IRMA-International.org: Creator of Knowledge
Information Resources Management Association
Advancing the Concepts & Practices of Information Resources Management in Modern Organizations

Between Tradition and Web 2.0: eLaborate as a Social Experiment in Humanities Scholarship

Between Tradition and Web 2.0: eLaborate as a Social Experiment in Humanities Scholarship
View Sample PDF
Author(s): Anne Beaulieu (University of Groningen, The Netherlands), Karina van Dalen-Oskam (Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands, The Netherlands)and Joris van Zundert (Huygens Institute for the History of The Netherlands, The Netherlands)
Copyright: 2013
Pages: 18
Source title: Social Software and the Evolution of User Expertise: Future Trends in Knowledge Creation and Dissemination
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Tatjana Takševa (Saint Mary's University, Canada)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-2178-7.ch007

Purchase

View Between Tradition and Web 2.0: eLaborate as a Social Experiment in Humanities Scholarship on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

Web 2.0 is characterized by values of openness of participation (unrestricted by traditional markers of expertise), collaboration across and beyond institutions, increased value of resources through distributed participation, dynamic content and context, and self-organization and scalability. These values seem to offer new possibilities for knowledge creation. They also contrast in important ways with traditional forms of knowledge creation, where expertise, institutional affiliation, and restrictions on access and circulation have been important. Yet, rather than seeing a dichotomy between Web 2.0 and non-Web 2.0 modes of working in digital humanities, the authors observe the rise of hybrid forms that combine elements of these two modes. In this chapter, the authors reflect on the reasons for such hybrids, specifically through an exploration of eLaborate. As a virtual research environment, eLaborate targets both professional scholars and volunteers working with textual resources. The environment offers tools to transcribe textual sources, to annotate these transcriptions, and to publish them as digital scholarly editions. The majority of content currently comprises texts from the cultural heritage of Dutch history and literary history, although eLaborate does not put limits on the kind of text or language. Nor does the system impose limits on the openness of contribution to any edition project. Levels of openness and access are solely determined by the groups of users working on specific texts or editions. This Web 2.0 technology-based software is now used by several groups of teachers and students, and by scholarly, educated, and interested volunteers. We conducted interviews with coordinators of and participants in different editorial groups, and we evaluate their experiences from the point of view of the described values of Web 2.0. We investigate changes in digital humanities resulting from intermediate forms between traditional academic practices and Web 2.0 modes. Rather than claim a revolution, we show how hybrid forms can actually be very powerful sites for change, through their inclusive rather than oppositional setup in relation to traditional practices.

Related Content

Rod D. Roscoe, Russell J. Branaghan, Nancy J. Cooke, Scotty D. Craig. © 2018. 34 pages.
Steve Ritter, R. Charles Murray, Robert G. M. Hausmann. © 2018. 17 pages.
Yvonne S. Kao, Bryan J. Matlen, Michelle Tiu, Linlin Li. © 2018. 24 pages.
Melissa L. Stone, Kevin M. Kent, Rod D. Roscoe, Kathleen M. Corley, Laura K. Allen, Danielle S. McNamara. © 2018. 23 pages.
Elizabeth R. Kazakoff, Melissa Orkin, Kristine Bundschuh, Rachel L. Schechter. © 2018. 24 pages.
Irfan Kula, Russell J. Branaghan, Robert K. Atkinson, Rod D. Roscoe. © 2018. 17 pages.
Erin Walker, Ruth Wylie, Andreea Danielescu, James P. Rodriguez III, Ed Finn. © 2018. 19 pages.
Body Bottom