CAA Task Force on Digital Art and Architectural History Wiki - User contributions [en]

Universities and Individuals

2015-03-12T12:31:21Z

GEsperdy:

Alka Patel at the University of California Irvine. She has been trying to get more tenure acknowledgment for her architectural fieldwork photography and sharing it in ARTstor. (Suggestion from one of the researcher applicants)

Nancy Troy, Chair, Stanford University Art and Art History

UCLA, Dept of Art HIstory (especially Diane Favro)

Berkeley, Art History

Pittsburgh, History of Art & Architecture (esp. the Chair, Barbara McCloskey)

Niall Atkinson, U of Chicago, Dept of Art HIstory (assistant Prof. perspective)

Rob Borke, U of Iowa, Art History (former chair and user of CAD and other digital tools)

Susan Siegfried, History of Art and Women's Studies, U of Michigan (former Getty Projects Manager)

Jesus Escobar, Chair, Art History, Northwestern U. [GE]

University of Virginia, McIntire Dept of Art

Jonathan Hay, IFA, New York

Columbia University, Art History and Archeology Dept.

Suzanne Blier, Harvard University

Nancy J. Troy, Chair of Dept. of Art & Art History, Stanford; https://art.stanford.edu/people/nancy-j-troy

Jeffrey Schnapp, Harvard University - FAS/GSD

Dianne Harris, Director, Illinois Program for Research in the Humanities & Professor of Landscape Architecture, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign [GE]

Mark Jarzombek, Professor & Interim Dean, School of Architecture, MIT

Sharon Haar, Professor & Chair of Architecture, University of Michigan [GE]

Diane Favro, Professor, UCLA School of Architecture and Urban Design [GE]

Beatriz Colomina, Director of Graduate Studies & Director of Program in Media and Modernity, School of Architecture, Princeton University [GE]

John Unsworth, CIO, Brandeis University Library

Jud Harward, Harvard University

Andrew Tallon, Vassar http://mappinggothic.org/person/338

Reto Geiser, Rice http://arch.rice.edu/People/Faculty/Reto-Geiser/

Felicity Scott, GSAPP-Columbia http://www.arch.columbia.edu/about/people/fs2248columbiaedu

Abigail Van Slyck, Connecticut College http://www.conncoll.edu/directories/faculty-profiles/abigail-van-slyck/

Dietrich Neumann, Brown, http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Joukowsky_Institute/people/facultypage.php?id=10274 [GE]

David Brownlee, UPenn http://www.sas.upenn.edu/arthistory/people/profile/david-brownlee

Caroline Bruzelius (Duke). http://aahvs.duke.edu/people/profile/caroline-bruzelius

Swati Chattopadhyay, professor and department chair, UCSB. http://www.arthistory.ucsb.edu/faculty/chattopadhyay.html

Hilary Ballon, Ballon worked to create JSAH online, one of the first scholarly journals that could be illustrated with multimedia content http://wagner.nyu.edu/ballon

Todd Presner, founder of HyperCities, thick mapping in the digital humanities, http://www.toddpresner.com/

Cathy N. Davidson, co-founder of HASTAC, the Humanities, Arts, Science and Technology Alliance Collaboratory, http://www.hastac.org/blogs/cathy-davidson

Ted J. Ligibel, Director Historic Preservation Program with concentration in Digital Heritage, Eastern Michigan University, http://emich.edu/geo/preservation tligibel@emich.edu

Ellen Faran, director of MIT Press. she has been active in recruiting non-print "monographs" in visual culture, art history, etc and has experience with peer review processes; Duke U Press also active in developing multi-media publishing models

Anne Whiston Spirn - Anne has been involved in developing e-books and in discussions about digital scholarship.

Johanna Drucker, Chair, Digital Humanities Program, and Professor of Germanic Languages and Comparative Literature

Katina Rodgers, Associate Director, Futures Initiative

Neil Freistat, Director of MITH

Lev Manovich, CUNY

Joan Saab, University of Rochester

Anne Kelly Knowles, Middlebury College

Jon Ippolito, University of Maine

Sheila Brennan, George Mason University

Miriam Posner, Digital Humanities Program Coordinator, UCLA

Hussein Keshani, Associate Professor of Art History, The University of British Columbia

Todd Presner, Chair, Digital Humanities Program, and Professor of Germanic Languages and Comparative Literature, UCLA

Steven Nelson, Associate Professor of African and African American Art History, ULA [GE]

Diane Zorich

Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Director of Scholarly Publication for the Modern Language Association

William Sherman, Professor of Architecture & Associate Vice President for Research, School of Architecture, University of Virginia (current head of P&T committee)

Universities and Individuals

2015-02-13T14:18:08Z

GEsperdy:

Alka Patel at the University of California Irvine. She has been trying to get more tenure acknowledgment for her architectural fieldwork photography and sharing it in ARTstor. (Suggestion from one of the researcher applicants)

Nancy Troy, Chair, Stanford University Art and Art History

UCLA, Dept of Art HIstory (especially Diane Favro)

Berkeley, Art History

Pittsburgh, History of Art & Architecture (esp. the Chair, Barbara McCloskey)

Niall Atkinson, U of Chicago, Dept of Art HIstory (assistant Prof. perspective)

Rob Borke, U of Iowa, Art History (former chair and user of CAD and other digital tools)

Susan Siegfried, History of Art and Women's Studies, U of Michigan (former Getty Projects Manager)

Jesus Escobar, Chair, Art History, Northwestern U.

University of Virginia, McIntire Dept of Art

Jonathan Hay, IFA, New York

Columbia University, Art History and Archeology Dept.

Suzanne Blier, Harvard University

Jeffrey Schnapp, Harvard University - FAS/GSD

Dianne Harris, Director, Illinois Program for Research in the Humanities & Professor of Landscape Architecture, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Mark Jarzombek, Professor & Interim Dean, School of Architecture, MIT

Sharon Haar, Professor & Chair of Architecture, University of Michigan

Diane Favro, Professor, UCLA School of Architecture and Urban Design

Beatriz Colomina, Director of Graduate Studies & Director of Program in Media and Modernity, School of Architecture, Princeton University

John Unsworth, CIO, Brandeis University Library

Jud Harward, Harvard University

Andrew Tallon, Vassar http://mappinggothic.org/person/338

Reto Geiser, Rice http://arch.rice.edu/People/Faculty/Reto-Geiser/

Felicity Scott, GSAPP-Columbia http://www.arch.columbia.edu/about/people/fs2248columbiaedu

Abigail Van Slyck, Connecticut College http://www.conncoll.edu/directories/faculty-profiles/abigail-van-slyck/

Dietrich Neumann, Brown, http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Joukowsky_Institute/people/facultypage.php?id=10274

David Brownlee, UPenn http://www.sas.upenn.edu/arthistory/people/profile/david-brownlee

Caroline Bruzelius (Duke). http://aahvs.duke.edu/people/profile/caroline-bruzelius

Swati Chattopadhyay, professor and department chair, UCSB. http://www.arthistory.ucsb.edu/faculty/chattopadhyay.html

Hilary Ballon, Ballon worked to create JSAH online, one of the first scholarly journals that could be illustrated with multimedia content http://wagner.nyu.edu/ballon

Todd Presner, founder of HyperCities, thick mapping in the digital humanities, http://www.toddpresner.com/

Cathy N. Davidson, co-founder of HASTAC, the Humanities, Arts, Science and Technology Alliance Collaboratory, http://www.hastac.org/blogs/cathy-davidson

Ted J. Ligibel, Director Historic Preservation Program with concentration in Digital Heritage, Eastern Michigan University, http://emich.edu/geo/preservation tligibel@emich.edu

Ellen Faran, director of MIT Press. she has been active in recruiting non-print "monographs" in visual culture, art history, etc and has experience with peer review processes; Duke U Press also active in developing multi-media publishing models

Anne Whiston Spirn - Anne has been involved in developing e-books and in discussions about digital scholarship.

Johanna Drucker, Chair, Digital Humanities Program, and Professor of Germanic Languages and Comparative Literature

Katina Rodgers, Associate Director, Futures Initiative

Neil Freistat, Director of MITH

Lev Manovich, CUNY

Joan Saab, University of Rochester

Anne Kelly Knowles, Middlebury College

Jon Ippolito, University of Maine

Sheila Brennan, George Mason University

Miriam Posner, Digital Humanities Program Coordinator, UCLA

Hussein Keshani, Associate Professor of Art History, The University of British Columbia

Todd Presner, Chair, Digital Humanities Program, and Professor of Germanic Languages and Comparative Literature, UCLA

Steven Nelson, Associate Professor of African and African American Art History, ULA

Diane Zorich

Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Director of Scholarly Publication for the Modern Language Association

William Sherman, Professor of Architecture & Associate Vice President for Research, School of Architecture, University of Virginia (current head of P&T committee)

Universities and Individuals

2015-02-13T13:52:35Z

GEsperdy:

Alka Patel at the University of California Irvine. She has been trying to get more tenure acknowledgment for her architectural fieldwork photography and sharing it in ARTstor. (Suggestion from one of the researcher applicants)

Nancy Troy, Chair, Stanford University Art and Art History

UCLA, Dept of Art HIstory (especially Diane Favro)

Berkeley, Art History

Pittsburgh, History of Art & Architecture (esp. the Chair, Barbara McCloskey)

Niall Atkinson, U of Chicago, Dept of Art HIstory (assistant Prof. perspective)

Rob Borke, U of Iowa, Art History (former chair and user of CAD and other digital tools)

Susan Siegfried, History of Art and Women's Studies, U of Michigan (former Getty Projects Manager)

Jesus Escobar, Chair, Art History, Northwestern U.

