Measuring Impact of Digital Repositories

Simon Tanner will offer a sneak peek at the Balanced Value Impact Model 2.0 (BVI Model). Tanner will introduce the Digital Humanities at King’s College London, and link this to his open and collaborative research practices to tell the story of the intellectual development of the BVI Model. He will detail the BVI Model 2.0 to highlight what’s new and how it works. Tanner will relate these changes to his collaboration with Europeana to develop their Impact Playbook and look to the future of that tool.

The session will include time for questions and discussion.

—

Simon Tanner is Professor of Digital Cultural Heritage in the Department of Digital Humanities at King’s College London. He is a Digital Humanities scholar with a wide-ranging interest in cross-disciplinary thinking and collaborative approaches that reflect a fascination with interactions between memory organization collections (libraries, museum, archives, media and publishing) and the digital domain.

As an information professional, consultant, digitization expert and academic he works with major cultural institutions across the world to assist them in transforming their impact, collections and online presence. He has consulted for or managed over 500 digital projects, including digitization of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and has built strategy with a wide range of organizations. These include the US National Gallery of Art and many other museums and national libraries in Europe, Africa, America and the Middle East. Tanner has had work commissioned by UNESCO, the Danish government, the Arcadia Fund and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.  He founded the Digital Futures Academy that has run in the UK, Australia, South Africa and Ghana with participants from over 40 countries.

Research into image use and sales in American art museums by Simon Tanner has had a significant effect on opening up collections access and OpenGLAM in the museum sector. Tanner is a strong advocate for Open Access, open research and the digital humanities. Tanner was chair of the Web Archiving sub-committee as an independent member of the UK Government-appointed Legal Deposit Advisory Panel. He is a member of the Europeana Impact Taskforce which developed the Impact Playbook based upon his Balanced Value Impact Model. He is part of the AHRC funded Academic Book of the Future research team.

The post Measuring Impact of Digital Repositories – Simon Tanner appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

In February of 2018, MITH spent dedicated time talking about sustainability of digital projects with a team from the University of Pittsburgh’s Visual Media Workshop (VMW) as part of a focused user testing session for The Socio-Technical Sustainability Roadmap. The research project that produced the Roadmap was led by Alison Langmead, with Project Managers Aisling Quigley (2016-17) and Chelsea Gunn (2017-18). The final goal of that project was to create a digital sustainability roadmap for developers and curators of digital projects to follow. The work was initially based on what the project team discovered during its NEH-funded project, “Sustaining MedArt.” In this blog post, which is a late entry in MITH’s Digital Stewardship Series from 2016, I’m going to talk a bit about what I discovered during the process of using the roadmap for one of MITH’s projects, how I synthesized our discoveries in the form of a concrete tool for MITH to utilize the roadmap afterward, and how this has changed some of my conceptions about digital sustainability practices.

The process of walking a future digital project through the roadmap can be completed either in a full eight-hour day session, or two four-hour sessions. During  the process, you work through three sections, each with different modules pertaining to aspects of a project’s future sustainability prospects. We chose the latter, with each attending member focusing on a different MITH project they were developing or working on. I opted to use a project for which we were awaiting funding at the time, Unlocking the Airwaves: Revitalizing an Early Public and Educational Radio Collection. Although significant time and effort went into developing the grant proposal for Airwaves, which included a section on sustainability, the Roadmap process cemented how much more concretely we could have been thinking through these issues, and how better planning for those components from the start would lead to better management of the project. In fact, one finding that Langmead and her team had discovered as they developed and tested the roadmap, is that thinking through the project management aspects of a digital project was a necessary first component to even being able to effectively get through the remaining sections of roadmap exercises. So as they went along, they added several elements and exercises to Sections A and B which force users to pinpoint the structural elements of their project. These include elements such as access points, deliverables, workflows, intellectual goals, data flow, and anticipated digital lifespan. This kind of work is essentially an extension of a project charter, which often includes a lot of these same basic concepts. In fact, Module B1 of the roadmap encourages users to create or reference existing charters, and stresses that using the roadmap in conjunction with a charter enhances the usefulness of both tools.

The lifespan questions in Section A were eye-opening, because although the need to ask them seems obvious – How long do you want your project to last? Why have you chosen this lifespan? – I think we as stewards of digital information feel compelled to predict unrealistically long lifespans, which Langmead and her collaborators define as “BookTime:”

“BookTime” is a term we have coined to denote a project lifespan equivalent to, “As long as a paper-based codex would last in the controlled, professional conditions of a library.” It may often be assumed that this is coterminous with “Forever,” but that belief relies heavily on a number of latent expectations about the nature of libraries, the inherent affordances of paper and glue, and other infrastructural dependencies.

The module asks us to acknowledge that not every digital project can realistically span decades into the future, and that sometimes this honesty is better for both the project and your team. The module also leverages concepts such as ‘graceful degradation,’ and ‘Bloom-and-Fade,’ both of which, in moments of dark humor, felt similar to planning for a project’s  hospice care or estate. “It’s okay, everything dies, let’s just be open in talking about it and how we’ll get through it together.” Humor aside, it was a useful exercise for me to acknowledge that time, change, and entropy will stand in the way of a project achieving BookTime, and that that IS, in fact, okay.

The other two sections and exercises that I felt were the most useful and that provided the core, structural materials on which to base a sustainability plan were Sustainability Priorities (Section A4) and Technological Infrastructure (Sections B2 and B3). In the former, we were asked to list out the core structural components of a project “without which your project simply would not be your project,” and to list them in order of priority. This could include things such as, but not limited to, authority records, curated access points, facets, geo-spatial data, or digitized materials. We were also asked to define the communities that each property served. In the latter, we were asked to list out every single technological component of the project, from Google Drive, to Trello, to IIIF servers, to the university’s digital repository, define the function(s) of each, and assign project team members that are responsible for each. Then we were asked to realistically assess how long each technology was guaranteed to be funded, as well as “how the duration of the funding for members of your project team compares with the duration of the funding for technologies they maintain, keeping in mind that funding discrepancies may require special considerations and/or contingency plans to ensure uninterrupted attention.” Again, at first glance, much of this may seem very logical and obvious, but actually doing these exercises is illuminating (and sometimes sobering).

After Sections A and B force you to have a reckoning with the deep dark potential (good and bad) of your project, Section C focuses on applying the the National Digital Stewardship Alliance (NDSA)’s Levels of Preservation to your identified structural components. The Levels of Preservation are a set of recommendations that align the entire the digital preservation spectrum in six core areas: Access, Backing up Work, Permissions, Metadata, File Formats, and Data Integrity. For each of these areas, the roadmap defines four ‘levels’ of commitment to each of these areas, and what each of those levels really mean. For example, Level 1 for Data Integrity involves designating which project members have credentials for certain accounts and services, and who has read/write/move/delete authorization. Levels 2-3 requires the ability to repair data and create fixity information for stable files, and Level 4 specifies the checking of that fixity data specifically in response to specific events or activities. After defining your current and anticipated levels in each area, you’re asked to define concrete actions your team would need to undertake in order to achieve your desired level. Once again, these exercises encourage expectation management, with comments like “Please note! Reaching Level 4 sustainability practices is not the goal. Your work here is to balance what your project needs with the resources (both in terms of technology and staff) that you have.” It also notes that it is “absolutely okay” to decide that your project will choose Level 0 for any one of these areas, choosing consciously not to engage with that area, using the resources you have to focus on what your team wants to prioritize.

Module A3 in written form

After the two four-hour meetings, my brain was full and I was full of new ideas about my project that probably should have already occurred to me, but that only coalesced in any meaningful way by walking through the roadmap process. I’ve also been around long enough to know that the giddy enthusiasm that comes after a meeting like this can die on the vine if those ideas aren’t transformed into actionable items and documented somewhere. I did have the printed roadmap modules and exercises with my written answers on them, and Langmead and her team were clear that if we wanted to merely file (or scan) those written documents and stop there, that was fine. But written in the final module of the roadmap is the recommendation that after its completion, “make sure that you store the documentation for this, and all other, STSR modules in one of your reliable sites of project documentation.” So after several months of contemplation, I finally determined that MITH’s most reliable current site of project documentation is Airtable, which we’ve been using more and more to track aspects of different projects.

