The Impact of Digital History

The idea that struck me the most from this week’s readings was the idea of forming online groups of historians and archivists. I find it surprising that given the ways in which the internet has increased the accessibility of primary sources, and the ways it has connected people, that internet crowd-sourcing and social media groups of historians and like-minded people have not come to play a large role in how history is practiced. I believe that much better scholarship could take place if as many scholars participated as possible. I also think that the relative lack publicity of places for scholars to form groups online has slowed the development of the active engagement of historians on the internet. I was surprised to learn that Zotero was not only a tool for managing digital sources and citations, but also a place where groups could form for people to remotely collaborate. After searching the groups, I found several that would have been incredibly useful as places to find ideas and sources for my theses. In addition to the lack of publicity, is digital history being slowed by a fundamental wariness to share research among scholars?

One thought on “The Impact of Digital History

  1. I did not know prior to these readings that Zotero was a means of collaboration and I agree that it would have been helpful for my senior history thesis as well. Going through the notes and bibliography of many sources in order to find yet more sources was incredibly time consuming, so Zotero would have been useful and I wish I had known about this previously. I also agree that the field of history would benefit from digital communication between scholars. This is extremely common in the field of education and I think it has advanced research.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *