Archive for September, 2016
Terras Response
Melissa Terras’ writing within “Disciplined: Using Educational Studies to Analyse ‘Humanities Computing” is noticeably different from the writing-of Stephan Ramsey, Lisa Spiro, Matt Kirschenbaum, and Jerome McGann. Although upon initially reading Terras’ article I didn’t know she was an Engineer, there was certainly something about her writing and its format that stood out. It doesn’t […]
Terras 9/19
As a PhD in engineering, Melissa Terras has a much more technical and scientific approach to how she views the study of digital humanities, compared to that of the other literary scholars we have read and discussed thus far. When the literary scholars write their essays, they have a type of literary flair to their […]
STEMMER in the House! : The Clinical Meets the Digital
Terras’ background as a STEMmer instead of Humanist shines through in her writing as well as methodology. Overall, her writing is extremely technical and detailed in a sciencey, clinical fashion, rather than attempt to be coy and get us to infer the consequences of the DH as legitimate scholarship debate, she explicitly says early on […]
Response to Terras: Thou shalt not fear numbers
When I first read the essay by Melissa Terras, I was not aware that her degree is in engineering, rather than English or another humanities subject. This revelation helps me understand why her essay is so much different than the other essays we have read so far. The first striking difference is that Terras uses numbers frequently throughout […]
Response
Melissa Terras wrote the article, Disciplined: Using Educational Studies to Analyse ‘Humanities Computing.’ Throughout the article, she argues on why the discipline has trouble finding funds and what the implications are throughout the Digital Humanities. Though the studies are different between digital humanities and technological studies might be two separate entities of itself, I thoroughly […]
Terras Response
When I read Terras’ article, I noticed that her approach seemed very analytical, using data tables and list to describe from a distance what seems to be trending in the humanities. Though I didn’t know her scholarly position at the time, I had the impression that she was an outsider looking in. However, as a pro-digital […]
Terras: The Social Science DHer
The differences between Terras’ approach and those of the other notable players in the Digital Humanities field (or at least those we read) are pretty apparent. Most notably, her methodology, the writing style related to this methodology, and some of her assumptions about scholarship and the academic discipline stand out. In keeping with Terras’ highly […]
Terras Response: She doesn’t even go here
“Being a part of a discipline gives a scholar a sense of belonging, identity, and kudos. But the idea of what constitutes a discipline is muddy, and often hinges around the bricks and mortar proof of a university department’s existence” [72]. Terras frequently refers to the Humanities Computing field as a community. This assertion is […]
Terras’s Response
Apparently, Terras’s approach in “Disciplined: Using Educational Studies to Analyse ‘Humanities Computing’ is based on outcomes and results coming from a research she conducted, and on information from ACH/ALLC 2005 conference. All of her effort was done to “analyze, measure, and define the field” through the use of “educational theory” (68) The perspective she adopted in order […]
Interdisciplinary Digital Humanities
Terras comes at the topic of Digital Humanities from a different perspective than the other authors we’ve read, like Spiro and McGann. She bluntly states in the beginning of her essay that she intends to evaluate Digital Humanities from the perspective of Education theory, which had not been done yet in other literature on the […]
