doing history research and writing in the digital age

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Doing history: Research and writing in the digital age

Related Papers

Digital Histories: Emergent Approaches within the New Digital History, eds. Mats Fridlund, Mila Oiva, & Petri Paju (Helsinki: Helsinki University Press)

Mats Fridlund , Mila Oiva , Petri Paju

The History Teacher

Dominique Daniel

The article discusses innovations in information and communication technologies and examines their impact on the teaching of history, as well as student learning. Particular focus is given to ways in which the practices of historians, librarians, and history teachers are influenced by technology. Studies regarding the opinions of students, faculty members, and librarians regarding historical research training are highlighted and research processes such as metaliteracy and bibliographic instruction are explored. The article also notes collaborative efforts between academic librarians and college history teachers.

Gerben Zaagsma

Digital humanities seem to be omnipresent these days and the discipline of history is no exception. This introduction is concerned with the changing practice of ‘doing’ history in the digital age, seen within a broader historical context of developments in the digital humanities and ‘digital history’. It argues that there is too much emphasis on tools and data while too little attention is being paid to how doing history in the digital age is changing as a result of the digital turn. This tendency towards technological determinism needs to be balanced by more attention to methodological and epistemological considerations. The article offers a short survey of history and computing since the 1960s with particular attention given to the situation in the Netherlands, considers various definitions of ‘digital history’ and argues for an integrative view of historical practice in the digital age that underscores hybridity as its main characteristic. It then discusses some of the major changes in historical practice before outlining the three major themes that are explored by the various articles in this thematic issue – digitisation and the archive, digital historical analysis, and historical knowledge (re)presentation and audiences.

Laura Westhoff

Historyka. Studia Metodologiczne

Jan Pomorski

The paper examines the special historiographic evidence: the lost last book of the well-known Polish historian and methodologist Professor Jerzy Topolski entitled "New Methodology of History". Only its working outline in the form of an extensive table of contents has survived, but this does not prevent the author from making interesting hypotheses as to its meaning.

Caroline Humfress

Helsinki University Press

Mila Oiva , Petri Paju , Mats Fridlund

Historical scholarship is currently undergoing a digital turn. All historians have experienced this change in one way or another, by writing on word processors, applying quantitative methods on digitalized source materials, or using internet resources and digital tools. Digital Histories showcases this emerging wave of digital history research. It presents work by historians who – on their own or through collaborations with e.g. information technology specialists – have uncovered new, empirical historical knowledge through digital and computational methods. The topics of the volume range from the medieval period to the present day, including various parts of Europe. The chapters apply an exemplary array of methods, such as digital metadata analysis, machine learning, network analysis, topic modelling, named entity recognition, collocation analysis, critical search, and text and data mining. The volume argues that digital history is entering a mature phase, digital history ‘in action’, where its focus is shifting from the building of resources towards the making of new historical knowledge. This also involves novel challenges that digital methods pose to historical research, including awareness of the pitfalls and limitations of the digital tools and the necessity of new forms of digital source criticisms. Through its combination of empirical, conceptual and contextual studies, Digital Histories is a timely and pioneering contribution taking stock of how digital research currently advances historical scholarship.

Digital Histories

Kathleen Jones , Robert Stephens

Daragh Grant

This tutorial will expose students to the scholarship on modern empire from across the fields of anthropology, history, law, and political science. Students will be asked to consider the differences and commonalities in empires across space and time. They will also explore how relations of empire and colonialism were constituted through structures of law and of economic relations, as well as how notions of race and culture were shaped by imperial encounters. Finally, the readings for this tutorial will introduce students to a range of methodological approaches to the study of empire, and will invite them to consider the strengths and weaknesses of these different approaches.

Items related to Doing History: Research and Writing in the Digital...

Doing history: research and writing in the digital age - softcover, galgano, michael j. ; arndt, j. chris ; hyser, raymond m..

• 3.87 67 ratings by Goodreads

This specific ISBN edition is currently not available.

• About this title
• About this edition

"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.

"About this title" may belong to another edition of this title.

• Publisher Cengage Learning
• Publication date 2012
• ISBN 10  1133587887
• ISBN 13  9781133587880
• Binding Paperback
• Edition number 2
• Number of pages 240

Convert currency

Shipping: US$ 4.00 Within U.S.A.

Add to Basket

Other Popular Editions of the Same Title

Featured edition.

