This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.
CJK: Is renaming as "scholars' network" something that resonates more with people?
-The term "social network" can also be an adjective, so I was seeing it as an adjective describing a whole set of things; a "scholar's network" makes sense, but if it's an adjective, we're still talking social connections
CJK: Let's leave it.
Discussion: should "Education" be split?
DAG: Is this still one direction? Or two, with a focus on outreach and another on a focus on teaching/mentoring?
-How to integrate tech into pedagogy is a different question than how to get colleagues in the humanities to make more intelligent use of technology in research and teaching
-Our group would disagree; we wanted to transform grad education, take a longer view and look at next generation of faculty
-Group 10 agrees with breaking them apart; distinction between undergrad pedagogy (and some graduate) different than relationships between faculty and IT specialists
-Group 8 agrees with splitting them
-The word "training" is a bad word; concerned with grouping along with professional development
Part of what PB's got to do is come up with productive ways of using technology in humanities work
Training is incidental to that - you have to show them what button to click on, but you're not training people in the big picture, people are learning and internalizing methodologies
Training is a reductive term
(vote: Some in favor of dropping training, others not)
CJK: Two groups, same data
One: education and training
Then have a discussion tomorrow.
-Main distinction is between education of students and professional development of faculty within/across institutions
-It's not only faculty that need development; it's librarians, technologists, all support structures too
-With or without the term "training", keep operations out of all discussions; any words alluding to "how" institutions do things will get a lot of pushback
-Important to think about grad students; they're in both worlds, and a key player
-Have information on interface and usability
Undergrad and grad education has research component; the best academic technology is that which feeds into teaching that facilitates research of the scholar
Powerful undergrad education is undergrad research
Neophyte vs. expert researchers - tools that respond to skill level
-Instead of going in opposite directions, think of it as two sides to the same coin - there's a relationship that's sometimes oppositional, but not severed
CJK: Where does this leave us?
DAG: Opportunity for people to structure two working groups; one with a deeper connection to undergrad education, another to rich forms of professional development for everyone in Bamboo - find some way for those working groups to talk to each other
-Risk of mixing directions for Bamboo (things it should try to do) and things that Bamboo has to do to be a project (there has to be outreach).
If you want to influence pedagogy of humanities scholarship, that's a mission you decide you want to take
They're not both directions - you can say Bamboo should advocate for digital humanities, or it can do marketing of what it does
Discussion of Advocacy
-I heard a lot of pushback on advocacy; some are rebelling against the Chicago workshops in thinking that we don't need advocacy
DAG: Problem with the word, or with the concept?
-Isn't that for disciplines to sort out their P&T on their own?
DAG: If we had one that's focused on advocacy, raise hands (a few hands raised)
Other thoughts for framing?
-I put "moral responsibility" into our question
If we develop tools for scholars, we have to understand their intellectual climate in the professional world
We have a moral responsibility to at some level become advocates - that doesn't mean we have to define standards of scholarship, just supply a form or work with groups more involved in doing this kind of work
Could even be a secondary role
-Recognition that at different stages of its maturation, PB will be better/less well equipped to advocate
To be pragmatic, first to advocate for its own relevance
Later, once that's established and there's models in place showing how it can function, maybe then it becomes an advocating body (by example, explicitly)
Talking about advocating as a generic whole from the beginning is too abstract
-Problems with term "advocacy" - didn't think it was something I was interested in or applicable to issues I deal with in University Press
Gets confused with PB advocating for itself, and advocacy in a larger way for digital humanities
It's not the right term
DAG: Description was focused on cluster of issues people in workshop 1 were interested in, in regards to advocacy
-When we were discussing these directions this morning, came across two different interpretations that need clarification:
1) Advocating to other humanities scholars, raising their awareness of what can be done
2) Advocacy from workshop 1 - trying to change things out of the control of most people
Very useful to keep this direction as a core thing
-Social networking came into this discussion of the culture of humanities, peer review, etc.
Need a hand in the conversation about if there's ways that tools can be constructed to allow for humanities contributions to databases to serve for those purposes
Not going to advocate for faculty contributing to repositories, but that could influence how repositories are structured (including things like timestamps, etc.)
Not going to the deans and advocating to them, but keep those issues in mind as we develop other tools
-I wish we wouldn't talk about it at all - there's plenty of other things to talk about
Better ways of doing this and that; waste a lot of psychological energy and time going into meta-issues of faculty prestige
Things are changing - more positions available for new media specialists
Things will take care of themselves; we've got enough to do building better tools and resources to help people do things better and faster
-Issue of disinterestedness; may make it easier to articulate the sheer use value of the tools part if Bamboo isn't also getting into more political issues
Won't have to identify itself with positions on those issues
-Counterpoint: some form of advocacy is going to be needed; whatever PB is doing will change the landscape, and that's inherently political
If we don't engage with professional societies (may have vested interests), business models for publishing, this could inhibit what PB wants to accomplish re: interoperability, access to scholarship, etc.
Need to address larger structural issues in the Academy
-Be more pragmatic; it's hard to evaluate digital scholarship
PB could provide set of criteria, peer review techniques for evaluating it
Tools for understanding the value, rathe than saying "it's good" - show people why it's important and how to demonstrate the importance
-Clearinghouse for what's happening in all these disciplines
Is the term "advocacy" appropriate?
A lot of the deans don't know what's happening in all these fields; PB could be the place to go to keep up with what's happening
We could represent that with visualizations (use our own technologies) - could be very constructive
-Need to be cognizant that there's standards for evaluation already; MLA already developed standards
PB should consider who are the faculty who are coming in to work on these things
If you don't have any advocacy, you can't get junior faculty to do this
-Building on model seen in CNI; very broad organization, multi-institutional
Trying to advance a common cause; seems like a natural model for a broad-based group like this to advance the cause of A&H scholarship
DAG: Important case made for a modest approach; ways tools and services could play into academic recognition portfolio
Seems to be people who are interested in being involved; there's an opportunity for a group of people to talk about a modest version, discuss how these questions interrelate with other directions
-Sounded more like the question of how Bamboo is going to partner w/ institutions, rather than how institutions should be organized within Bamboo
How do things happen in an institution to help support this?
DAG: This sheet is a starting way to get discussion going; we want to hear what the most fundamental questions that need to be addressed are
Strong statements around institutional support