What an informative experience this has been! I have learned so much about digital humanities, what it can look like, and how to do it.

We began the semester by writing our own definition of DH. Looking back on my definition, I’m still satisfied with it. I believe my definition emphasized both the application of DH and the fact that DH is in and of itself a field of study. Invention is crucial to DH, as is perspective. If anything, I would modify my definition to include the importance of perspective and context to the field. DH tools can provide users and researchers with new perspectives on familiar data, but at the perils of reducing or eliminating precious context.

I’m really surprised by how much I’ve progressed this semester. When I filled out the survey at the beginning of the course, I considered myself a bit of a helpless cause – too technologically challenged to learn much about digital tools. I was eager to learn the basics of Omeka, learn basic DH terminology, become comfortable with at least one digital method, and use DH methods to make history research accessible to the public. I feel that I’ve met all of these expectations. Using kepler.gl for my project, I became relatively comfortable with GIS mapping. I also believe that most (if not all) DH tools have the potential to make research accessible to the public, especially podcasts and games/AR/VR which we covered in some of our final modules.

In addition to the mapping module, I enjoyed learning about Omeka. I am excited to create an exhibit with Omeka and perhaps try my hand at including a GIS map in an Omeka exhibit. I would also like more experience with network analysis and topic modeling – those subjects are the ones that I feel I understand the least, so I’d like to bolster my knowledge with more experience in those areas.