johnnyortiz21

[johnnyortiz21]

Week 14 Reflections on the History Harvest Democratizing the Past Through the Digitization Of Community History

For this week, I attended the History Harvest for the Hungerford School on Saturday, November 18th, 2023. This was my first time doing a History Harvest and I did not realize that this has been going on since 2010. What I found most fascinating about the History Harvest is that the events serve the community in which students photograph objects and scan images from an individual from their collection. Dr. Connie Lester argues that History Harvest can only be successful if they are "organic, grassroots, and local." (Lester, 2016) From my experience of being a part of the History Harvest for the Hungerford school, I saw the connection that Dr. French and Jared had with the individuals coming in. I would argue that the relationship that Dr. French and Jared had with these individuals showed because the individuals who came in stayed and were appreciative of the work we were doing.

Our class was tasked with signing up for the role of doing an oral history for Hungerford school alumni, registration of the individuals, scanning documents, and/or document signing, intake, and return forms. During class, Jared Freedline one of Dr. French's interns this semester, gave us a presentation on the Hungerford school and showed us the scanning technology he used to scan some of the yearbooks so they can be digitality archived. We had the opportunity to join Dr. French, Jared, and the remaining of our class to preserve the history of the Hungerford school. Being a part of preserving this history was an honor to be a part of.

I volunteered to do the scanning of the documents. One of the challenges was to make sure that somebody was able to log into the computers and to make sure the scanner was working properly. Thankfully, we had somebody successfully log into the computers so we could operate the scanner. Once the computers are up and running, we can give a test run on scanning documents. However, once individuals began to sign in, I did not realize how long the scanning process would take. We had a team of four people scanning in which one scanned the documents while the other was renaming the files and documenting the items. It was a stressful process, but it felt good to be able to preserve a history that could have been forgotten.

One of the unique opportunities that we had was having a scanner that gives you a 3D dimension of an item. We did a test run with Dr. French’s hat and it was a great learning experience for everyone involved. However, I realized when we were doing the scanning that it takes a lot of hard work to make sure the scanning was done properly. First, you must make sure that the scanner is working properly. Second, it takes some time to learn how to properly use it. Last, the lighting of the room is key for proper scanning. This opportunity to learn this skill made me realize the importance of digital history and the importance it has on the field.

One area of opportunity that I wish we had the opportunity to do was to scan a class ring or a trophy from the Hungerford school. We realized that we did not promote individuals bringing in a trophy or a class ring once we had the 3D scanner. An area of opportunity such as this makes me realize the importance of the History Harvest. It gives you a perspective of the importance of teamwork and working with the local community to preserve their history such as the Hungerford school. I hope events such as the History Harvest influence other historians on the once of serving and preserving the history of the local community.

[johnnyortiz21]

Week 13: Draft Proposals for Final Paper/Digital Demo - In-Class Workshop

For this week, I will highlight course reading/material that will help inform my work on the Young Lords Movement and discuss specific resources/tools that I will use in my final paper/digital demo. The course reading/material that will help inform my work on the Young Lords Movement will be from Week 11 which I will utilize Bill Ferster’s ASSERT Model. The specific resource/tool that I will use in my final paper/digital demo will be the Knight Lab Story Map JS. I will build the framework of my final paper/digital demo by utilizing the ASSERT model which will ask a question, search for information, structure for information, envision the answer, represent the visualization, and tell a story using data. The tool that I will use will be the Knight Lab Story Map JS which I will create a timeline/mapping of events that will be an interactive visualization for both research and teaching. Based on Bill Ferster’s ASSERT Model and the Knight Lab Story Map JS, I hope to build an interactive visualization to discuss the importance the Young Lords Movement had on the Civil Rights movement from 1968 to 1976.

            First, I will establish this final paper/digital demo by providing good questions that will provide a good visualization. (Ferster, 2012, 40) For example, some of the questions will be "What significance did the Spanish-American War have on the Puerto Rican diaspora?” and “What significance did the Mexican Revolution have on Civil Rights in the Southwest?” By establishing questions such as the examples above, I will utilize the Knight Lab Story Map JS to establish the origin of the story of how the Young Lords Movement came about. Having good questions to start with, will build the foundation of my final paper/digital demo.

            Second, I will search for information by utilizing primary sources and secondary sources. (Ferster, 2012, 74) The Young Lords have plenty of primary sources that I can use to establish the origins of the organization such as pamphlets and photographs. Also, using secondary sources helps establish the historiography of the Young Lords movement and how it ties into the Civil Rights Movement. The Knight Lab Story Map JS allows you to upload primary sources such as pamphlets and photographs. Also, I can cite secondary sources such as articles for the audience to get more information on what other people have written about regarding the Young Lords Movement.

            Third, I will structure my primary sources and secondary sources by utilizing Richard Saul Wurman’s LATCH model. (Ferster, 2012, 78) I will establish the location of my sources by mapping them through the Knight Lab Story Map JS to give the origin of the sources. I am still trying to figure out how I would alphabetize the sources, but I believe that it is a good way of organizing sources. The Knight Lab Story Map JS can establish a timeline while I am mapping out the sources. I am not sure if I will be able to put a hierarchy of the Young Lords organization, but I believe it is important to include a hierarchy structure of the organization.

            Fourth, I will construct how I would like to represent the visualization by utilizing the Knight Lab Story map JS. I will utilize Bill Ferster’s Action Cycle in which I will set my goal, make an intentional decision, plan the format, and execute the action plan. (Ferster, 2012, 108-109) I will set the goal of establishing a timeline of the Young Lords movement. Second, I will make an intentional decision on what I would like to include in the interactive visualization. Third, I will create a format for the mapping of the timeline. Last, I will execute and organize the interactive visualization through the Knight Lab Story map JS.

            Last, I will tell the story of the Young Lords by using primary sources and secondary sources in my final paper/digital demo. Telling the story of the Young Lords will educate the audience on the importance of the Young Lords movement and how it contributed to the Civil Rights Movement. Also, I will examine internal and external validity threats that may question the way the data has been selective, structured, or tested. (Ferster, 2012, 184) By examining internal and external validity, will give the audience context as to why I chose the data and how it is used. From the feedback provided, the digital demo can be revised and updated so the digital project can be relevant.