ISBN 10:  ISBN 13:  9780534619534 Publisher: Cengage Learning, 2007 Softcover

Top Search Results from the AbeBooks Marketplace

Doing history: research and writing in the digital age.

Book Description Paperback. Condition: new. New. Fast Shipping and good customer service. Seller Inventory # Holz_New_1133587887

More information about this seller | Contact seller

Book Description Paperback. Condition: new. Buy for Great customer experience. Seller Inventory # GoldenDragon1133587887

Book Description Paperback. Condition: new. New Copy. Customer Service Guaranteed. Seller Inventory # think1133587887

Book Description Condition: new. Seller Inventory # newMercantile_1133587887

Book Description Condition: new. Seller Inventory # FrontCover1133587887

Book Description Paperback. Condition: new. New. Seller Inventory # Wizard1133587887

Book Description Paperback. Condition: new. Prompt service guaranteed. Seller Inventory # Clean1133587887

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

Doing history : research and writing in the digital age

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

Obscured text on back cover due to sticker attached.

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

128 Previews

2 Favorites

Better World Books

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

PDF access not available for this item.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by station26.cebu on November 20, 2021

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

From the President

Doing History in the Digital Age

Barbara Weinstein | May 1, 2007

I usually don't relish reading my teaching evaluations. Once draped in the cloak of anonymity, students can be quite unkind in their remarks. Even the flattering ones can be less than satisfying, such as the evaluation that declared "Prof. Feinstein is the best teacher I've had at this university." But a couple of years ago I read an evaluation for my introductory course on modern Latin American history that I found genuinely touching. In the section in response to the question "What do you think should be changed, if anything?" the student wrote, "Better classroom! That classroom blows . . . no power point was used . . . no pictures, no movie excerpts . . . just copying outlines and listening." What I found moving was this student's insistence on blaming the course's failings on the physical facilities, rather than my own lack of facility with the new technology—which, truth be told, was the better explanation for its alleged shortcomings.

Having been so charitably given the benefit of the doubt by my anonymous student, I felt I had no choice but to rethink my low-tech approach to historical research and pedagogy. For years I had dismissed visual aids as filler, and told myself that colleagues who routinely used images and films in their courses simply didn't want to invest time and thought in their lectures. I also initially scoffed at the many internet tools and digital databases that could help me with my research, assuring myself that archival research was an artisanal work process in which direct, tactile contact with documents was a meaningful experience and serendipity was a major methodology. But as visual sources came to play an ever larger role in my own research, it seemed indefensible to treat a lecture outline as the consummate visual aid. And as the time I could spend away from home doing research became more and more restricted, it made less and less sense to treat each archival visit as if it were a fishing expedition.

Not that I had ever been a Luddite. By the late 1970s I had traded yellow legal pads and pencils for an IBM Selectric, and a decade later had almost effortlessly transitioned to a word processor. And I loved e-mail from the very first instant: it took me all of five minutes to figure out what a difference electronic messaging would make in my ability to maintain a sense of community across national boundaries. Same thing with Google—I quickly perceived how much time that now ubiquitous search engine could save me. Soon after its debut, I received a late-night call from an anthropologist friend frantically trying to get the exact citation for an article that she wanted to include on her syllabus for a course that was meeting early the next morning. She thought I might have a book that listed the article in its bibliography, and hoped I would be willing to spend the next half hour rummaging through my bookshelves to locate the reference. Instead, I entered the little information she could give me into Google and there it was, the full citation. My anthropologist friend was (briefly) in awe, and for one night, at least, I felt like the Goddess of Google.

Despite these occasional moments of technological lucidity, the fact is that my knowledge of the new technology was, and is, spotty at best. Like many members of my academic generation, I've learned things in fits and starts, mostly when it was absolutely necessary (and sometimes not even then—I wrote an entire book about São Paulo on a computer without ever figuring out how to put the tilde above the "a"). It's as if I had decided to learn another language by periodically eavesdropping on a conversation or painstakingly translating a journal article in that language rather than systematically studying it or figuring out its basic structure.

This is particularly regrettable because, with or without my awareness or complicity, new technology has profoundly reshaped the way we approach scholarship and teaching. Because most of the transformations have occurred gradually, some almost imperceptibly, I have never really stepped back and considered how much my work process has changed over the last two decades. Writing this column for an issue of Perspectives devoted to history and new technology has finally induced me to take stock of the many ways in which our digital age has changed the way we do history.