University of Virginia, McIntire Dept of Art

Jonathan Hay, IFA, New York

Columbia University, Art History and Archeology Dept.

Suzanne Blier, Harvard University

Jeffrey Schnapp, Harvard University - FAS/GSD

Dianne Harris, Director, Illinois Program for Research in the Humanities & Professor of Landscape Architecture, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Mark Jarzombek, Professor & Interim Dean, School of Architecture, MIT

Sharon Haar, Professor & Chair of Architecture, University of Michigan

Diane Favro, Professor, UCLA School of Architecture and Urban Design

Beatriz Colomina, Director of Graduate Studies & Director of Program in Media and Modernity, School of Architecture, Princeton University

John Unsworth, CIO, Brandeis University Library

Jud Harward, Harvard University

Andrew Tallon, Vassar http://mappinggothic.org/person/338

Reto Geiser, Rice http://arch.rice.edu/People/Faculty/Reto-Geiser/

Felicity Scott, GSAPP-Columbia http://www.arch.columbia.edu/about/people/fs2248columbiaedu

Abigail Van Slyck, Connecticut College http://www.conncoll.edu/directories/faculty-profiles/abigail-van-slyck/

Dietrich Neumann, Brown, http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Joukowsky_Institute/people/facultypage.php?id=10274

David Brownlee, UPenn http://www.sas.upenn.edu/arthistory/people/profile/david-brownlee

Caroline Bruzelius (Duke). http://aahvs.duke.edu/people/profile/caroline-bruzelius

Swati Chattopadhyay, professor and department chair, UCSB. http://www.arthistory.ucsb.edu/faculty/chattopadhyay.html

Hilary Ballon, Ballon worked to create JSAH online, one of the first scholarly journals that could be illustrated with multimedia content http://wagner.nyu.edu/ballon

Todd Presner, founder of HyperCities, thick mapping in the digital humanities, http://www.toddpresner.com/

Cathy N. Davidson, co-founder of HASTAC, the Humanities, Arts, Science and Technology Alliance Collaboratory, http://www.hastac.org/blogs/cathy-davidson

Ted J. Ligibel, Director Historic Preservation Program with concentration in Digital Heritage, Eastern Michigan University, http://emich.edu/geo/preservation tligibel@emich.edu

Ellen Faran, director of MIT Press. she has been active in recruiting non-print "monographs" in visual culture, art history, etc and has experience with peer review processes; Duke U Press also active in developing multi-media publishing models

Anne Whiston Spirn - Anne has been involved in developing e-books and in discussions about digital scholarship.

Johanna Drucker, Chair, Digital Humanities Program, and Professor of Germanic Languages and Comparative Literature

Katina Rodgers, Associate Director, Futures Initiative

Neil Freistat, Director of MITH

Lev Manovich, CUNY

Joan Saab, University of Rochester

Anne Kelly Knowles, Middlebury College

Jon Ippolito, University of Maine

Sheila Brennan, George Mason University

Miriam Posner, Digital Humanities Program Coordinator, UCLA

Hussein Keshani, Associate Professor of Art History, The University of British Columbia

Todd Presner, Chair, Digital Humanities Program, and Professor of Germanic Languages and Comparative Literature, UCLA

Steven Nelson, Associate Professor of African and African American Art History, ULA

Diane Zorich

Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Director of Scholarly Publication for the Modern Language Association

Questions

2015-02-12T18:49:59Z

GEsperdy:

*NB: There are two sets of questions that will be needed--one set for the survey of 'yes/no and check-off' and another set of open-ended questions for the interviews by the researcher.

'''SURVEY QUESTIONS'''

Are there students and faculty in your department who are using digital tools and sources for their primary research?
*Is your department or school prepared to evaluate digital research projects for promotion?
*Does your institution offer support for the development of digital research projects? [check off] library resources, academic technology or educational technology services?
*Does your institution have faculty members with expertise in digital scholarship in the humanities?
*Does your department call upon outside expertise such as programmers, web developers, and other technologists to assist with evaluation of digital scholarship?
*Do you use the following criteria to evaluate digital scholarship:
Peer Review of digital research sites or tools
Collaboration or connections with related digital research projects at other institutions
Links from other sites to the scholar's digital research or other citation of the research
Use of internationally accepted encoding standards (e.g., XML, TEI guidelines)
Technical innovation and sophistication of projects
Preparation of materials must involve consultations with experts in design and implementation
Long-term accessibility, viability for archival use
Compatibility between design, content, and medium [from: University of Nebraska Center for Digital Research in the Humanities: http://unlcms.unl.edu/cas/center-for-digital-research-in-the-humanities/articles/promotion#criteria)
*Does your institution require a student or faculty member to prepare a written description of their digital research project before being reviewed for promotion or tenure?
*Does your institution have guidelines for collaborative digital projects?
*Does your institution require posting digital research in a university repository?

