Digital Scholarship Summer Fellows 2021

Over the past three weeks, it is undeniable that we (the cohort and the mentors) have built a great sense of community. We have collaborated, supported and opened up to each other for help. Collaborating on the Albert Chance Overseas Micro project has provided us a great opportunity to act as a collaborative community of practice, and our collaborative efforts have brought results that we are proud to showcase.

The cohort has been a place of openness, collaboration, and collegiality from the first day. Since the very beginning, each of us in the cohort have demonstrated openness to listen to other’s ideas, have recognized each person’s competency, and have respected and trusted their judgments in following a “divide and conquer” strategy. We have respected each other and trusted the choices that the other has made with regards to the project. Our collaboration is centered on mutual respect and collegiality. We each operate by acknowledging our responsibility to the group.  Our mutual respect to one another has also allowed the cohort to be a safe space to ask questions without fearing any ridicule.

Openness to listen to other people and their opinions is essential in any group project, especially in one as based on collaboration as our micro project is. The cohort is always open to consider various ideas and opinions. In fact, we find it essential to ask others’ opinions on the work that we have completed personally, and we almost always seek feedback from the cohort. My thoughts, ideas, evaluations, and feedback have all been taken very well by the cohort, and I certainly feel that my thoughts are given value, respect, and weight by my peers.

Despite being miles apart from one another, we have managed to collaborate in this group project successfully. I do believe we owe a huge part of this to Zoom’s ‘Share Screen’ feature though. We have navigated new tools and created projects together with this feature. Whether it is WordPress, Scalar, a Timeline made through TimelineJS or a map made in StoryMapJS, we have shared our screens and jointly explored the tools’ features, never forgetting to applaud proudly when we figure out how to use a particularly confusing feature.

Working this closely with the cohort for our micro-project will definitely act as a great learning experience as I continue on and now take upon the challenge of completing my own project. Not only has this micro-project reminded me of the importance of feedback and the value of other people’s ideas and interpretations, but it has also taught me that it is completely okay to ask for help. Navigating the several digital humanities tools together with the cohort has equipped me with greater technical knowledge about these tools than I would have had if I had explored these tools only by myself. There were times when few of us understood a tool better than others, and other times another few understood another tool better. Working together strengthened our understanding of each of the tools, and we are now better equipped at using these tools ourselves for our own projects. As I now go forward with my project, I do so armed with all that I have learnt while working with the cohort these past weeks.

Working together with the DSSF 2021 cohort has certainly removed my general dislike for group work, and I am now much more open to collaboration. As we come to the end of this micro-project, I would like to show my appreciation to the cohort for being supportive, respectful, competent, understanding and for strengthening my work with their helpful input.

Written by Shukirti Khadka, Gettysburg College Class of 2024, and part of the DSSF 2021 Cohort.

The DSSF cohort for 2021 tackled a challenging topic for our microproject. We tried to outline and visualize the wartime experiences of a serviceman in different theaters of World War II. As a unit, we demonstrated the values of collaboration and experimentation which Lisa Spiro outlined in her book chapter “This is Why We Fight: Defining the Values of the Digital Humanities.” In what certainly felt like a quick turnaround, our group learned how to use digital tools to tell a story effectively. Through dividing up the work on different sub-sections of Albert Chance’s service by theater, we efficiently utilized our time by delegating the work. After reviewing Albert Chance’s digitized source material on the Musselman Library website, our group decided to experiment with different visual tools such as Voyant Tools, StoryMapJS, and TimelineJS. Our experience has taught me to seek help when I need it, trust in my ideas, and to work to my strengths.

         Our group collaborated honestly and successfully throughout the entire microproject experience. Balancing the ideas of six individuals who had different areas of academic expertise is by itself a formidable challenge. We overcame this test by being sincere in our thoughts and trustful of those of the others in our group. We valued collaboration, and our microproject demonstrates our general wiliness to balance our thoughts with others in the group. I felt heard and believe that others would say the same thing. We pushed each other to see different perspectives, and frequently asked for feedback to ensure that our individual efforts were strengthened by the input of others. By collaborating, our group succeeded in creating a microproject that would be impactful because it was produced by different perspectives.