Some of them are so obvious that they are hardly worth mentioning. Most of us now compose directly on a computer, tapping out our work on a keyboard uninhibited by fears of typos or tedious cutting and pasting (I mean with real scissors and tape). Has that improved our writing? Probably not. After all, a pencil with an eraser allowed for considerable revision prior to the advent of personal computers, and the work involved in revising once a text had been committed to print likely meant that a draft was in very good shape by the time it would be typed. In the age of personal computers, the speed with which thoughts are translated into printed text—and the more final look of a paragraph typed onto a computer screen—may actually mean that our drafts are not as carefully organized and polished when we commit them to print.

We also now have seemingly endless access—through Google Scholar , the online Library of Congress Catalog , WorldCat , Amazon.com —to books and articles related to whatever subject we are teaching or researching. I suppose that's mainly a good thing, but it does have the potential to leave us all feeling overwhelmed by the sheer volume of what's available out there. I remember a review of my first book that took me to task for not citing two monographs the reviewer regarded as directly relevant to my topic. I thought this criticism was not entirely fair since the books had been published (in Brazil) shortly before my own book appeared, and had not yet been reviewed or cited in any other source. These days it would take only the slightest effort to learn of these books' existence and so I would have no excuse for not citing them.

Nothing, perhaps, has been transformed more dramatically by the new technology than journal editing. Over the last five years I have served as co-editor of the Hispanic American Historical Review , a venerable publication dating back to 1918. When my colleagues at the University of Maryland and I began to edit the HAHR , it was obvious that many of the activities previously conducted by mail could be shifted to e-mail to save time, money, and trees, but we still somehow imagined that submissions would be both electronic and paper. Even that soon went by the wayside as we assured our hesitant colleagues that, really, they only needed to send us an electronic copy. The most momentous change, however, was the decision to make the 10-year index entirely electronic. Previously, a whole issue had been dedicated to this index, but a digital version made more sense not only because it would open up space for more articles and reviews, but it would also allow the index to be searchable. It seemed like a win-win situation until someone asked where the index would be "archived"—a question that, I confess, it took me a minute or two to comprehend. The web site of the HAHR might appear to be the obvious location, but with the journal moving every five years, that didn't seem like a very stable home for it. And since it would no longer be an issue of the journal proper, it seemed unlikely that the index could be preserved on JSTOR. At last report, this dilemma remains unresolved. 1

If I've had no choice as a journal editor but to join the modern world, I've been more recalcitrant in the realm in which I have greater autonomy, the classroom. True, my anonymous student would be pleased to hear that I have started to use internet images in my lectures, and I've even done something that approximated a PowerPoint presentation. On my latest undergraduate syllabus I assigned articles that the students could access through JSTOR. But I still lug in videotapes and even, believe it or not, audiotapes when I sparingly incorporate film or music (I do, after all, teach Brazilian history) in my lectures. Anyone hoping for a genuinely multimedia approach to Latin American history will still have to sign up for somebody else's course. 2

The flip side of my haphazard embrace of the new technology has been a limited awareness of the dilemmas posed by the digital age. Not everything has escaped my notice: as co-editor of the HAHR, for example, I did realize that online reading of journal articles—though dramatically expanding access—would mean that fewer readers would ever hold a particular issue in their hands and browse it in a way that would lead them to read articles beyond their most immediate interests. Despite the "Browse this journal" option on JSTOR, there's a substantial difference between thumbing through the pages of a periodical and scrolling down a list of titles. Concern about this contributed to our decision to introduce "In this issue" front matter, similar to the longstanding practice of the AHR, that we hope will lure our online public into reading "off topic." 3

Like most historians, I readily acknowledge the benefits of having journals, books, and primary sources available online. Not only does this make our work process easier, but it also opens up new possibilities for research in historical documents by undergraduate and graduate students, and is a godsend for scholars working in countries where there is precious little funding available for libraries or research collections. Most of us, however, give very little thought to the cost and effort involved in digitizing books and documents, a consideration that might not be paramount if we lived in an age of abundant public spending on the humanities. But at a time when funding for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the National Historic Preservation Records Commission (NHPRC) is either flat or declining, such considerations cannot be ignored. The Association for Documentary Editing (ADE) recently expressed concern to the NEH regarding the Digital Humanities Initiative, which seemed to give preference to grant proposals that included plans for digitalization and open online access. The ADE members' complaints were neither meant as a rejection of new technology nor as a plea for greater exclusivity. Instead, they reflected the practical considerations associated with a condition of limited resources. Some of the larger editing projects could easily accommodate demands for digitalization, but many of the smaller projects would have to skew their operations to meet these guidelines. In a classic case of putting the cart before the horse, they would have to reduce the time and resources devoted to the crucial processes of transcription and tracking down references in order to ensure digital accessibility. The result would be a devaluing of an artisanal/scholarly process in favor of an industrial/technological mandate, with the likelihood that quality would be sacrificed.