'''INTERVIEW QUESTIONS''' (some of the same questions above may be used in the interviews)

*Please describe the content and technology used by students and faculty in your department who are using digital tools and sources for their primary research.
**What support does your institution offer for development of digital research projects? Do you have support from Academic Technology or Educational Technology services? The Library?
**Where do you find expertise such as programmers, web developers, and other technologists to work with?
*Do you have evaluation criteria for digital scholarship?
*If so, how would you approach the evaluation?
*Is it necessary for the student or faculty member being evaluated to call in an expert in digital media and an expert in their sub discipline to evaluate a digital research project?
*If so, how are these individuals identified?
*What categories of criteria should be addressed for all digital research projects? How do you define each category?
*Does your institution require a student or faculty member to prepare a written description of their digital research project before being reviewed for promotion or tenure?
*Does your institution have a working definition of digital scholarship? digital art/architectural history?
*Does your institution have clear standards for evaluating different kinds of digital art and architectural historical projects? Do you make distinctions, e.g., between development of digital tools that have significant art/architectural historical uses vs. use of preexisting digital tools for significant art/architectural scholarship? Are both of these kinds of scholarship considered "art or architectural history" in your department?
*How are collaborative projects more generally evaluated within your department (e.g., work on an exhibition, co-editing an anthology, etc.)? Do you have specific guidelines in your personnel bylaws for this?
*Do you think digital art/architectural history is the same as art/architectural history? if not, what elements of digital scholarship work do you see as distinctive, especially in regards to evaluating their quality or impact?
*Does your institution require posting digital research in a university repository? What format is required?

Book and Journal Articles

2015-02-12T18:29:43Z

GEsperdy:

;Lunenfeld, Peter, Anne Burdick, Johanna Drucker, Todd Presner, and Jeffrey Schnapp. Digital_Humanities. (MIT Press, 2012):
This MIT Press book is available as an open access PDF on the press’s website. It contains an essay, "How to Evaluate Digital Scholarship," which outlines guidelines for assessing works of digital scholarship for promotion and tenure. The section of the book is aimed at deans, chairs, and others who need guidelines for assessing digital works for hiring and promotion. The authors intend the text to inform institution-wide however, the recommendations are a guide and not specific to any single discipline or subject area.
The book provides an overview of the development of digital humanities in four chapters, and takes the reader from a bdiscussion and definition of the field to an overview of the methods and types of digital humanities research to the role of the digital humanities in society.
The authors provide A Short Guide to the Digital_Humanities, also an open-access PDF, which contains a discussion of how to evaluate digital scholarship.
See also a review of the full volume by Dene Grigar, Director and Associate Professor, Digital Technology and Culture Program, Washington State University Vancouver, in Leonardo Reviews. http://leonardo.info/reviews/dec2012/burdick-grigar.php.

;Gold, Matthew, ed. Debates in the Digital Humanities, online edition. (University of Minnesota Press, 2012. http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/:
The University of Minnesota Press first published this extensive overview of the digital humanities field in 2012. Edited by Matthew Gold and extending to over 500 pages, the print (and now online version) of this collection of essays contains five chapters to define, describe and critique the digital humanities. Each essay has endnotes and a bibliography; there is no index.

;Journal of Digital Humanities: http://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/

;Artl@as: http://www.artlas.ens.fr/

;Michael Dear, Jim Ketchum, Sarah Luria and Doublas Richardson, GeoHumanities: Art, history, text at the edge of place (London: Routledge, 2011)

;Visual Resources 29, nos. 1-2 (March-June 2013): Special Issue on Digital Art History

;Journal of Society of Architectural Historians

;Weller, Martin. The Digital Scholar: How Technology is Transforming Scholarly Practice (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2011). [https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/the-digital-scholar-how-technology-is-transforming-scholarly-practice/]

Definition of Terms

2015-02-12T18:26:46Z

GEsperdy:

;Task Force: Group of individuals assigned a specific task to complete
;Wiki: A website that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections

;Authorship: authorship refers to assigning credit to the individual or individuals responsible for the production of the scholarly work. Unlike traditional publications in which authorship is relatively easy to assign to an individual author or a series of co-authors or editors, digital scholarship is frequently more collaborative and authorship is more diffuse. In some fields, such as medicine and the social sciences, authorship is not restricted to writing a manuscript, but may also include those who made significant contributions to conceptualization, revision or review, and realization.
;Digital Art and Architectural History: Research focused on significant art and architectural historical problems which include digital and computational methods and tools that are integral to the argument. Digital art and architectural history may be basic or applied research. This may included, but is not limited to: visualizations relying on digital technologies, including 3-D modeling and mapping; research designed for and presented in born-digital platforms; computational methods employed for art historical research (e.g., corpus linguistics); statistical or other digital exploration of big data; production of a digital archive or other online art/architectural historical resource; etc.
;Collaborative Research: any art and architectural historical research that involves more than one scholar who has contributed in a significant capacity to the development, content or digital presentation of the scholarship. Collaborators should be acknowledged specifically either in the author byline, in the first footnote or in a similar appropriate site. Collaborators should also be listed according to their contribution, if their contribution is not otherwise clear.
;Outcomes: Traditionally, scholarly research requires explicit and defined outcomes in order for it to "count" for promotion and tenure--even though securing funding for research through grants, fellowships, etc., is a kind of an outcome, since it demonstrates the importance of the research. Traditional outcomes include publishing or otherwise distributing the findings of the research in the form of articles, books, exhibitions, lectures, etc. For digital scholarship, the definition of outcomes must be more expansive to include a broad range of digital and/or web-based work.
;Peer Review: Peer review is the evaluation of scholarly work or research by a relevant expert in order to determine if the work should be published or the research should be funded. For promotion and tenure, peer reviewed work is generally given more weight than non-peer reviewed work. Peer review of digital scholarship is still in flux because the standards and methods of review for databases, GIS, modeling and other digital outcomes are different than for traditional publications, regardless of whether these are print or digital.
;Process: process indicates the intellectual give and take that occurs in the formation of a final argument. In digital art/architectural history, process is often included separately as a "Project Narrative" that clarifies the methodological decisions and implications that led to the final work.
;Project Narrative: an account of the process by which the scholar and/or her collaborators developed the final argument. Project narratives must include information on the development or application of digital technologies central to the scholarship. They should also indicate the contribution of various collaborators.
;Publication: making a work public. Scholarly publication specifically means that a work is made public in a form that is accessible to peer review, with the goal of ensuring accuracy, authenticity, and scholarly value. In the print-on-paper regime, processes for submission, review, and formal publication was normalized through books and journals. Long-term access to those publications was secured through libraries. Digital publishing genres, review processes, and warrants of long-term access are still moot.
;Research: Research in digital art and architectural history can have specific uses and applications that should be described and recognized in the review and hiring process. These include:
;A) Developmental Digital Humanities Research: Digital Art and Architectural History that focuses particular attention on conceptualizing and implementing significant programming, coding or the development of tools and other technologies that are of value to art and architectural historical research. This may include, for example, developing a new means of visualizing historical buildings and environments.
;B) Research that Uses Digital Methods: Digital Art and Architectural History research that takes preexisting digital tools or methods and applies them to art historical problems with little to no change to the digital tool itself. This may include, for example, the use of GIS to explore spatial distribution of galleries in a specific place and time or contributions to databases and other digital resources that expand but do not change the dataset.
;C) Experimental Research that Combines Digital and Humanities Methods: Projects that clearly articulate research questions that combine both art and architectural historical problems and methods with computational problems and methods. This may include, for example, the analysis of a "big data" set of codices through corpus linguistics that both advances the interpretation of the art historical significance of the data set as well as offers new digital methods and insights in corpus linguistics.
;Scholarly Practice: the work of the art/architectural historian, including both process and outcomes (or research and publications), as informed/shaped by methodologies, resources, and technologies.

Definition of Terms

2015-02-12T17:43:44Z

GEsperdy:

;Task Force: Group of individuals assigned a specific task to complete
;Wiki: A website that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections

;Authorship: authorship refers to assigning credit to the individual or individuals responsible for the production of the scholarly work. Unlike traditional publications in which authorship is relatively easy to assign to an individual author or a series of co-authors or editors, digital scholarship is frequently more collaborative and authorship is more diffuse. In some fields, such as medicine and the social sciences, authorship is not restricted to writing a manuscript, but may also include those who made significant contributions to conceptualization, revision or review, and realization.
;Digital Art and Architectural History: Research focused on significant art and architectural historical problems which include digital and computational methods and tools that are integral to the argument. Digital art and architectural history may be basic or applied research. This may included, but is not limited to: visualizations relying on digital technologies, including 3-D modeling and mapping; research designed for and presented in born-digital platforms; computational methods employed for art historical research (e.g., corpus linguistics); statistical or other digital exploration of big data; production of a digital archive or other online art/architectural historical resource; etc.
;Collaborative Research: any art and architectural historical research that involves more than one scholar who has contributed in a significant capacity to the development, content or digital presentation of the scholarship. Collaborators should be acknowledged specifically either in the author byline, in the first footnote or in a similar appropriate site. Collaborators should also be listed according to their contribution, if their contribution is not otherwise clear.
;Outcomes: Traditionally, scholarly research requires explicit and defined outcomes in order for it to "count" for promotion and tenure--even though securing funding for research through grants, fellowships, etc., is a kind of an outcome, since it demonstrates the importance of the research. Traditional outcomes include publishing or otherwise distributing the findings of the research in the form of articles, books, exhibitions, lectures, etc. For digital scholarship, the definition of outcomes must be more expansive to include a broad range of digital and/or web-based work.
;Peer Review: Peer review is the evaluation of scholarly work or research by a relevant expert in order to determine if the work should be published or the research should be funded. For promotion and tenure, peer reviewed work is generally given more weight than non-peer reviewed work. Peer review of digital scholarship is still in flux because the standards and methods of review for databases, GIS, modeling and other digital outcomes are different than for traditional publications, regardless of whether these are print or digital.
;Process: process indicates the intellectual give and take that occurs in the formation of a final argument. In digital art history, process is often included separately as a "Project Narrative" that clarifies the methodological decisions and implications that led to the final work.
;Project Narrative: an account of the process by which the scholar and/or her collaborators developed the final argument. Project narratives must include information on the development or application of digital technologies central to the scholarship. They should also indicate the contribution of various collaborators.
;Publication: making a work public. Scholarly publication specifically means that a work is made public in a form that is accessible to peer review, with the goal of ensuring accuracy, authenticity, and scholarly value. In the print-on-paper regime, processes for submission, review, and formal publication was normalized through books and journals. Long-term access to those publications was secured through libraries. Digital publishing genres, review processes, and warrants of long-term access are still moot.
;Research: Research in digital art and architectural history can have specific uses and applications that should be described and recognized in the review and hiring process. These include:
;A) Developmental Digital Humanities Research: Digital Art and Architectural History that focuses particular attention on conceptualizing and implementing significant programming, coding or the development of tools and other technologies that are of value to art and architectural historical research. This may include, for example, developing a new means of visualizing historical buildings and environments.
;B) Research that Uses Digital Methods: Digital Art and Architectural History research that takes preexisting digital tools or methods and applies them to art historical problems with little to no change to the digital tool itself. This may include, for example, the use of GIS to explore spatial distribution of galleries in a specific place and time or contributions to databases and other digital resources that expand but do not change the dataset.
;C) Experimental Research that Combines Digital and Humanities Methods: Projects that clearly articulate research questions that combine both art and architectural historical problems and methods with computational problems and methods. This may include, for example, the analysis of a "big data" set of codices through corpus linguistics that both advances the interpretation of the art historical significance of the data set as well as offers new digital methods and insights in corpus linguistics.
;Scholarly Practice

Definition of Terms

2015-01-28T21:22:10Z

GEsperdy:

;Task Force: Group of individuals assigned a specific task to complete
;Wiki: A website that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections
;Applied Research: Digital Art and Architectural History research that takes preexisting digital tools or methods (e.g., GIS) and applies them to art historical problems with little to no change to the digital tool itself
;Authorship: authorship refers to assigning credit to the individual or individuals responsible for the production of the scholarly work. Unlike traditional publications in which authorship is relatively easy to assign to an individual author or a series of co-authors or editors, digital scholarship is frequently more collaborative and authorship is more diffuse. In some fields, such as medicine and the social sciences, authorship is not restricted to writing a manuscript, but may also include those who made significant contributions to conceptualization, revision or review, and realization.
;Basic Research: Digital Art and Architectural History research that combines both art and architectural historical problems and methods with computational problems and methods, including significant programming, coding or the development of other technologies
;Digital Art History: Research focused on significant art historical problems which include digital methods and tools that are integral to the argument. Digital art history may be basic or applied research. This may included, but is not limited to: visualizations relying on digital technologies, including 3-D modeling and mapping; research designed for and presented in born-digital platforms; computational methods employed for art historical research (e.g., corpus linguistics); statistical or other digital exploration of big data; production of a digital archive or other online art historical resource; etc.
;Collaborative Research: any art and architectural historical research that involves more than one scholar who has contributed in a significant capacity to the development, content or digital presentation of the scholarship. Collaborators should be acknowledged specifically either in the author byline, in the first footnote or in a similar appropriate site. Collaborators should also be listed according to their contribution, if their contribution is not otherwise clear.
;Outcomes: Traditionally, scholarly research requires explicit and defined outcomes in order for it to "count" for promotion and tenure--even though securing funding for research through grants, fellowships, etc., is a kind of an outcome, since it demonstrates the importance of the research. Traditional outcomes include publishing or otherwise distributing the findings of the research in the form of articles, books, exhibitions, lectures, etc. For digital scholarship, the definition of outcomes must be more expansive to include a broad range of digital and/or web-based work.
;Peer Review: Peer review is the evaluation of scholarly work or research by a relevant expert in order to determine if the work should be published or the research should be funded. For promotion and tenure, peer reviewed work is generally given more weight than non-peer reviewed work. Peer review of digital scholarship is still in flux because the standards and methods of review for databases, GIS, modeling and other digital outcomes are different than for traditional publications, regardless of whether these are print or digital.
;Process: process indicates the intellectual give and take that occurs in the formation of a final argument. In digital art history, process is often included separately as a "Project Narrative" that clarifies the methodological decisions and implications that led to the final work.
;Project Narrative: an account of the process by which the scholar and/or her collaborators developed the final argument. Project narratives must include information on the development or application of digital technologies central to the scholarship. They should also indicate the contribution of various collaborators.
;Publication