         Although we created a general wireframe for our project in the beginning stages, we had to adapt to our collaboration of ideas and the realistic expectations of what we would be able to accomplish in a couple weeks. This experimentation ensured that what our group created through collaboration would be effective. After experimenting with visualization tools such as TimelineJS and StoryMapJS, we decided which tool would be useful in each theater Albert Chance served in. This process of experimentation enabled our group to present a narrative which was backed by strong visualizations. By being honest with ourselves and dividing up the work, we allowed our group to experiment purposefully to create our microproject.

         I came into the DSSF cohort ready to set off into my own digital humanities project. I was sure of my concept, and confident in my abilities to pick up digital tools on the fly. Working as a cohort taught me to ask for help from those who better understand digital tools, and to absorb the ideas of others to strengthen my own. I am proud of what we were able to accomplish, and grateful for the patience and abilities of my fellow group members. Our collaboration and experimentation made our microproject successful because it was the creation of many hands. Looking forward to my own project, I am left with the reminder that digital humanities is about community. I look forward to implementing the perspectives of those in this community to strengthen my own project.

This post was written by Ben Johnson, Gettysburg College Class of 2022 and member of the DSSF cohort for 2021.

Grounded on DH’s Value to Independent DH project

My experience working with the Microproject on Albert Chance Collection for the past weeks is phenomenal. I have not only gained a better understanding of the definition and the value of Digital Humanities, but I have also practiced applying it to a real project. It is very interesting to reflect on the theory and incorporate it with a real example.

Overall, I think that our DSSF 21 cohort have done a very good job at the application of Albert Chance Collection into a digital project. In this reflective post, I want to emphasis on three of the DH values that I see in the process of our work on the Micro project, and how I can ground myself to these value in my independent research.

Despite being physically distance and time different, we manage to work collaboratively based on our expertise and responsibility, and finally able to deliver the products on time. Among the six of us in the fellowship, three of us are on campus, and three are doing a remote fellowship, two of which are in different countries and time zone. Through a clear and constant communication, we manage to meet, discuss, and apply our work and expertise into this Albert Chance project. It was amazing to see how we can come together and accomplish something in a short period of time.

Moreover, I have learnt to find and appreciate the openness aspect of the Digital Humanity projects. I remember while we were doing the mapping and timeline for the Albert Chance Project, there are places where he went that we wanted to highlight but we do not have the photos of it (or rather Albert himself did not take a photo of). Therefore, we went online and surf for some photos to use so that the audience can have a better understanding of Albert’s journey. We are glad that there are photos with no copy right/under creative common license that let us use their material for educational purpose. In addition, we are using WordPress, an open-source website hosting that is really detailed, useful and helpful in many ways. Through this openness related to DH, I have come to consider putting my work out there and allow people to use it under educational purposes.

Finally, it was the experimentation value that teach me how to think outside the box when it comes to digital humanity project. When we were doing the Microproject together, it feels like plan was changing every time we have a meeting. It is not a bad thing though. From one meeting to another, we keep experimenting new ideas and digital tools and then think together and see whether what works best. We did something wrong the first time, but it was fine because then we can solve that problem and move on. This experience really put me in a good spot for applying it to my personal project. I do think that experimentation is an important value in digital humanities because it helps direct us to try something new, analyze whether what work and what not, and correct if there are mistakes.

I have learnt a lot working on this Albert Chance Micro project. It gives me a solid foundation on how I should approach digital humanities and what I should do with my individual project moving forward.

As we are about to present the Albert Chance Microproject, I reflect back on my experience with the Digital Humanities through a group project and look ahead to how I can use this for my individual project.

