The End is Near...

A semester long of trying to understand the digital world of history will officially end this week with the finished product of an online exhibit on the Charlotte Woman of the Year Awards sponsored by the radio and television station, WBT. These awards started in the 1950s and ended in 1990. The goal was to honor the women who helped to establish Charlotte as an up and coming city. My group and I wanted to provide an overall view of the women and their contributions so we split the winners up by decades and each chose five women from each decade to spotlight in the exhibit. I liked the idea of being able to remind the people of Charlotte of these women, although some may be forgotten their efforts and influences can still be seen today.

The first step was to start digging in the archives and collections where we found photos, press releases, the ceremony’s programs, the actual nominations and applications. Across four decades, expectations of women and their roles in society were changing and by looking at these women it became clear that they were representative of the changes Charlotte was experiencing. We also felt that the exhibit should provide a brief history of WBT, of the awards, and a short summary of what the city of Charlotte was undergoing at that time to offer historical context for each decade. I chose the women from the 1980s because it was at a time when Charlotte was beginning to flourish in the banking business and became home to other large industries and the women of the 1980s reflected that.  Having to choose the women was a difficult problem for me because each woman had something to offer but once we choose our specific women and gathered all the information we could on them, our focus changed to working with Omeka.

  Having never created an exhibit especially one online, this project was a list of new things for me. I have to admit that I was excited to learn more about Omeka and to have a finished product I could be proud of. I also have to be even more honest in admitting that more than once this semester that excitement faded away once I started actually working with Omeka and trying to make it fit what we had envisioned. Omeka felt a little limiting but of course we are using a free version so those setbacks are to be expected. As someone who lacks any knowledge about how technology works, it took me a while to figure out the particular parts of the site. The lingo of Omeka is still a bit of a confusing language for me but I have learned a tremendous amount of it.

 I feel like the layout in general was a common discussion for our group. We felt that it made more sense to have one large exhibit with collections organized within it, which worked best for us when it came to navigating our site. Aside from the research of my decade, I was in charge of the final touches of the site and in making sure the exhibit was cohesive and flowing. I am a well-organized person but making sure that the work of four individual people with four unique writing styles blend without completely losing everyone’s distinct voice is challenging. Luckily, our class has discussed quite a bit on how to write for the internet and that was extremely useful when writing for this exhibit.

As a history student, I am obviously used to analyzing and presenting historical context in a paper but in an online exhibit it’s a completely different approach. Every piece of information you want to include you have to create the perfect place on a page or in the collection to display it. There has to be a level of organization like any academic work but it has a visual aspect that along with the writing needs to blend together.

One thing about this project that I didn’t quite anticipate was its accessibility to the public. I know that seems trivial and obvious but it puts a lot of pressure on us to create a project that can be seen by anyone surfing the web. I want the exhibit to be a positive representation for everyone involved from the members of our group to UNCC and Dr. Cox. The women we are highlighting are being put in the spotlight as well. Normal projects are shown to a class and the professor and then are forgotten but this project is being put on the internet for people to see anytime. With its never ending availability, we will not be able to add to or explain our approach or goal to every viewer but hope that the project will truly speak for itself.

I believe that we have successfully done what we originally set out to do according to our contract’s mission statement:

Using the WBT/WBTV collection in the Atkins Library archives and other supplementary sources, our group will digitize original photographs and documents that concern some of the women who participated in the Woman of the Year contest from 1955 to 1989. We seek to discover what these women’s qualifications and characteristics were and how the award influenced them. We will profile certain women from each decade, offering historical context to discover why they were chosen.

I think we did a great job of working together as a team, especially with our schedules being limited. We contacted each other through email and were able to create a dialogue that worked well for us. When it came to our individual responsibilities I think we all did our part and definitely shared some of the unexpected workload that we stumbled upon through the process. Also, the opportunities to present to the class periodically through the semester really helped to understand how an audience would see our site. Their feedback helped to resolve issues that we ourselves could not decide on.

I hope that the end result will be as educating and enlightening to our audience as it was for us as a group and that we helped to re-honor the women who helped build Charlotte, N.C.

