Providing resources and trai­ning in the practices and tools of the digital humanities
  • Home
  • Digital Humanities Now »
Subscribe to Digital Humanities Now feed
Community-Curated Content Published by the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media
Updated: 16 min 18 sec ago

Job: Digital Humanities Academic Administrator, UCLA

Tue, 08/08/2017 - 13:00

From the ad:

Reporting to the Chair of the Digital Humanities Program, the Digital Humanities Academic Administrator is part of the core faculty of the Digital Humanities program and is responsible for developing new courses and teaching in the Digital Humanities program, advising undergraduate and graduate students, and overseeing a variety of student development initiatives. The Academic Administrator will work closely with the Digital Humanities Chair and affiliated faculty to schedule and plan course offerings, place students in mentorships and/or apprenticeships, recruit and advise students, and collaborate with the Library, Centers, and Institutes at UCLA.

Read the full ad here.

CFP: Global Debates in the Digital Humanities

Tue, 08/08/2017 - 12:30

From the CFP:

Following this line, we invite proposals for contributions to a collection of essays entitled Global Debates in the Digital Humanities: a collection on the issues and challenges of practicing Digital Humanities (DH) in diverse geographical contexts, countries, and cultures – especially from, but not limited to, the Global South. The aim of the collection is to highlight the critically engaged work of scholars outside the Anglosphere who have contributed to the advancement of DH but whose work has not received due attention for linguistic, cultural, or political reasons.

Read the full CFP here.

Editors’ Choice: DH 2017 Presentation – DH as Critical University Studies

Tue, 08/08/2017 - 12:00

I want to take a brief moment to explain the personal and theoretical underpinnings of this project, and state why I want to connect critical DH work with certain aspects of critical university studies (CUS).

At last year’s MLA I organized a panel on Digital Humanities in Secondary Education with excellent panelists doing critical DH work, and I presented on a grant funded project introducing DH methods to underserved high school students with my colleague Jamie Cohen. In that presentation we vocalized our frustration with the glacial pace at which our project was progressing, as well as a number of battles we had to fight with administrators over control of the project. Since that presentation, the project has been co-opted by administration at our institution and dramatically changed without our input. (Without getting into to much detail here, I work at a private commuter college on Long Island, and Governor Cuomo’s plan for state-subsidized education has already negatively impacted the financial outlook of the college. As a result, existing projects, like mine, have been co-opted by administration and transformed into profit-bearing opportunities for the college.)

While the project hasn’t failed holistically, it has failed in concept and intent. We went from creating open access teaching methods and training, course modules, and a collective working model based on WeWorkNYC and The Center for Social Innovation, to a situation where the college is trying to monetize every aspect of the project. The question I’ve had to confront as a result of this failure motivates this paper: What resources, critical traditions, and avenues of action are available to DH scholars whose projects fail as a result of austerity? This is perhaps minor concern among DH scholar-practitioners given the exuberance with which our work is often funded and valorized at the institutional level, but it is nonetheless an intimate one for me, and I’m sure I’m not isolated.


Read the full post here.

Editors’ Choice: Questions of Access in the Digital Humanities – Data from JDSH

Tue, 08/08/2017 - 11:00

I used The Altmetric Explorer to locate any  articles from the Journal of Digital Scholarlship in the Humanities that had had any ‘mentions’ online anytime. An original dataset of 82 bibliographic entries was obtained. With the help of Joe McArthur the Open Access Button API was then employed to detect if any of the journal articles in the dataset had open access surrogates (for example, self-archived versions in institutional repositories) and if so, which content they actually provided access to. The API located 24 URLs of the 82 DOIs corresponding to each article in the dataset.

I then edited and refined the original dataset to include only the top 60 results. Each result was manually refined and cross-checked to verify the resulting links matched the correct outputs and to what kind of content they provided access to, as well as to identify the type of license and type of access of each article’s version of record.

Back in 2014, we suggested that “altmetrics services like the Altmetric Explorer can be an efficient method to obtain bibliographic datasets and track scholarly outputs being mentioned online in the sources curated by these services” (Priego et al 2014).  That time we used the Explorer to analyse a report obtained by searching for the term ‘digital humanities’ in the titles of outputs mentioned anytime at the time of our query.

