<div style=”margin-bottom:5px”> <strong> <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/kaylablack/dh-metaphor-project-presentation” title=”DH Metaphor Project Presentation” target=”_blank”>DH Metaphor Project Presentation</a> </strong> from <strong><a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/kaylablack” target=”_blank”>kaylablack</a></strong> </div>
I really enjoyed the project that I chose, “The Mind is a Metaphor.” The navigation of the site was very easy for me to learn in a short amount of time. I wish I would have been able to get the Prezi site to work for me because I think I would have been able to represent how the site works much clearer. There were a number of flaws to the site, but the project its self was a very interesting concept. The blog like format of the site makes sense for that specific project because of the way it is being put together. Brad Pasanek, the brains behind the operation, is working on the project by adding material to the site in a very miscellaneous fashion. The archives can be sorted through by a process of elimination style of advanced search and this is what I enjoyed most about the project I chose to analyze, aside for the metaphors them selves.
Some of the other projects that were presented in class I also found to be very interesting. Lauren Brooker’s choice of project that was a 911 digital archive was relateble to the entire class because it is a time in history that we were all around to witness. It does not make sense to me why the project has stopped adding material but it is still encouraged to send it in. I think having a digital archive, of that tragic time in our countries history, that is accessible to everyone is a great representation of Digital Humanities. I do not remember Laurens full definition that she gave DH, (somthing along the lines of shared information an learning from it?) but I found it to be very fitting and broad enough to fit almost everything the Digital Humanities has to offer!
(It wouldn’t let me embed the video or upload to slideshare–here is the link: Speech Accent Archive)
After researching the Speech Accent Archive and listening my classmate’s presentations, I feel like I have gotten one big overview for the definition of DH and how it applies to the real world. I think each project touched on a different definition or aspect of DH. Each definition can relate to the “Scholarly Primitives” that John Unsworth wrote about and within each of the primitives, there is a specific connection to DH. Through my own project—and editing within my peer group—I learned about the influence of technology on the humanities. In previous years, the humanities would not have been able to reach such a large portion of the population, but the accessibility that comes with the use of technology within a project has allowed the authors to reach a larger portion of people. The accessibility factor alone makes a huge impact on each project. Another trend I saw was collaboration; many of the projects allowed for people to submit or add to the project so it was continually being updated. Humanities prior to the digital age would not have bee amble to accommodate for this type of collaboration because many of the artifacts were printed, making it impossible to add onto a project. Although the projects could be used as references, the possibility for a project to be out-of-date on a topic was highly likely; however, with the advancements in technology in modern societies, it is more likely that people will have a greater and faster access to information, which leads to more collaboration because each person can submit ideas or share the topic through social media websites or something as simple as e-mail. Much of the increased accessibility and collaboration of projects today is due to the increasing use of digitalization of the humanities, which influences the whole idea of DH.
Well, the election is over and it was an interesting day. After an encounter with law enforcement and clarification on the difference between exit polling and electioneering, I was finally able to start collecting data. The law is very specific in that campaigners must be at least 100 feet from the entrance to the polls. That would have put me across the street in one direction, in the middle of the street in one direction, and at the end of the block in the other direction. But, I was not a campaigner. The police chief insisted my activities fell under that law. The legal department at Edison Research and the Government Accountability Board had to call the election officials to let them know it was legal for me to be there. This is what the Government Accountability Board has to say about it exit polling:
What are the rules regarding exit polls?
Wisconsin’s law regulating the conduct of persons on Election Day is designed to ensure that nothing interferes with the orderly conduct of the election, and that nothing distracts voters from exercising their right to vote at the polls on Election Day. S. 5.35(5), Wis. Stats.
Persons conducting surveys, circulating petitions or engaging in similar activity may not do so inside the polling place, and may not interfere with the orderly conduct of the election. Electioneering is prohibited within 100 feet of the entrance to a polling place on public property on election day. S. 12.03(2), Wis. Stats. The Government Accountability Board staff recommends that surveys and other activities should be conducted outside the 100 ft. area where electioneering is prohibited.
Exit polls are surveys conducted by news organizations and others to determine how electors have voted. Wisconsin law does not prohibit the conduct of exit polls by a news organization. The Government Accountability Board and its staff have taken the position that exit polls may not be conducted within the building containing the polling place. It is recommended that persons conducting exit polls do so outside of the entrance to the building containing the polling place. Exit pollsters do not have to be positioned outside the 100 ft. electioneering area. However, persons conducting exit polls must not block the entrance or interfere with the access of voters entering and leaving the polling place.
Most people have no idea where the exit poll information was, so they were pretty excited to have input. Some people ‘looked the other way’ and kept on going. This polling place had two entrances, so I was only able to approach about half of the voters. My sampling rate was to approach every voter. I had to record misses and refusals categorized by gender, 3 age-group breaks, and whether they were black or non-black. The questionnaires are confidential – no name was required and the surveys were folded and dropped into a box. At my polling place, the vote was heavily Democrat. Most of the voters who refused were in the older age group (50+). Their roster lists about 1050 registered voters, 922 people voted.
There were 3 versions of the questionnaire:
We called in 3 times during the day with the number of voters who had already voted, the counts for Obama and Romney, and the counts for Baldwin and Thompson. We also read the results from a percentage of the surveys. We called in a final vote count at the end of the night. I do want to point out that these surveys were completely voluntary and confidential. Voters were not required to fill them out and answering each question was voluntary.