The Arrival Fallacy: Collaborative Research

Relationships in the Digital Humanities

image courtesy of flickr user azrasta https://www.flickr.com/photos/azrasta/5088254388/in/photostream/lightbox/

Alix KeenerDigital Scholarship Librarian, University of Michigan LibraryMay 28, 2015@alix_rae

Background

2

“The click-bait question, as posed, had a foregone conclusion — but there’s much to recommend in the report, even if it fails to define a “DH center” in any clear way, makes an unwarranted assumption that “DH academics” and librarians exist in mutually-exclusive categories, and bases too much of its understanding of faculty and researcher perceptions on the inadequate sample of some conference-going and a couple of focus groups (however carefully convened and accurately reported).”

-Bethany Nowviskie, “asking for it”

Public domain image from Library of Congress http://scholarlyoa.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/library-acquisitions.jpg

3

“But the language used throughout the report sets up an unnecessary and unhelpful ‘us/them,’ differentiating between ‘DH academics’ and ‘librarians.’”

-Dot Porter, “What if we do, in fact, know best?: A Response to the OCLC Report on DH and Research Libraries,” dh+lib

Public domain image from Library of Congress http://scholarlyoa.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/library-acquisitions.jpg

4

Academic libraries are becoming inextricably linked with digital humanities research on their respective campuses. That means that new collaborative relationships are emerging between individuals on those campuses. However, the nature of these relationships may produce tension, as the nature of being an equal collaborator may not fit into the role of “traditional” librarianship (Vandegrift & Varner 2013).

Vandegrift, Micah, and Stewart Varner. 2013. Evolving in common: Creating mutually supportive relationships between libraries and the digital humanities. Journal of Library Administration 53 (1): 67.

5

Context: Research Questions

1. What are the unique needs of digital humanities scholars in terms of research support?2. What do faculty and academic librarians expect of each other in the realm of digital scholarship?

a. in terms of physical space, technology, and collections, and they ways in which each are used?

3. For librarians whose work is related to digital scholarship, is collaborating on research with scholars, faculty, or students more important, or is providing “service(s)”—the more traditional support role of librarians?

b. Are there common underlying tensions in librarian-scholar relationships, such as that of service vs. servitude?

6

The Study

❖ Conducted in March-April 2014❖ Participants from seven CIC schools❖ Individual phone and Skype interviews❖ Two interview protocols: one for librarians and

one for faculty➢ Librarians: how are you engaging faculty? How do you

define DH? Is it part of your library’s strategic plan?➢ Faculty: How do you define DH? What expertise is

needed for your work? What do you expect of the library?

7

Context: Demographics

❖ 11 participants total❖ 5 faculty❖ 4 librarians❖ 2 postdoctoral researchers, positioned in the library and thus

included in the “library” group❖ The faculty members held appointments in the following

academic departments: English, History, Rhetoric, Philosophy, and Classics, as well as an additional appointment in the museum.

❖ Of the 11 participants, there were four pairs, leaving one faculty member and the two library-affiliated postdocs as “single” participants.

8

Findings

I) the best model for engaging DH scholars II) what domain expertise is needed III) the areas in which faculty and librarians agree IV) the areas in which they disagreeV) where the two groups have a perceptual disconnect.

9

Findings

❖ Precarious inclusiveness of DH:❖ “One of the sites of [stress] in the digital

humanities has been the inclusion of those alternative academics without faculty jobs.” (Rockwell 2013)

Rockwell, Geoffrey. 2013. "Inclusion in the Digital Humanities." In Defining Digital Humanities: A Reader, ed. Melissa M. Terras, Julianne Nyhan, and Edward Vanhoutte. 249-253. Farnham, Surrey, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing. 10

“We’ve held a reading seminar and it’s been held at the humanities institute on campus. Most of the research reading seminars tend to attract almost exclusively professors and graduate students. However, the DH reading seminar has attracted many, many librarians and technologists, sometimes more so than professors and grad students. That’s been great, but I think it’s raised some unwritten hierarchies at the university. My impression is the more librarians and technologists come, the fewer faculty and graduate students come. They arrive… and see there aren’t people from their immediate circle of colleagues. The librarians… ask some different questions. There’s been a real challenge in working across the boundaries of training and perspective in one group.”

11

Findings

V) where the two groups have a perceptual disconnect.

12

13

The “feminized” nature of the library profession, and the interplay between gender and service versus scholarship, should also be taken into account

Shirazi, Roxanne. 2014. “Reproducing the Academy: Librarians and the Question of Service in the Digital Humanities.” http://roxanneshirazi.com/2014/07/15/reproducing-the-academy-librarians-and-the-question-of-service-in-the-digital-humanities/.

14

“The library [is] this amazing place, this building with people in it, a central location

on campus, it has lots of books in it… what an amazing place to situate the exploration of

what’s good about the digital, what does the digital not do?”

15

Thank you.

image courtesy of flickr user azrasta https://www.flickr.com/photos/azrasta/5088254388/in/photostream/lightbox/

(paper to appear in Digital Humanities Quarterly)

Alix Keeneralixkee@umich.edu

@alix_rae