Miriam Posner, coordinator of the digital humanities program at the University of California at Los Angeles, posts some cautionary remarks at Inside Higher Ed regarding the future of alt-ac jobs: some cautions I had not necessarily considered. The entire article is linked below:
But I do hope to give you pause as you consider what a university would look like if it were populated by many more people like me: flexible employees, carrying out a great deal of administrative work, whose time is managed by someone else, who do research when they can carve out the time, whose work belongs to someone else, and who have no voice in faculty governance. The picture begins to look a lot like a corporation. These alt-ac gigs can be great jobs, but they differ in some fundamental ways from faculty jobs as they have been traditionally understood — and not because we’re doing different work, but because we’re doing that work on very different terms. I think we begin to see why so many administrators have embraced the alt-ac model, and why we need to ask ourselves whether this is the future we want for scholarly labor.
Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2013/12/04/essay-asks-whether-alt-ac-careers-are-really-solution-academic-jobs-shortage#ixzz2obdZa6C0
Inside Higher Ed
Showcase Your Undergraduates’ Digital Work at Re:Humanities – ProfHacker – The Chronicle of Higher Education.
This is an excellent example of what the digital humanities can offer undergraduate humanities students: the opportunity to participate in real knowledge-making through a peer-reviewed channel–an opportunity not usually offered to humanities undergraduates. This contributes to a long-needed shift in thinking in the humanities, in which peer-review and publication were reserved for the graduate student or Ph.D. It also provides the opportunity to accomplish real work in cooperation with others.
Big data meets the Bard – FT.com.
Yet another article about the perhaps “diabolical” use of “Big Data” in the humanities. The article describes the author’s reactions to a Skype seminar from the Stanford Literary Lab. While I don’t think that “Big Data” will replace actually reading novels, I did cringe at this quote:
Ryan Heuser, 27-year-old associate director for research at the Literary Lab, tells me he can’t remember the last time he read a novel. “It was probably a few years ago and it was probably a sci-fi. But I don’t think I’ve read any fiction since I’ve been involved with the lab.”
But reading books, and analyzing Big Data, as I’ve said before on this blog, are different –and complementary–tasks.
As an umbrella term for many kinds of technologically enhanced scholarly work, DH has built up a lot of brand visibility, especially at research universities. But in the context in which I work, it seems more inclusive to call it digital liberal arts (DLA) with the assumption that we’ll lose the “digital” within a few years, once practices that seem innovative today become the ordinary methods of scholarship.
via Stop Calling It ‘Digital Humanities’ – Advice – The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Meaning everywhere and nowhere, produced not by anyone but by everyone in concert, meaning not waiting for us at the end of a linear chain of authored thought in the form of a sentence or an essay or a book, but immediately and multiply present in a cornucopia of ever-expanding significances.
There are two things I want to say about this vision: first, that it is theological, a description its adherents would most likely resist, and, second, that it is political, a description its adherents would most likely embrace.
via The Digital Humanities and the Transcending of Mortality – NYTimes.com.
As usual, Stanley Fish is insightful, provocative, and theoretical.