My mind (and my printer) is reeling.

First of all, for a digital history course, I’m sure using a lot of paper. That is entirely my fault, however. I like to read things on paper, mark them up and go back to them, if need be (sorry, trees).

Now, wikipedia. Hmm… As an undergrad we weren’t allowed to cite anything at all from wikipedia. If we did certain professors would refuse to grade our papers. I cannot say that I disagree. The information can at times be sketchy, and for proof, I offer a classmate’s comment today in class. She said that one of her students (high school ) edited a site which stated that he was the father of democracy. I didn’t bother to look, I just believed. However, after reading the assigned readings, I’m sure a ‘wikignome’ has gotten in there to correct it. On a very basic level I really think that the people who write, edit, and moderate wikipedia are truly loyal to the integrity of the site. However, I also believe that the information can indeed be faulty. This is not to say that I have never used wikipedia, I have found it a good jumping off point for certain things. For example, In Spanish classes in the past when given a topic to explore and then present, I have found good information about leaders in South America, environmental and cultural issues that I could not easily access by searching google or some other search engine. Another example is watching ‘Who wants to be a millionaire?’ Not that I sit there everyday, computer on lap ready to key in before a contestant gets to answer, but i have found some fun and interesting things (I now know what a fata morgana is) by perusing wikipedia. And after reading Schiff’s article in The New Yorker, I now understand the dedication and work that goes into keeping the site up and running. I also learned that there is a lot of drama that goes along with that, as well. The fact is that anybody can add, edit, and contribute to the site and it gives a lot of ‘buffs’ the chance to show their wares, so to speak. This very topic was debated in last week’s class, and some believe that the buff and the true historian are on very different planes. While I don’t quite disagree with this, I think Wikipedia is an outlet for all different kinds of minds to meet and contribute to the ‘greater good’ as the site remains, for the most part, anonymous and allows for collective thought, regardless of titles and degrees.

Now for the dreaded scantron. Geez, can filling bubbles with a pencil really gauge one’s intelligence? If I were to answer this question, I’d say no. From personal experience, many people, myself included, simply stink at that kind of testing. I think, as Cohen and Rosenzweig do, that it just allows for rote memorization of things: dates, names, places and in order to really learn something one must put things in context and absorb the bigger picture being presented. Again, as an undergrad, students would whine to professors why they did not put multiple choice questions on tests. The answer across the board was always that the department did not allow multiple choice questions, only short answers and essays. To this I was always glad for I would, given the choice, choose the wrong answer.

The way teachers teach and the way students learn are forever–and quckly–morphing due to the digital age. Computers are in many classrooms, and if not in the classroom, at least in the bedroom–or in the cell phone. To truly teach ( and learn) today there must be a blending of old ways and new. I’ve had classes that did not require any computer class time and others that did. Both worked for me, and will continue to do so. However, please don’t make me fill in any bubbles.

But I like books!!!

I have an open mind. I even like technology and computers. However, more than that, I like books. I like the way they look, the way they feel, even the way they smell when they’re new. I also like stuff: there’s nothing better (in my book..no pun intended) than seeing an old letter or diary right there in front of you, even if it is behind glass. It sends shivers up my spine. I don’t think I’d get the same reaction seeing it load on a computer screen, but that’s just me. However, I do understand the ease and accessibility of digitized books/archives. For research it’s a needed and necessary tool. And a huge time saver. And you can find things you’d otherwise never come across, making research more thorough and concise. Kelly (in Scan This Book! NYT) mentions the linking of books, footnotes and other useful tools to further research and writing, and there, I agree with him. But like everything else, this ‘universal library’ is just another business, making people (and not always the right ones) wealthy while others (namely authors and publishers) continue to go unnoticed (I may be off the mark here, but it always seems that big business eats up the arts and humanities). Regardless, what I like about Kelly most is when he says that so far, the universal library lacks books. Yeah!

scavenger hunt

First, let’s talk about the scavenger hunt. I found all (within the 30 minute time slot) but #5. The frustrating thing about this exercise was that everytime I googled a search term, the first 3 or 4 entries were people’s blogs. Of course I skipped over those. Here’s the results:

1. Leon Trotsky. I found that one on youtube. Very interesting (Moscow trials) as I like Russian history. I’m not going to list web address (i hope I don’t get yelled at..tee hee) but really, does anybody not know how to access youtube?

2. Suffrage poem was easy, as well. I found it here: www.scribd.com/doc/2393145/Are-Women-PeopleA-Book-of-Rhymes-for-Suffrage-Times The poem is entitled “Evolution” by Alice Duer Miller and is part of scribd’s Gutenberg eBook project. It was actually a good poem, fitting for the times, I would say.

3. George Washingtons’ letter to Timothy Pickering was found at google books (address obvious).

4. I found Willie Lynch’s speech at menuampim.com/lynch_hoax1.html This was full text and pretty disturbing.

5. Like I said….Didn’t find this one.

6. This article was found a JSTOR. That’s a no-brainer.

7. Four syllabi for Hamlet on the Holodeck were easy to find, as well. Just google and scroll down until you find university websites and just make sure that they are syllabi (I won’t bore anybody with the addresses here, either).

8. Oh, yeahhhhh. This one. I went to Way Back and my browser said there was an error. This was Fire Fox. So I tried  Safari. This was bad, too. A shame because I’ve used Way Back successfully in the past. O-wel.

9. Janet Murray and the Sims. I found both, but not together. However, i did find a picture of her in front of a screen and the images may well have been the Sims. I dunno.

Phew…that’s that. A few thoughts on this exercise. I think when it was first assigned it was probably a real challenge. Now, not so much because. like I said before, when you google a search term, you get everybodys blogs that have done them before. Perhaps a new hunt would be in order here?

Dan Cohen likes blogs.

It’s obvious that Dan Cohen likes blogs.  And he wants others to like them, too. While he laments the “self-involved, insecure, oversexed teens and twentysomethings” who drone on about daily activities, he also sees blogs as useful tools for academics to inform and educate interested parties. In fact, he implores academia to start their own blogs. I agree with his various points that blogging is indeed a ‘new’ form of writing and an outlet for publishing material, and that it easily accessible to many (after all, all one has to do is a keyword search and BLAM… the options are endless). 

When I got to the end of the blog I saw that it was published in 2006, and it got me to thinking. I did a little research and found countless academic blogs out there and realized what he proposed actually happened: Professors started their blogs.

I went one step further and dusted off my Chicago Manual of Style, leafed through the index and did not find the word ‘blog’ anywhere. And this was the 15th edition. So I went to their website, and there it was: proper citations for blog entries. So I guess what Cohen wanted, happened. Blogs have become both a valuable tool for authors and a legitimate source for research. 

While I was never really interested in blogging, or reading blogs before, I can say that I have found a new appreciation for both the bloggers and the readers of the blogs. I look at it this way, you can pick someones brain without the big bar tab.

hi there

Hi everybody.

I’m looking forward to starting classes, meeting all of you, learning some new stuff and also having some fun. Cheers!