Definition of Terms

2015-01-28T21:09:13Z

GEsperdy:

Definition of Terms

2015-01-28T21:08:38Z

GEsperdy:

;Task Force: Group of individuals assigned a specific task to complete
;Wiki: A website that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections
;Applied Research: Digital Art and Architectural History research that takes preexisting digital tools or methods (e.g., GIS) and applies them to art historical problems with little to no change to the digital tool itself
;Authorship: authorship refers to assigning credit to the individual or individuals responsible for the production of the scholarly work. Unlike traditional publications in which authorship is relatively easy to assign to an individual author or a series of co-authors or editors, digital scholarship is frequently more collaborative and authorship is more diffuse. In some fields, such as medicine and the social sciences, authorship is not restricted to writing a manuscript, but may also include those who made significant contributions to conceptualization, revision or review, and realization.
;Basic Research: Digital Art and Architectural History research that combines both art and architectural historical problems and methods with computational problems and methods, including significant programming, coding or the development of other technologies
;Digital Art History: Research focused on significant art historical problems which include digital methods and tools that are integral to the argument. Digital art history may be basic or applied research. This may included, but is not limited to: visualizations relying on digital technologies, including 3-D modeling and mapping; research designed for and presented in born-digital platforms; computational methods employed for art historical research (e.g., corpus linguistics); statistical or other digital exploration of big data; production of a digital archive or other online art historical resource; etc.
;Collaborative Research: any art historical research that involves more than one scholar who has contributed in a significant capacity to the development, content or digital presentation of the scholarship. Collaborators should be acknowledged specifically either in the author byline, in the first footnote or in a similar appropriate site. Collaborators should also be listed according to their contribution, if their contribution is not otherwise clear.
;Outcomes: Traditionally, scholarly research requires explicit and defined outcomes in order for it to "count" for promotion and tenure--even though securing funding for research through grants, fellowships, etc., is a kind of an outcome, since it demonstrates the importance of the research. Traditional outcomes include publishing or otherwise distributing the findings of the research in the form of articles, books, exhibitions, lectures, etc. For digital scholarship, the definition of outcomes must be more expansive to include a broad range of digital and/or web-based work.
;Peer Review: Peer review is the evaluation of scholarly work or research by a relevant expert in order to determine if the work should be published or the research should be funded. For promotion and tenure, peer reviewed work is generally given more weight than non-peer reviewed work. Peer review of digital scholarship is still in flux because the standards and methods of review for databases, GIS, modeling and other digital outcomes are different than for traditional publications, regardless of whether these are print or digital.
;Process: process indicates the intellectual give and take that occurs in the formation of a final argument. In digital art history, process is often included separately as a "Project Narrative" that clarifies the methodological decisions and implications that led to the final work.
;Project Narrative: an account of the process by which the scholar and/or her collaborators developed the final argument. Project narratives must include information on the development or application of digital technologies central to the scholarship. They should also indicate the contribution of various collaborators.

