Blog Post 3: Mike Roche

Of our readings so far, I found the "Frame of Reference: Special Collections" article by Lori A. Goetsch particularly provocative for its emphasis on how technology has affected our understanding of who gets granted access to the rarest of the rare. Goetsch writes, "

We are moving from an environment that values special collections as a treasure to be hoarded to one that recognizes that for these collections to be truly valuable, they should be used." In other words, what good is it doing anybody keeping the brilliant and long-lost manuscript in the attic? I think it is wonderful how many more people can reach deep into the literary canon and get their hands dirty now.

However, I do maintain t

hat Academia has not exclusively benefited from all the recent technological advancements. I agree with

Dana that there is tremendous tension around publishing now, particularly with regard to its use in establishing credentials.

Nevertheless, this blog is pro-technological advancements. I began this course a little suspicious about technology's tendency to infiltrate everything, including the study of literature. Its drawbacks are evident enough. But the progress we've made with just the most basic regard to the dissemination of rare texts (special collections, for example) is amazing. In this way, technology has leveled the playing field for curious people (for example, me) everywhere!

Blog Post #3: Dana

Like Jaime, I was most interested by the Phillips article, "Where is the value in publishing?," for pointing out the issue in differentiating between a variety of new publishing choices without the necessity for a publisher. Consequently, I saw the Phillips article working interchangeably with ideas in Dalton's "A System Destabilized" in this way: If publishing work is still the form for legitimizing your stake in the scholarly world, how does one reconcile that fact with the growth of the internet industry of self-publishing? The only argument I saw posed by both articles in favor of the "old" method of having a publisher, was for the sake of establishing credentials and reaching a mass audience, which "going viral" can also accomplish.

Academia is constantly chasing after technology and seeks to make itself work in, what I believe, is an exponentially impossible forum. By that I mean technology stops for no one and the line has to be drawn somewhere. We're hitting a point where super-saturation is burning us out instead of abetting our scholarship, and it's impossible to keep up. A practical, though slightly off-kilter representation of this movement-at-the-speed-of-light-woe, is the number of status complaints we read this past weekend regarding Facebook's newest layout change. And while neither of these articles fit well with my work in terms of my research, it does make me wonder about the future of scholarship.

Practical application wise, I found the screencasts available for Newman library the most beneficial to my personal work. Establishing lists of different databases (and tutorials in navigating said databases) is helpful in terms of whittling down the ways to come by credited, applicable scholarship.

Blog Post 3

The closed system Dalton mentioned (scholars writing for other scholars, poets for other poets, etc.) reminded me of a favorite book, Camile Paglia’s Break, Blow, Burn, which aims to communicate with a general rather than an academic audience. The subject is poetry, and the approach is critical. Incredibly, and best of all, Paglia’s prose is not only intelligible but pleasant to read. Oh, and insightful, too.
You can hear Paglia briefly discuss critical culture by following the links below.

Segment One

Seg 2

Seg 3

When I am not embittered and/or amused by the self-congratulatory and absurdly insignificant hamster wheel of institutionalized writing, reading, and talking about literature – the ‘discipline’—I remember through books like Paglia’s how much I like this stuff.

Oh, and the last poem she discusses? Joni Mitchell’s “Woodstock.” So thank you, Ms. Paglia, for rescuing me from dark and futile musings.

And now for something completely different. I agree with Kevin that the tutorials have been most instructive. I found exploring Google scholar to be especially useful because I had not used the advanced features before. I was able to find several full-text PDF novels for my research paper by using this tool and an article I used for a pedagogy presentation as well.

Blog Post 3-Jennifer Schrauth

Like Jamie, Angus Phillips' article, "Where is the Value in Publishing?," stuck with me and seemed most directly relevant to my position in the MFA department. Publishing is something every author has to think about. Sure, writing for yourself is swell, but that doesn't pay the bills, and eventually you long for some recognition. As Phillips points out in his article, the internet provides a relatively simple and painless way to publish original work, through websites like lulu.com as well as personal website, online portfolios, and even blogging software like blogger and wordpress, among others. And yet, despite this availability, authors still choose to get agents who will represent them to publishers and send their work to publishing houses.

Phillips' article talks a lot about value and the value chain. While he proves that internet publishing can be more profitable than print publication for a variety of reasons, the fact of the matter is that there is a lot of junk on the internet and people tend to be more willing to trust a hard copy or even an ebook representation rather than something that is only found online. That is not to say that everything that is published in print is of good quality nor that everything published online is of bad quality; it is to say that with print publication there is a review process which seems should result in a higher quality publication than online publishing, where anyone can publish just about anything themselves.

On the other hand, the online format does give the author more flexibility when it comes to multimodality and intertextuality. Hyperlinks allow authors to point readers toward relevant or supplemental resources and the digital format allows for the embedding of audio or video files, control over when readers are exposed to certain information, etc.

Ultimately, I don't think Phillips' article said anything to really sway my thinking toward or against online publication, but it did get me thinking about publishing in general and the pros and cons of each mode of publishing, which I think will be very useful.