Writing for the Internet

    One of the great things about putting your work out on the internet is that anyone can do it and do it easily. However it doesn't mean that you know how to write for the internet. All semester long I have been attempting to write this blog and I now feel like I have been doing it all wrong. After reading the articles under Yahoo! Style Guide, I realize that putting your writing on the internet requires a lot of thought and planning. 

     You have to use strong short sentences that get to the point. People who read on the internet are looking for quick precise information. When you use deadwood (phrases that can be omitted) the reader has to dig and skim for the information they are looking for and that makes them move to another article. You also has to avoid weak verbs so that each sentence provides a strong subject with strong verbs.

     There is also the obstacle of finding your voice.  Showing  your voice through word choice and organization is key. The most important part of writing on the web it seems is to keep things as simple as possible and to know your audience. You need to know who reads your page to know what type of language and jargon to use and which to avoid.

     With all these rules and tips floating around in my head, I figured no better way to figure out how my writing measures up then with testing it with The Writer's Diet. You enter in your work and it lets you know how fit your writing is, mine definitely leaves something to be desired. The website offers tips and a break down of how to trim up your writing. I probably should have been using this site all along!

      Writing for the internet is definitely different than any other style of writing and will take practice to perfect my online writing style

Overwhelming Data Mining

    I am a everyday user of search engines like Google. I use it to look up movie times, recipes, and I always use it to start off my research on projects but I never really put much thought in the importance of such a tool. The actual work that goes into searching millions of websites and databases can cause anyone a headache.
    There is an extreme about of variables that go into how a search engine mines through every individual piece of information out there. It takes in consideration the chance of misspellings and all the ways a researcher can search a topic like U.S. History or American History or History of the United States. The programmers and programs have to take in account how people think and how they expect their information to be presented to them.
    Aside from the scientific programming of mining data, a relationship forms between history and the immediate present. At any moment we can search an issue or topic and because there is an extensive about of organizing based on a classification of words, letters, and numbers, we can access information that may have been lost over time but now can be read at any computer across the world.
    I will admit I am completely lost when it comes to understanding the detail and science that goes into data mining for search engines. But I am forever grateful for the easy accessibility that it offers.

Twitter: Making Education more of Conversation

     In the article How will Twitter revolutionize academic research and teaching, the positive aspects of social media are described as active listening in an academic conversation. In the article the author talks about how when someone in academia uses Twitter for educational purposes they are no longer standing at a podium in front of a lecture hall but more at an equal level like in a seminar room. It discusses how Twitter followers are automatically an active participant that (hopefully) want to add to the conversation and can easily do so with the ease of the reply button. With active participants come constant and genuine feedback that help not only the "tweeter" but all those who follow them. Twitter offers opportunities to anyone willing to click the follow button and according to the article " can lead to an ethical shift towards active efforts for engaging new audiences and widening participation beyond the ivory tower walls" that most people regard as higher education.
     Although I am slow on the uptake of Twitter, I do see the mass potential it offers to have an immediate conversation with a million people all across the globe. It gives people an informal way to conduct research, form thought, and suggest theories. What is great about Twitter is that it is a two way street of information. I can read what other people are thinking and on the rare occasion that I have something to say, I have the perfect audience already waiting to be involved and participate.

