Category Archives: DPH 794

Part of the George Mason University Digital Public Humanities Internship

DPH 794

DPH 794: Progress Blog

Leave a comment

What do you care about?  What do You collect?

The purpose of the Smithsonian Institute, embedded in the will of James Smithson (1765-1829) the illegitimate son of an English Duke and a wealthy widow… who never stepped foot in the United States, is “The increase and diffusion of knowledge”.[1]  “With 19 museums and the National Zoo, the Smithsonian is the largest museum, education and research complex in the world”.[2]  The purpose of the Smithsonian National Museum of American History (NMAH) is “the collection, care, and study of objects that reflect the experience of the American people,” which aligns with Smithson’s interest in the American experiment. [3]   The Division of Medicine and Science within the NMAH “acquires, preserves, studies, and interprets the material culture of the biological, medical, and physical sciences.”[4]   My purpose and task is to connect my regionally focused research on ‘Women and Healthcare in Cleveland’ to the national impact of women as demonstrated through an examination of the collections in Smithsonian Division of Medicine and Science and its local affiliate the Western Reserve Historical Society.[5]  This research aligns with the strategic goals of the current Smithsonian Vision and its American Women’s History Initiative–Because of Her Story, “one of the country’s most ambitious undertakings to research, collect, document, display and share the compelling story of women.”[6]

If one attempts to research the story and influence of women, it becomes immediately apparent that “her story” has not been collected or documented in traditional historical catalogues and methodologies.  “She” does not lay claim to the firsts, the foundings, and rarely appears among the famous, unless a fatale.  To uncover the evidence of women at the local level is difficult; the evidence of women at the national level is almost non-existent.  How can it be that half (50.8% in 2010) the population is so poorly recorded?[1]  Where are the women?  I am using the Smithsonian Learning Lab as a tool for exploring and communicating the connections between Cleveland and Washington, D.C.

“The Smithsonian Center for Learning and Digital Access created the Smithsonian Learning Lab to inspire the discovery and creative use of its rich digital materials—more than a million images, recordings, and texts. It is easy to find something of interest because search results display pictures rather than lists. Whether you’ve found what you were looking for or just discovered something new, it’s easy to personalize it. Add your own notes and tags, incorporate discussion questions, and save and share. The Learning Lab makes it simple. 

By encouraging users to create and share personalized collections of Smithsonian assets and user-generated resources, the Learning Lab aspires to build a global community of learners who are passionate about adding to and bringing to light new knowledge, ideas, and insight.”[2]

Women are not the only people “missing” from the historical record in general and museums in particular.  There is a relatively large literature dating to Fred Wilson’s ground breaking exhibit, “Mining the Museum” in 1992. Persons of color and uncomfortable ideas, often share the same fate and compound our ignorance of our full and authentic past.  For my project, I must examine what can and has been collected and consider what is missing.  Or, and I think this is more accurate pursuit, find the ‘hidden women’.  Aside from the few who managed a first or married a first or miraculously achieved some rank of notoriety, women are nameless in the collection.  But they appear in photographs as assistants, they are the workers in the companies whose products have been collected, they have taken care of supported both the family and the great scientist while “He” achieved success.  Reminiscent of the television sitcoms of the late 1960’s Bewitched and I Dream of Jeannie, women made the magic happen behind the scenes.  Reflecting on this type of history is not quick and easy.  Documenting it (necessary for a historian), is a nightmare.  However our collections reinterpreted, may hold some important knowledge treasures that have been lost in the ‘American Experiment’ as it exists today.

The work continues.

[1] U.S. Census. “Age and Sex Composition:2010.”  https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf  accessed 11/23/19.

[2] Smithsonian Institute.  “About the Smithsonian Learning Lab.” https://learninglab.si.edu/about  accessed 11/23/19.  

[1] Smithsonian Institution. “Purpose and Vision.” https://www.si.edu/about/mission accessed 11/23/19.

[2] Smithsonian Institution. “About the Smithsonian.” https://www.si.edu/about accessed 11/23/19.

[3] Smithsonian Institution. “Mission & History: National Museum of American History. ”https://americanhistory.si.edu/museum/mission-history  accessed 11/23/19. 

[4] Smithsonian Institution, “Division of Medicine and Science.” https://americanhistory.si.edu/about/departments/medicine-and-science  accessed 11/23/19.

[5] This Internship is part of the Roy Rosensweig Center for History & New Media: Digital Public Humanities Certificate Program within George Mason University.

[6] Smithsonian Institution. “Purpose and Vision” & “Because of Her Story” https://womenshistory.si.edu/about  accessed 11/23/19.

DPH 794, Project

Making History!

1 Comment

What skills or knowledge from your coursework are you using in your internship?  Have you noticed a difference between theory and practice? Why or Why not?  This is a challenging question for me, because I have been attempting to merge history and Digital Public Humanities (DPH) and it is difficult for me to now isolate them.  ‘What are the skills of DPH and how does the theory and practice differ from traditional history’ and is what the essence of my internship’ and another effort to merge the two (history and digital humanities).

During the process of arranging for this internship and coinciding with it; I have had some planned, some unanticipated, professional and personal opportunities providing DPH engagement experience.  These ventures have provided their own insights into the theory and practice.  As I have made a concerted effort to immerse myself in all things digital humanities over the past 2 years, the experiences tend to wind together in my brain.

