Search results

Public-funded research in digital humanities (DH) enhances institutional and individual research missions and contributes open data to a growing base of globally networked knowledge. The Digging into Data 3 challenge (DID3) (2014–2016) is an international, interdisciplinary and collaborative grant initiative, and the purpose of this paper is to explore skills that faculty and students brought to projects and others they acquired and shared on collaborative teams.

Rooted in the naturalistic paradigm, this qualitative case study centers on semi-structured interviews with 53 participants on 11 of the 14 DID3 projects. Documentary evidence complements empirical evidence; analysis is constructivist and grounded.

Hailing from diverse academic research institutions, centers and repositories, participants brought 20 types of discipline-based or interdisciplinary expertise to DID3 projects. But they reported acquiring or refining 27 other skills during their project work. While most are data-related, complementary programming, management and analytical skills push disciplinary expertise toward new frontiers. Project-based learning and pedagogy function symbiotically; participants therefore advocate for aligning problem-solving skills with pedagogical objectives at home institutions to prepare for public-funded DH projects. A modified content analysis juxtaposes DID3 skills with those advanced in 23 recent DH syllabi to identify commonalities and gaps.

Pedagogy has an important yet under-researched and underdeveloped role in public-funded DH research.

In Digging into Data 3 (DID3) (2014-2016), ten funders from four countries (the USA, Canada, the UK, and the Netherlands) granted $5.1 million to 14 project teams to pursue data-intensive, interdisciplinary, and international digital humanities (DH) research. The purpose of this paper is to employ the DID3 projects as a case study to explore the following research question: what roles do librarians and archivists take on in data-intensive, interdisciplinary, and international DH projects?

Participation was secured from 53 persons representing eleven projects. The study was conducted in the naturalistic paradigm. It is a qualitative case study involving snowball sampling, semi-structured interviews, and grounded analysis.

Librarians or archivists were involved officially in 3 of the 11 projects (27.3 percent). Perhaps more importantly, information professionals played vital unofficial roles in these projects, namely as consultants and liaisons and also as technical support. Information and library science (ILS) expertise helped DID3 researchers with issues such as visualization, rights management, and user testing. DID3 participants also suggested ways in which librarians and archivists might further support DH projects, concentrating on three key areas: curation, outreach, and ILS education. Finally, six directions for future research are suggested.

Much untapped potential exists for librarians and archivists to collaborate with DH scholars; a gap exists between researcher awareness and information professionals’ capacity.

Providing housing with care may seem to be integration at its best. This paper investigates the workforce implications of this form of provision with a focus on older people with high support needs.

In this chapter, we examine the unique and heightened negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic through tracing how the preexisting social conditions of exclusion and precarity in which many disabled people live, effected access to safe, affordable, and accessible housing in Canada. We then illustrate the reverberating impacts housing choices have on how people with disabilities lived, lived well, and how they faced barriers to living well during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Using an intersectional livelihoods approach, we analyzed semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 32 diverse people with disabilities, 12 key informant semi-structured interviews, as well as academic and community literature and a social media scan of key disability advocacy organizations in Canada.

Pandemic-related policies in Canada often excluded people with disabilities, either overlooking barriers to access and safety, which exacerbated the already precarious livelihoods of people with disabilities or over-emphasized the usefulness of social adaptions such as work from home. These exclusions had more profound consequences for people with disabilities from historically marginalized groups, as they often faced increased barriers to livelihoods pre-pandemic, and disability- or care-specific policies failed to consider intersectional experiences of discrimination. People with disabilities formed communities of care to meet their needs and those of their loved ones.

To achieve a responsive policy response that addresses the cascading impacts of risk and care, it is necessary for governments to engage, early and often, with people with disabilities, disability leaders and organizations in emergency planning and beyond.