The letter from the ADE also noted that open access was not something that the editing projects could easily provide or maintain, especially since few project editors or host institutions control the rights to these editions. "Typically," the letter pointed out, "publishers have made substantial financial investments in these editions with little or no profit to show for it. Asking them to produce free online resources is unrealistic. There is a very strong archival argument to be made for the presses as the best candidates to create electronic resources that will be maintained for future generations, particularly if there is a revenue stream to support this maintenance. If the editions are not put online by publishers, who will guarantee long-term access and pay the costs of maintaining digital editions?" 4 In other words, free access is not without costs. 5

Over the next decade, as the digital revolution continues to remake the world of scholarship and scholarly resources, many such complications are likely to arise. Not even the most unyielding amongst us will be exempt from its effects. Some of the changes it will bring are likely to be marvelous, while others will raise as many problems as they resolve. Thus, I think we can ill-afford to treat this revolution as a technological juggernaut over which we have no control, nor can we indiscriminately embrace each and every electronic innovation that comes online. In this regard, I am reminded of a colleague who suggested that soon, with all the sources becoming available online or on CD-Rom, it will be possible to do a dissertation in Brazilian history without ever going to Brazil. To which I could only reply, "What would be the fun of that?"

—Barbara Weinstein (NYU) is president of the AHA.

1. In recent testimony to a House Appropriations Subcommittee, Librarian of Congress James H. Billington contended that digital materials "are less stable than analog materials, because digital content is easily altered, corrupted or even lost." He noted that the average web site's life span is between 44 and 75 days. http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2007/07-060.html .

2. For a more encouraging view of multimedia teaching (as well as a very engaging account of early encounters with personal computers), see Lynn Hunt, " What I learned Doing a Multimedia Project on the French Revolution ," Perspectives Online , Summer 2002.

3. "When editing a journal in its ninth decade of publication, one does not make changes lightly, but we felt that the time was right to alter the longstanding format. Among our motives for this decision was the advent of the electronic age, the e-journal, which means that our colleagues and students increasingly read the HAHR in online slices, rather than leafing through an entire issue or volume. We hope that an introduction will motivate our readers to explore beyond the article that first drew them to a particular issue." "In this Issue," Hispanic American Historical Review 86:2 (May 2006), 201.

4. Letter from Roger Bruns, president of ADE, to Bruce Cole, chair of the NEH, Sept. 1, 2006. NEH responded by refining the language in its announcement so that it did not exclude proposals without a digital component.

5. On the implications of open access for university presses, see the statement of the American Association of University Presses at http://aaupnet.org/aboutup/issues/oa/statement.pdf . My thanks to Sandy Thatcher for this reference.

Tags: From the President AHA Leadership

The American Historical Association welcomes comments in the discussion area below, at AHA Communities , and in letters to the editor . Please read our commenting and letters policy before submitting.

Please read our commenting and letters policy before submitting.

Writing History in the Digital Age

• General Comments
• All Comments
• Comments by Commenter
• Minimise Header

May 22, 2011

2013 final edition published open-access online and in print by University of Michigan Press

¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Buy the 2013 book or read free online  from University of Michigan Press

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Has the digital revolution transformed how we write about the past — or not? Have new technologies changed our essential work-craft as scholars, and the ways in which we think, teach, author, and publish? Does the digital age have broader implications for individual writing processes, or for the historical profession at large? Explore these questions in  Writing History in the Digital Age , an open peer-reviewed volume published in open-access online format (for free) and in print (for sale) from the University of Michigan Press, as part of its Digital Humanities Series and the  digitalculturebooks  imprint.

