Course Description: What is DH and what does it add to our scholarship? This course answers these questions and provides students with an opportunity to learn and apply various digital research methods to their own research. Through frequent hands-on workshops, students will acquire transferable digital skills in the command line, cleaning and structuring data, creating visualizations, and analyzing information and data from textual sources. Each class will explore scholarship and digital projects that exemplify the methods we study. In-class discussions will interrogate the underlying epistemologies of the practices and theories we’re investigating. The course will conclude with the completion of a short research paper and an oral presentation based on the application of at least one digital research methodology learned in class. This course does not require any background knowledge in the Digital Humanities.
| Date | Topic | Readings | Projects | Assignments Due |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monday, May 14 | The Humanities & the Digital Humanities | Burdick, Anne. Digital_Humanities (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2012), chapter 1, “Humanities to Digital Humanities.”
Shawn Graham, Ian Milligan, and Scott Weingart, Exploring Big Historical Data: The Historian’s Macroscope (Imperial College Press, 2015), chapters 1-2. |
Robots Reading Vogue
The Garden of Earthly Delights
|
Complete the “Getting to Know You” questions
Choose at least 2-3 sources to explore for your research throughout this course. |
| Monday, May 21 | Power, Narrative & Silence | Michel-Rolph Trouillot, Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (2015), chapter 1, “The Power in the Story.”
Ted Underwood, “Seven Ways Humanists Are Using Computers to Understand Text. The Stone and the Shell,” The Stone and the Shell, blog (4 June 2015). Teddy Roland, “Topic Modeling: What Humanists Actually Do With it” |
Cameron Blevins, Topic Modeling Martha Ballard’s Diary.
Jean-Baptisete Michel, et al., Robert K. Nelson, Mining the Dispatch. |
Reflection 1 |
| Monday, May 28 | [No Class. Complete the following on your own or in small groups] | Reading: Anthony Grafton and Daniel Rosenberg, “Time in Print,” Cartographies of Time (2010).
Workshop: Multimedia Timelines with TimelineJS |
Images from Cartographies of Time | |
| Monday, June 4 | “Data” and the Question of History | Trevor Owens, “Defining Data for Humanists: Text, Artifact, Information or Evidence?” Journal of Digital Humanities 1, no. 1 (Winter 2011).
Hayden White, “The Narrativization of Real Events,” Critical Inquiry 7, no. 4 (Summer 1981): 793-798. Shawn Graham, Ian Milligan, and Scott Weingart, Exploring Big Historical Data: The Historian’s Macroscope (Imperial College Press, 2015), chapter 5. Which Chart or Graph is Right for You? Johanna Drucker, “Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display,” Digital Humanities Quarterly 5, no. 1 (2011). http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/5/1/000091/000091.html |
Reflection 2 | |
| Monday, June 11 | Network Analysis | Shawn Graham, Ian Milligan, and Scott Weingart, Exploring Big Historical Data: The Historian’s Macroscope (Imperial College Press, 2015), chapter 6.
Elijah Meeks, “Hacking Networks in the Humanities,” 26 September 2011. |
Michael Sommer, “Texture of empire: Personal networks and the modus operandi of Roman hegemony,” in Sinews of Empire, edited by H. F. Teigen & E. H. Seland (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2017: 85-93.
Ryan Cordell and David Smith, Viral Texts: Mapping Networks of Reprinting in 19th-Century Newspapers and Magazines (2017), http://viraltexts.org. |
Reflection 3 |
| Monday, June 18 | Spatial
Analysis |
Shawn Graham, Ian Milligan, and Scott Weingart, Exploring Big Historical Data: The Historian’s Macroscope (Imperial College Press, 2015), chapter 7.