[johnnyortiz21]

Week 12: Making the Case for the Black Digital Humanities: Recovery, Redress, Reciprocity

In this week’s reading, I will individually and collectively analyze the reading of Kim Gallon, Jessica Marie Johnson, Safiya Umoja Noble, Julian C. Chambliss, and Scot A. French and how it relates to Black Digital Humanities. First, I will analyze Kim Gallon's article in which she argues that there is a relationship between the digital humanities and African-American studies that can expose humanity as a racialized social construction. (Gallon, 2016) Second, I will analyze Jessica Marie Johnson's article in which she argues that the practice of black digital humanities reveals that black subjects have taken science, data, and coding to commodify, digitize, and mediate themselves in their black freedom dreams so they can live on. (Johnson, 2018) Third, I will analyze Safiya Umoja Noble’s article in which she questions the investment in the black digital humanities in that we exclude pressing social issues of racial injustice, disenfranchisement, and community. (Noble, 2019) Last, I will analyze Julian C. Chambliss and Scot A. French’s article in which they argue that a collective digital past and present can address concerns about open access and public knowledge through the frameworks of generative digital reciprocity (GDR). (Chambliss & French, 2022) In examining these articles, I will highlight the importance of why scholars need to be careful when making the case for Black Digital Humanities.

              In Kim Gallon’s article, Gallon argues that the connection between humanity and digital requires an examination of how computational processes may reinforce racial systems. (Gallon, 2016) This shows that the connection between humanity and digital must have a closer examination of how it impacts racial systems. For example, when examining Digital Harlem, one may view it as an interactive scholarly work that shows a racial system within humanity and digital. However, Robertson argued that it was meant to be a "thematic research collection" rather than an "interactive scholarly work." (AHR, 2016, 141) Therefore, I would agree with Gallon's argument that the connection between humanity and digital does require an examination of computational processes so that it does not reinforce racial systems.

              In Jessica Marie Johnson's article, Johnson questions how the black death and commodification of slaves during the 18th and 19th century Atlantic archives connect to digital humanities and the fight for justice and redress. (Johnson, 2018) Furthermore, Johnson argues that the archive of the Atlantic slave trade "haunts efforts to render black people as human." (Johnson, 2018) This shows that the black digital humanities are important to telling the story of slaves through databases such as the Slave Voyages. Johnson challenges scholars that when we write about slavery, we need to feel the pain of the descendants of the enslaved come to terms with how uncomfortable it is, and refuse the disposability of it. (Johnson, 2018) I would argue that when utilizing databases such as the Slave Voyages, we must highlight the reality of the treatment of slaves and give advocacy to slaves.

              In Safiya Umoja Noble’s article, Noble argues that scholars need to revise their approach to digital history and include the conditions of labor and exploitation rather than just making sure there is Black representation. (Noble, 2019) This shows that scholars need to include the details of labor and the exploitation of blacks instead of an emphasis on making sure there is Black representation. I would argue that the inclusion of labor and exploitation is important in discussing the Black Digital Humanities to give context to the digital archive we examine. For example, if we highlight how slaves were used as labor and how they were exploited, it can show the treatment of slaves and how they were commodified in records.

              In Julian C. Chambliss and Scot A. French’s article, Chambliss and French argue reciprocity, partnership, and digital humanities can emerge from scholars and tackle and interact with historiographical questions regarding African-American studies. (Chambliss & French, 2022) Furthermore, Chambliss and French argue that scholars' goal should be to document, preserve, and present unique Black knowledge. (Chambliss & French, 2022) This shows that scholars need to work together to document, preserve, and present Black knowledge while interacting and tackling historiographical questions regarding African-American studies. Also, it shows the importance of how we should go about Black Digital Humanities and the importance of telling the whole story with context. I would argue that the emergence of scholarly thinking and collaboration can better document, preserve, and present African-American knowledge in a way that can best represent African-American studies.

[johnnyortiz21]

Week 11: Interactive Visualization: Insight Through Inquiry / Bill Ferster's ASSERT Model

              The ASSERT model is a great model that I would like to use to build a digital tool project based on the Young Lords Movement in the US from 1968-1976. The A stands for "Ask a Question" in which you choose the best paths to inquire about the interactive visualization. (Ferster, 2012, 45) The first S stands for “Search for Information” in which you choose the most effective use of information sources. (Ferster, 2012, 63) The second S stands for “Structure for Information” which explores how you structure the data to make sense. (Ferster, 2012, 75) The E stands for “Envision the Answer” which explores several methodologies and techniques for how to effectively communicate the answers to the data-driven research question(s). (Ferster, 2012, 87-88) The R stands for “Represent the Visualization” in which you explore how to choose how to represent the visualization of what you are trying to convey. (Ferster, 2012, 108) The T stands for “Tell a Story using Data” in which you choose how to structure and narratively explain what you are trying to convey using data. (Ferster, 2012, 175)

              In building a digital tool project based on the Young Lords Movement in the US from 1968-197, the ASSERT model is great in establishing this goal. First, I would approach this digital tool project by simply asking a question. As mentioned in the book, Ferster argues that “good visualization is driven by good questions.” (Ferster, 2012, 40) The first step to approaching this topic would be utilizing the KWL model. The K stands for “What they know,” the W stands for “What we want them to learn,” and the L stands for “What we want them to learn.” (Ferster, 2012, 51) How I would establish the KWL model would be to know what the general audience knows about the Young Lords (many people don’t know), give common context that the Young Lords were a part of the Civil Rights Movement, and give them an understanding of the significance of this movement.

              Second, I would search for information regarding the Young Lords Movement. Utilizing primary sources and secondary sources about the Young Lords Movement gives the information needed to structure the information. (Ferster, 2012, 74) The primary sources would be data such as writing from members of the Young Lords that are taken directly from the Young Lords Movement. The secondary sources would be books and other articles that put together the primary sources and what is generally discussed regarding the Young Lords Movement. Searching for information such as primary sources and secondary sources gives the tools needed to bring forth the structuring of information.

              Third, I would structure the primary sources and secondary sources by utilizing Richard Saul Wurman’s LATCH model. The L stands for “Location,” the A stands for “Alphabet,” the T stands for “Time,” the C stands for “Category,” and the H stands for “Hierarchy.” (Ferster, 2012, 78) The Young Lords Movement was in various locations such as Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia in which the information needed to be structured. Putting sources in alphabetical order creates organization of the sources themselves. Since the Young Lords Movement was from 1968-1976, knowing the time in which these sources came from gives us the context of the time. Putting sources in categories such as primary sources and secondary sources gives different ways of visualizing the Young Lords. Last, the Young Lords movement did have a hierarchy in which certain data can have more to offer than others.

              Fourth, I would construct how I would like to represent the visualization of the Young Lords Movement. I would utilize the Action Cycle to represent how I would like to present the Young Lords Movement. (Ferster, 2012, 108-109) In the Action Cycle, I would first set a goal of how I would like to format the digital tool. Second, I would make an intentional decision to commit to reaching that goal. Third, I would plan a format with action items to reach that goal. Fourth, I would execute the action plan. Fifth, I would want to receive feedback from the public. Sixth, I would interpret the feedback I receive and how it affected the action plan put in place. Last, I would evaluate the outcome of my digital tool.

              Last, I would tell the story of the Young Lords by using the data. I would first identify internal and external validity threats to my digital tool project. I would examine the internal validity by questioning the way the data has been selected, structured, or tested. (Ferster, 2012, 184) Also, I would examine the external validity threats by questioning the ability of the data beyond the sample data chosen. (Ferster, 2012, 184) By examining the internal and external validity threats, the digital tool project of the Young Lords Movement can be revised and updated through the feedback that was provided.

[johnnyortiz21]

Week 10: Focus on Digital Methods @ UCF's Florida Historical Society Symposium

On October 20th, 2023, I attended UCF’s Florida Historical Society Symposium which I would recommend anybody interested in Florida history should attend. I was able to attend Amy Giroux's session titled St. Augustine National Cemetery, Charles Cavaliere, Robert Smalls, and Edwin Vasquez’s session titled From Slavery to Jim Crow, Amy Anderson's session titled Lost Voices from St. Augustine’s Parish Archive, 1594-1821, and Andrew Kishuni and George Crawford session titled Disease in Florida History. Out of the three sessions I attended, I would highlight two sessions that I found particularly interesting that involved Digital History. The first session I would like to highlight is Amy Giroux's session titled St. Augustine National Cemetery. In this session, Giroux used digital pictures, photographs, maps, and official records to recognize the inhumane treatment of Native Americans by R.H. Pratt and others while uncovering and recognizing unknown Native American graves in the St. Augustine National Cemetery. The second session I would like to highlight is Amy Anderson's session titled Lost Voices from St. Augustine’s Parish Archive, 1594-1821. In this session, Anderson utilizes the digital tool LaFlorida.org which digitalizes Archives of the Diocese of St. Augustine from 1594-1822 that includes Baptism, Confirmations, marriages, death, and burials.

In the first session, Giroux highlighted the importance of recognizing the Seminoles as the original habitat of Florida. Since St. Augustine is the oldest settlement in the Americas, Giroux argues that St. Augustine has the longest history of colonialism. Giroux is a Digital historian for the St. Augustine National Cemetery where she was tasked with digitalizing the physical space of the cemetery. In particular, she was tasked with identifying six unknown Native American graves that were moved through the years in the St. Augustine National Cemetery. The moving of these Native American graves shows the insignificance of Native American lives in history and proves the inhumane treatment of Native Americans even in burial. Even in the St. Augustine Museum, there is a lack of mention of Native Americans which Giroux expressed they are working on including Native Americans.

In the session, Giroux displayed some of the digitalized pictures, photographs, maps, and official records to show some of the inhumane treatment of Native Americans. For example, Giroux used the life mask of Heap of Bird to express the inhumane treatment of Native Americans. However, I found it heartwarming that Giroux with her team was able to do a 3D scan of the life mask which she was able to share with one of Heap of Bird's descendants. With the use of AI and other digital tools, we can take the life mask of Heap of Bird to tell the story of the Native American side of what happened to these Native American prisoners. Giroux also used official records to show the record of events of R.H Pratt. For example, Giroux digitalized those official records to show the Pratt attempted to arrange for the Native American families to come down to the prison which showed the Pratt had some compassion for the Native American prisoners. Unfortunately, Pratt's attempt was shot down by President Grant in which Native American interpretation of R.H Pratt is still widely negative.

In the second session, Anderson highlighted how far along digital tools have evolved. For example, when this digital project was first started, many of the records were laminated and difficult to read due to the condition of the records. Thankfully, with the advancement of technology along with funding and grants, the records were able to be digitalized in a way that the records go from accessible to accessible. The digital project of LaFlorida.org ranges from 1594-1882 and includes sixteen books, fourteen boxes, and 8,258 pages. The records that are included in this digital project are baptisms, confirmations, marriages, deaths, and burials. What I found interesting is one of the first marriages recorded in the Americas was by Gabriel Hernandes and Catalina de Bales on February 2nd, 1594. One of the difficulties faced in this digital project was making the transcripts readable. Most of the records were in Spanish and Latin. Anderson and her team faced difficulty with the language barrier such as some of the records include a city in Scotland in which the scribe put "Excheerlexpte.” This shows that the language barrier within that time can be difficult to figure out. However, these records were sent to Spain to be translated to help with this project. What I found interesting about this digital project was how user-friendly the digital tool is. For example, if you wanted to search birth of twins, it is easy to search instead of going through the records one by one. The most interesting thing I found about this digital tool was how diverse Spanish Florida was especially in St. Augustine. Overall, I found both of these sessions very interesting and it shows that we need to continue to advance and collaborate with others to make history accessible to professionals and the public alike.

[johnnyortiz21]

Transatlantic Encounter Digital Tools

The Transatlantic Encounter digital tools developed by the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media give students, educators, scholars, and archivists an open-access digital tool for research, collaboration, and sharing of information on the worldwide Web. This digital tool explores Latin American artists in the Parisian art scene during the Interwar years in Paris. It has the chronicles of residency, training, exhibition history, and Parisian contacts of about three hundred Latin American artists living and working in Paris between 1918 and 1939. This digital tool shows the rise of an exhibition format that would continue for the rest of the twentieth century. The reason why it is significant is that there was no exhibition held in Latin America or the United States and the exhibition was a catalyst for Latin American art and was a turning point in Latin American art history.

              The Transatlantic Encounter uses Zotero which is a part of the Firefox browser that enables users of the Transatlantic Encounter to save citations. For example, the Transatlantic Encounter uses Zotero as their bibliography which is helpful to users trying to save information and where to locate digital citations. However, I believe that the bibliography has some areas of improvement. For example, some of the citations do not include a creator or date but when you click on the citations it does include the creator and date. However, these are small improvements that can easily be fixed by Zotero.

