“Historians continue to write in these same ways, but we also now write blogs, e-books that were never intended for print, journal articles that appear only online, headnotes for database entries, have Twitter feeds, create music videos, and produce other forms of electronic historical writing that looks and feels quite different from the books and articles that have been the staple of the discipline for the past century. New online platforms that aggregate content from various of these sources into something not quite a journal, not quite a book, not quite a website.”
I feel that this quote encapsulates the overall theme of the class in general, that the way history is being recorded is changing and while some of these new ways of recording/ displaying information can be less formal or academic, this does not have to take away from their credibility. Though these new forms of media can be intimidating to beginners, they can make the process of history more engaging and fun in comparison to more common forms of historical writing. In addition to this, new media forces historians to think of newer, better ways to organize and present information in non- essay form.
“When we ask students to create historical work in a digital environment, we create the possibility for greater collaboration between the students in the course and, depending upon the digital environment we choose, with others not enrolled in the course—students in other sections of the course, students enrolled at other institutions, or the public at large.”
This brings up a question I have wondered- does opening up digital history to the public bring upon better ideas and collaborations or does it possibly make it less credible. Though accessible, opening things like this up to the public runs the risk of false information (via comments, replies, etc) being presented. Though this is a real risk, I personally believe that public collaboration can breed some wonderful insights to whatever topic is being explored. Public availability can bring new perspectives and suggestions to the discussion that can help the historian better understand the topic.
Students certainly derive a sense of satisfaction from the completion of (and grade from) a well-written historical essay, and are almost certainly better for having written such an essay. But what happens to that essay once the graded version is handed back by the professor? Do students publish those essays online for others to read? Do they hand out copies to their friends? Most often, they file the graded essay away, and at some point later in life recycle the paper.
This is something I have often thought about as a history major. Most of my major projects have been 20 or so page papers that never see the light of day after I turn them in. This always seemed like a waste of my work and effort, but publishing my work never seemed like the right thing to do. I think that if we were more encouraged to publish our work online without having to go through the lengthy process of getting it scholarly reviewed it would perhaps encourage students when they are writing their paper. If there is a promise of people seeing your finished work, you are more likely to put more effort into it as well as feel a bigger sense of accomplishment when it is done.