Universities and Individuals

2015-01-28T20:21:41Z

GEsperdy:

Universities and Individuals

2015-01-28T20:14:52Z

GEsperdy:

Definition of Terms

2015-01-28T19:58:00Z

GEsperdy:

;Task Force: Group of individuals assigned a specific task to complete
;Wiki: A website that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections
;Applied Research: Digital Art History research that takes preexisting digital tools or methods (e.g., GIS) and applies them to art historical problems with little to no change to the digital tool itself
;Authorship: authorship refers to assigning credit to the individual or individuals responsible for the production of the scholarly work. Unlike traditional publications in which authorship is relatively easy to assign to an individual author or a series of co-authors or editors, digital scholarship is frequently more collaborative and authorship is more diffuse. In some fields, such as medicine and the social sciences, authorship is not restricted to writing a manuscript, but may also include those who made significant contributions to conceptualization, revision or review, and realization.
;Basic Research: Digital Art History research that combines both art historical problems and methods with computational problems and methods, including significant programming, coding or the development of other technologies
;Digital Art History: Research focused on significant art historical problems which include digital methods and tools that are integral to the argument. Digital art history may be basic or applied research. This may included, but is not limited to: visualizations relying on digital technologies, including 3-D modeling and mapping; research designed for and presented in born-digital platforms; computational methods employed for art historical research (e.g., corpus linguistics); statistical or other digital exploration of big data; production of a digital archive or other online art historical resource; etc.
;Collaborative Research: any art historical research that involves more than one scholar who has contributed in a significant capacity to the development, content or digital presentation of the scholarship. Collaborators should be acknowledged specifically either in the author byline, in the first footnote or in a similar appropriate site. Collaborators should also be listed according to their contribution, if their contribution is not otherwise clear.
;Outcomes: Traditionally, scholarly research requires explicit and defined outcomes in order for it to "count" for promotion and tenure--even though securing funding for research through grants, fellowships, etc., is a kind of an outcome, since it demonstrates the importance of the research. Traditional outcomes include publishing or otherwise distributing the findings of the research in the form of articles, books, exhibitions, lectures, etc. For digital scholarship, the definition of outcomes must be more expansive to include a broad range of digital and/or web-based work.
;Peer Review: Peer review is the evaluation of scholarly work or research by a relevant expert in order to determine if the work should be published or the research should be funded. For promotion and tenure, peer reviewed work is generally given more weight than non-peer reviewed work. Peer review of digital scholarship is still in flux because the standards and methods of review for databases, GIS, modeling and other digital outcomes are different than for traditional publications, regardless of whether these are print or digital.
;Process: process indicates the intellectual give and take that occurs in the formation of a final argument. In digital art history, process is often included separately as a "Project Narrative" that clarifies the methodological decisions and implications that led to the final work.
;Project Narrative: an account of the process by which the scholar and/or her collaborators developed the final argument. Project narratives must include information on the development or application of digital technologies central to the scholarship. They should also indicate the contribution of various collaborators.

Definition of Terms

2015-01-28T19:42:10Z

GEsperdy:

;Task Force: Group of individuals assigned a specific task to complete
;Wiki: A website that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections
;Applied Research: Digital Art History research that takes preexisting digital tools or methods (e.g., GIS) and applies them to art historical problems with little to no change to the digital tool itself
;Authorship: authorship refers to assigning credit to the individual or individuals responsible for the production of the scholarly work. Unlike traditional publications in which authorship is relatively easy to assign to an individual author or a series of co-authors or editors, digital scholarship is frequently more collaborative and authorship is more diffuse. In some fields, such as medicine and the social sciences, authorship is not restricted to writing a manuscript, but may also include those who made significant contributions to conceptualization, revision or review, and realization.
;Basic Research: Digital Art History research that combines both art historical problems and methods with computational problems and methods, including significant programming, coding or the development of other technologies
;Digital Art History: Research focused on significant art historical problems which include digital methods and tools that are integral to the argument. Digital art history may be basic or applied research. This may included, but is not limited to: visualizations relying on digital technologies, including 3-D modeling and mapping; research designed for and presented in born-digital platforms; computational methods employed for art historical research (e.g., corpus linguistics); statistical or other digital exploration of big data; production of a digital archive or other online art historical resource; etc.
;Collaborative Research: any art historical research that involves more than one scholar who has contributed in a significant capacity to the development, content or digital presentation of the scholarship. Collaborators should be acknowledged specifically either in the author byline, in the first footnote or in a similar appropriate site. Collaborators should also be listed according to their contribution, if their contribution is not otherwise clear.
;Outcomes: Traditionally, scholarly research requires explicit and defined outcomes in order for it to "count" for promotion and tenure--even though securing funding for research through grants, fellowships, etc., is a kind of an outcome, since it demonstrates the importance of the research. Traditional outcomes include publishing or otherwise distributing the findings of the research in the form of articles, books, exhibitions, lectures, etc. For digital scholarship, the definition of outcomes must be more expansive to include a broad range of digital and/or web-based work.
;Process: process indicates the intellectual give and take that occurs in the formation of a final argument. In digital art history, process is often included separately as a "Project Narrative" that clarifies the methodological decisions and implications that led to the final work.
;Project Narrative: an account of the process by which the scholar and/or her collaborators developed the final argument. Project narratives must include information on the development or application of digital technologies central to the scholarship. They should also indicate the contribution of various collaborators.