Response
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 2 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 believe that the argument helps secure the idea that the two subjects (Digital humanities and engineering) consist of the same ideals and care for the same things.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 Terras quotes Philip Jackson:
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 “‘Hidden Curriculum…’ refers to the fact that education is a socialization process, and that cultural norms, socially accepted practices and acceptable types and levels of knowledge are passed on to students through the way the teaching process is constructed. [78]
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 1 Jackson’s statement can be used in all disciplines but also states that this curriculum is also based off of what is socially acceptable and the norms in the society that we live in today. Even though our society today is leaning more towards STEM instead of the humanities, we can all come to agree that no matter what discipline you might be a part of, we must all be aware of the continuous changes within the subjects and the way that people learn so that the disciplines can all be transgressing and transitioning the same way that our education is.
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0
¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0
¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 This particular idea is also supported by McGann in the way that we must adapt to keep learning. Though Terras believes that, “it is hard to define a skills set to pass in which would individually define discipline, rather than just providing technical ‘training’ on specific computer technologies;” I fully believe that within each discipline, there are some commonalities that we all share [69]. This is also supported by the chart that Terras provides on page 86. This chart provides an assessment of different disciplines at a “humanities computing” event. Yes, the predominant majority of presenters were disciplinarians in the humanities (Library Science, English, and even Computer Science), but the fact that a handful of the presenters were from disciplines like computer science and digital technologies demonstrates that there is a commonality between those in the STEM oriented disciplines and those in the humanities.
¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0
¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 2 In class today, we had a discussion on the differences that we read in the article. These differences that we mentioned were more along the lines of her writing style rather than the digital humanities itself. I would like to note that I find it interesting how we talked about we believed that Terras is trying to state that this is more along the lines of a community and not by a method. I believe this really hits home with the idea that though computer science or engineering is quite different than the digital humanities, we use the same guidelines (technology) to further our educational purposes.
The digital humanities may not be recognized as a department or even a sub-department by many institutions, which therefore makes the acquisition of funding more difficult, but the use of technology is prevalent across all disciplines in the university. Does the humanities use of technology warrant the creation of a new department all together? If so–what’s left behind? How are the humanities different from the digital humanities?
Terras uses her data to illustrate a clear interest in the DH field and a clear concern among humanities scholars–which for her means that the field already exists–but she doesn’t discuss what it means to tease out this new department and what’s left behind after that separation.
Brittney asks some very useful questions in her comments here. I, too, am curious to think through the implications and stakes associated with the debate over “department vs. discipline vs. ????”. Because, of course, my first response is who cares? But as Brittney points out, there are real benefits / consequences associated with these labels, including equipment funds, staffing, space, etc. But do those benefits, in and of themselves, constitute “need”? Does DH “need” to be its own discipline in order to “work”?