Read:
- Cohen & Rosenzweig, Digital History, Introduction, Ch. 1
- “The Promise of Digital History.” Journal of American History 95 (2008).
- Robert Townsend, “Google Books: What’s not to Like?” AHA Blog, April 30, 2007.
- Poe, “
Fight Bad History with Good, or, Why Historians Must Get on the Web Now,” Historically Speaking 10, no. 2 (2009): 22-23.
CHNM, “History Matters” http://historymatters.gmu.edu/
“Valley of the Shadow” http://valley.vcdh.virginia.edu/
Library of Congress, “American Memory” http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/
Theban Mapping Project http://www.thebanmappingproject.com/
National Gallery of the Spoken Word: Historical Voices http://www.historicalvoices.org/
The Lost Museum http://www.lostmuseum.cuny.edu/home.html
Martha Ballard diary online: www.dohistory.org
Studio: Fun with Google and other search engines
Working with search options. Choose a person from your research. Go the main Google search page, type in the name and keep track of your results. Now you are going to try various options to see if you can make the results more useful or more interesting (it’s your research, so you get to decide). Google allows phrase and boolean searching, negation of terms, synonyms, wildcards and many other options. It also allows you to limit the search by filetype, site, title, url, etc. See The Essentials of Google Search and Advanced Search Made Easy. You might also spend some time playing with Soople.
Search Grids: Choosing a few terms from your research, try the search grid option at Find Forward. Are there any unexpected (or unexpectedly productive) results? Find Forward also lets you make a number of other lateral moves from your initial search strategy, like returning possible questions for a given search term, or adding a random word to your search.
Other Google applications:
February 7, 2010 at 3:08 PM
Looking at many of these sites we see how complete they look with all the connections and links. The time to open many of these like the History Matters course involves a lot of waiting time tho using dsl. Hard to believe we can complete sites as inventive as suggested by Ayers. i do agree that the future of history has to acquire the flash and depth of knowledge but do I see the subject of a paper having so much technologies developed that one is lost in the graphics and misses the point?