It’s been three years since I personally presented that poster at DH2014 in Lausanne, but the topic of publishing pracitices within the digital humanities keeps being of great interest to me. It could be thought of as extreme academic navel-gazing, this business of deciding to look into bibliometric indicators and metadata of scholarly publications. For the digital humanities, however, questions of scholarly communications are questions of methodology, as the technologies and practices required for conducting research and teaching are closely related to the technologies and practices required to make the ‘results’ of teaching and research available. For DH insiders, this is closely connected to the good ol’ less-yacking-more-hacking, or rather, no yacking without hacking. Today, scholarly publishing is all about technological infrastructure, or at least about an ever-growing awareness of the challenges and opportunities of ‘hacking’ the modes of scholarly production.


Read the full post here.

CFP: Current Research in Digital History

Thu, 08/03/2017 - 13:00

From the CFP:

The first annual CRDH meeting will be held at George Mason University in Arlington, VA, on Saturday, March 17, 2018. Papers proposed for that meeting are due on September 29, 2017.

The annual conference will feature one plenary session: a roundtable with four leading scholars on the state of digital history. The remainder of the sessions will consist of panels and presentations advancing historical argumentation.

Read the full post here.


Thu, 08/03/2017 - 12:30

From the CFP:

The main topic of the AIUCD 2018 Conference is Cultural Heritage in the Digital Age. Memory, Humanities and Technologies. The topic brings together interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary fields, and examines the role of cultural heritage in all its aspects in the digital age, the way in which the study and scientific research of humanistic knowledge (literary, historical, artistic, archaeological and philosophical) combines with different methodologies, logic and computer technologies and various types of media and digital resources. It also concerns the critical problems of digital memory, the re-thinking of contemporary digital culture the changing definition, enhancement, research and conservation of cultural heritage in the digital era, as well as the digital rebirth of humanistic culture.

Read the full CFP here.

Job: Research Librarian for Digital Humanities & History, University of California-Irvine

Thu, 08/03/2017 - 12:00

From the ad:

The UCI Libraries seeks a knowledgeable, innovative, and collaborative professional for the position of Research Librarian for Digital Humanities & History to lead the development and growth of the Libraries’ Digital Humanities Program. As a member of the Digital Scholarship Services Department, the Librarian will work collaboratively within the department and across the Libraries to develop and foster best practices for curating research data across Humanities disciplines, produce library collections developed for computational use, and shape repository policies and features to encourage computational use of collections.

Read the full ad here.

Announcement: Announcing New 2017 ODH Grant Awards

Thu, 08/03/2017 - 11:30

From the announcement:

The Office of Digital Humanities is pleased to announce 31 awards through our Digital Humanities Advancement Grants program and our Institutes for Advanced Topics in the Digital Humanities program. These awards are part of a larger slate of 245 grants just announced by the NEH. Congratulations to all the awardees as they begin these exciting new projects!

Read the full announcement here.

Editors’ Choice: Predicting the Past – Digital Art History, Modeling, and Machine Learning

Thu, 08/03/2017 - 11:00

We are surrounded by models.

When you check the weather forecast in the morning before going to work, you are seeing the result of a model of your local atmosphere. This model is a set of rules and data manipulations built according to past observations of the weather, and refined over many years of testing and evaluation of predictions against actual results. By running current data—like temperature, pressure, humidity, and wind from a variety of locations collected over the past few days or weeks—through this model, you get a resulting prediction about whether it’s going to rain that afternoon.

Similarly, when Facebook recommends “people you might know,” it’s showing you predictions produced by a model of how people have previously used that site (e.g. in the past, how likely was someone to friend a person who has X mutual friends with them?, etc.) and using that past data to predict what might happen next…(1)

But models aren’t only good for trying to predict the future. By using them to predict the past, they can become powerful mechanisms for reasoning about history. In this post, I’ll be introducing some modeling approaches (some aided by machine learning) that historians at the Getty and elsewhere are using to grapple with the past.


Why model?

The sociologist Joshua Epstein once wrote that we are all modelers already(2). Anyone who suggests what might happen in the future based on what happened in the past holds a model—however informal—of the world in their head. These mental models are replete with rules and assumptions that chart the course between some set of evidence or past observations, and some prediction for the future.

Thus, Epstein argues, the choice for scholars isn’t whether or not to model, but whether or not to do so explicitly by specifying our starting premises along with the rules—whether defined mathematically, or in code—that lead from that starting evidence to our final conclusions. Among other benefits, Epstein shows that explicit model buildings help us form better explanations, discover new questions, and highlight uncertainties and unknowns.

While Epstein was talking about modeling in the context of the social sciences, many historians are beginning to think (once again) about the intersections between modeling and historical thinking and argumentation. Historians create theories to explain the processes that may have produced evidence—whether archeological remains, archival documents, or even works of art—that survives today.


Read the full post here.

Job: Assistant Professor, Electronic and Digital Rhetoric, San Diego State University

Tue, 08/01/2017 - 13:30

From the ad:

We seek candidates with a demonstrated capacity for scholarly research and publication and a demonstrated record of excellence in teaching electronic and digital rhetoric. Desirable areas of teaching experience include multimodal literacies, multimodal composition, professional communication, social media, digital humanities, content management, and visual and information design.

Read the full ad here.

Job: Lecturer in Digital Humanities, Lancaster University

Tue, 08/01/2017 - 13:00

From the ad:

The Department of History wishes to appoint a Lecturer in Digital Humanities who will play a leading role in developing Lancaster’s Digital Humanities Hub. The Department will consider candidates from a range of disciplinary backgrounds.

Read the full ad here.

Resource: Infrastructure for Collaboration – Catching Dead Links And Errors

Tue, 08/01/2017 - 12:30

From the resource:

The The Programming Historian has enjoyed a huge surge of new lessons and translations this past year. This work wouldn’t be possible without our ever-growing community of authors, reviewers, and editors. But as teams get bigger, one needs to take special care to organize around that size.

This post will highlight three behind-the-scenes, technical changes to the way that the Programming Historian is transformed from plain text files into beautiful, preservable HTML pages.

Read the full resource here.

Editors’ Choice: Argument Clinic

Tue, 08/01/2017 - 12:00

Zoe LeBlanc asked how basic statistics lead to a meaningful historical argument. A good discussion followed, worth reading, but since I couldn’t fit my response into tweets, I hoped to add a bit to the thread here on the irregular. I’m addressing only one tiny corner of her question, in a way that is peculiar to my own still-forming approach to computational history; I hope it will be of some use to those starting out.

In brief, I argue that one good approach to computational history cycles between data summaries and focused hypothesis exploration, driven by historiographic knowledge, in service to finding and supporting historically interesting agendas. There’s a lot of good computational history that doesn’t do this, and a lot of bad computational history that does, but this may be a helpful rubric to follow.

Zoe’s question gets at the heart of one of the two most prominent failures of computational history in 2017 : the inability to go beyond descriptive statistics into historical argument. I’ve written before on one of the many reasons for this inability, but that’s not the subject of this post. This post covers some good practices in getting from statistics to arguments.

Historians, for the most part, aren’t experimentalists. Our goals vary, but they often include telling stories about the past that haven’t been told, by employing newly-discovered evidence, connecting events that seemed unrelated, or revisiting an old narrative with a fresh perspective.


Read the full post here.

Editors’ Choice: What Makes Computational Evidence Significant for Literary-Historical Argument?

Tue, 08/01/2017 - 11:00

Argumentation for digital history stumbles over the ontology of its evidence. I’m writing here about corpus-scale analysis, the digital methodology I know best from my work on the Viral Texts project, and variously named by terms like “distant reading” or “cultural analytics.” Though the specifics of these methods are hotly debated, we might gather them under the sign of scale, a notion of “reading”—and I’d like to make that word do more work than perhaps it should—across wider sets of materials than was typical for humanists prior to computational methods.

Recently in literary-historical circles, Katherine Bode has inspired a much-needed discussion about the corpora on which computational analyses are based. Drawing on traditions of book history and textual scholarship, Bode critiques Moretti and Jockers, in particular, as metonymies for distant reading approaches:

Moretti and Jockers construct literary systems as comprised of singular and stable entities, while also imagining that they capture the complexity of such systems in the process. In fact, because their datasets miss most historical relationships between literary works, their analyses are forced to rely upon basic features of new literary production to constitute both the literary phenomenon requiring explanation, and the explanation for it.

Most incisively, Bode shows how much “distant reading” work reconstitutes the primary assumption of close reading: “the dematerialized and depopulated understanding of literature in Jockers’s work enacts the New Criticism’s neglect of context, in a manner rendered only more abstract by the large number of ‘texts’ under consideration.” The problem may be, in other words, not that computational analysis departs from analog methods, but that we interpret the results of corpus-level analysis too much like we interpret individual texts. To be provocative, I might rephrase to say that we don’t yet as a field understand precisely how corpus-scale phenomena make their meaning, or how those meanings relate back to codex-scale artifacts.


