in visualization. Also, he sees GIS as a means of helping students understand sociopolitical issues and controversies (giving an example of personal privacy and the web), and lastly, he views it as a “pedagogic context” through which teachers can explore issues, such as gerrymandering, that can best be explained and understood through GIS (71). Amy Hillier also sees GIS as a useful teaching tool in that it will engage students in new ways with technology with which they’re already familiar (through the use of navigational tec

My understanding of text mining, based on our readings, is that it functions as a “zoomed out,” or “macroscopic” (Weingart) , perspective on the collection/text in question. This can be useful in revealing patterns that are not at all apparent unless one can view a data set as a whole, rather than at just individual instances—being able to view trends with the help of technology, as a means of better understanding or being able to better tell a narrative. I used a couple different texts/search terms for my experiments with text mining tools. For Voyant, I used the text of Persuasion by Jane Austen. I was motivated to choose this text because I’m teaching it right now to a class of undergrad English lit majors. I was curious to see what patterns text mining would reveal and if that would contribute to mine and my students’ understanding of the text. Also, ease of access was a factor; the entire text is available in the public domain. My other experiments used words/terms relat

1) What is digital history? Based on the explanations of Seefeldt and Thomas and the discussion in “Interchange,” I understand digital history as the application of digital tools to the work of historians for the purpose of greater story-telling possibilities. These scholars define digital history as not just a cataloging device for the past, but as a means of representing the narratives and the important questions that arise through the study of history. Seefeldt and Thomas allude to this by saying, “To do digital history, then, is to digitize the past, certainly, but it is much more than that. It is to create a framework through the technology for people to experience, read, and follow and argument about a major historical problem” ( What Is Digital History ) . This definition is extended by participants in “Interchange,” who assert that digital history projects, as opposed to traditional history scholarship, invites reader participation in different ways than those of a trad

Digital Humanities: A Primer for Students and Scholars by Eileen Gardiner and Ronald G. Musto is a thorough introduction to and reference work for issues and dilemmas surrounding the digital humanities, especially for scholars like me who are relatively new to DH. But beyond being just a reference work, I read this book as a cautionary tale—or an explanation of what the digital humanities are not —for those who may view DH as either the salvation or displacement of humanities scholarship. A common thread I find running through the subtext of Digital Humanities is a caution against assuming that digital tools somehow displace the need for thorough scholarship by providing “shortcuts.” Chapter 2 describes two foundational concepts of the study of the humanities: the study of documents, objects, artifacts—the “data” of the humanities-- can’t be encompassed in large numerical data sets (as the research of the sciences often is) (15) and that seeing such “data” in person, in its ori