ORBIS: Interactive Scholarly Work on the Roman World: “ORBIS — the Stanford Geospatial Network Model of the Roman World“ |
Todd Presner, David Shepard, and Yoh Kawano, HyperCities: Thick Mapping in the Digital Humanities (2014). See the corresponding website here (http://www.hypercities.com/). | Reflection 4 |
| Monday, June 25 | Final Project Presentations | Project Presentations | Reflection 5
Project Presentations |
Links to Free Software:
Browser-based:
Download:
Links to Workshops:
Course Schedule
Semester start/end dates: May 14 – June 30, 2018
Meeting day, time: Monday, 9:00 – 11:50 & 1:00 – 3:50
Course Location: ACB 119 (Academic Computing Building)
Course Instructor:
Dr. Ashley Sanders Garcia
O: 310.206.5414 C: 424.256.5960
Email is the best way to reach me.
Virtual Office Hours: Tuesdays 9:00-11:00 or by appointment
Ashley Sanders Garcia holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialization in Digital Humanities from Michigan State University and a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics and History Secondary Education from Western Michigan University. She is Vice Chair and core faculty in the Digital Humanities program at UCLA.
Learning Objectives:
By the end of the course students will be able to:
Grading
Your grade will be calculated using the following scale. Grades with plus or minus designations are at the professor’s discretion.
| Letter Grade | Grade Point | Description | Learning Outcome |
| A | 4.0 | Complete mastery of course material and additional insight beyond course material | Insightful |
| B | 3.0 | Complete mastery of course material | Proficient |
| C | 2.0 | Gaps in mastery of course material; not at level expected by the program | Developing |
| U | 0 | Unsatisfactory | Ineffective |
Continual matriculation at CGU requires a minimum grade point average (GPA) of 3.0 in all coursework taken at CGU. Students may not have more than two incompletes. Details of the policy are found on the Student Services webpage (http://www.cgu.edu/pages/5081.asp).
See the attached assignment descriptions and rubrics for details
Course Policies: The CGU institutional policies apply to each course offered at CGU. A few are detailed in the space below. Students are encouraged to review the student handbook for the program as well as the policy documentation within the bulletin and on the Registrar’s pages (http://bulletin.cgu.edu/ http://www.cgu.edu/pages/179.asp).
Electronic Submission Guidelines:
Electronic documents need to:
Attendance: Students are expected to attend all classes. Students who are unable to attend class must seek permission for an excused absence from the course director or teaching assistant. Unapproved absences or late attendance for three or more classes may result in a lower grade or an “incomplete” for the course. If a student has to miss a class, he or she should arrange to get notes from a fellow student and is strongly encouraged to meet with the teaching assistant to obtain the missed material. Missed extra-credit quizzes and papers will not be available for re-taking.
Scientific and Professional Ethics: The work you do in this course must be your own. Feel free to build on, react to, criticize, and analyze the ideas of others but, when you do, make it known whose ideas you are working with. You must explicitly acknowledge when your work builds on someone else’s ideas, including ideas of classmates, professors, and authors you read. If you ever have questions about drawing the line between others’ work and your own, ask the course professor who will give you guidance. Exams must be completed independently. Any collaboration on answers to exams, unless expressly permitted, may result in an automatic failing grade and possible expulsion from the Program. Additional information on CGU academic honesty is available on the Student Services webpage (http://www.cgu.edu/pages/1132.asp).
Instructor Feedback and Communication:
The best way to get in touch with me is email. I will respond to email/voice messages within two business days.
Expectations and Logistics:_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities: CGU is committed to offering auxiliary aids and services to students with verifiable disabilities, in compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. If you are seeking academic accommodations as a student with a disability or suspect that you have a disability, please contact CGU’s Office of Disability Services as early as possible. Students need to register with this office before academic accommodations can be prescribed through an Accommodation(s) Letter and implemented in the classroom. Additional information and resources can be found on the linked page: (http://www.cgu.edu/pages/1154.asp).
Mental Health Resources: Graduate school is a context where mental health struggles can be exacerbated. If you ever find yourself struggling, please do not hesitate to ask for help. If you wish to seek out campus resources, here is some basic information about Monsour (http://www.cuc.claremont.edu/monsour/):
“Monsour Counseling and Psychological Services (MCAPS) is committed to promoting psychological wellness for all students served by the Claremont University Consortium. Our well-trained team of psychologists, psychiatrists, and post-doctoral and intern therapists offer support for a range of psychological issues in a confidential and safe environment.”
