Dear all,
We're looking for an Associate Research Scholar to work at our new Center
for Spatial Research at Columbia University. "Candidates must demonstrate
literacy in the Digital Humanities with a focus on either Geographic
Information Systems (GIS), or Data Visualization in the context of research
in the Humanities."
Full posting here:
https://academicjobs.columbia.edu/applicants/jsp/shared/frameset/Frameset.j…
Best,
a.
Hi all,
Earlier this week, ADHO announced a change in leadership as John Nerbonne
stepped down as ADHO chair and Karina van Dalen-Oskam was elected as
interim chair (the announcement is here:
http://adho.org/announcements/2015/adho-announces-new-steering-committee-ch…).
As part of the announcement, Karina called for a discussion on
inter-cultural communication:
"The first thing I have asked the Steering Committee to do, is to establish
a protocol or a set of rules/guidelines for dealing with these fundamental
cultural issues. We will not be the only organization that runs into this
kind of problems. I have asked all members of the Steering Committee to do
some research, and I would welcome input from others as well. Can you find
guidelines that we could adopt/adapt for ADHO? Do colleagues from other
international organizations have suggestions based on their own experience?
Are there policy makers who can help? "
This is something GO::DH can contribute to: it is closely related to our
core interest AND we have actually discussed parts of this in our early
days (see for example, the discussion involving some of these emails:
http://listserv.uleth.ca/pipermail/globaloutlookdh-l/2013-April/000319.htmlhttp://listserv.uleth.ca/pipermail/globaloutlookdh-l/2013-January/000163.ht…http://listserv.uleth.ca/pipermail/globaloutlookdh-l/2013-January/000188.ht…
At our meeting today, the executive decided to lead development of a GO::DH
response to Karina's call. Because of the time limitations, we will not be
able to have a full membership development and approval process (it is due
Nov. 30th), though we may want to develop the interim statement further
using that process after it is submitted to ADHO. For this reason it will
be submitted formally as a document of the executive (and any additional
authors) and as specifically reflecting their views rather than those of
the SIG as a whole.
But we would very much to develop this as openly and as broadly as possible
within those constraints.
To do this, we will be developing and writing the document openly in Google
Docs between now and Sunday. We have divided our response into three
sections:
- Recognising and Accommodating Barriers to Participation (Lead editor:
Gimena del Rio)
- Best practice in governance and mentorship (Lead editors: Alex Gil and
Élika Ortega
- Best practice in inter-cultural language use and communication (Lead
editors: Daniel O'Donnell and Øyvind Eide).
Each of the editors will be sharing a link to a Google doc specifically for
their section with the list in the next couple of hours. In the document,
they will collect notes and points and examples (and ask you to help with
your ideas). On Sunday morning, we will then lock the documents down and
edit them into a narrative (it is because of time pressure that we will
institute this lock down; this lock-down and the lack of time for followup
consultation is also why, in the end, it will be submitted as a document of
the executive rather than the SIG as a whole).
In keeping with the GO::DH ethos, we encourage people to contribute in
whatever language you feel most comfortable in and let the editors figure
out how to combine the bits and pieces. Our final document will be
submitted in three forms: an original language narrative written in the
languages the editors feel most comfortable in (probably English and
Spanish for the most part), an English-language, lingua franca translation
for wide dissemination, and, as Karina has indicated that her first choice
would be for Dutch, a Dutch-language submission copy.
Let me emphasis the extent to which we welcome your ideas on these topics
and invite you to contribute to the formulation of our response. It may
also make sense to use the list as a way of conversationally developing
ideas under these topics as well, so please feel free to contribute ideas
that way, as well, again in whatever language you feel most appropriate.
-dan
Hi all,
We have an almost final version of our document now available online:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11b87VmblizmYeFoOUbHDOeR8A2EQ1F_Kg9jNQwU….
Karina has asked that we submit it in the course of the day Wednesday CET.
The section editors still need to take a final view to make sure that their
work is showing up the way they want and, of course, we welcome any
comment--though at this point we may need to wait for subsequent iterations
to incorporate significant points.
I'd like to thank all who participated in what was a really enjoyable
collaborative process. Mistakes and misrepresentations are the
responsibility of the editors...but mostly inadvertent. We realise (I
think) that it is a little platitudinous.
-dan
Dat mag. De documenten zijn tot "wereld" gezet. Iedereen met de link mag ze
lezen.
On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 at 15:17 Karina van Dalen-Oskam <
karina.van.dalen(a)huygens.knaw.nl> wrote:
> Beste Dan, dear all,
>
> heel veel dank voor deze prachtige bijdragen. Ik stuur ze rond aan de
> Steering Committee, in drie verschillende mails om de discussie te
> stroomlijnen per onderwerp. Voordat ik dat doe heb ik nog 1 vraag: ik zou
> het liefst de link naar de google.docs rondsturen. Mag dat? Met name vraag
> ik dat voor het stuk over de talen, waarin aan het eind nog verschillende
> opmerkingen van mensen staan. Ik wil de link niet doorgeven zonder
> toestemming.
