• HOW TO MAKE POSTERS, DIGITAL PICTURES, AND USE AND MAKE DATA VISUALIZATIONS
• read ahead in Berger, and pick 5 things to do serious web research about. (Notice what you need to do for Thursday too – plan out how to get it all done for the week).
What did you choose in Berger to research on the web and why? what were your results? how did you get them? what records did you need to keep to demonstrate both the results and the methods for us? Did you come across pictures that mattered in this research? What are data visualizations and did you come across any in this research? Be sure you spend at least as much time doing all this as you ordinarily do reading for class.
• Wikipedia on visualizations
• Wordle
• Google data visualizations examples
Check out this link from WMST 400 about posters and handouts too!
Always bring in notes answering the questions for each class!
Berger1, Berger2, Berger3, Berger4
=== Web Action 3
===
Thursday 22 Sept – How the transnational and the transdisciplinary live on the Web
• HOW TO WRITE PAPERS, CREATE HANDOUTS, USE CITATIONS, AND FIND CITATION STYLES ON THE WEB
• bring in the results of your serious web research on transnational feminisms, and be prepared to tell us why this information is on the web, who made it, what it is for, who is using it and why, and what that all means.
What
do Zandt and Davis have to tell us that helps us understand what sorts
of knowledge live on the web? What does looking for and analyzing such
knowledges about transnational feminisms tell us about the work of
both Zandt and Davis? How can we flip back and forth between one way of
seeing things and another? What does that have to do with what happens
when knowledge travels? ===
Meet with partners briefly and pool the information you gathered for today:
- Results of web research on transnational feminisms
- What is this information on the web?
- Who made it?
- What is it for?
- Who is using it and why?
- What this all means! What do Zandt and Davis have to tell us that helps us understand what we have found?
- What do the results of your web research tell you about the work of both Zandt and Davis?
- How does doing web work help you think about what it might mean to look at Zandt’s work through Davis’ eyes, or Davis’ work through Zandt’s eyes?
We will use this as a basis for general discussion for 30 mins.
===
Why do we use footnotes? How do they place us in networks of trust and of sharing knowledges? What might feminists in particular think about when they look deeply into citation and its record-keeping? Some thoughts we want to consider as we consider how feminists share trust and knowledge:
From a scholarly collective blog on doing history, a contributor post: "On Footnotes and Doing History" by Lisa Clark Diller: [bold emphasis is mine, for your particular attention]
"Footnotes reveal our technical proficiency, but they do so within a particular context. While in grad school, I can remember discounting entire volumes of historical research because the footnotes were so 'thin.' And one of my advisors at the University of Chicago would warn us to look with grave suspicion on any early modernist who cited too many printed sources. I’m less puritanical in my standards now. And [Anthony] Grafton [1999. The Footnote: A curious history. Harvard] has reminded me that: 'No accumulation of footnotes can prove that every statement in the text rests on an unassailable mountain of attested facts. Footnotes exist, rather, to perform two other functions. First, they persuade: they convince the reader that the historian has done an acceptable amount of work . . . . Second, they indicate the chief sources that the historian has actually used” (22). [in other words, create trust and authority.]
"We sometimes still operate under the assumption that if we have all the 'original sources' our argument will be solid. But what makes history interesting is all the various interpretations that we can develop from the same sources. It is part of why we revisit the same problems over and over again. Interpretation as well as sources give each of us our originality. This is decidedly not the same thing as saying that any interpretation of the documents is as good as another, but it is what keeps me from reading a scholarly tome and thinking that because the footnotes took up 37% of each page I read, no one need any longer do research on that subject. Grafton also reminded me to be careful in judging the scholarship of an earlier generation by the type or quantity of footnotes.
"As I sweat through proper citation of digital works and decide how much to include or exclude from my own footnotes, I am glad to remember that this process isn’t simply about showing off my guild credentials. It’s also a way to 'out' myself regarding my priorities and methods. The evidence I use won’t be considered equally sufficient for all time; but then again, I don’t expect to answer historical questions and decide their significance once and for all.
"The footnote reminds me of the time-laden nature of my queries and verifications." [1]
[1] Diller, "On Footnotes," The Historical Society. &
Dilller, Lisa Clark. 2010. "On Footnotes and Doing History." The Historical Society [Website] 22 December. Retrieved 11 Feb 2011 at http://histsociety.blogspot.com/2010/12/on-footnotes-and-doing-history.html
===
searching for citation formats on the web? • Google it! • How they do it at The Feminist Press. • How they do it at Feminist Studies.
what about making research posters? • Google it!
===
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are welcome from all, although not required (for students)! Anyone can comment, but all comments are moderated to keep away spambots! So there may be a lag between when you wrote your comment and when it gets posted. Thanks for contributing!