Read the full post here.

Job: Front-End Web Developer, National Archives

Thu, 07/27/2017 - 13:00

From the ad:

This position is part of the WEB AND SOCIAL MEDIA BRANCH, National Archives and Records Administration. As a IT Specialist (INET) -Front-End Web Developer, you will be leading enterprise-wide web design efforts with a particular emphasis on, blogs, Presidential Libraries, and related websites

Read the full ad here.

Job: Scholarly Communication Librarian, University of Chicago

Thu, 07/27/2017 - 12:30

From the ad:

The Scholarly Communication Librarian provides strategic leadership and direction for the development of the University of Chicago’s growing scholarly communication services, including Knowledge@UChicago, the institutional repository (IR) being developed in collaboration with the University’s IT Services.

Read the full ad here.

Job: Collection Services Specialist, HathiTrust

Thu, 07/27/2017 - 12:00

From the ad:

The Collection Services Specialist is the primary contact for members, staff, and development partners regarding the deposit and ingest of collections and metadata. This is a special opportunity to support the continued growth of the largest digital book collection in the public sector.

Read the full ad here.

Job: Web Content Manager, National Museum of African American History and Culture

Thu, 07/27/2017 - 11:30

From the ad:

This position is located in the Office of Public Affairs at the National Museum of African American History and Culture (NMAAHC). The Web Content Manager will educate the public about African American history and culture through web-based initiatives, engagement, development and maintenance of NMAAHC’s website.

Read the full ad here.

Editors’ Choice: One Finch, Two Finch, Red Finch, Blue Finch – Measuring Concentration and Diversity in the Humanities, A Response to Wellmon and Piper

Thu, 07/27/2017 - 11:00

In “Publication, Power, and Patronage: On Inequality and Academic Publishing,” Chad Wellmon and Andrew Piper motivate their study in a laudable spirit: they seek to expose and root out elitism in the name of a more egalitarian and truly meritocratic academy.[1] That the study at the same time makes a claim for more studies of its kind— “What we need in our view is not less quantification but more” (“P”)—seems justifiable based on the results it found. We find, then, an argument for the continued practice of the digital humanities (DH).

But this study is not DH as we typically understand the term. Wellmon and Piper are not producing new software or a digital archive, or offering an interpretation of a large corpus of books using quantitative methods. Rather, they are humanists making a claim about social organization, where the organization in question is their own field. This is an important distinction to make. Rather than holding their study to a research standard held by other digital humanists, we ought instead to evaluate their work using the rubrics of disciplines that answer similar kinds of questions.

Specifically, Wellmon and Piper assess the heterogeneity of university representation in top humanities journals as an indicator of the extent to which publication practices in the humanities are corrupted by “patterns and practices of patronage and patrimony and the tight circulation of cultural capital” (“P”). Perhaps unknowingly, the authors find themselves a part of a long and contentious literature in the social sciences[2] and natural sciences[3] over the creation and interpretation of metrics for diversity (and its opposite, concentration) that continues through the current decade.[4] The authors put themselves into the shoes of ecologists seeking novel data in unexplored terrain. Traditional bibliometric indicators of status and concentration in the sciences that rely on citation and coauthorship lose traction in the humanities.[5] As such, the authors seek to do what any good ecologist might: they go out into the field and count species.


Read the full post here.

Job: Institutional Repository Coordinator, University of Nebraska, Omaha

Tue, 07/25/2017 - 13:00

From the ad:

In a collaborative, team-based environment, under the direct supervision of the Digital Initiatives Librarian and the general direction of the Director of Archives & Special Collections, leads the institutional repository, DigitalCommons@UNO, and collaborates on other digital initiatives. Working collaboratively with the library team, this position is also responsible for developing outreach, instruction, and support for users of the institutional repository and other digital collections.

Read the full ad here.


Directory of DH Scholars

Looking for collaborators, expertise, or other scholars with related interests? 

Please see our list of affiliated scholars at KU.

If you would like to be included in this list please complete our affiliated scholars form.


KU Today
Home to 50+ departments, centers, and programs, the School of the Arts, and the School of Public Affairs and Administration
KU offers courses in 40 languages
No. 1 ranking in city management and urban policy —U.S. News and World Report
One of 34 U.S. public institutions in the prestigious Association of American Universities
44 nationally ranked graduate programs.
—U.S. News & World Report
Top 50 nationwide for size of library collection.
23rd nationwide for service to veterans —"Best for Vets," Military Times