Phone 909-621-8202
Fax 909-621-8482
After hours emergency 909-607-2000
Address
Tranquada Student Services Center, 1st floor
757 College Way
Claremont, CA 91711
Title IX: If I learn of any potential violation of our gender-based misconduct policy (rape, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, or stalking) by any means, I am required to notify the CGU Title IX Coordinator at Deanof.Students@cgu.edu or (909) 607-9448. Students can request confidentiality from the institution, which I will communicate to the Title IX Coordinator. If students want to speak with someone confidentially like certified experts, the following resources are available on and off campus: EmPOWER Center (909) 607-2689, Monsour Counseling and Psychological Services (909) 621-8202, and The Chaplains of the Claremont Colleges (909)621-8685. Speaking with a confidential resource does not preclude students from making a formal report to the Title IX Coordinator if and when they are ready. Confidential resources can walk students through all of their reporting options. They can also provide students with information and assistance in accessing academic, medical, and other support services they may need.
Reflection 1:
Due 9:00am May 21, 2018
In a 3-5 page paper:
**NOTE: The analysis is the most difficult part, so make sure you allow enough time to ponder and explore what you’re seeing. Be patient with yourself and your analysis.
Reflection 2
Due: 9:00am, June 4, 2018
In a 2-3-page paper, describe where power resides in the narrative you are beginning to frame with your research. What silences exist in the source material? What are you choosing not to discuss? Why? How does this shape the story you are beginning to craft?
Reflection 3
Due: 9:00am, June 11, 2018
In a 2-3-page paper,
Reflection 4
Due: 9:00am June 18, 2018
Answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Make note of any questions you have and include this in your assignment.
**NOTE: You are not expected to frame your question or method perfectly at this point. This is an opportunity to practice what you’re learning and get feedback.
Reflection 5
Due: 9:00am June 25, 2018
In a 2-3-page paper, describe how your discipline – its epistemology, habits of mind, acceptable evidence, authorial norms – shapes how you think about your project, sources, and methods. Provide two specific examples from this class.
Project Presentation
Due: June 25, 2018
Purpose: The individual presentation provides an opportunity to work on oral presentation skills for an academic audience. This assignment is also intended to give you a chance to prepare a presentation that you could propose for either a disciplinary or DH conference.
Task: Prepare a 15-minute oral presentation that
Criteria for Success: See attached presentation rubric.
An exemplary presentation will meet the following expectations:
Final Project
Due: June 29, 2018
Purpose: The purpose of this final project is prepare a piece of writing that advances your academic career. Writing for an academic audience can be daunting and is a very specialized skill, but this project provides a chance to improve your writing skills. Feel free to include revised sections from previous writing you have done in this class. I strongly encourage you to have a draft prepared at least one week before the deadline and visit the writing center or work with a writing partner to receive feedback and make revisions before turning in the final draft.