In terms of theory, my natural bent is to the work of Sam Wineburg who discusses the nature of historical thinking and Digital Humanities processes reflecting on the intellectual differences between the two.[1] He applies historical thinking methodology to the data gathered through digital means, in other words, ‘digital humanities’ is just a new historical methodology.  That is what I thought when I decided I wanted to learn what ‘digital humanities’ was all about.  However, every historian is taught the significance of methodology and how the body of research impact interpretation.  The use of the term “corpus” has transformed the meaning of historical research to include digital textual and linguistic analysis rather than the socio-cultural contextual analysis traditionally practiced.  Digital historians seek to incorporate the digital into our research, which changes where we search for sources and eventually influence our interpretation.  

In my internship, I am seeking to create a new corpus from established collections and then interpret and present the findings using digital strategies.  To date, I have found helpful in this process, theory that is ‘methods’ rich, such as the work of Sheila Brennan and T. Mills Kelly.  Although I am not creating a crowd-sourcing project; their framing has been helpful.  I have applied their “lessons” in content collection, technical issues, attracting visitors & building trust with potential contributors and most  important adding 25% (50% if you are a newbie like me) to TIME Estimates.  Their idea that “low barrier entry is critical”I found very applicable when recruiting partners for this internship.  I promoted maximum benefit, minimal work and management to my supervising institutions as the “low barrier entry”.  Institutional collections, even when you think you are familiar with them, have their own idiosyncrasies and the assistance of ‘the insider’ is essential.[2] The literature of digital methods AND historical thinking is helping as I process the form of the Smithsonian Learning Lab collection I am creating.[3]  However, the experts make it appear so easy.  The challenges of research, the interference of daily obstacles and filling in the gaps of technical knowledge sometimes make this adventure feel more tedious then inspiring.  But then I remember: I am creating new knowledge, in a new way……Making History!

[1] Wineburg, Sam. “Why Historical Thinking is Not About History.” History News 71, no. 2 Spring. 2016.

[2] Brennan, Sheila A., and T. Mills Kelly. “Why Collecting History Online is Web 1.5” Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. 2009.

[3] Examples include: Kelly, T. Mills. “The History Curriculum in 2023.” edwired (blog). January 2013.  Schrum, K. (2012). “A tale of two goldfish bowls . . . Or what’s right with digital storytelling.” In D. Cohen & T. Scheinfeldt (Eds.) Hacking the academy: A book crowdsourced in one week. Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Press. Calder, Lendol.  “Uncoverage: Toward a Signature Pedagogy for the History Survey”. Journal of American History.  P. 1358-1370. March 2006.

DPH 794

Exploring Questions

Leave a comment

What about your internship has been an eye-opening (new or unexpected) experience? What were your initial expectations?

The task in which I am engaged seeks to understand the significance and impact of women’s role in medicine and health care broadly.  The current iteration is focused on identifying the connections and differences/similarities between national and regional experience.  The vehicle for accomplishing this analysis is a comparison between the collections of the Smithsonian Division of Medicine and Science and the Western Reserve Historical Society. 

Recognizing there is an entire body of scholarship on collections, who collects, rationale and preservation issues, etc.; this project focuses on what can be determined about women’s action and influence on healthcare through the analysis of two comparable collections: one nationally focused and one regionally focused.  There is an assumption that since the Western Reserve Historical Society is a Smithsonian Affiliate, their general standards, practices and goals are similar enough to enable a rough comparison.  The unexpected challenge that I am facing is searching the collections effectively.  The archives for the institutions are structured quite differently.  So while I am sure both institutions have the archival material I need; identifying and collecting these resources has been more time consuming task than anticipated.

This past week I attended an annual Digital Humanities Conference.  I considered that even the title is an oxymoron…digital down to the smallest element and humanities which is a full expression of the human experience. As at most academic conferences, new works are presented and the field of study is refined and shaped by the experts and participants who discuss the administrative issues of the year.  Since Digital Humanities is a new field, the challenge of framing the language, tools and practices of the discipline is a significant portion of the conference and important work.  Identifying standards of expertise and hierarchies are important for remuneration and academic credentialing.  However these processes and vocabularies create distances and barriers.  What does the public lose?  How are the humanities constrained and limited when a group of experts claim control over a field?

The grand institutions claim expertise and protect their collections.  The academic disciplines control who can claim authority and expertise.  Their commitment is admirable and the services of collection, protection and preservation vital.  Yet, both raise obstacles and barriers of access to the very material they are trying to promote.  The struggle that I have been facing is frustrating.  While I am used to surmounting administrative hurdles, having available resources and yet not having the common language or processes to facilitate their analysis, is a new thing for me. 

Have these expectations changed now that you are half-way through? How? Why?

While the task has become more time consuming, I have not given up.  Rather, I am widening my understanding and learning the how and why of the institutions with whom I am working.  It is our language that expresses our identity and world view.  The languages of organizations, fields of expertise and the processes we use express identity and meaning.  Communication requires learning these meanings and being able to share them.   Researchers are bridges between worlds, crossing into unknown or hidden territory and bringing this new information back to be used in a new way.  These challenges are reminding me of the need to make my work transparent and to pay significant attention to how I am communicating the ideas that arise from it.