              The Transatlantic Encounter uses Omeka which is a web publishing tool that displays information and archival material in an easy-to-use web format. Omeka has done a great job with the Transatlantic in that the home page is easy to navigate to where you need to go. For example, on the home page, if you want to look for an artist, there is a toolbar on the top and bottom while you’re browsing the digital tool including a tile that brings you to the multiple artists. Although it has not been updated since 2021, the digital tool is still user-friendly to use. I would like to see an update on the digital tool since it is outdated by two years, but it is still useful for users.

              When I first started exploring this digital tool, I found that the home page was simply easy to use. The digital tool mentioned earlier has a toolbar and tiles to navigate to either the home, artists, galleries, subjects, maps, about, contact, and bibliography. Also, the design of the website is nice and attractive for users which you tell Omeka does a great job in the design. Also, I like that it gives a brief description of what the Transatlantic Encounters digital tool is. I think the combination of a brief description, the design of the homepage, and user-friendly web design makes it a great digital tool for the user.

              Exploring the toolbar and tiles, I found them to be user-friendly as well. For example, when searching for artists, it is listed in alphabetical order by last name and even includes, for the most part, the artist's painting or work. However, when searching the galleries, I have noticed that many of the galleries do not include a picture or photograph. If there is no picture or photograph, there is no use in including the gallery. This is why it is important to maintain updating these digital tools, so they are useful to the user. What I found interesting was the way they formatted the subject. They put it in a word cloud and when you click on any of the hyperlinks, it brings you to anything related to that word. For example, if you click on "Venezuela" it will pull anything related to Venezuela. I thought this was a great way to make it user-friendly for users.

               However, the most useful tool I found was the maps in the toolbar and tiles. They listed all the Latin American Artists by country residing in Paris and the Parisian Galleries that exhibited Latin American art throughout Paris. When looking at the Latin American Artists Residing in Paris, they created a legend that included the artist's nationality and put a color to it to make it easy to identify where they resided. The majority of artists resided in Paris, however, the digital tool even included other artists living throughout France and even one artist residing in Italy. I find this to be so helpful for historians to explore because it gives a visual of where these artists resided. Using the Parisian galleries that exhibited Latin American art in Paris gives you a perspective of how much Latin American art was exhibited throughout Paris.

              The Transatlantic Encounters is a great digital tool that gives users an experience of Latin American art exhibits that did not even exist in Latin America and the US during the time. Some of the strength of this digital tool is its user-friendly home page, the word count in subjects, and the maps usage. Also, I enjoyed how they utilized Zotero for their bibliography which makes it easy for users to get citations. However, the biggest flaw I have about this digital tool is that it was last updated in 2021. For example, as mentioned earlier, the galleries and artists do not include pictures or photographs which makes the digital tool useless unless it is updated. Also, the bibliography does not include the creator and date sometimes and you must manually search for the creator and date. This may be a result of funding and time to update the digital tool. Nonetheless, this is still a great digital tool for those exploring Latin American art during the interwar period in Paris.

[johnnyortiz21]

Digital History Reviews - Guides & Models

For this week's discussion, I will be critically analyzing the evolving guidelines and contemporary practice of Digital History reviews in flagship professional journals such as the American Historical Review (AHR) and Journal of American History (JAH). As mentioned in a previous discussion post, the AHR guidelines and contemporary practice define digital history as a “scholarship that is either produced using computational tools and methods or presented using digital technologies. (AHA, 2017, 1) They view the contemporary practice of digital history as the use of archival evidence, oral testimony, or other material. (AHA, 2017, 1-2) They believe that there is a certain number of roles and responsibilities by departments, scholars, and themselves in which the departments are responsible for the development of tools, the scholar needs to collaborate, and the AHA plays a supportive role to both. (AHA, 2017, 2-4)

Comparing the AHR to the JAH guidelines and contemporary practice, the JAH guidelines and contemporary practice in that they believe digital history projects fall into certain categories, they are reviewed in five different areas, and the preference might they like to review historians' work. The JAH believes that digital history projects fall into either an archive, essay, teaching resource, tool, gateway, journal, professional site, digital community, podcast, audio, games, and data sets. They believe that digital history projects are reviewed in five areas which are content, design, audience, digital media, and creators. They prefer to review digital history projects in which they have headings, examples, and contacts.

            These guidelines and contemporary practice for both the AHR and the JHA are important in reviewing the development of the DH subfield because they bring validity and scholarship to the profession. However, I would argue that the AHR is not clear in its guidelines and contemporary practice. Rather, they leave it up to the departments and scholars to provide the guidelines and contemporary practices and play a supportive role to them rather than defining their own guidelines and contemporary practices. In contrast, I would argue that the JAH has established guidelines and contemporary practices that are clearly defined. By having guidelines and contemporary practices, it gives better support to both scholars and departments alike.

            Some insights that I gained from the assigned exchanges/reviews are the contributions that Dr. Jeffrey W. McClurken made to digital history. For example, McClurken argued that it was important to treat digital projects as a "big piece" and identify everyone's role in the project and their contribution such as the Valley of the Shadow Project. (McClurken, 2015) He mentioned that historians are not trained to work together which I would argue that it hurts our profession because it is focused on individualism rather than the profession itself. Giving that insight into the Valley of the Shadow Project shows that a collaborative project can be successful.

            Another insight that I gained from the assigned exchanges/reviews is the AHR Exchange: Reviewing Digital History. I found interesting Stephen Robertson's view on how Sternfeld viewed the Digital Harlem project. Robertson argued that Digital Harlem was a "thematic research collection" rather than an "interactive scholarly work." (AHR, 2016, 141) Although I have respect for Robertson as a founding member of the Digital Harlem project, Robertson is not realizing the potential that Digital Harlem has in digital history. I would argue that viewpoints such as Robertson's are hurting the profession of digital history because they refuse to acknowledge it as collaborative work. This example is the reason why the AHR needs to come up with a way to create guidelines and contemporary practices so digital history does not become stagnant.

            Another insight that I gained from the assigned exchanges/reviews was Cameron Blevins's the New Wave of Review. Blevins argued that digital historians have embraced what is considered a "radical shift" from the traditional academic process and how it has been slow to evaluate and review. (Blevins, 2016) He mentions in the article that the AHA has great guidelines but at the same time stated that digital historians deserve better. (Blevins, 2016) I find this to be confusing because I believe he is holding onto the traditional academic process and its value but stating that we need to do better in understanding the evaluation of digital history. Examples such as this show that the AHA is not as well established in its guidelines and contemporary practices as compared to the JAH.

