A single team member had become a de facto leader. Since divesting ourselves of hierarchy was so important to us, it was frustrating to see its reappearance.
I think it just makes people feel safer or more comfortable when they have someone they can rely on for support or guidance than freestyling essentially.
Encouraging researchers to make digital discomfort (ideological, interpersonal, technological, emotional, etc) visible to oneself and team members can heighten the consciousness that is driving such research: What part of this methodology is unsettling to me? Am I using this digital tool appropriately? Why am I hesitant to ask this question?
I can see how promoting digital discomfort would help us learn more about ourselves. It would ultimately contribute to better efficiency and results.
Because they expected to be assigned responsibilities and receive corrective oversight, when asked to contribute equally to theory-based methodology decisions that could change the trajectory of the project, discomfort arose.
I probably would have felt a little uncomfortable as well. It is definitely odd in project settings to not simply be assigned a rigid set of instructions. Especially if it could affect the trajectory of the project.
In the “Golden Age” of postcards, the decades before World War I, postcards circulated with the same fervor, if not speed, of images on popular social media apps today.
I could definitely see how would make sense. Postcards were popular because it was an easy way to let people know where you were if you were traveling. It was a cute way to keep in touch with others since it was popular to keep postcards.
Digital media changes the way users as readers and viewers digest informa-tion.
I agree. Digital media allows for readers to be actively engaging with the source. It provides opportunities that printed media falls short to provide like being able to annotate on the work without damaging it.
In a digital media environment, lurkers, commenters, visitors, viewers,and users replace readers.
I definitely agree with this. With printed media, readers tend to be people interested in the topic or who are actively seeking that information. However, with online media, readers become anyone who happens to come across the source.
eptune did not die for three hours, and he never stopped talking
Honestly this is pretty admirable and incredible. I don't think I would have been able to withstand such pain especially to prove a point.
Social historians in the 1970s and 1980sspent long hours compiling data by hand: aggregating state-generated sources totrack demographic shifts, labor patterns, and market trends and show us the massesen masse, at least.
It is crazy to think that someone was filing all this paperwork when now we have computers that do that for us
Ancestry.com offers a single portal to a wide range of government documents, including cen-sus sheets, port records, and draft cards, alongside an expanding array of non-gov-ernmental texts: obituaries, city directories, and more
I was honestly so tempted to use Ancenstry.com but I was super uncomfortable with how much information they would have on me
Yet those of us trained in an analog age can look back at how information used towork, and measure the transformation
I honestly don't know what it was like before the technological age. I always say "I don't know how you guys do it," when older people mention the old days. I could not imagine having information at my fingertips like I do now.
I will def agree with this but thats our responsibility. Just because the information is on there, doesn't mean its true or accurate. It is our job to verify and to back up our findings.
Forthe first time, historians can find without knowing where to look.
I don't necessarily find this to be a bad thing. I think thats the main reason why digital search is so popular. It made things easier than before when it wasn't possible to find everything in one spot.
By using social media platforms like Twitter with hashtags that can be followed in-real time and asynchronously
The use of hashtags has def gotten more popular over time as people have realized how much faster information (pictures, videos) can be spread.
Free online publishing software facilitates a type of dialogue that many inclusive historians already engage with in other ways; however, it expands the reach, depth, and breadth of these conversations.
I def agree with this. By providing an easier access to publishing, it allows for diversification in thoughts and ideas. It paves the way for conversations that need to be addressed or had.
The museum launched an online Memory Book in 2007 that asked visitors to share their stories, family photos, or traditions
I would genuinely love to see this! It is such a beautiful and interesting way to create a digital collection of history.
Today, digitized collections of primary sources from thousands of libraries, archives, and museums continue to facilitate access to existing collections
I honestly appreciate that UCSD also holds a online library reserve because it is able to provide it's students more access to resources that would otherwise be difficult to attain
An important milestone occurred in the 1990s when cultural heritage institutions began creating digital copies of their holdings and sharing them online for free.
I honestly would have thought that the first version of digital copies and keeping digital history would have been into the 21st century.
The birth of the Web and the first modern browser, Mosaic, in 1993, opened new means for sharing, networking, and collaborating in ways not previously possible
I often forget how new and recent the web/internet is. We are so accustomed to having technology be fully immersed in our every day lives that it's crazy to think it's only been a few decades.
chronologically younger are somehow moretechnologically fluent than those who are older.
I have definitely noticed this. It is very obvious in my household. My dad is still learning how to use all the elements of his iphone and my mom is almost fully tech savy but we still teach her a couple of things here and there.
Beginning by highlighting the importance of the creation and analysisof digital archives about the transatlantic slave trade, historian JenniferHart argues that African countries and those who study African historyface “per sistent challenges to processing and preserving archival materialson the continent.”17
I do think that digital history will help more marginalize groups other than African communities to help preserve their history. By digitalizing everything, it make its harder to erase art or historical artifacts and thus makes it easier to preserve these communities.
digital history isnot so much a field or sub-field . . . as a universal approach to history
I like the sound of this. I do agree that it is a universal approach to history because the digital element makes it easily accessable to others.
memorizing facts just for a test and then forgetting them.
I'm super guilty of this! I tend to pack all my studying and try to memorize as much information as possible but I'm not able to retain it that well.
“life was easier with grades” because they take so much less time than meaningful assessment
Of course it'll be easier for them because it wouldn't require them to really focus on student progress individually. However, by just using a grading scale, it affects their student's actual educational progress. it's also shocking to me that it comes from an 8th grade teacher because kids at that age are still very much developing and going through so many changes that it'd be difficult for them.
Replacing letter and number grades with narrative assessments or conferences — qualitative summaries of student progress offered in writing or as part of a conversation — is not a utopian fantasy.
I think this is better. I would prefer to receive notes on my personal growth. It is easier to have only myself and my old work to compare to rather than following a rubric. I think professors sometimes dismiss the fact that no one has the same educational background and sometimes some people have more advantages than others.
Extrinsic motivation, which includes a desire to get better grades, is not only different from, but often undermines, intrinsic motivation, a desire to learn for its own sake (Kohn 1999a).
I think it's also important to note that intrinsic motivation is slightly more important in terms of personal student development as it affects all areas of life.
Research on the effects of grading has slowed down in the last couple of decades, but the studies that are still being done reinforce the earlier findings.
I definitely think they should conduct studies regarding high school seniors and if there has been a change since universities made big college exams like the ACTs and SATs optional now.
Grades create a preference for the easiest possible task
I think it's a little funny that they were able to pick up on this. However, it makes sense. Why would a student pick a difficult book or project that would make it harder for than to achieve a good grade? I'm definitely guilty of this.
Why tests are not a particularly useful way to assess student learning (at least the kind that matters), and what thoughtful educators do instead, are questions that must wait for another day.
I agree with this statement to an extent. Testing is definitely beneficial to student learning because it allows us to be able to measure our progress. However, at the same time, if we are constantly testing and are more concerned with the score on the test, it's no longer as beneficial. It becomes a matter of scoring high on the test rather than improving.