Browse
Recent Submissions
Item The Dynamics of the Early Reformation in their Reformed Augustinian Context, by Robert Christman(Oxford University Press, 2022) Saak, Eric; History, School of Liberal ArtsItem Frederick Douglass, Slum Landlord?(Institute for American Thought, 2024-02) McKivigan, John R.; Duvall, Jeffery A.; History, School of Liberal ArtsItem At the Chariot House: a screenplay associated with Afraid of AIDS: AIDS Panic and Gay Discrimination through State of Indiana v. Herb Robbins(2024-07-31) Gackle, DaltonA screenplay centered around the State of Indiana v. Herb Robbins court case. The story includes representations of the murder of lawyer Donald Jackson by underaged sex worker Herb Robbins, the evidence collection by the police and journalists, and the trial.Item Kevin Morgan oral history to go with Afraid of AIDS: AIDS Panic and Gay Discrimination through State of Indiana v. Herb Robbins(2018-10-26) Gackle, Dalton; Morgan, KevinAn oral history with journalist Kevin Morgan, mostly about his recollection of the murder and court case for State of Indiana v. Herb Robbins. Underaged sex worker Herb Robbins murdered lawyer Donald Jackson and his defense in court was a fear of catching HIV/AIDS.Item Marc Allan oral history to go with Afraid of AIDS: AIDS Panic and Gay Discrimination through State of Indiana v. Herb Robbins(2018-10-24) Gackle, Dalton; Allan, MarcAn oral history with journalist Marc Allan, mostly about his recollection of the murder and court case for State of Indiana v. Herb Robbins. Underaged sex worker Herb Robbins murdered lawyer Donald Jackson and his defense in court was a fear of catching HIV/AIDS.Item Looking for psychopaths in all the wrong places: fMRI in court(The Conversation US, Inc., 2014-06-10) Seigel, Micol; History, School of Liberal ArtsItem Disrupting Hierarchies of Evaluation: The Case of Reviews in Digital Humanities(Knowledge Futures, 2022-11-15) Risam, Roopika; Guiliano, Jen; History, School of Liberal ArtsThis essay discusses how the editors of the journal Reviews in Digital Humanities have developed a people-first approach to peer review: community-centered peer review policies, workflows, and practices intended to address the gap in evaluation of digital scholarship. This work offers a model for disrupting hierarchies of evaluation that position senior, tenured professors as the appropriate gatekeepers of “quality” for digital scholarship and instead reframes the notion of “scholarly community” to recognize that expertise lies beyond the professoriate — particularly when evaluating public-facing scholarship. The essay further offers an example of how to create a community-driven peer review culture that brings in graduate students, librarians, archivists, public humanities workers, curators, and more to assess scholarship. In doing so, it articulates a vision for disrupting conventional notions of “expertise” and, in turn, hierarchies of evaluation for scholarship within the academy. What does it mean to develop and implement a people-first peer review system? This question lies at the heart of our work founding and running Reviews in Digital Humanities, an open-access journal published on PubPub that is dedicated to peer reviewing digital scholarly outputs (e.g., digital archives, exhibits, data sets, games) based on humanities research. Reviews responds to a gap in evaluation at the intersection of technology and the humanities, offering researchers who produce scholarship in genres other than traditional monographs, journal articles, and book chapters the opportunity to seek the imprimatur of peer review and external vetting of their work. From our commitment to creating a humane system of peer review that supports scholars as people, to the design of our peer review workflow, to the selection of reviewers who participants, Reviews disrupts hierarchies of evaluation in the academy and aims to consistently remind our scholarly community that we are all people first. The journal emerged from conversations between us, based on our experiences running peer review mechanisms for digital humanities conferences together. Through this work, we recognized a lack of consensus over how to peer review digital scholarly outputs. Despite the fact that colleagues in digital humanities create digital scholarship, there appeared to be no shared sense of how to evaluate digital scholarship created by others. Although professional organizations like the Modern Language Association (MLA) and American Historical Association (AHA) have invested time in developing guidelines, these have yet to be operationalized in evaluation. In addition to the challenges of conference abstract reviewing, there has also been a lack of outlets for peer review of digital scholarly projects themselves. We further observed that those most negatively affected by this lack of consensus were scholars in areas such as African diaspora studies, Latinx studies, Native and Indigenous studies, Asian American studies, and other areas that have been systematically marginalized in the academy. As many in these fields are also often scholars of color and/or Indigenous scholars, the peer review problems for digital scholarship compound harm in multiple ways: scholars in these areas already have a burden of demonstrating the legitimacy of their research, which is further compounded by the lack of an evaluation structure for the digital scholarship they create. This, in turn, has impacts on how their work is (or isn’t) valued in hiring, reappointment, tenure, and promotion. Recognizing that the many facets of these scholars’ identities as people has a direct impact on their professional lives, we identified the lack of peer review as a clear deterrent to building up digital scholarship in these underrepresented fields in digital humanities.Item Frederick Douglass’s “New Departure” in the Reconstruction Era Woman Suffrage Movement(IUPUI Institute for American Thought, 2022-12-19) McKivigan, John R.; Schwartz, Alex; History, School of Liberal ArtsItem The Frederick Douglass Papers Speaks Out: The Frederick Douglass Papers Speaks Out(ADE, 2022-04-11) McKivigan, John R.; Schwartz, Alex; History, School of Liberal ArtsItem Digital Humanities Workshops: Lessons Learned(Routledge, 2023) Estill, Laura; Guiliano, Jennifer; History, School of Liberal ArtsDigital Humanities Workshops: Lessons Learned is the first volume to focus explicitly on the most common and accessible kind of training in digital humanities (DH): workshops. Drawing together the experiences and expertise of dozens of scholars and practitioners from a variety of disciplines and geographical contexts, the chapters in this collection examine the development, deployment, and assessment of a workshop or workshop series. In the first section, “Where?”, the authors seek to situate digital humanities workshops within local, regional, and national contexts. The second section, “Who?”, guides readers through questions of audience in relation to digital humanities workshops. In the third and final section, “How?”, authors explore the mechanics of such workshops. Taken together, the chapters in this volume answer the important question: why are digital humanities workshops so important and what is their present and future role? Digital Humanities Workshops: Lessons Learned examines a range of digital humanities workshops and highlights audiences, resources, and impact. This volume will appeal to academics, researchers, and postgraduate students, as well as professionals working in the DH field.