            I believe the reviews this week addressed larger issues/concerns raised in than previous reading in that it shows the disconnect between the AHR and the JAH. Historians such as Robertson and Blevins have difficulty in how to come up with guidelines and contemporary practices for digital historians. I believe the JAH has come up with great guidelines and contemporary practices that simply need to be recognized more in the profession. I have hope that it is just a matter of time before these guidelines and contemporary practices are widespread through digital history.

[johnnyortiz21]

The Dangerous Art of Text Mining: A Methodology for Digital History

This week I would like to discuss the new book The Dangerous Art of Text Mining: A Methodology for Digital History by Jo Guldi. Jo Guldi is a professor of Quantitative Methods at Emory University. She received her AB from Harvard University and studied for some time at Trinity College at Cambridge. She received her Ph.D. in history from the University of California at Berkeley as well as her postdoctoral at the University of Chicago and the Harvard Society of Fellows. She has created a digital tool named Paper Machines which assists students and professionals in distant reading technology. She also published a book The History Manifesto which analyzed the effect of digital analysis on periodization, graduate student training, and audience in the profession of digital history. Currently, she is working on utilizing machine learning and statistical approaches such as “topic modeling" to understand the history of Great Britain.

              The thesis of her book is that text mining can be improved by historians and professionals if it is pursued with careful historical context, an understanding of the limits of evidence, and the creation of methodological questions that are suited for those objects. (Guldi, 2023, 22) The book is broken down into three different parts. The first part of the book analyzes the dangers and failures of contemporary data. (Guldi, 2023, 18) The second part of the book analyzes the ideas and philosophy of history and how it can help historians and professionals in the study of historical change. (Guldi, 2023, 19) The third part of the book analyzes different algorithms and questions how critical thinking can be used in methods. (Guldi, 2023, 20-21) In the Appendix, the book analyzes the limits of this book based on imperfect data. (Guldi, 2023, 445)

              This book contributes to the field of digital history by making historians aware of the dangers of text mining while arguing that text mining can be beneficial to the future of digital history. For example, the first chapter discusses the dangers of imperfect data in three different dangers. The first danger is that data from the past can hide historical data that does not align with data science. (Guldi, 2023, 28) The second danger can be considered “dirty” meaning that it can have racist and sexist biases. (Guldi, 2023, 28-29) The third danger is that researchers may fall victim to the desire for mastery over the past through prediction machines. (Guldi, 2023, 30) This shows that text mining can be dangerous based on simply that the data is imperfect and that can lead to imperfect analyses and methodologies. I would argue that is why we need to have a human element to understand text mining.

              One of the themes/critical issues that was highlighted in this book is critical search. Chapter 4, the chapter discusses the strategy of critical thinking through data and algorithms and how the researcher uses it to understand the implications of choices to see how clean the dataset is and how it is used in the algorithm. (Guldi, 2023, 117) Guldi argues that guiding reading can be a tool that analyzes relationships between events, periodicity, change over time, causal factors, and conditions in the past. (Guldi, 2023, 132) This shows that critical thinking through data and algorithms can be a helpful tool for historians analyzing time and place to depict historical events more accurately. However, as mentioned in Chapter 1, we has historians and professionals need to know the dangers of text mining because it can lead to misleading information which can lead to racist or sexist biases that do not reflect accurately historical analysis.

              Another theme/critical issue that was highlighted in this book is that even the book had limits with imperfect data. In the Appendix, Guldi acknowledges that the field is still under process of review and therefore there is more work to be done. (Guldi, 2023, 445) For example, Guldi provides limits and aids to code, labor, room for error, and her analysis of British history. This shows that even the latest work of digital historians has limitations due to imperfections of data and the creation of the process of review. Therefore, historians and professionals need to continue to use critical thinking to analyze the data and create the process of review for the future of the profession.

              In summary, I believe that this book contributes to digital history by making historians and professionals aware of the danger of text mining. As defined in the book, text mining is a process that mines for value with text as the data. (Guldi, 2023, 1) This shows that text mining looks for value, but it can only determine value if there is a human element of critical thinking within the tool. Books such as these need to continue to be brought to the forefront of historians and professionals because this is the future of our profession. Therefore, if we are not careful about the danger of text mining, our profession can fall victim to inaccurate analysis and lose credibility altogether.

[johnnyortiz21]

Arguing with Digital History / The Valley of the Shadow Project & Other Case Studies

For this week, I will be discussing the articles/projects of the Digital History and Argument White Paper, Notes on the Future of Virginia: Visualizing a 40-Year Conversation on Race and Slavery in the Correspondence of Jefferson and Short and Researching Genres in Agricultural Communities: The Role of the Farm Record Book.  Before we go into these article/projects, I need to establish some guidelines according to Guidelines for the Professional Evaluation of Digital Scholarship by Historian. There are different roles/responsibilities for departments, scholars, and the American Historical Association (AHA). According to AHA, the role/responsibility for departments are to figure out what will count as scholarly contributions toward tenure and promotion, how to evaluate sophisticated digital tools, develop protocols for evaluating collaborative work. (AHA, 2015, 3) This shows that department have a big impact on the support, development, and evaluation of digital scholarship. The role/responsibility for scholar is be prepared to explain and document any development and/or progress and/or its contributions to digital scholarship, seek support and guidance to work toward promotion or tenure, and how processes and procedures digital scholarship and teaching will have on your plans. (AHA, 2015, 3) This shows the importance of scholars establishing, owning, and seeking support to work toward the contribution of digital scholarship and working toward promotion or tenure. The role/responsibility for AHA is to get experienced digital historians together as a working group to keep informed on developments in the field and establish a directory of qualified historians to assist department looking for expert outside reviewers for candidates at times of tenure and promotion. (AHA, 2015, 4) This shows that the AHA can be a support system for all departments to work together to development digital scholarship while supporting departments on assisting with tenure and promotion.

