From Written to Digital: Creating a Digital Media Assignment Event

photo of computer and a notebook with a cell phoneThe phrase, the times, they are a changin’, never seemed so apropos as it does today. The advent of the internet and its technology quickly changed how we consume and produce content. You might not think that asking your students to create a digital media assignment is in your wheelhouse but there are some benefits to switching assignments up.

Our own, Dr. Mitchell of Communication finds his students are highly motivated by the creative projects. Through these assignments, students are also asked to engage with the campus community. And if students never pursue a degree in communication, he finds that the skills students learn are applicable across all majors. This supplemental reading from the Chronicle of Higher Education also highlights some of the reasons to move towards digital assignments: Let’s Kill the Term Paper.

In the following articles, we cover what our faculty had to say during From Written to Digital: Creating a Digital Media Assignment event on April 4. Our conversation led us to write on four themes. They are

So follow along and learn how to take your written assignments digital.


Images from Pexels , which are copyright free. Those selected do not require attribution. No infringement intended.

From Written to Digital: Faculty Digital Assignments

photo of man working at a computerLet’s begin by taking a look at which assignments our faculty members are implementing in their own classes. The assignments represent a variety of instructional techniques, technologies, and end products.

photo of Innes MitchellShort Film
Innes Mitchell, Communication
Group Project, 3-4
Technology: Adobe Premiere

The short film assignment asks students to conduct 4 interviews from their peers in order to create a 4-5 minute video on the topic of feminism. He also requires that students must hand in a script and include voice-over narration. The goal of this assignment is for students to tackle a broad topic, argue their perspective, and reach a decided conclusion about the topic. Essentially students are being asked to find their voice as producers of meaning for a peer audience.

Issue Film
Group Project, 4-5
Technology: Adobe Premiere

Occurring after the short film assignment, Dr. Mitchell merges his groups to form larger ones and assigns a 10-12 minute video project. The intent is that students will focus more heavily on the process of video production: pre-production, production and postproduction. They are also required to interview 6 individuals and arrange a site visit to an organization in the local area. Students must also prepare a 15-minute presentation in which they present their film plan.


Photo of Jena HeathStorytelling with Sound
Jena Heath, Writing
Individual Project
Technology: Adobe Audition, SoundCloud

Here Professor Heath asks her students to create a very short audio, no longer than 2 and a half minutes, news story à la NPR. This brevity challenges her students to keep their stories laser-focused. Students must also interview at least one individual and provide a voice over to help tie together the story. Students are also asked to consider how ambient noise can add atmosphere to their news story.


Photo of Dede GarrisonComposing in 3 Different Genres Project
Professor Dede Garrison, Literature, Writing and Rhetoric
Individual Project
Technology: Adobe Spark

In this assignment, Professor Garrison has her students take pieces of their research paper (which they completed earlier in class) and repurpose it either into a graphic design piece, a website, or video. The intent here is to make students aware of different audiences that might consume their work and how they can tailor their work to serve multiple groups.


Photo of Don UngerCommunity Engagement through ATX Hack for Change
Don Unger, Literature, Writing and Rhetoric
Group Project,
Technologies: Screencast-o-matic

This project requires Dr. Unger to find a compatible community partner to work with his students. He was able to find such a partner though ATX Hack for Change. This project asked his students to create instructional videos for Austin Free-Net. Because branding was especially important, Dr. Unger had his students work on the intro and credits of the videos in class. In-class conversations discussed the aims of the tutorials, how to write instructions, as well as how long the videos should be. In the end, these conversations help students determine what was best for their client’s and audience’s needs.

Now we’ve covered the types of assignments, you might be thinking that this is something you want to actually do. In our next post, we’re going to figure out how to get started.


Images from Pexels , which are copyright free. Those selected do not require attribution. No infringement intended.

From Written to Digital: Getting Started

Board game with a piece on the start spotOur faculty members reflected on how they began incorporating digital media assignments into their curriculum. Although some of them have been doing this type of assignment for several years, they had some advice to offer those who’d like to dip their toes into the digital assignment water.

Start with a small assignment. With this bit of advice, you can begin by keeping the assignment workload manageable. Don’t start with huge projects like thirty-minute documentaries but instead start with finished assignments that last no longer than 5 minutes.

Schedule in-class time to cover the software. Professor Dede Garrison of Literature, Writing, and Rhetoric says to not be fooled by your students’ technical proficiency. Students may be astute at using familiar technology but when it comes to these assignments, it’s wise to schedule some in-class time to cover the software as per Dr. Don Unger’s suggestion.

Utilize the Digital Media Center. You don’t need to have sole expertise in creating digital content because the Digital Media Center has individuals who can help you and your students.  They can assist with forming the assignment as well as coming into your classroom and teaching your students how to create successful digital media projects.

Learn to use the software yourself. That being said, many of our faculty recommend learning to use the software yourself. You can start by using the software for your own projects as Professor Heath of Journalism and Digital Media did. She stresses that this will help provide a frame of reference for your students on how long these projects should be taking.

Look to your faculty colleagues for templates. You may be surprised to find faculty in your department who are already doing these types of assignments. If you ask, you might find someone who is willing to share what they’ve learned with you.

Now that we’ve discussed a bit of how to get started, let’s examine how we can ensure our students’ success with these projects.


Images from Pexels , which are copyright free. Those selected do not require attribution. No infringement intended.

From Written to Digital: Student Success

bunch of fists bumping in a circleThere’s no reason to reinvent the wheel, our faculty have advice on ensuring your students’ success in these projects.

Emphasize time management is crucial to a successful digital project. In terms of creating a video project, for every minute you’re asking your students to create, that represents an hour of editing–and that’s not even including conducting research, recording footage, script writing, etc. So have a discussion with your students emphasizing that the best projects take time.

Discuss accountability and/or assign roles in group projects. The dreaded group project can be an excellent tool for your digital assignment. Students can become responsible for logistics, script writing, recording, and editing. By discussing how these roles should fill out, the more technically savvy can assign themselves in roles where they can be the most useful and let others stay in more familiar roles.

plan on a white boardHave students create a project plan. Having them figure out what they are recording, who they are interviewing, down to what equipment they will need. Not only will this help them create purposeful projects but it will also reinforce the previous point regarding time management. If your students may feel a need to skip this step, have them present as Dr. Mitchell requires for his Issue Film project.

Record audio right the first time. With the progression of technology, it’s often believed that we can fix everything after we record it. And although this might be true to a certain extent, many of us do not have the time nor the expertise to fix it. Although your students may want the ambient noise of Jo’s Coffee, have them record their interview in a quiet location. The students can then add sounds to the audio/video project when they are editing their videos. As Professor Heath stated, “audio can only be edited so much in the end.” The Digital Media Center offers a whisper room for audio recording.

Raise the stakes by making the viewing audience beyond the faculty member. Dr. Mitchell concludes that by having his students share their projects with each other, the quality of the assignment was higher. It made students want to put forth their very best. As a result, students spent more time on task.

Schedule in-class project editing time. In Dr. Unger’s class, this tactic became especially important as all the videos crafted for Austin Free-Net must have the same look and feel. He could then address any concerns while students were in class. If you’re not feeling particularly savvy, you can have someone from the Digital Media Center on hand to assist your class.

And although this is by no means a comprehensive list of how to ensure student success, you can always drop an email to one of our instructional designers to begin a conversation. Otherwise, let’s move on to how do we actually grade these projects.


Images from Pexels, which are copyright free. Those selected do not require attribution. No infringement intended.

From Written to Digital: Managing Grading

You’re probably thinking that it’s all well and good that we receive support in teaching how to use the technology. But what about the grading aspect? Although you may not feel like an expert or even a budding amateur at this very moment, our faculty members share their experiences to help quell any misgivings you have.

You already know how to grade the content component of a digital media assignment. Is the argument sound? Did the student support their argument with reliable sources? Was a thesis clearly stated? These types of questions should already be familiar to you and will make grading the content a breeze. But what about the technical aspect of the video?

Try learning to use the software with your own projects. Both Professor Heath and Mitchell had the same piece of advice to share. If you recall, this was also a piece of advice in our getting started section. That’s because this can inform so much of what you’re asking your students to produce in their digital media assignments. In grading, it can shed light on what’s possible and not possible.

Ask fellow faculty colleagues for rubrics. Perhaps the most useful piece of advice is that you don’t have to start from scratch. Looking over different rubrics can help you hone in on the areas you want to focus on grading. Here Professors Heath, Mitchell, and Unger have graciously granted us the ability to share their rubrics with you.

  • 1. Introduction/story hook (What is the hook for the story? (25 Points)

    • Does your voice-over contain a hook in the first fifteen seconds?

    2. Script audio/voice-over: (25 Points)

    • Is the interviewee properly identified?
    • Does the voice-over script allow you to build to your main point?
    • Does the voice-over script provide adequate transitions?
    • Does the voice-over script reflect research and knowledge of the subject area?
    • Are you able to leverage operative words —the who, what, when, where, how?
    • Did you upload the script to the blog w/the SoundCloud link?

    3. Audio levels and pacing (25 Points)

    • Are the audio levels consistent?
    • Do you as the interviewer allow space for responses — no talking over your interviewer?

    4. The Edit (25 Points)

    • Does the edited final audio story meet the minimum length requirements?
    • Does it tie the voice-over and interview audio together in a package?
    • Is the audio quality clear? Is the volume level acceptable — not too low or too high?

    Total: /100
  • Credits – 20 points

    • Includes opening credits with title that fits with instructional video series (formatting, naming, etc.)
    • Includes main title image and music
    • Includes closing titles that are formatted correctly and contain accurate information

    Instructions – 40 points

    • Introduction sets up video as part of series and addresses video contents>/li>
    • Body provides step by step instructions without inundating user with extraneous information
    • Conclusion points toward troubleshooting resources and next video in series

    Screencast – 40 points

    • Corresponds to steps in instructions
    • No lengthy pauses or sound flubs
    • Narration is well-paced and clear

    Total: /100 points
  • Content Introduction – 10%

    • Film introduced creatively with examples

    Content – 40%

    • Good variety of interviewees
    • Narration clear and designed to help audience understand issue(s) & perspectives expressed
    • Perspectives expressed creatively illustrated

    Content Conclusion – 15%

    • Narration clearly articulates group perspective and/or summary of points of view expressed

    Form/Editing – 20%

    • Film clearly organized/structured
    • Precise and smooth editing and transitions
    • Editing well-paced and designed to tell a story
    • Sound edits clean and levels balanced throughout film

    Timing – 15%

    • Film length requirement (5-6 minutes) met
    • Film link sent to Instructor prior to class of showing

    Total: /100
  • Your Name: ______________
    Group: __________________

    Rate each member of your group in the following areas related to their group participation. Use a separate sheet for each member of your group. Circle the appropriate number to indicate your rating for each area. Then, total the ratings, divide by 3, and multiply by 10 to get a total score on a 100 point scale.

    Note: This form is between you and your instructor. Your group members will not see this form. They will only receive their average participation score. Using “across-the-board” grades for group members will result in a 50% deduction from your Peer Critique points.

    Group Member's Name: _______
    Total Points: _______________

    Task Functions:

    On a scale of 1-10, rate: how effective was the group member in performing their duties and responsibilities as required?

    Comments:


    Social Maintenance Function:

    On a scale of 1-10, rate: How effective was the group member in contributing to a positive socio-emotional climate? (e.g. showed concern for others’ ideas, openly shared ideas with the group…)

    Comments:


    Group Process:

    On a scale of 1-10, rate: How effective was the group member in contributing to the smooth functioning of the group? (e.g. attendance at meetings, promptness, accepting leadership and/or other functional group roles.)

    Comments:

And that concludes our event writeup, From Written to Digital. Be sure to look out for new events where we discuss digital pedagogy.


Images from Pexels, which are copyright free. Those selected do not require attribution. No infringement intended.

Register by 12/1 for Free, Local Event on Digital Pedagogy, January 5-6, 2016

THATCamp Digital Pedagogy ATX logoJoin local and national faculty to network, share ideas, assignments, and techniques for integrating digital technologies into teaching and learning.  THATCamp Digital Pedagogy ATX 2016 seeks to bring together diverse participants to share ideas, issues and strategies around teaching and learning with digital tools and methods.  Registration is free, but space is limited and we request that you only register if you are actually planning to attend.  Find out more and register by December 1 here: http://dpatx.thatcamp.org/

St. Edward’s Office of Information Technology is co-sponsoring this event and several St. Edward’s faculty and staff have contributed to planning, including the logo designed by St. Edward’s University graphic design student Melany Klopp.  The event will be held in Austin, Texas at the University of Texas Libraries’ new Learning Commons on January 5-6, 2016 (just before the annual convention of the Modern Language Convention also in Austin).  THATCamps (The Humanities And Technology Camp) are unconferences that originated in the digital humanities community.  This one has been organized by a network of digital humanists in the Austin area.

Open Peer Review of New Resource for Digital Pedagogy Ends August 3

Digital Pedagogy Avatar for MLA BooksWe invite you to take part in open peer review of a new project on digital pedagogy that is being coedited by Rebecca Frost Davis. The brief essays and pedagogical artifacts present valuable models of innovative pedagogy.  Read on for details.

Digital Pedagogy in the Humanities: Concepts, Models, and Experiments, edited by Rebecca Frost Davis, Matthew K. Gold, Katherine D. Harris, and Jentery Sayers, is a dynamic open-access collection currently in development on MLA Commons. The editors invite your participation in the open peer review of this collection.

Each entry in the collection focuses on a keyword in the field of digital pedagogy (ranging from “queer” to “interface” to “professionalization”) and is curated by an experienced practitioner, who briefly contextualizes a concept and then provides ten supporting artifacts, such as syllabi, prompts, exercises, lesson plans, and student work, drawn from courses, classrooms, and projects across the humanities. New keywords will be added in batches throughout 2015, with fifty keywords to be included in the final project.

Please visit https://digitalpedagogy.commons.mla.org  to read through and respond to the first set of keywords, now available for open review. The official review period for the first set of keywords will end on 3 August 2015. You do not have to be a member of the MLA to take part in open peer review, and while this collection focuses on humanities pedagogy, many of the keywords and resources will be relevant to other disciplines.

Keywords and curators in the first batch are:

  • Hybrid (Jesse Stommel)
  • Interface (Kathi Inman Berens)
  • Praxis (Bethany Nowviskie, Jeremy Boggs, and J. K. Purdom Lindblad)
  • Queer (Edmond Y. Chang)
  • Rhetoric (Douglas Eyman)
  • Video (Daniel Anderson and Jason Loan)

Thanks in advance for reading and participating!

Trends in Academic Publishing Round Table, Thurs., Oct. 16, 3:30 to 5 PM, Fleck Hall 314

Open Access LogoThe Internet, digital tools, and digital methodologies have drastically transformed scholarly communication.  This Thursday the Munday library is sponsoring a round table discussion that considers these transformations specifically in the area of academic publishing.  Here is the official announcement:

You are invited to a Round Table discussion on the state of academic publishing. If you ever wondered how books are sold, library collections are built, and how new modes of information dissemination affect your scholarship, please join us in this discussion. The panelists will be Sara Hills, Collection Development Librarian, John McLeod, Assistant Director UT Press, and Gary Morris, Dean of the School of Natural Sciences. Pongracz Sennyey, Library Director, will moderate the panel on Thursday October 16, 3:30 to 5 PM in Fleck Hall 314.

 

Learn about Local Archives for Student Research, Sunday, October 19, 2-6 pm

Interior of old St. Elizabeth of Hungary Church, Alice, TX, June, 1936; photographer unknown. Courtesy of Catholic Archives of Texas

Interior of old St. Elizabeth of Hungary Church, Alice, TX, June, 1936; photographer unknown. Courtesy of Catholic Archives of Texas

One of the greatest resources for students doing research at St. Edward’s University is Austin itself—its community, environment, and history.  This coming Sunday twenty Central Texas archives will be showing off their amazing collections in one big room.  These archives are perfect sources for students looking to research local history or issues.  Such archives provide opportunities for students to do their own authentic research rather than just reading about the research of others.  So if you are looking for ideas for future student research projects, check out the Austin Archives Bazaar, Sunday, October 19th from 2-6 p.m. at the Spiderhouse Ballroom near 29th Street and Guadalupe in Central Austin.  The event is free and features Continue reading

Reflections on a Text Analysis Assignment

In Spring 2013, I taught LAT312K: Intermediate Latin at the University of Texas-Austin.  This was the fourth and last required course in the Latin sequence at UT and focused on Vergil’sAeneid.

Word Cloud

Word Cloud of a Translation of Vergil’s Aeneid

The course functioned both as a cap to a student’s Latin experience (several of my students were graduating seniors finishing off their required courses) and a gateway into advanced study of Latin literature and culture for Classics majors.  One of my goals in the course was introducing students to a variety of approaches scholars take to the study of Latin literature in general and Vergil’s Aeneid in particular. This goal allowed me to include a digital humanities element in the course by having my students experiment with digital methodologies.  One such assignment focused on text analysis.  I include the assignment below, as well as my reflections on how this pedagogical experiment went.