Airtable is an online relational database application that looks and functions like a spreadsheet in its default ‘Grid’ UI, but which also has more robust relational functions allowing you to meaningfully connect data between different tables/worksheets. As opposed to merely entering my answers to each module/exercise, I opted to begin by actually moving references and links to all the roadmap’s sections and modules into two tables in Airtable, so that the full text of each module was easily at hand for reference. I also included base, table, and

column descriptions at all levels (this would be the rough equivalent of Excel comments), which explain how information should be entered or that gave sample entries. The base description also provides an overview to this whole exercise, and gives attribution to the project in the format requested by Langmead and her team.

There are descriptions throughout with details on how to utilize each table or field. Click on the ‘i’ Info button to display them.

There were actual spreadsheets provided by the Roadmap’s project team for certain exercises, and I uploaded those as new tables in Airtable, and modified them as needed to connect/link with other tables. For example, the Technological Infrastructure table (which includes all the various technologies used by your project), the ‘Project Member Responsible’ column is linked to the Project Team table. So after you’ve entered the data for each, you can go back to the Project Team table and see all the tech components each member is responsible for, rolled up in a linked record field. There’s also a reference table listing out the definitions of Levels 1-4 for each of the six NDSA areas, so when you’re deciding what to enter in the Sustainability Levels table, you can instantly reference that table and choose an appropriate level for each area. After crafting the ‘template,’ I tested its usability by entering all the data from Unlocking the Airwaves that I’d written down. By doing that I realized where there were a few tweaks and bottlenecks that needed ironing out, and went back and modified the template. See below for a few more screenshots of the completed template.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

So now we’ve got the roadmap data for Unlocking the Airwaves saved in a reliable site of project documentation. MITH team members are now encouraged (but not required) to use the template as we develop new projects, and it’s available to anyone else who’d like to request a blank duplicated copy. Dr. Langmead also provided a gentle but useful reminder that there is inherent risk in picking and using any such technology for this purpose, since platforms like Airtable may not always remain available. She suggested that we include a mention along the lines of “The inclusion of Airtable in your project’s suite of technologies should be considered carefully (in line with the work done in Modules A5 and B2)” in the intro description text for the base, which we did.

In a way this was also a sense-making exercise wherein, by taking all the roadmap data and turning it into structured data, I’d not only be able to sync up all these components in my head and turn them into actionable tasks, I’d also better retain the information. Anyone who has transformed, mapped, or structured previously unstructured data knows that by doing these tasks, you become much more intimately connected to your data. But what I think really appeals to me about the roadmap process is the mindfulness aspect. It encourages participants to think beyond the theoretical concepts of sustainability and actually apply them, write them down, look at them, consider their implications, and be honest about project expectations as aligned with available resources. In a world of overtapped resources and academic and bureaucratic hurdles, that’s an incredibly valuable skill to have.

The post Reckoning with Digital Projects: MITH Makes a Roadmap appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

Eligible graduate students must be enrolled in an appropriate terminal degree program (Ph.D. or M.F.A) at the University of Maryland and must agree not to accept any other form of financial support from the University or other fellowships of $2,000 or more during the term for which this fellowship is awarded. Winnemore Fellows are provided  a stipend of $9,929 and a $1,509 contribution toward health insurance fees. Fellows are also provided with work space at MITH, consultation with MITH staff about their project, and technical support (including server space) where applicable.

Fellows are expected to be in-residence throughout the duration of their fellowship.  They are encouraged to attend MITH events such as Digital Dialogues, contribute to the intellectual community of MITH, share their work on the MITH blog, participate in professional development opportunities, and be engaged with the digital humanities more broadly.

Interested applicants should submit:

• a cover letter that includes your name, program/department, college, email, phone, title of dissertation, and advisor’s name, phone, and email. The cover letter should also include the date that you completed coursework and any other degree requirements, the date that you passed your prospectus/proposal examination, the date you advanced to candidacy, and the proposed date for your dissertation defense. All dates should include month and year;
• a current short CV;
• a 250-word abstract written for a general audience including your name and the title of your dissertation or project.
• the proposal itself, which should be no longer than three pages and which should specifically address the following points:
  • the project that you will work on if awarded the fellowship;
  • how the use of advanced technology would help achieve your research goals and contribute to the intellectual outcome
  • a statement of work completed to date;
  • a detailed timetable or work plan for duration of the fellowship including the projected date of completion.
• two confidential letters of recommendation, including one from your dissertation director that outlines how the applicant’s advisor will support the student’s effort for the duration of the fellowship in addition to the merit of the applicant.