Now that I established the roles of departments, scholars, and the AHA on digital scholarship, I will discuss first the article of Digital History and Argument White Paper. This article was written by a collaborative group organized by Stephen Robertson. Stephen Robertson is a digital historian from George Mason that served as director of the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. By simply having a project team, they are contributing to collaboration between digital scholars. In this article, they make arguments for digital history in digital collection, public history, methodological, computational history, and visualization. In the article, the DH working groups argues that it is important to equip historians to recognize these forms of argument to extend their engagement with digital history and uncovering the practices of argumentation in digital history to improve digital scholarship. (DH working group, 2017, 27) For example, visualization can be reliable means of communication that appear new and rooted in several centuries of practice and are key signs that visualizations are arguments and that they can argue with one another. (DH working group, 2017, 21-22) This shows that visualization can bridge the gap between the traditional analog historians and the digital historians. By having a collaborative group of digital historians working on visualization can have significant improvement in public history and bring it to a wider audience.

Next, I will be discussing the article/project of Notes on the Future of Virginia: Visualizing a 40-Year Conversation on Race and Slavery in the Correspondence of Jefferson and Short by Dr. Scot French. Dr. French is a digital historian at the University of Central Florida that specializes in the study of collective memory and application of new technologies in teaching, learning, and historical scholarship. In this article, he is not collaborating with other scholars which is not common for digital scholars but common in analog historians. In his article/project, he utilizes visualizations to analyze Thomas Jefferson and his “adoptive son” William Short interactions regarding the fate of blacks in Virginia’s post-emancipation future. French argued that the visualization provided a stereoscopic view of the two men, bound by ties of family and social class as they conversed on topics on social, political, and economic issues during their time alive. (French, 2018, 13) This shows that visualization is an important research/presentation digital tool that can be effective in examining historical figures conversation such as Jefferson and Short.

      Last, I will be discussing the article/project of Researching Genres in Agricultural Communities: The Role of the Farm Record Book by Mary L. Galbreath and Amy L Giroux. Galbreath is English professor and has experience with digital scholarship in which was a chair for a symposium for Digital Activism in Spring 2016. Giroux is an associate director for the humanities and digital research (CHDR) at the University of Central Florida assisting faculty and graduate students with digital humanities projects. In this article/project, they are collaborating to analyze genres in agricultural communities. Galbreath and Giroux argue in their article/project that progressive ideologies were transmitted through social action of genres and are not always easily visible, but their help understand agricultural practices. (Galbreath & Giroux, 2018) They utilized ChronAm to perform their analysis of the times and contexts which were from the actual record book. (Galbreath & Giroux, 2018, 19) Utilizing search tools such as ChronAm, Galbreath and Giroux were able to utilize digital tools to analyze agricultural practices while collaborating with others to come up with this analysis. The examples of French, Galbreath, and Giroux show that digital scholar have successfully used digital tools such as visualizations and advanced search tools to help contribute to digital scholarship. As a result, it is up to departments, scholars, and the AHA to continue advocating for more digital scholarship.

[johnnyortiz21]

Spatial History & Historical GIS

This week I will be discussing Spatial History and Historical GIS in theory and practice. I will be discussing the five different perspectives on Spatial History and Historical GIS. First, I will define what is “Spatial History” and how it is different from “normal” historical practice. Second, I will be analyzing what is historical GIS and how it is applied in American History. Third, I will be discussing the meaning of “The Spatial Turn” in social science in history. Fourth, I will analyze if GIS is essential to Spatial Analysis. Last, I will explain why spatial analysis and mapping are intriguing to historians.

According to Richard White, Spatial History is a “means of doing research” that puts forward questions that may go unasked and reveals historical relations that may go unnoticed which can undermine the stories we have created about our past. (White, 2000, 6) Establishing a definition, helps us understand the foundation of what Spatial History is. How it is different from the normal historical practice is their concept of space. According to White, White argues that space is historical within itself, and it is an attempt to shape what is lived and perceived. (White, 2000, 2, 6) By emphasizing that space is historical within itself, gives a different perspective that traditional historians have not explored yet. I would argue that Spatial History is a research method that puts space within a certain perspective that opens out more historical questions that historians need to embrace and explore.

Next, we will need to define what is historical GIS and how it has been applied to different episodes in American History. According to Anne Kelly Knowles, historical GIS is the practice of converting source data from analog to digital form. (Knowles, 2000, 452) As technology advances, historians need to keep up with the times and take those old analogs and convert them into a digital form. According to David Rumsey and Meredith Williams, GIS offers new techniques to analyze and display historical maps. (Rumsey & Williams, 16) An example is the exploration of the Louisiana Purchase.  GIS was able to gauge some of the errors made by Lewis and Clark in their measurements and estimation by overlaying modern highways and state boundaries. (Rumsey & Williams, 6) This shows that historical maps and GIS can give a different perspective of how historical people looked at geography and the flaws that may have errored in map making. I would argue that historical GIS is just the beginning of the conversion of historical maps. As technology advances, historians will have to come up with new ways to convert old digital archives into new updated digital archives which can be a challenge in the future.

Now that I have defined what is Spatial History and Historical GIS, we need to explore what Anne Kelly Knowles meant by “The Spatial Turn” in social science history. The Spatial Turn in social science history is that historical GIS, which is a part of Spatial History, makes space an explicit part of the analysis. (Knowles, 2000, 452) This shows that Spatial history is now making space a big part of the historical analysis. Furthermore, Knowles argued that GIS will be a commonplace that historians will use as a tool that will be used for historical and geographical collaborations. (Knowles, 2000, 465) I would argue that the meaning of “The Spatial Turn” is that Spatial History will be the foundation of creating new approaches to social science history.

This creates questions such as whether is GIS essential to Spatial Analysis. Wiliam G. Thomas argued that a historian’s goal is to "spatialize history" not to "historicize space." (Thomas, 2004, 7) Therefore, if GIS is used to “spatialize history” it can be an essential tool for Spatial Analysis. However, historians seeking to create spatial histories need only to push the computer's potential. Others are already doing so, using the technology to create appealing worlds and simulations. We should experiment too. Nothing is stopping us, and a new history awaits. (7) However, Thomas argued that as digital scholarship developed it became clear that spatial history did not rely on historical GIA but instead on Extensible Markup Language (XML). (Thomas, 2004, 5-6) This shows that GIS is a great tool for Spatial Analysis but for some digital scholarship, it may require other tools such as XML. I would argue that GIS is an important tool for Spatial Analysis, but it is not necessarily essential.