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 See also prior editions of the book-in-progress, with open peer review commentary:

• ¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0
• 2012 Revised Manuscript: an Introduction, 20 essays, and new Conclusions (see contents below)
• 2011 Fall Open Peer Review  of 28 essays, with 945 comments from readers and reviewers
• 2011 Summer Open Call for essay ideas with over 60 contributions and 261 comments

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 Introduction , by Kristen Nawrotzki and Jack Dougherty

¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Part 1: Re-Visioning Historical Writing

Is (Digital) History More Than An Argument about the Past? , by Sherman Dorn

Pasts in a Digital Age , by Stefan Tanaka

¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 Part 2: The Wisdom of Crowds(ourcing)

“I nevertheless am a historian”: Digital Historical Practice and Malpractice around Black Confederate Soldiers , by Leslie Madsen-Brooks

The Historian’s Craft, Popular Memory, and Wikipedia , by Robert Wolff

The Wikiblitz: A Wikipedia Editing Assignment in a First Year Undergraduate Class , by Shawn Graham

Wikipedia and Women’s History: A Classroom Experience , by Martha Saxton

¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 Part 3: Practice What You Teach (and Teach What You Practice)

Towards Teaching the Introductory Course, Digitally , by Tom Harbison and Luke Waltzer

Learning How to Write Traditional and Digital History , by Adrea Lawrence

Teaching Wikipedia without Apologies , by Amanda Seligman

¶ 20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 Part 4: Writing with the Needles from Your Data Haystack

Historical Research and the Problem of Categories: Reflections on 10,000 Digital Notecards , by Ansley Erickson

Creating Meaning in a Sea of Information: The Women and Social Movements Sites , by Kathryn Kish Sklar and Thomas Dublin

The Hermeneutics of Data & Historical Writing , by Fred Gibbs and Trevor Owens

¶ 24 Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0 Part 5: See What I Mean? Visual, Spatial, and Game-based History

Visualizations and Historical Arguments , by John Theibault

Putting Harlem on the Map , by Stephen Robertson

Pox and the City: Challenges in Writing a Digital History Game , by Laura Zucconi, Ethan Watrall, Hannah Ueno, and Lisa Rosner

¶ 28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0 Part 6: Public History on Web: If You Build It, Will They Come?

Writing Chicana/o History with the Seattle Civil Rights and Labor History Project , by Oscar Rosales Castaneda

Citizen Scholars: Facebook and the Co-Creation of Knowledge , by Amanda Sikarskie

The HeritageCrowd Project: A Case Study in Crowdsourcing Public History , by Shawn Graham, Guy Massie and Nadine Feuerherm

¶ 32 Leave a comment on paragraph 32 0 Part 7: Collaborative Writing: Yours, Mine, and Ours

The Accountability Partnership: Writing and Surviving in the Digital Age , by Natalia Mehlman Petrzela and Sarah Manekin

Only Typing? Informal Writing, Blogging and the Academy , by Alex Sayf Cummings and Jonathan Jarrett

¶ 35 Leave a comment on paragraph 35 0 Conclusions: What We Learned from Writing History in the Digital Age , by Jack Dougherty, Kristen Nawrotzki, Charlotte Rochez, and Timothy Burke

¶ 36 Leave a comment on paragraph 36 0 We encourage you to share reflections about the process  in the  General Comments section . All commenters must use their full names.   –Co-editors  Jack Dougherty  and  Kristen Nawrotzki  ( email  or  follow us on Twitter or RSS feed )

Comments are closed

0 comments on the whole page, 0 comments on paragraph 1, 0 comments on paragraph 2, 0 comments on paragraph 3, 0 comments on paragraph 4, 0 comments on paragraph 5, 0 comments on paragraph 6, 0 comments on paragraph 7, 0 comments on paragraph 8, 0 comments on paragraph 9, 0 comments on paragraph 10, 0 comments on paragraph 11, 0 comments on paragraph 12, 0 comments on paragraph 13, 0 comments on paragraph 14, 0 comments on paragraph 15, 0 comments on paragraph 16, 0 comments on paragraph 17, 0 comments on paragraph 18, 0 comments on paragraph 19, 0 comments on paragraph 20, 0 comments on paragraph 21, 0 comments on paragraph 22, 0 comments on paragraph 23, 0 comments on paragraph 24, 0 comments on paragraph 25, 0 comments on paragraph 26, 0 comments on paragraph 27, 0 comments on paragraph 28, 0 comments on paragraph 29, 0 comments on paragraph 30, 0 comments on paragraph 31, 0 comments on paragraph 32, 0 comments on paragraph 33, 0 comments on paragraph 34, 0 comments on paragraph 35, 0 comments on paragraph 36, table of contents.

