Would you buy a product to support digital humanities?

I'm launching an experiment, and I'd love for you to be involved. My PhD funding has just run out and I've been given a final £350 tuition bill during what's known as my 'writing up' period. In my search for solutions to cover this cost, I've found dozens of small grants that will pay for me to buy train tickets or hotel stays for research trips or conferences. I've found dozens more that will let me buy train tickets or hotel stays for others to come to a conference I'd organize. I can even get money to buy equipment for my research projects. But no one will give me money to pay my rather modest fees.

So I've decided to be creative. Crowdfunding has become rather trendy lately. Sites such as Kickstarter are even being taught as part of digital humanities courses, suggesting those of us in the field need to get out there and convince the public to part with some money in support of the research we do. Shawn Graham at Carleton University is now using this idea to raise money for an Undergraduate Scholarship in digital history, with funds to be matched by his university if he meets a certain threshold, and I wish him the best with what I consider a great initiative. But I know the marketplace can only handle so many campaigns that take the same form. So I've decided to go another route and ask: would you buy a product if you knew the procedes went to support digital humanities? Or more specifically: helped to pay my tuition fees?

So I've teamed up with Cafepress, and designed some digital humanities schwag to tempt you into my experiment. I've focused my product line on three key areas for the digital humanities:

1. Bags and Electronics - Your electronics never looked so digital humanities
2. Baby Clothes - Your baby makes digital humanities look good
3. Mugs and Water Bottles - Support digital humanities while you drink

All of my profits will go directly towards my tuition fees. And in the interest of this experiment, I'll report back on progress at the end of 2013 when these limited edition products will disappear FOREVER! Are baby clothes the key to the future of digital humanities? We'll soon find out.

I thank you most humbly for your support.
Edited note: It has been wisely pointed out to me that not everyone needs baby clothes or more 'stuff'. If you'd like to contribute directly, I've set up a link through Paypal where you can do so. Thanks again.

Voluntary Article Processing Charges for Scholarly Journals

The Article Processing Charge (APC) has started to rear its ugly head in many academic fields and it's threatening to spread wider, particularly in Britain as the government moves towards mandated open access publishing of research. This move means that publishers will lose out on subscription revenue and have instead turned towards APCs to compensate for that lost revenue. The idea here is that the author pays an APC (which could be anything from a few pounds to tens of thousands depending on the journal) and the publisher agrees to provide open access to the article.

The model isn't perfect, but it is realistic for many publishers, provided that no one is turned away if they cannot afford to pay. It turns out at least one not-for-profit journal has been able to adopt just such an idea that protects those vulnerable, while raising funds at the same time. The Journal for Open Research Software, run by the Software Sustainability Institute (of which I am a fellow - though I am not affiliated with the journal) offers a voluntary APC:

If your paper is accepted for publication, you will be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee of £25 to cover publications costs...You will be able to pay any amount from nothing to full charge, as we recognise that not all authors have access to funding, and we do not want fees to prevent the publication of worthy work. The editor and peer reviewers of the journal will not know what amount (if any) you have paid, and this will in no way influence whether your article is published or not.

I'm not sure how well this policy has worked for the Journal, but I have to say I'm incredibly enthusiastic about it for a few reasons. Firstly, it acknowledges openly that publishing - even open access publishing - DOES cost money. That money needs to come from somewhere, and APCs, like 'em or hate 'em, are one such solution. Secondly, it acknowledges that not everyone has a research budget - students, emeritus scholars, independent scholars - and that these people should not be squeezed out of the system of research publishing because of their career status. And thirdly, it's a creative solution that's taking on the challenge of raising money for publishing that thinks a little outside the box.

We're all going through changes in terms of publishing and academic funding. I for one am pleased to come across examples such as this that are facing those changes with optimism and ingenuity.

Is Digital Humanities a Field of Research?

If you are a Canadian graduate student, the answer is currently: no.

At least according to SSHRC, the Canadian national research funding body. Canadian graduate students applying to fund their studies must choose one of five “multidisciplinary selection committees” to review their proposal. These committees are designed to ensure that someone with an expertise in your field – broadly construed – will be able to critique it fairly. Unfortunately, digital humanities does not appear in the list and SSHRC’s official suggestion is that students choose as best they can from the choices available.

1. Fine arts, literature (all types)
2. Classical archaeology, classics, classical and dead languages, history, mediaeval studies, philosophy, religious studies
3. Anthropology, archaeology (except classical archaeology), archival science, communications and media studies, criminology, demography, folklore, geography, library and information science, sociology, urban and regional studies, environmental studies
4. Education, linguistics, psychology, social work
5. Economics, industrial relations, law, management, business, administrative studies, political science

This puts Digital Humanities students at a distinct disadvantage, as their work will only be deemed valuable if it contributes to history, literature, geography, or some other traditional research discipline, and cannot be judged on its own merits.

Please join me in telling SSHRC that Digital Humanities is an academic discipline, and one that deserves recognition within the SSHRC infrastructure. I have sent the following letter asking for a review of their current practice. If you support the measure, please send a brief, polite message to Roxanne Dompierre, SSHRC Program Officer (roxanne.dompierre@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca), outlining your support or let SSHRC know on Twitter (@SSHRC_CRSH).

Thank you very much

Adam Crymble

***

Ms. R. Dompierre

SSHRC Program Officer

RE: The inclusion of “Digital Humanities” as a category for graduate study

Dear Ms. Dompierre,

I respectfully submit a request to the SSHRC Doctoral Committee to add “Digital Humanities” as a category in one of your multidisciplinary selection committees.

Digital Humanities is a vibrant worldwide community of multidisciplinary scholars with PhD and MA programs in Canada, the US and Europe. This is a rapidly expanding field with more international involvement every year. It is a community that is researching and working within and beyond academia, with traditional peer-reviewed research, community outreach, and government partnerships. Research ranges widely from user studies, to humanities data mining, to digital tool construction.

The value of digital humanities research is clearly recognized within Canada. Recent SSHRC digital humanities funding initiatives for faculty include “Image, text, sound and technology” and “Knowledge Syntheses on the Digital Economy” (2010), as well as “Digging Into Data”, which was jointly funded by SSHRC, the NEH and AHRC. Despite ample funding at the faculty level, funding opportunities for students have not yet caught up with this trend.

The current advice from SSHRC for students studying within this emerging field is that they should apply to an evaluation committee with a traditional discipline that touches on the themes of their research. Working in a multidisciplinary field such as digital humanities, applicants are put at a distinct disadvantage when competing for funding against scholars doing traditional research within a single field. This is particularly the case when the judging criteria asks evaluators to assess how the research will impact that traditional discipline, something which may not be the explicit aim of the multidisciplinary research.

I urge SSHRC to make a positive step towards removing the ambiguity for digital humanists and encouraging the participation of new scholars in this developing research area by explicitly adding “Digital Humanities” to one of the multidisciplinary selection committees.

Thank you for your consideration.

Adam Crymble

SSHRC Applicant

PhD Candidate, King’s College London