Lately, quite a few people have been asking some version of the question, “What is the relationship between digital pedagogy and DH?” The most recent example that comes to mind is Alex Reid’s post “The Digital Humanities Divide.” There Reid notes that, even though some rhetoric and composition specialists have been studying how writing and writing pedagogy have evolved in the wake of digital technology since the PC arrived on the scene nearly 30 years ago, one isn’t likely to find computers and composition studies in DH journals or at DH conferences. In addition, although the panel, “Where’s the Pedagogy in Digital Pedagogy?,” that a couple of my colleagues organized for the MLA this year was included in lists of the conference’s DH sessions, I think a number of people might argue that digital pedagogy isn’t *really* DH at all. I’ve certainly seen at least one or two grant descriptions that specifically exclude “primarily pedagogical” applications from the kinds of projects that might be eligible for funding. This last may be due more to a perception that there are separate sources of funding for pedagogical projects, rather than a perception that DPed is not DH, but it has contributed to my own uncertainty regarding how the two are related.
From the way some of the other proposals are shaping up, I think we might use some of our time at THATCamp SE to reframe productively this discussion by considering the question, “Can we put DH into our DPed?” I know that a number of us are pushing the boundaries of assignment design in order to engage students in what Bruno Latour might call “compositionism,” and what I tend to think of as doing things *with* objects of study or creating our own new objects of study, alongside the more traditional (at least in the lit classroom) activity of writing *about* literature. In my own classes, I’ve had my students use Media Wiki to create a collaborative repository of community knowledge. I’ve also worked closely with a couple of colleagues to design an assignment where students used a digital learning platform that I helped build to create digital critical editions of short texts. Some of my other colleagues have given their students assignments that involved creating aesthetic or useful objects, both real and digital, and writing about them. Might we argue that DPed is related to, even if it doesn’t exactly fall under the umbrella of DH because it involves students in using digital technologies to build things?
I don’t know, but I think the question could lead to a useful, not to mention exciting, exchange of ideas. The many questions we could ask and discuss include the following: Should digital humanists be concerned with ensuring the resources they create are accessible to the average student at Small State U as well as fortunate scholars working at elite institutions? What pedagogical and ethical issues do we confront when we think about involving students in the work that goes on at DH centers and on DH projects? As Roger has asked, what place, if any, should building have in a classroom centered around humanistic inquiry? Finally, and this is my own particular hobby-horse, to what extent should intellectual property controls be relaxed to accommodate innovative educational uses of pre-existing work? In addition to Roger’s proposed session, I also think this topic complements and might be folded into or combined with the sessions that Pete, Miriam, and Michael have proposed.