• General comments on the book
• How to comment — with video tutorial
• Editorial and intellectual property policy
• Assigning your students to read this book?
• Acknowledgements
• More Than an Argument about the Past? (Dorn)
• Pasts in a Digital Age (Tanaka)
• “I nevertheless am a historian” (Madsen-Brooks)
• Historian’s Craft, Memory & Wikipedia (Wolff)
• The Wikiblitz (Graham)
• Wikipedia and Women’s History (Saxton)
• Teaching the Introductory Course (Harbison & Waltzer)
• Learning How to Write (Lawrence)
• Teaching Wikipedia without Apologies (Seligman)
• Reflections on 10,000 Notecards (Erickson)
• Creating Meaning in a Sea of Information (Sklar & Dublin)
• Hermeneutics of Data and Historical Writing (Gibbs & Owens)
• Visualizations and Historical Arguments (Theibault)
• Putting Harlem on the Map (Robertson)
• Pox and the City (Zucconi, Watrall, Ueno, & Rosner)
• Writing Chicana/o History (Rosales Castañeda)
• Citizen Scholars (Sikarskie)
• HeritageCrowd Project (Graham, Massie, & Feuerherm)
• Accountability Partnership (Mehlman Petrzela & Manekin)
• Informal Writing, Blogging & the Academy (Cummings & Jarrett)
• Conclusions: What We Learned
• How it works: our open-source web-book
• conference proposal submission (February 2010)
• first round of essays & comments (Fall 2010)
• proposal to University of Michigan Press (Nov 2010)
• response from Press reviewer 1 (March 2011)
• response from Press reviewer 2 (March 2011)
• revised proposal to the Press (April 2011)
• assessment by Press of revised proposal (May 2011)
• call for essays/ideas (late May 2011)
• essay idea discussion (May-August 2011)
• progress report to Press (mid-June 2011)
• our contract with the Press (July 2011)
• essay submission and policies (July-August 2011)
• editorial & intellectual property policy (Fall 2011)
• instructions to expert reviewers (Sept 2011)
• instructions for authors (September 2011)
• how to comment — with video (Fall 2011)
• open peer review essays (Fall 2011)
• instructions for resubmitting essays (December 2011)
• contributor’s agreement for the press (December 2011)
• summary of revisions to the manuscript (September 2012)
• our words to the wise (March 2013)
• copyediting with collaborators in a digital age (May 2013)
• Announcements about this book
• Follow us on Twitter or RSS feed

Recent Comments in this Document

May 18, 2013 at 5:36 pm

While you’re correct that a Zotero source record only has a single field for notes, you can have any number of associated text (i.e. note) records related that that source.

See in context

March 20, 2013 at 10:50 am

Our apologies for this frustration. We had temporarily suspended new registrations for technical reasons but have since reactivated it, so that both new registration and commenting without registration should now be possible.

March 20, 2013 at 10:00 am

This is the lesson that I’m learning right now.  It’s so true, and so difficult.  All of the authors on our project are also discovering that you have to hit hundreds of people you know, and thousands of others, to get just a few willing to visit and contribute to the site.  Thinking about strategies in this area requires great creativity, and many of us historian types are unused to thinking creatively about human contact in the here-and-now.  But you have to do it to get a the kind of interaction that delivers on the promise of the technology.

March 13, 2013 at 9:41 am

Unfortunately, it says above that you need to enter your details in full for each comment or register once … but when you click ‘register’ it says ‘registration is not allowed’. Mildly frustrating!  :-)

March 13, 2013 at 9:40 am

Hmm … you’re asking ‘the public’ to comment on the essays in this journal, but then the first two or three paragraphs talk exclusively about ‘we historians’ etc. which might well put of ‘the public’ from commenting, I would have thought. I can’t see how the digital revolution could not transform how historians write about the past – but it probably depends how far back you go. The past is yesterday – for yesterday’s history there must be a vast mine of information on the net, from the completely trivial (I hurt my knee, ouch – I’ve written a blog post about it) to major world news. However, pre-web history will obviously not be affected in the same way. I’ve no doubt the way it’s written about will still be affected though and I look forward to reading more and finding out how.

