Page Tree:

Child pages
  • W4 Action Plan - 3.5 Education Materials

This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

What should be the qualities of a project in this area?

  • Dynamic interface with information of the site and possibly a blog archive.
  • Inform practices in research and teaching.
  • Facilitate access to established work in digital humanities.
  • Capture imagination of non-initiated faculty and students.
  • Provide access to and communicate news about/in digital humanities.
  • Feature meta-critical approaches to digital humanities.
  • Scale available information / tools to established and neophyte faculty and students in humanities, from syllabus development to extensive research [models?].
  • Visualization / Relationship tools.
  • Bring information from outside of Bamboo into Bamboo.
  • Address the divide between research and pedagogy in the humanities.
  • Facilitate strategies for modeling, finding, and accessing new digital humanities labs and classrooms.

What could be done in one year? What could be done in two years?

1st Year

  • Selectively treat and sample projects to make this process concrete.
  • Target existing activities and begin to assemble them.
  • Work with other groups to recognize dependencies or relationships.
  • Investigate incentives to bring content to the Bamboo environment.
  • Map institutions to goals (i.e. "assign" leader institutions on this section to flesh out particular goals).

2nd Year

  • Curate effective models, provide assessments.
  • Feature successful examples; conduct needs analysis.
  • Build new tools, models, relations to other groups.
  • Beta test developed curricular materials.

What may be the dependencies or necessary relationships?

  • Probably Scholarly Networking and Tools, and likely more.

Educational Technology Organizations, Projects, and Resources, compiled by Maureen Engel:

  • No labels


  1. Unknown User (

    Comments via email after this page went up (posted here to maintain record):

    Mark Williams: One idea: we might consider altering the order of some items, for emphasis.

    Mary Flanagan: I like the prioritization idea, where we see, e.g. three core activities that MUST be done, and then fan out the related material.

    Kathy Harris: What about that visualization tool that the narratives/recipe group used starting with verbs such as "I teach"? Also, the audience issue is important (as the narratives group also pointed out)

    Comments from general discussion about this Action Plan (Workshop 4, Day 3):

    • put education on front page to highlight relationship between research & pedagogy
    • focus on core initial year (proof of concept) and the tool that is produced during that first year, i.e., use that tool to provide educational & curricular materials
    1. Unknown User (

      The Tools Action Plan will guide us in what we're producing for curricular materials:

       BTW, I still really like Mary's idea about working with undergraduates.

    2. Unknown User (

      I'm joining this discussion late, driven largely by the comments and reports of CUNY's rep. to this workshop, Jeff Drouin. We're delighted here with the emphasis on teaching and pedagogy and I would like to supplement Mary's good point about focusing on undergraduate teaching with a call for us to make sure that we include doctoral students as active partners/members in PB. Doctoral students are an important bridge (and Jeff himself is a good example of this) between faculty doing digital humanities and the growing use of digital technology to enhance teaching and learning in the undergraduate classrooms.

      Steve Brier, the Graduate Center, CUNY