Just another WordPress.com site
Similarities: As I gathered two lists of DH centers/resources/tools, one from my librarian and one from a formal survey, I found the most useful information came from digging through these websites individually. All of the tools featured in my librarian’s list were were mentioned somewhere in the documentation of an ARL respondent’s website (MONK: VOYERE: TAPOR: MALLET). The following institutions were featured in both my lists.
Institutions that both the Librarian and the ARL survey featured:
Columbia University: Center for Digital Research and Scholarship
Comments: The library catalog/ resources cannot be reached from this web page. The resources in this site are more focused towards students and faculty at Columbia. They have an impressive digital collection and project list.
Indiana Bloomington University: Indiana University Digital Library Program
Comments: The library catalog is not searchable from this site. This institution is open to cross institutional work.They have a library of digital projects and collections that are freely available. The web bibliographies and blog roles refer to the version of Information Literacy I define as traditional library knowledge regarding information construction. They are making that traditional library knowledge accessible via digital technology.
Comments: The library catalog is searchable from this site. This site has the most integrated library and Digital Humanities information I have come across. The projects listed on this site are not only advertisements for the university but they are useful interactive publications. This project list is a very good example of a new kind of publication format.
Differences: The librarian reference interview lead to a delineation of categories and content regarding DH material. Together we considered categories of DH scholarship. We considered DH tools vs. DH centers/institutions. I expressed a specific interest in Library Guides and my librarian followed up our reference interview with a library guide from UCLA: http://guides.library.ucla.edu/digitalhumanities.
The ARL survey had statistics regarding a general feeling about the state of library Digital Humanities initiatives. The ARL survey focussed on comparable categories mission statements, tools, and marketing material. The survey sought to standardize variables of Digital Humanities initiatives. The act of navigating through a number of these institutions led to the discovery that library institution support of Digital Humanities depends on an institutions definition of the meaning of DH. A standardized list of DH centers and initiatives would have to be a continually changing document.