Task: This project needs to represent your best writing and therefore is not a first draft. All projects need to include the following elements:
Format:
Criteria for Success: All final projects will be graded based on the attached writing rubric
| WRITING RUBRIC | Exemplary (4.0) | Proficient (3.0) | Emerging (2.0) | Unsatisfactory (1.0) |
| Thesis or Research Question | The writer formulates an elegant, ambitious argument or question which governs the evidence and analysis throughout. | The thesis / question is clear and arguable, even interesting, and governs the evidence throughout. | The thesis/question is not entirely clear or is not arguable or does not govern the evidence throughout. | The thesis/question is difficult or impossible to identify, and the purpose of the essay is unclear. |
| Information and Evidence | The writer selects persuasive, interesting, and insightful information to contextualize and inform the argument. Sources are cited appropriately. When necessary, evidence counter to the argument is effectively addressed. | Sufficient and appropriate persuasive information informs and contextualizes the argument. Sources are appropriately cited. Ineffective counter argument. | Information informing and contextualizing the argument is sometimes insufficient or unpersuasive for the argument. Sources are sometimes inappropriately cited. No counter argument. | Information informing and contextualizing the argument is rarely sufficient or persuasive for the argument. Sources are generally inappropriately cited or not cited. |
| Use of Key Terms | The writer establishes, and defines where necessary, the key terms of the argument. Key terms are used with confidence and sophistication. | Key terms are established and defined. Use of key terms lacks either confidence or sophistication. | Key terms are established but not consistently used or not clearly defined. | Key terms are not established, or they are unclear or inappropriate. |
| Organization | Excels in organization & representation of ideas. Writing flows smoothly throughout from intro to conclusion. Transitions effectively aid reader in following writer’s logic. | Ideas are logically arranged to present sound scholarly argument. | Ideas & concepts are generally satisfactorily presented, although lapses in logic & organization are apparent. | Content may be poorly focused or the scholarly argument is weak. Overall, the content & organization needs significant revision to represent a critical analysis of the topic. |
| Grammar | Word choice is appropriate. Sentence structure is correct and clarifies meaning. Essentially error-free in terms of mechanics. | While there may be minor errors, the paper follows normal conventions of spelling and grammar throughout. Errors do not significantly interfere with topic comprehensibility. | Inconsistency and/or errors in syntax and/or grammar result in weak formulation of argument or lead to difficulties in reader understanding. | Frequent errors in spelling, grammar (such as subject/verb agreement & correct tense), sentence structure, and/or other writing conventions make comprehension difficult. |
| PRESENTATION RUBRIC | Exemplary (4.0) | Proficient (3.0) | Emerging (2.0) | Unsatisfactory (1.0) | |||
| Organization (15 %) | The type of presentation is appropriate for the topic and academic audience. Information is presented in a logical sequence. All elements of the prompt are discussed (research questions, source materials, analytical methods, and findings) | The type of presentation is appropriate for the topic and academic audience. Information is presented in a mostly logical sequence. All elements of the prompt are discussed (research questions, source materials, analytical methods, and findings) | The type of presentation is appropriate for the topic but not for an academic audience. Information is presented in a logical sequence.2-3 elements from prompt are not discussed (research questions, source materials, analytical methods, and findings) | The type of presentation is not appropriate for the topic or an academic audience. Information is not presented in a logical sequence. 1-3 elements of the prompt are discussed (research questions, source materials, analytical methods, and findings) | |||
| Content
(45%) |
Introduction captures attention, lays out the research questions, & establishes a framework for the rest of the presentation. Technical terms are well-defined. Presentation contains accurate information. Material included is relevant. The amount of material is appropriate and points made reflect well their relative importance. Obvious conclusion summarizes the presentation. | Clear introduction that lays out the research questions and establishes a framework for the rest of the presentation. Technical terms are defined. Presentation contains accurate information. Material included is generally relevant. Appropriate amount of material is prepared, and points made reflect their relative importance. There is a conclusion summarizing the presentation. | Introduction that mentions the research questions. Technical terms are not be defined. Presentation contains mostly accurate information. Material included is somewhat relevant. Too much or too little material prepared. There is a conclusion. | No clear introduction. Research questions mentioned. Technical terms are not defined. Presentation contains inaccurate information. Material is somewhat relevant. Too much or too little material prepared. There is no clear conclusion. | |||
| Presentation
(40%) |
Speaker maintains good eye contact and is appropriately animated; uses clear, audible voice. Delivery is poised, controlled, and smooth. Visual aids are well prepared, informative, effective, and not distracting. Length of presentation is within the assigned time limit (15min). Information is well communicated. | Speaker maintains good eye contact; uses clear, audible voice. Delivery is poised & controlled. Visual aids are well prepared, informative & effective. Length of presentation is within the assigned time limit (15min). Information is well communicated. | Speaker maintains fair eye contact; uses audible voice. Delivery is uneven. Visual aids are included. Length of presentation is within the assigned time limit (15min). | Speaker does not maintain eye contact and is difficult to hear/understand. Delivery is uneven. Visual aids are not included. Length of presentation is under 15 minutes. | |||
| Student Overall Score | __________ | ||||||