Source: https://writinghistory.trincoll.edu/

• Writing History in the Digital Age

In this Book

• Jack Dougherty and Kristen Nawrotzki, editors
• Published by: University of Michigan Press
• Series: Digital Humanities

Writing History in the Digital Age began as a “what-if” experiment by posing a question: How have Internet technologies influenced how historians think, teach, author, and publish? To illustrate their answer, the contributors agreed to share the stages of their book-in-progress as it was constructed on the public web.

To facilitate this innovative volume, editors Jack Dougherty and Kristen Nawrotzki designed a born-digital, open-access, and open peer review process to capture commentary from appointed experts and general readers. A customized WordPress plug-in allowed audiences to add page- and paragraph-level comments to the manuscript, transforming it into a socially networked text. The initial six-week proposal phase generated over 250 comments, and the subsequent eight-week public review of full drafts drew 942 additional comments from readers across different parts of the globe.

The finished product now presents 20 essays from a wide array of notable scholars, each examining (and then breaking apart and reexamining) if and how digital and emergent technologies have changed the historical profession.

Table of Contents

• Copyright Page
• About the Web Version
• Acknowledgments
• pp. vii-viii
• Illustrations
• pp. xiii-xiv
• Introduction
• Kristen Nawrotzki, Jack Dougherty
• Part 1. Re-Visioning Historical Writing
• Is (Digital) History More than an Argument about the Past?
• Sherman Dorn
• Pasts in a Digital Age
• Stefan Tanaka
• Part 2. The Wisdom of Crowds(ourcing)
• "I Nevertheless Am a Historian": Digital Historical Practice and Malpractice around Black Confederate Soldiers
• Leslie Madsen-Brooks
• The Historian's Craft, Popular Memory, and Wikipedia
• Robert S. Wolff
• The Wikiblitz: A Wikipedia Editing Assignment in a First-Year Undergraduate Class
• Shawn Graham
• Wikipedia and Women's History: A Classroom Experience
• Martha Saxton
• Part 3. Practice What You Teach (and teach what you practice)
• Toward Teaching the Introductory History Course, Digitally
• Thomas Harbison, Luke Waltzer
• Learning How to Write Analog and Digital History
• Adrea Lawrence
• pp. 110-120
• Teaching Wikipedia without Apologies
• Amanda Seligman
• pp. 121-130
• Part 4. Writing with the Needles from Your Data Haystack
• Historical Research and the Problem of Categories: Reflections on 10,000 Digital Note Cards
• Ansley T. Erickson
• pp. 133-145
• Creating Meaning in a Sea of Information: The Women and Social Movements Web Sites
• Kathryn Kish Sklar, Thomas Dublin
• pp. 146-158
• The Hermeneutics of Data and Historical Writing
• Fred Gibbs, Trevor Owens
• pp. 159-170
• Part 5. See What I Mean? Visual, Spatial, and Game-Based History
• Visualizations and Historical Arguments
• John Theibault
• pp. 173-185
• Putting Harlem on the Map
• Stephen Robertson
• pp. 186-197
• Pox and the City : Challenges in Writing a Digital History Game
• Laura Zucconi, Ethan Watrall, Hannah Ueno, Lisa Rosner
• pp. 198-206
• Part 6. Public History on the Web: If You Build It, Will They Come?
• Writing Chicana/o History with the Seattle Civil Rights and Labor HIstory Project
• Oscar Rosales Castañeda
• pp. 209-215
• Citizen Scholars: Facebook and the Co-creation of Knowledge
• Amanda Grace Sikarskie
• pp. 216-221
• The HeritageCrowd Project: A Case Study in Crowdsourcing Public History
• Shawn Graham, Guy Massie, Nadine Feuerherm
• pp. 222-232
• Part 7. Collaborative Writing: Yours, Mine, and Ours
• The Accountabliilty Partnership: Writing and Surviving in the Digital Age
• Natalia Mehlman Petrzela, Sarah Manekin
• pp. 235-245
• Only Typing? Informal Writing, Blogging, and the Academy
• Alex Sayf Cummings, Jonathan Jarrett
• pp. 246-258
• Conclusions: What We Learned from Writing History in the Digital Age
• Jack Dougherty, Kristen Nawrotzki, Charlotte D. Rochez, Timothy Burke
• pp. 259-278
• Contributors
• pp. 279-284

Additional Information

Project MUSE Mission

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

©2024 Project MUSE. Produced by Johns Hopkins University Press in collaboration with The Sheridan Libraries.

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.