A committee composed of digital humanities faculty and staff will review applications. Proposals should specify how a Winnemore Fellowship would be crucial to the dissertation or equivalent project’s development. The committee will place emphasis on projects that center the perspectives of underrepresented or oppressed groups and such proposals are highly encouraged. Also encouraged are projects addressing complex ethical issues inherent to engagement with new media, cultural heritage data, and the digital humanities.

We encourage applicants to consult with MITH regarding their applications. All application materials should be sent in PDF format to Purdom Lindblad, by 11:59 PM Friday, November 2, 2018. Announcement of the Winnemore Fellow will be made by Monday, November 19, 2018.

The post 2019 Winnemore Dissertation Fellowship Call for Applications appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

The post Laurie Allen Digital Dialogue appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

The symposium aims to gather a diverse group of voices who are working in these areas to foster dialogue and connections. Sessions will focus on: supporting digital work by students, pedagogy, social justice, and facilitating regional collaboration. Conversations between small groups from four institutions (MITH, Scholars’ Lab, Washington & Lee, and the University of Richmond) suggested a shared desire for greater collaboration and exchange. The aspiration for this meeting is to get people together to share strategies, concerns, as well as seed ideas for future collaborations with the ultimate goal of fostering a larger network of collaborators across the Virginia, D.C., Maryland region.

The Regional DH Symposium website may be found at http://symposium.scholarslab.org/ and the schedule at: http://symposium.scholarslab.org/schedule/. Events will take place on Friday, March 9, 2018, from 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM.

Logistics information is located at http://symposium.scholarslab.org/logistics/

Please contact Purdom Lindblad (mith@umd.edu) with any questions. If you are interested in participating or in sharing your work on issues of social justice or pedagogy (or both!), please fill out the form at https://goo.gl/forms/riXessSSyuk9192m2

A limited number of bursaries up to $75 may be available to support travel. Apply for funding or to present by March 1, 2018. We will continue taking expressions of interest in attending until 11 PM Wednesday, March 7, 2018.

The post Inviting UMD Participants to a Regional DH Symposium, March 9, 2018 appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

Led by the Digital Library Federation, Endangered Data Week, February 26 – March 2, is an international, collaborative effort, coordinated across campuses, nonprofits, libraries, citizen science initiatives, and cultural heritage institutions, to shed light on public datasets that are in danger of being deleted, repressed, mishandled, or lost. The goals of Endangered Data Week are to promote care for endangered collections by publicizing the availability of datasets; increasing critical engagement with them, including through visualization and analysis; and by encouraging political activism for open data policies and the fostering of data skills through workshops on curation, documentation and discovery, improved access, and preservation.

2018 Endangered Data Week Events

Interdisciplinary Panel & Practitioner Lightning Talks

February 26, 1 – 4 PM
Special Events Room, McKeldin Library

This panel of diverse disciplinary representatives invites participants to discuss the definitions of data, practices of data collection, ethical considerations and threats against data. Viewed in concert with each other, these domain perspectives will aid us in understanding the complex environment of research data preservation and the numerous dangers that can threaten the long-term usability, sustainability, and discoverability of this information. This panel will include:

• Ricardo Punzalan, UMD iSchool (moderator)
• Angus Murphy, UMD Department of Plant Science & Landscape Architecture
• Joanne Archer, UMD Special Collections and University Archives
• Jennifer Serventi, National Endowment for the Humanities
• Catherine Knight Steele, UMD Department of Communication and Director of the African American History, Culture, and Digital Humanities

To supplement our expert panel, a number of practitioners from around the university and surrounding community will provide quick-fire presentations on their current data practices, describing the lived experience of professionals operating in a world of endangered data. Presenters will include:

• Matthew Miller, UMD Roshan Institute (moderator)
• Kelley O’Neal, UMD Libraries
• Maddie Clybourn, Prince George’s County Memorial Public Library System
• Jessica Lu, Post-Doc with African American History, Culture, and Digital Humanities
• Amy Wickner, UMD Special Collections and University Archives

Data Preservation Workshop

February 28, 10 AM – 12 Noon
Rm 6107, McKeldin Library

This hands-on session will seek to address a topic that has important impacts for both individual researchers and the larger endangered data landscape: personal data preservation. This workshop will feature two segments: first, an overview of data preservation topics will familiarize participants with the core practices of data stewardship in individual practices and within the University community. Second, a hands-on tool demonstration will give participants a chance to try their hand at tools that facilitate self-guided archiving practices.

This will be a tech heavy course, please bring a personal computer.

Endangered Data Week Happy Hour

March 2, 4 PM
MilkBoy ArtHouse, 7416 Baltimore Avenue, College Park

An informal closing to Endangered Data Week 2018. Continue the conversation over drinks and snacks.

An open-ended conversation on the impacts of endangered data in all its varieties and forms. From personal data to tax-funded public research data, how will uncertain futures for data impact us? As individuals? As institutions? As nations?

Curious? Have ideas? Have questions? Bring them all and join in the conversation.

The post Endangered Data Week, February 26 – March 2, 2018 appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

Winter Term 2018: Jan 2 – 22 (click here to enroll)
In-class meeting: Tuesdays / Thursdays 1 – 4:30 PM in 0301A Hornbake (MITH offices)
Online or Team Time: Mondays / Wednesdays unless indicated by *

Instructors:

Purdom Lindblad
Stephanie Sapienza
Ed Summers
Raff Viglianti

This course will frame and support collaboration on digital research with emphasis on introducing digital humanities workflows and research practices. The goal is to provide ‘small bites’ of each stage of digital work, from a survey of common theoretical and practical methodologies, to learning about project management, writing literature reviews and grant applications. By the end of the course, you will have the ability to scope, design, pitch, and participate in a digital project.

For students who are part of the DSAH or are seeking a MITH Internship, this course will provide a strong foundation from which to approach the practicum requirement.

Module 1: Survey of common DH Methodologies

Tuesday January 2 (in-class meeting)
*Wednesday January 3 is an in-class meeting

This module will introduce common methodologies in the Digital Humanities, such as archives, text encoding, and spatial humanities. We will survey theoretical papers, practical examples, and common critiques to DH.

Module 2: Project Management Part I (DH Workflows)

Thursday, January 4 (in-class meeting)
Monday, January 8 (online/team time)
Tuesday, January 9 (in-class meeting)

This module will introduce the fundamentals of digital project management and establishing your project’s workflow, and methods for collaboration. We will discuss how to structure your project data, create a team charter, and use selected project management tools. Project proposals resulting from work in this module will articulate the purpose and approach of your project, while the team charter states how things such as shared credit will work across the project’s lifecycle.

Module 3: Project Management Part II (Version Control)

Wednesday, January 10 (online/team time)

Digital work relies on collaboration and version control. Version control enables you to keep track of your many revisions, the various contributions to the project by team members, and repair mistakes. This module will introduce Git and GitHub as well as best practices for collaborating on a shared digital project.

Module 4: Writing DH Literature Reviews and Environmental Scans

Thursday, January 11 (in-class meeting)

DH research typically incorporates or creates digital resources; how should those be discussed and integrated into literature reviews for academic writing? In this module we will look at relevant examples, including journals focusing on the review of digital resources such as Scholarly Editing and American Quarterly. You will also work on your own DH literature review for your final project.

Module 5: Prototyping + Assessment

Tuesday, January 16 (in-class meeting)
Wednesday, January 17 (online/team time)

One challenge working with digital approaches is to anticipate the look and feel of the finished project. We will draw from design concepts and practices to produce many possible versions of a digital project, exposing the constraints and opportunities of each version. In this module, your team will produce paper and digital prototypes.

Module 6: Grants, Budgeting, Professional & Social Networking

Thursday,  January 18 (in-class meeting)
*Monday January 22 is an in-class meeting, presentations

In this module we’ll discuss how to talk about and persuade others to buy into your project by workshopping a quick elevator pitch, a conference presentation, and a grant proposal. We will cover how to think through the financial aspects of your project and create a project budget. Finally, we will discuss the social and political aspects of working within digital humanities communities of practice. We will cover alternative academic careers, building social networks, and modes of research.

