<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Grockwell on Journal of Digital Humanities</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/grockwell/</link><description>Recent content in Grockwell on Journal of Digital Humanities</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/grockwell/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Short Guide To Evaluation Of Digital Work</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-4/short-guide-to-evaluation-of-digital-work-by-geoffrey-rockwell/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-4/short-guide-to-evaluation-of-digital-work-by-geoffrey-rockwell/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;This short guide gathers a collection of questions evaluators can ask about a project, a check list of what to look for in a project, and some ideas about how to find experts in one place. This assumes that evaluators who are assessing digital work for promotion and tenure are:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;new to the review of digital scholarly work and therefore could use a framework of questions to start with;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;prepared to review the materials submitted by a candidate in the form it was meant to be accessed but need ideas of what to look for; and&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;will also ask for expert reviews from others and therefore need suggestions on where to look for relevant expertise.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is an annotated expansion of &lt;a href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/files/EvalMediaCheckList.2.pdf" title="Geoffrey Rockwell, 'Evaluating Digital Work in the Humanities for Tenure and Promotion Checklist'"&gt;Evaluating Digital Work&lt;/a&gt; (PDF) which was prepared as a one page checklist.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Text Mining Tools in the Humanities: An Analysis Framework</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/text-mining-tools-in-the-humanities-an-analysis-framework/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/text-mining-tools-in-the-humanities-an-analysis-framework/</guid><description>&lt;h3 id="poster"&gt;Poster&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;iframe class="gde-frame" scrolling="no" src="https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournalofdigitalhumanities.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F12%2FTextMiningToolAnalysisFramework-DH2013-DRAFT3.pdf&amp;amp;hl=en_US&amp;amp;embedded=true" style="width:100%; height:500px; border: none;"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/TextMiningToolAnalysisFramework-DH2013-DRAFT3.pdf"&gt;Download (PDF, 3.56MB)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 id="abstract"&gt;Abstract&lt;sup id="fnref:1"&gt;&lt;a href="#fn:1" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref"&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The most extensive compendium of text mining tools to date includes 71 tools and summarizes each based on ten criteria.&lt;sup id="fnref:2"&gt;&lt;a href="#fn:2" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref"&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; While extensive, this listing of tools and their properties is general in its review criteria and does not offer any testing-based observations to help users assess actual usability. Humanists looking to try text analysis, visualization, and mining tools for research need better information that is relevant to their needs and reviews of tools that help them make choices. This poster presents the testing framework developed for the TAPoR 2.0 portal reviews. The poster will cover:&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Voyant Notebooks: Literate Programming and Programming Literacy</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/voyant-notebooks-literate-programming-and-programming-literacy/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/voyant-notebooks-literate-programming-and-programming-literacy/</guid><description>&lt;h3 id="poster"&gt;Poster&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;iframe class="gde-frame" scrolling="no" src="https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournalofdigitalhumanities.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F11%2FVoyant-Notebooks-Sinclair-and-Rockwell.pdf&amp;amp;hl=en_US&amp;amp;embedded=true" style="width:100%; height:500px; border: none;"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Voyant-Notebooks-Sinclair-and-Rockwell.pdf"&gt;Download (PDF, 676KB)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 id="abstract"&gt;Abstract&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some thirty years ago Donald Knuth, a computer scientist, proposed literate programming as a better way of organizing narrative and code (1984). Knuth argued that more emphasis should be placed on explaining to humans what computers are meant to do, rather than simply instructing computers what to do. Knuth was especially interested in weaving together macrostyle code snippets with prose that provided a larger narrative context, not merely functional comments of specific lines of code that are the distilled remnants of an intellectual process.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>