Assignment Directions

Text Analysis

For most of this semester we have been focusing on a close reading of Latin.  Now we’re going to try distant reading.  You can find our more about this idea here:

Schulz, Kathryn. “The Mechanic Muse – What Is Distant Reading?” The New York Times, June 24, 2011, sec. Books / Sunday Book Review. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/books/review/the-mechanic-muse-what-is-distant-reading.html.

For this discussion you are going to play with distant reading Vergil’s Aeneid in English:

1. Read “What is Text Analysis?”: http://tada.mcmaster.ca/Main/WhatTA

2. Play with Text Analysis tools here: http://voyant-tools.org/

a. Find out more about Voyant Tools using the TAPOR Portal (http://www.tapor.ca/) by doing a search for Voyant.  Note that some tools have basis descriptions while others have reviews with more information on how to use them. Pick one tool to play with that you think might be useful in analyzing the Aeneid.  Please explain why you picked this tool.

b. Find a text of the Aeneid in English.

Try project Gutenberg: http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/v#a129

Be sure to note who the translator is. (see the bibrec tab)

c. Try at least one Voyant tool and compare and contrast the experience of using it to doing a close reading of the text. How useful might this type of analysis be for analyzing the Aeneid? What challenges do you see with this methodology?

Reflections

Kolb's Learning Cycle

Kolb’s Learning Cycle

This assignment was completed outside of class, with students sharing their results in an online discussion board.  Then, we followed our online discussion with an in-class discussion aimed at synthesizing findings and analysis from the online discussion and reflecting on the overall experience. This sequence was designed to follow Kolb’s learning cycle, with students trying out what they had learned about the Aeneid by experimenting with text analysis, leading to a concrete experience, then reflecting on that experience in the online discussion, and using the in-class discussion to draw conclusions from the learning experience.  In the in-class discussion I wanted my students  to come to the abstract concept of considering how digital tools might change interpretive practice.  Linking the online and in class discussions also follows principles of good blended learning design in laying out clear links between in and out of class activities.  In class discussion expanded online discussion rather than repeating it. Admittedly, I’m writing my own reflection many months later, but in my opinion I’d say this overall assignment was a partial success. Students were able to complete the assignment–both using the tools and writing the online discussion–but for the most part they did not fall in love with text analysis.  Still, our discussion in class did include reflection on issues of digital scholarship and revealed some insights into the text that they gained from the experience.

What Went Wrong or What I Would Change If I Did This Again

I was disappointed that these students didn’t fall in love with digital methodologies.  I think I fell prey to the fallacy that I often warn faculty members about–just because it is digital doesn’t mean students will like it.  The overall assignment needed better framing to explain why they might use text analysis.  I did try to give them some context for distant reading and chose a NY Times article on digital humanities rather than a more specialized digital humanities article because I wanted them to have an accessible text.  I think, however, that the article was more negative than I remembered and some students picked up on those negative parts, proclaiming how much they loved close reading and interpretation and how bad distance reading was.  (The next week I assigned an article that was a beautiful example of close reading and interpretation–some students criticized that reading because they felt the author pushed the interpretation too far.  Then I realized my students were good humanists trained to critique whatever they read.) If I did this assignment again, I would provide the general framing in class and assign only an informational article focused specifically on text analysis as a methodology, e.g., Geoffrey Rockwell’s “What is Text Analysis?”  While the debate on the limitations of distant reading is a good one for students to consider, it was also somewhat of a distraction when they hadn’t even tried any sort of computer-assisted text analysis.

I also framed this assignment very much as an experiment and let their own inclinations guide their choice of tool.  I wanted them to use the TAPOR portal so they would learn about it as a resource for the future.  I also wanted to introduce an element of play into the class.  Some of the students chose tools that were less successful than others, so for future assignments I might instead suggest that they choose from a pre-determined set of tools.  If this were a different class, I might also include this exercise in a sequence of assignments to scaffold engagement with computer-assisted text analysis.

I think my discussion prompt also unintentionally invites criticism more than a discussion of value.  In asking, “How useful might this type of analysis be . . .” and “What challenges . . . ” I set myself up for some negative answers.  Based on my past teaching experience, I know that students of the Classics can be very conservative when it comes to technology–after all the discipline of Classics does privilege old things.  From the point of view of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, even the codex is a new-fangled invention, not to mention the digital text.  While resources like the Perseus Project demonstrate the early engagement of Classics in humanities computing, in the undergraduate curriculum this project is often represented as a resource for texts (a tool for consumption) more than as a tool for analysis (a tool for “generative scholarship” to use Ed Ayers’ term).  In other words, undergraduate students of classics can be even more disinclined to think in terms of digital methodologies for scholarship.  Though my students mostly brought digital devices to class–laptops, tablets, smart phones–and used them to read our Latin text and take notes, they had not had much practice in using such tools for humanities research (which was, after all, the point of my assignment).  Overall, then, I would say I needed to provide more positive framing for this assignment–I misjudged how much I needed to “sell” digital scholarship to my students.  In the future I might also start from the tools for analysis built into  the Perseus Project, with which they were already familiar rather than Voyant Tools.  I had chosen Voyant because of the potential application outside of Classics, but a tool built for Classicists might have been an easier sell.

What Went Right

Despite my dissatisfaction with the results, I do think this assignment was valuable for a number of reasons.  First of all, it exposed my students to a methodology of digital scholarship that they might otherwise never have tried.  At least one student said that he liked it because it made more sense to him than close reading and interpretation.  This reaction demonstrates how quantitative approaches to the humanities can be a bridge to students trained in more quantitative disciplines like the sciences.

The most valuable tools for my students seemed to have been Voyant Cirrus andVoyant Links. Both of these confirmed themes that we had already discussed for the Aeneid.  Still, that experience validates the tools rather than offering the new insights I wanted students to gain.

A more interesting insight came from an unexpected place.  I was having students analyze translations of the Aeneid (an admittedly flawed approach–in a perfect world they would be analyzing the Latin texts), so some of these insights were based more on the translator than the work of Vergil.  I intentionally did not explain how to use stop words (common words like “the”, “and”, “of”, etc., that should be excluded from analysis) because I wanted to see if my students would figure out on their own that this is one challenge of doing text analysis.  Some of them did and used the the tool directions to discover how to exclude those words.  Other students didn’t use stop words and had some interesting grammatical insights.  Because prepositions hadn’t been excluded they noticed how prevalent the words “to”, “for”, “from”, and “by” are in translations of theAeneid.  As it happens, these prepositions can be used to translate the dative or ablatives cases from Latin.  While I had been drilling them on datives and ablatives for much of the semester, this exercise really drove home to them how important it was that they memorize the various uses of these grammatical cases.  Perhaps this insight also just confirms something they should have known already, but it gave them empirical evidence–they didn’t have to just take my word for it.  For this insight alone it might be worth it for students to do some text analysis of the Aeneid at the beginning of the semester rather than later.  They might also compare multiple translations of the Aeneid by using text analysis without having to read all of them–a truly distant reading–to get an initial look at what themes might emerge.

Learning Outcomes

I would definitely do such an assignment again if I were teaching the same class.  With some of the changes I suggested above, I hope it would be more successful.  And, whether my students love digital scholarship or not, I still think it is important to expose them to these new methodologies.  Even if they do not become professional digital humanists, as Stéfan Sinclair and Geoffrey Rockwell have argued,

From search engine indexing to sophisticated methods of literary analysis, the computer has become an indispensable tool in dealing with the massive influx of digitized textual data in our information age. Liberal arts students need to understand automated methods of text analysis because they underlie how we find, use, and share information today.

Finally, for humanists and scientists alike computer-assisted text analysis affords a different way to look at a text one that might yield insights not easily realized by traditional methods of close-reading.

More Resources and Sample Assignments for Text Analysis

I’ve covered text analysis in many workshops introducing digital humanities.  Here are some other resources, sample assignments, and ideas for using text analysis.

Stéfan Sinclair and Geoffrey Rockwell. “Teaching Computer-Assisted Text Analysis: Approaches to Learning New Methodologies.” Digital Humanities Pedagogy: Practices, Principles and Politics, ed. Brett Hirsch. Open Book Publishers, 2013, pp. 241-254.

Sample Assignments

Wordle: http://www.wordle.net/

Wordle is a toy for generating “word clouds” from text that you provide. The clouds give greater prominence to words that appear more frequently in the source text. You can tweak your clouds with different fonts, layouts, and color schemes. The images you create with Wordle are yours to use however you like. You can print them out, or save them to the Wordle gallery to share with your friends.

Ideas for using Wordle

  • Use wordle on an assignment text to pull out key issues and themes. (by student in writing class)
  • Use wordle on a paper to make sure the right themes are emphasized. (by writing instructor)
  • Use wordle on text survey results to find hidden themes.