The post MITH Winter Term Course: Anatomy of DH Research appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

The post Alexandrina Agloro Digital Dialogue appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

Thursday November 2, 2017, 1:30 – 4:30pm

MITH Conference Room
0301 Hornbake Library North
College Park, MD 20742

Please note that this event is now FULL. If you’d like to be placed on a waiting list, please email mith@umd.edu. 

Understanding the contents of institutional and digital collections and their connections to other related material can be daunting. Increasingly researchers, institutions and a broader public can work together, using crowdsourcing and linked open to meaningfully enrich and connect collections.

This panel and workshop, planned in conjunction with the 2017 Radio Preservation Task Force Conference, will focus on innovative workflows for crowdsourcing linked data to build a web of data that can bridge collective heritage. Both researchers interested in learning to access more information about radio collections and collection managers will benefit from this cross-disciplinary event.

Panelists will discuss their work and research in crowdsourcing or linked open data for radio collections. Subsequently, a two-hour workshop will introduce the core principles behind the data structure and framework for Wikidata, and demonstrate how it can be used to connect archival radio collections to a broader web-based community of knowledge.

Moderator: Stephanie Sapienza (​Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities)

Panelists:

Alex Stinson (Wikimedia Foundation) will highlight how Wikidata is being used by diverse cultural heritage organizations around the world, including by the Archive of the Finnish Public Radio organization (Yle), the Social Network of Archival Collections (SNAC), and by other heritage organizations as diverse as the Metropolitan Museum and university libraries working to make their collections better connected with the world of linked open data through Wikidata.  

Casey Davis Kaufman and Karen Cariani (WGBH Boston/American Archive for Public Broadcasting) will showcase the their IMLS-funded crowdsourcing project FIX IT, an online game that allows members of the public to help AAPB professional archivists improve the searchability and accessibility of more than 40,000 hours of digitized, historic public media content.

Eric Hoyt (University of Wisconsin-Madison) will reflect on his work developing the Media History Digital Library’s search platform, Lantern, and data mining application, Arclight. He will also discuss methods that users can use to translate their data into new queries and interpret and share the results.

Effie Kapsalis (Smithsonian Institution Archives): will share the Smithsonian Institution Archives’ (SIA) methods for enriching and sharing their collections through crowdsourcing, with a particular focus on the institutional challenges of implementing such projects. Since 2005, SIA experimented with publishing minimum metadata about little-known women in the history of science, and recruiting constituents on various platforms (blogs, institutional websites, Flickr Commons, Wikipedia, Smithsonian Transcription Center) to fill in the ‘unknowns.’ These experiments have led to rich collections records on the Smithsonian’s websites, complete Wikipedia articles, and improved digital resources on female scientists for the public. Today SIA is leading a pan-Smithsonian pilot to make a large contribution to Wikidata.

Workshop

In the workshop, we will provide a basic introduction to Wikidata and then use Wikidata to develop more robust context for an archival radio collection. We will connect Wikidata with authority records pulled from descriptive metadata about the National Association of Educational Broadcasters (NAEB) collection at the University of Maryland/American Archive of Public Broadcasting. We will use that linked data to demonstrate visualizations and other potential applications of Wikidata for research, including unearthing other authority records and digital web resources about people, places, and other entities, showing network relationships between various metadata items, and asking questions to better understand the context of the collection.

About Wikidata

A sister project of Wikipedia, Wikidata is a human and machine readable platform that allows for crowdsourcing to enrich metadata and access linked open data content from free and open vocabularies and data projects, such as the Getty vocabularies, the Social Network of Archival Content (SNAC), and others. Wikidata maintains many of the dynamics of the widely popular encyclopedia: it’s free and open, editorial decisions are made by the community participating in the project, and the content is multilingual, supporting hundreds of languages.

The post MITH Panel/Workshop Nov 2 on Linked Data & Crowdsourcing for Radio Collections! appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

The post DocNow and Rhizome receive IMLS National Forum grant! appeared first on Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.