The digital method this week included Wordle and Ngram. These tools gave us a feel for what textual analysis might entail. And while I can see how a wordle might be useful in a presentation I don't really expect to be using either of these tools all that often.
The Ngram Viewer was fun and it could be a great tool for seeking out trends... but how far is it to be trusted? When I clicked a certain set of years for a topic it turns back some of the results from Google Books. Depending on how refined or narrow your search is this could potentially turn back millions of results. What I'm curious about is why the first 10 results that pop up are the first 10 results? It can't really be relevance, especially in a broad search for the trends of certain terminology, as any result turning up that term should be just as relevant as the next. Unfortunately the Ngram info page didn't really shed any light on this for me.
Some Blogs and Twitter
I have continued combing through the World History Blog's old posts.. hundreds, scratch that, thousands- dating back to 2007, though the blog dates back as far as 2003. It is a great general history blog and touches on virtually every aspect relating to history. From the history of certain countries (Laos for example) to the programming on the hisory channel, to the horse, to digital humanities. This blog really does provide a broad range of material for anyone interested in the field of history in a more general sense.
I also checked out Professor Kee's page which I linked to through twitter. I reluctantly admit that I wasn't subscribed before this. I am now though. I promise!
I thought the post about the PhD track being aimed at becoming a tenured Professor was an interesting thing to turn up, as it was actually something I was thinking about over this past weekend. I wasn't thinking about it because I plan to do my PhD in history but rather, because I am not. This thought came about because of a TA workshop I had attended on Saturday morning. It seemed to me that the workshop was speaking to the TAs, many of whom are doing their masters, as if it was a given that everyone there would be interested in pursuing a PhD and becoming a Professor. I'm sorry but this just isn't the case. It's almost as if by pursuing a post grad (especially in history) you are simply taking workplace training, this isn't necessarily something I agree with. As was evident in Professor Kee's quoting of Grafton and Grosman they seemed to be indicating that this direct track to the ivory tower might even be limiting should the candidate decide they do not want to become a history Professor. There are other things you can do with history outside the ivory tower. And the skill set developed through the study of history is extremely adaptable and desirable in the wider world beyond the campus.Perhaps this fact should get more recognition within the department.
Not exactly the most 'on topic' entry but that's the beauty of blogs, ain't it?
No comments:
Post a Comment