Group projects are rough. Even back when it was the standard for meeting in the same place at the same time, there can be issues on communication, collaboration, or just plain human error. When we factor in the fact that the cohort is divided between residential and remote students, it can make things a lot trickier. Obstacles included, I’d say I’m quite impressed with how the Albert Chance Microproject has progressed. In Spiro’s chapter, she describes the five values of the Digital Humanities to be Openness, Collegiality, Collaboration, Diversity, and Experimentation, and I would argue that we practiced each of those values while working on this microproject.

Since this was a group project, I would argue that collaboration was the most significant value that we had to follow while working together. We had to communicate frequently to build this website and delegate where each person was doing their investigation and what part of the webpage they would be building/ writing/ designing/ etc. It was helpful that we had group chats and multiple shared documents to help us navigate through the work we conducted. Since we were located in different time zones from one another, we had to collaborate to schedule meeting times that worked for everyone. Often times that meant meeting right after workshops or during office hours in a Zoom Breakout room.

The value of experimentation had to be practiced to build this website and do this research. For many of us, the primary sources from the Albert Chance Collection were new and we were practicing with new tools. As part of our workshops, we were sent into breakout rooms to experiment with these new tools like WordPress, Scalar, StoryMaps, and TimelineJS. Eventually, we would go on to incorporate many of these tools into our website.

When it came to diversity, I found that that came from the endless variety of potential that the Digital Humanities has to offer. Our resources can vary from photos to videos to interviews from a wide array of places and there is limitless potential on subjects to study within the range of the humanities.

I would say that Openness works in tandem with Collegiality and Connectedness. As a cohort working together on a group project, we definitely had to practice collaboration (as mentioned above), but we also found success in the ideas of openness and collegiality. When looking at the Chance collection, we practiced with frequent communication. As part of this communication, we simply had to be open with one another. Originally, we had planned to split our investigation among the six of us in what we thought was an even distribution. For context, there were three main places where Chance was located while serving in World War II: North America, North Africa, and Italy. Originally, we had it set so that two of us would investigate one of the three locations (three groups of two, adds up perfectly on paper), but then we discovered that the source material was not evenly distributed, especially since we wanted to explore Chance’s life in the context of the war, not just his time as a soldier. This meant that we wanted to focus on his time exploring Italy and taking in the sights, not just fighting in battles. There was a significant amount of photos taken in Italy and journal entries and letters that showcased his exploration of the area. In contrast, the majority of the materials from the United States (barring a photo taken in Miami after Chance returned to the United States), involved his training and had much less applicable materials than Italy. The teams had to be pretty open with one another since the Italy collection was so large and the North American and North African collection was smaller. Eventually, we decided it would be best to redistribute the groups. Now four of us were working on Italy while one person each worked on North Africa and another person worked on his biography. These tasks and decisions were not simple, but they made for a lot less trouble in the long run, because we were open with one another. We also practiced openness by putting helpful links on a shared document for other members of our cohort to see.

As for my individual project, I believe I can practice these values while working on my webpage. I have the support of the cohort and the team working on the Digital Scholarship Committee (including my advisor) with whom we practice collegiality as a group. I am able to be open with this same group as I progress on my research. When looking at different sources, I am looking at a variety of areas to do research, including performances, books, and an interview all from different creators. In terms of collaboration, I have reached out to communicate with multiple people in terms of research. I had also been experimenting with new tools that this program has introduced to me, and even found success in this experimenting as I decided to change the content manager on my webpage from WordPress to Scalar. It also feels like working with others on the micro project was a great way for me to get accustomed to the standards of the Digital Humanities in a group setting. I now feel more confident about my individual project because it won’t be my first experience with the Digital Humanities.

Ultimately, I am looking forward to see how my practice with these values will help me in my future with DSSF and to see how I can continue to use them when the program is done.

Written by Nicole Parisi, Gettysburg College Class of 2023 and member of the DSSF 2021 Summer Cohort.