>
> Many thanks for these wonderful contributions. I will send them for
> discussion to the Steering Committee, in three different mails to
> streamline the discussion based on topic. Before I do that, I do have one
> question: I would like to present the three pieces through their link to
> the google.doc. Is that OK? Especially because the piece about languages at
> the end has several personal remarks. I would not want to share the link
> without permission.
>
> Groeten, best,
> Karina
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Daniel O'Donnell [daniel.odonnell(a)uleth.ca]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:39 PM
> To: Karina van Dalen-Oskam
> Cc: globaloutlookdh-l, MailList
> Subject: GO::DH reactie
>
> Beste Karina,
>
> De GO::DH response aan jou oproep for commentaar aan de mogelijkheden for
> interculturaal communicatie is nu hier beschikbaar:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/11b87VmblizmYeFoOUbHDOeR8A2EQ1F_Kg9jNQwU…
>
> Zoals wij daar zeggen: er is een engels tekst van alles, maar de original
> is in drie talen: nederlands, engels, een spaans (met wat Estse alleen voor
> de lekker).
>
> Veel bedankt!
>
> -dan
>
Beste Karina,
De GO::DH response aan jou oproep for commentaar aan de mogelijkheden for
interculturaal communicatie is nu hier beschikbaar:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11b87VmblizmYeFoOUbHDOeR8A2EQ1F_Kg9jNQwU…
Zoals wij daar zeggen: er is een engels tekst van alles, maar de original
is in drie talen: nederlands, engels, een spaans (met wat Estse alleen voor
de lekker).
Veel bedankt!
-dan
Dear colleagues,
It is a pleasure for us to announce at the Open University announced that the
registration period is extended until March 13, for the two courses offered by
the Digital Innovation Lab @UNED (LINHD): the “Experto professional en
Humanidades Digitales”
http://linhd.uned.es/p/titulo-propio-experto-profesional-en-humanidades-dig…
in its second edition (specialization course in Digital Humanities), and the
“Experto Profesional en Edición Digital Académica”
http://linhd.uned.es/p/titulo-propio-experto-en-edicion-digital-academica/
(specialization course in Digital Scholarly Editing).
Registration is open till 1st December and admissions are limited. The courses
will start in January 2015 and will end in September. Each of them consists of
30 units, and will be taught completely online and in Spanish.
We hope that this initiative will let users a deeper knowledge of digital
humanities and digital scholarly editing. Please, feel free to circulate this
message among all people that could be interested in following any of these
programs.
Best regards,
Elena González-Blanco García
Director of the Digital Humanities Innovation Lab @UNED
(LINHD)http://linhd.uned.es/
Rosa Sebastià
LINHD
http://linhd.uned.es/
Hi all,
There have been some excellent comments suggested in the language document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pLB3-QYZdETd-fjBO9Bw6W93JbcJgcc5_m8BmUK…
But a central question asked by Karina van Dalen-Oskam is not being
answered there: what to do about intercultural differences in acceptable
rhetoric?
This is a real issue and one that goes much farther than just interpersonal
communication. Some disciplines, some cultures, have traditionally had very
aggressive argumentative and rhetorical approaches to research
communication; others have had far less aggressive ones.
I come from Anglo-Saxon studies, for example, which used to have a very
hard and aggressive tone at conferences and the like (though it has toned
itself down a lot in the current generation). But I'm also in North
America, which has a far less aggressive academic culture on the whole,
than, I'd say, the UK, Australia, or Germany.
I think there can also often be a strong gender aspect to this: part of the
lessening of the aggression of tone in Anglo-Saxon studies, I'd argue, has
been a result of the sea change in gender composition of the field in the
last couple of decades: apparently 2/3 of the speakers at the last ISAS
meeting were women, for example (I couldn't go).
So a real question is what to suggest about handling this? If you work in a
discipline or culture that values that aggressive edge, for example, you
can find not being tested aggressively vaguely insulting (as my
father-the-physicist used to say, the worst thing in the world is being
told you're not even wrong). But if you are used to a culture that values a
more supportive or deferential or indirect approach to criticism and
questioning, that same approach can come across as incredibly rude and
exclusionary.
My own feeling is that this needs to be treated a little like
native-speaker use of international English: i.e. that we need to strive,
regardless of what we consider to be the norm, for an approach that is
accommodating and inclusive rather than divisive. So if I'm used to asking
hard questions in a hard way in my own discipline, in an international
context, I need to consciously practice a style that is more deferential
and supportive, even while asking necessary questions and making necessary
value judgments, in an international forum.
Or is it as simple as saying "don't be an asshole"? I really don't know.