The Ups and Downs of a New Relationship

    History and technology are not two things, that in the past, have necessarily belonged together. However, in this new age of digital media it seems only fitting that the two have a long-lasting relationship. With a relationship so new, the bad tends to come with the good.
    In Talking Shop with the "Gutenberg-es", recent recipients of the Gutenberg-e award discuss the ups and downs of being published in an e-book format. It is difficult for new historians to get published and this award offers them a chance to publish their works in electronic form. Although electronic resources are a growing legitimate source, some winners still felt being published didn't feel real without that hard copy in hand. Others felt as though their work would be easily accessible to scholars around the world. When dealing with such a relatively new media, it seems as though the preconceived negative notion of e-books is hard to forget. I think to offer historians an opportunity to get their work and ideas out to the public should only be seen as a great perk of history and technology's new relationship.
    I also looked at  H-Net: Digital Discussion for Historians, which highlights the strengths of technology and history working together. I just recently learned of H-Net and can not believe I went so long without using it! Its an online resource for historians, that has 180,000 subscribers that contribute to 181 separate discussion networks. The availability of ideas and concepts are literally at your finger tips. I can not imagine a researcher not being able to find something of use with 181 different discussion topics. H-Net helps to post announcements and news that historians would find useful. Maybe I am still in the beginning stages of love with this website, but I can't seem to find a flaw with history and technology converging in this case.
    I think that the misconceptions of e-books will fade as the field of digital media strengthens and with every new technological advance the historians will doubt its contributions like a never ending cycle. Regardless we are benefiting from the accessibility of information that this relationship of new technology and history has to offer.

Respect for Wikipedia

    I have always been a major supporter of Wikipedia. I love that I can quickly look up a topic to settle a bet, a discussion or my own curiosity. Every time I begin learning a new topic or have a project to do I go straight to Wikipedia, just to get my mind in the right place. However, I would never even dream of using it as a legitimate source in a paper or project.
    The most exciting new discovery on Wikipedia for me is the history tab. I always understood that anyone could edit an entry but I never realized that the reader could see every edit made on that page. So I looked up random historical topics like Modernism, History of Sexuality, and Abraham Lincoln.  How I ended up on these three pages I'll never know but it was actually surprising to me how much work goes into a Wikipedia page. There is a lot of activity in the editing section for it to be organized by volunteers. On all three of those pages there were edits done within the past few days. These edits weren't because of complete idiots messing with the pages, they were to improve grammar and clarify the information.
    Then under the talk tab there is a multitude of people questioning ideals and theories to see if they are relevant enough to be included on the page on Modernism. On the Abraham Lincoln discussion section there is a warning that all edits are monitored by a bot and will be removed if they have not been approved within a month.
    There seems to be a serious professionalism that Wikipedia adheres to, in order to maintain this as a reliable free community based encyclopedia.Yes, it is easy to edit but it is also easy to contribute, and if the system works, it is also easy to catch those violating the rules. Although my love for Wikipedia has never wavered, discovering  the history and talk tabs may have made it more reliable in my eyes. Will I try to cite it in my work? Absolutely not. But now I no longer just use Wikipedia but I might actually respect it.

Group Contract and the Beginning of a Great Project

    The process of completing our group contract was much easier than I expected. With a starting off point as broad as WBT, I wasn't sure we could narrow down a topic that we would all be interested in. I wanted everyone in the group to enjoy or at least be intrigued by whatever topic we decided on. Amanda was the one who was initially excited about the idea of following the WBT's Woman of the Year awards as our focus for this project. After the rest of us looked into it, we knew that this was the best way to go about the loads of information we found in the collection and to showcase the women who helped Charlotte grow.
     It seemed too easy for a group project to get started so smoothly but it only got easier when it came to handing out the task because each of our strengths started to show and we realized how well balanced of a group we are. Luckily, Blake has experience with Omeka and the actual digital compilation portion of the project. I started digging through the archives looking for all the documents and support and so did Amanda. Amanda and I were able to meet and organize what each of us had found and as it turned out we work well at organizing and processing all the information into a theme for the project. Andrew jumped right on the research and found an awesome resource of the digital interviews of the winners of WBT's Women of the Year. We all plan to do our equal share of research but its nice to know we can rely on each other along the way if we need the help. The only thing that may come up as an issue would be our schedules. It seems as though we can never physically meet at the same time but the group is really great about communicating through email and meeting up with whatever partial members are available.
      Once we talked to Dr. Cox we were able to narrow down what we specifically wanted to get out of researching these women and which women in particular we were going to spot light. The decision was made that we would break down the winners by decade and discuss what made the women stand out in our local community and also what was happening in Charlotte at the time. I think the end result of the project will be a great resource to see the role that women played in the development of Charlotte.