Last, we need to ask the question of why spatial analysis and mapping are so intriguing to historians. Historians are intrigued by spatial analysis and mapping because of gives way to shifting epistemologies, deep mapping, digital storytelling, and data visualization. For example, deep mapping is helpful to public archaeology because it gives a multi-media way to display geographically referred historical and archaeological data for the public and specialists. (Earley-Spadoni, 2016, 96) This shows that maps such as deep mapping can be helpful to both the public and specialists alike. Earley-Spadoni argues that the reason why historians are intrigued by spatial analysis and mapping because it increases collaboration with DH communities and “improved access to research funding to broadening the scope and impact of scholarly work through interdisciplinary dialog.” (Earley-Spadoni, 2016, 101) I would argue that spatial analysis and mapping are intriguing to historians mostly because of the interdisciplinary dialog that promotes new approaches and perspectives to digital history.

[johnnyortiz21]

After reading Ian Milligan’s History in the Age of Abundance? How the Web is Transforming Historical Research, There are 5 key questions I feel are important to address during our Age of Abundance. The first key question would be how to make sense of all this information and how can we determine who and what it does and does not represent. (Milligan, 2019, 53) The second key question is how historians and archivists care for the historical record digitally. (Milligan, 2019, 88) The third key question is how can we connect our traditional historical predilection to the web archive effectively? (Milligan, 2019, 127) The fourth key question is how can we address the cultural problem of the historical profession. (Milligan, 2019, 169-170) The last key question is how can web historians become more fluent in basic capabilities of the web such as general computation. (Milligan, 2019, 219,222)

To address the first key question, how do historians make sense of all the information on the web, and can we have historians determine who and what it does and does not represent? Milligan argues that historians need to study the Age of Abundance and second, we need to mentor future historians so we can make better sense and determinations of what is does and does not represent. (Milligan, 2019, 61) I would agree that historians need to take a closer look at the web and this period now. I would argue further that historians are not taking advantage enough of the period we're living in now and need to start acting on making foundational sense of the web and need to begin determining what is important. This requires a collective effort by historians and archivists to work with interdisciplinary scholars so that way we can better understand the web and make a better determination on what it truly represents.

The second key question asks how historians and archivists care for the historical record digitally. Rosenzweig argues that historians need to be thinking about how to research, write, and teach in a world of abundance or they may have a future of scarcity in records. (Rosenzweig, 2003, 738) I would argue that historians and archivists need to start building their historical records digitally rather than being in private hands. (Rosenzweig, 2003, 752) If we leave digital records to private hands, private companies can make decisions on what is and what is not accessible. I would argue that historians need to build our historical records digitally and not rely on private companies for digital records.

The third key question asks how can we connect our traditional predilection to the web archive effectively. Milligan argues that historians need to take our traditional content and increase the importance of metadata so it can be a tool for historians today. (Milligan, 2019, 141) I would argue that metadata is a great tool for historians today and shortly. However, whatever technological advantages are made whether it is metadata or something else, historians need to embrace these new tools. Furthermore, I would argue that this is a "Golden Age" for digital history because of the abundance of information. Therefore, our historians need to be more flexible in utilizing tools like metadata and connecting them to our traditional predilection.

The fourth key question asks how we can address the cultural problem of the historical profession. This is not an easy question to answer because the speed of technology versus the historical profession is not equal. Everyday technology is coming up with new ways of how to make digital archiving easier and more efficient. Milligan argues that historians have a treasure of information and if use it responsibly, we can tell different histories of culture and society. I would argue that the "old guard" of historians needs to be more flexible about the culture of our profession. For example, Hitchcock argues that the nature of history remains unchallenged while the idea of archive was left to stand. (Hitchcock, 2020, 1339) We need to embrace the Age of Abundance and make it a part of our culture rather than wait for the next generation of historians.

The last key questions ask how can historians improve their fluency on the web by learning general concepts such as general computation. Milligan argues that we need to rethink our historical discipline and embrace the rapidly changing historical record. (Milligan, 2020, 1347) I would argue that this will take some time for historians to learn the general concepts of the web such as general computation. As the new generation of historians comes up, they will be able to come up with new ways of how to compute data and possibly create their databases. It is just a matter of time for historians to learn these new concepts and utilize them to their advantage.

[johnnyortiz21]

The Pasts and Futures of Digital History

As historians, it is important to understand the past, present, and future. I would argue that digital history is one of the most important historiographies for us to understand as a profession. If we are not careful as historians, it may be a profession that is viewed as not important to academia in the future. Therefore, understanding the history and present of digital history may in the future save our professions from being obsolete or “dead.” For us to understand digital history, we must examine the historiography of digital history. 

In 1999, the historiography of digital history was established may one of the founding fathers of digital history Edward L. Ayers. In his article, The Past and Futures of Digital History, Ayers argues during his time that historians need to better understand what he terms “new media” and how to explore its implications as much as possible. (Ayers, 1999) Ayers understood that this new phenomenon of media was coming, and it needed to be understood back in 1999. However, he warned that many historians only used a few that were beneficial while the remaining were not used. (Ayers, 1999) I would argue that the “old guard” of historians struggle with this today. For example, the topic of artificial intelligence is a hot topic for many universities, and how we can better utilize it to our advantage.

In 2006, another pioneer of the historiography of digital history named Roy Rosenzweig along with economic historian Daniel A. Cohen further the field by establishing how we should approach digital history as historians. In the article Promises and Perils of Digital History, Cohen and Rosenzweig argued that historians need to get acquainted with the basics of web-based history to build a public historical web case. (Cohen & Rosenzweig, 2006) Both Cohen and Rosenzweig understood at the time that historians needed to act in getting involved in building a public database for historians. For example, Cohen and Rosenzweig mentioned at the time that 13 percent of internet users maintained their websites with more than seven million blogs to be accounted for. (Cohen & Rosenzweig, 2006) Comparing Ayers to Cohen and Rosenzweig, the historiography of digital history changed from encouraging and exploring what Ayers called “new media” to an approach to digital history. 

In 2009, there was a shift in the historiography of digital history by Douglas Seefedt and Williams G. Thomas to better understand what is actually “digital history.” In their article What is Digital History? Seefeldt and Thomas defined digital history as a framework for people to experience, read, and follow an argument or approach about a major historical problem or topic through access to technology. (Seefeldt & Thomas, 2009) This is important to the historiography of digital history because the pioneer never clearly defined what digital history is. By establishing a clear definition, Seefeldt and Thomas argued that digital history gives historians a better sense of scholarship which will give way to future digital historians to use computational/algorithmic, large-scale data table sets, and visuals. (Seefeldt & Thomas, 2009) Comparing Ayers, Cohen, Rosenzweig, Seefedt and Thomas's approach to digital history is the importance of defining and establishing what historians are doing to further the professions of digital history while looking toward the future of what the professions will look like.  

In 2018, Cameron Blevins's approach to digital changed from past tense to future tense. In the article Digital History’s Perpetual Future Tense, Blevins argues that historians need to spend more time making digital history and new arguments rather than talking about the potential of digital history and new arguments. (Blevins, 2018) Furthermore, Blevins argued that digital historians have now contributed more to public history than argument-driven scholarship. This is a compelling argument for the historiography of digital history in which it challenges that historians are not doing enough to make use of digital history and create new arguments. I would argue that the “old guard” of historians is struggling to understand digital history and how to implement it in a way that benefits research and teaching. Therefore, Blevins's argument of challenging historians to make digital history and create new approaches is one that historians today and the future must answer, or the fate of the professions may be in jeopardy.

In the 2021 American Historical Association hosted a roundtable titled The Future Directions in Research and Training for Digital History which touched on topics such as the role of data, history, digital history, research, and the future of computational research. In the roundtable, the most compelling argument in the roundtable was by Zoe Genevieve on Gatekeeping Digital History. Leon argued that although collaboration is a big part of digital history it is not evenly distributed right. (Genevieve, 2021) This is a compelling argument that I would argue is an ethical issue with the historiography of digital history. I would argue that the “old guard” of historians focuses on the individualism of the profession and the approach rather than collaboration among one another to build new approaches to digital history so we can better research and teach our professions in a way that can not only benefit historians themselves but give way to future historians. 

[johnnyortiz21]

Artificial Intelligence and History in the Digital Age

For this week, I will be discussing the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) for teaching and research. During the 2021 American Historical Association (AHA) roundtable, six individuals addressed the implications of AI in the present and future of historical research. Each individual presented different arguments regarding AI and how it impacts the digital age. For each argument made by the six individuals, I will connect and analyze other writings such as Wulf Kansteiner, Lauren M.E Goodlad, Samuel Baker, Donovan Moira, E. Thomas Ewing, Landon Downer, Patrick Luppino, and Victor Mukora.

The first individual to address the implications of AI was presented by Matthew Jones from Columbia University. Jones argued that the goal of historians should not be to "author extremely elegant theories and instead embrace complexity." (Jones) He defined AI as a predictive learning machine and computational statistic based on different data sets over the last five to seven years. I would further this argument that historians need to embrace the complexity of AI and focus on how it can revolutionize the profession for today's and tomorrow's historians. Instead of limiting ourselves to the old "elegant theories" we should embrace interdisciplinary theories that complement our profession.

The second individual to address the implication of AI was presented by Kate Crawford from USC Annenberg. Crawford argued that historians need to dig deeper into the different layers of AI such as trained data. (Crawford) To further this argument, I would propose that we as historians do not as professionals understand the layers of AI. Our profession today needs to begin digging deeper into trained data so we can further the professions create new opportunities for future historians and keep our professions alive and relevant.

However, Kansteiner argues that AI such as GPT-History should be publicly controlled, not least of all to ensure that it adheres to democratically legitimated rules of censorship. (Kansteiner, 129) To put this simply, AI is a powerful tool that can easily be misused if there are no boundaries. Although who controls the GPT-History AI can be debatable, our professions need to ensure that a responsible party must have censorship and control democratically. Therefore, there must be a balance of digging deeper into AI while having the balance of controlling it.

The third individual to address the implication of AI was presented by Meredith Broussard from New York University. Broussard argued that historians need to create a scholarly archive of digital journalism to combat a fragile digital world. (Broussard) Broussard's argument is already making waves throughout the profession. JSTOR for example is a scholarly archive that is being utilized to combat a digital world. However, as technology advances, we must find different ways to preserve digital archives so future historians can analyze and utilize technology to continue advancing theories and facts on history.

To further Broussard's argument, Goodlad and Baker argue that historians need to "claim a seat at the table where tech entrepreneurs are already making their pitch for the future." (Goodlad & Baker, 12) History departments throughout universities and colleges are relying on tech entrepreneurs to help with scholarly archiving. Many history departments are facing budget issues because they simply are at the mercy of tech entrepreneur marketing prices such limits our resources for primary and secondary sources. Therefore, Goodlad and Baker's argument is one that historians need to be more well-rounded for us to be more tech-savvy in building our own scholarly archives to relieve history departments' budget issues.

The fourth individual to address the implication of AI was presented by Benjamin Schmidt from New York University. Schmidt argued that computers are not binary and they can only make predictions. (Schmidt) Schmidt's argument shows that AI has limitations. For example, Johannes Preiser-Kapeller of the Austrian Academy of Sciences argued that AI cannot make meaningful connections like humans can (Moira 2023) As advanced and great as AI is, it can not replace the human element of making connections. Therefore, we should be wary of how much reliance we have on AI.

The fifth individual to address the implication of AI was presented by Joshua Sternfield an independent scholar. Sternfield argued that we cannot historicize the past training data sets are an AI system’s primary source material. (Sternfield) Similar to Schmidt's argument, AI has limitations such as not being able to historicize past training data sets. However, I would argue that future AI systems may have the capacity and ability to historicize past training data sets in the future. Similar to Broussard's argument, historians need to begin taking a seat at the table with tech entrepreneurs for us to have those future possibilities.

The last individual to address the implication of AI was presented by Lauren Tilton from the University of Richmond. Tilton argued that "widen the range of scholarship, expand research methods, shift our definition of credit." (Tilton) I would argue that Tilton is seeing that the profession needs a change. We need to embrace fast-growing technology such as AI and be able to shift our scholarship, research methods, and even our credit so we are not behind in our profession. It also provides new opportunities for our way of teaching and research. For example, Ewing and other authors argue that higher education needs to provide and improve opportunities for instructors and students to apply critical and creative thinking to understand and take advantage of their potential in AI while minimizing the potential for harmful effects. (Ewing et a. 2023)

The implications of AI for teaching and research are fluid throughout the academic world. I would argue that we are not doing enough to implement AI in research efforts to preserve and build databases for years to come. However, we must be careful and responsible when utilizing AI in teaching. The traditional way of teaching may need a change in our we interpret scholarship. However, we would embrace AI and have a balance between utilizing it to our benefit and creating responsible ways of utilizing it.