Blog Post 3 - Rittenburg

Because my classmates Cassandra, Nial, and Kevin articulated their thoughts so well on the Dalton reading, I thought I could avoid recapitulation and write instead on the article that I enjoyed the most; the New York Times article, "Faulkner Link to Plantation Diary Discovered" by Patricia Cohen.

The main source of enjoyment I found throughout the article was a sense that I was reading the work of a peer. The kind of investigative work done through an examination of two disparate texts to discern a sort of general creative intent is interesting. The work done here concerning the deconstruction of Faulkner's themes and set-pieces as related to the diary is very similar to the kind of work that I am doing for my English 5014 Class.

The article resonated with me by establishing a sense of the importance of the work done in both finding and preserving historical documents such as these. The work done in preserving, examining, and extrapolating from the diaries is admirable in any sense, but when it can be applied to an author such as Faulkner to derive a new understanding of his work, you can see how valuable it really is.

Blog Post 3: Kevin, the Ironically Rebellious Joiner of Others' Arguments

Nial said it pretty well; I too wish we could "rebuild the in the organic splendor of open-source and creative commons models." Also, like Nial, the most resonating reading thus far has been Dalton's "A System Destabilized: Scholarly Books Today." The idea ultimately behind the selection of data available for research is too often the idea behind education in general (as well as the idea behind healthcare, food production and safety, and a litany of other necessities to the human condition)...money.

The capitalization of necessity is dirty game of elitist pool. The Invisible College becomes an askew game of telephone among the plebes and only represents a useful resource within the physical university because fellow academics have access to "the right information."

Of course, vetting sources on the basis of accuracy and/or practical use to a given field would remain a crucial clamp for the pipeline of misinformation. Such vetting would just be extended to those who do not have access to expensive databases and print sources.

Aside from soapbox wishes, I have found all the tutorials practically useful; I do feel my toolbox has become more efficient by way of a better understanding of the tools available at VT.

BP3: Nial C. DeMena

Dalton's "A System Destabilized: Scholarly Books Today" I go back to, like Cassandra, because I find the awareness of eschatology of humanities scholarship a fascinating premise. Moreover, the "Invisible College," is the one term I love to extrapolate. Here, I quote from Pynchon's Against the Day: 

...a school of modern architecture which believed that the more 'rationally' a structure was designed, the less visible would it appear, in extreme examples converging to its so-called Penultimate Term—the step just before deliverance into the Invisible, or as some preferred to say 'into its own meta-structure,' minimally attached to the physical world (625).

I can’t help but think of coalition building within the department when I think of the Invisible College and the dependence on faculty in liking what I endeavor to do as a scholar as an integral part in my success. There is a type of coercion that is engendered in this practice that bothers me, for if I do not agree, or fall in-step with the advice of my elders, I, no matter how well I try, will not be able to transcend the politics of English and get recognition or get published. Pynchon (above) is talking about the meta-structure, which I’ve co-opted and applied to that of the scholarly politics of networking and publishing based off our Module 3 readings. It is invisible only because it is so rational. But what if the rational is precisely what is killing English as a discipline? How does one form a counterforce against such an overwhelming conformity? How does one critique the death that is caused by the architectonic logic of the discipline without falling in line with the cortege?  

From this height it was as if the Chums, who, out on adventures past, had often witnessed the vest herds of cattle adrift in ever-changing cloudlike patterns across the Western plains, here saw that unshaped freedom being rationalized into movement only in straight lines and at right angles and a progressive reduction of choice, until the final turn through the final gate that led to the killing floor (10).

The passage describes how I feel as a neophyte humanities scholar, whereas the established “tenure-track” and “tenured” professors are the Chums watching me head to my disaster, parsing the scope of my vision, my project, into the “straight-line” specificity that kills it. The passage also connotes the product-like quality of the students in relationship the deadly machinery of the academy. We churn through the system but what happens to us after? Is there enough tenure for us all—surely not? But the hope remains. 

Although pessimism in me regarding institutions of higher learning remains, for my own account, I find this creative coiffure a pretense for its own liberation. I want to demolish the foundations of English, raze them to the ground, to rebuild the in the organic splendor of open-source and creative commons models. Or, as the software engineer turned rapper Sole puts it in his song “Dumb this Down,”  “if there’s a policeman living in your head, you’re not free,” which is as true as sentiment as I’ve ever heard. To echo and reify my point, I quote Deleuze, “Representation no longer exists; there is only action.” 

What I’ve learned is during the course of our modules is thus: scholarship, for me, represents what I hate. Hidden, networked information, the cabal of monied, conservative "city-fathers" whose magisterial moxie lies in their ability to privilege information then squirrel it away in closed discourse communities beyond the reach of my lower-middle-class glazzies, behind pay-walls, copyrights, and official insignia. There is a global society, us as educators and scholars must build. Informational control is a serious threat to our futures; we must not allow it to take part. Our prerogative should be to staple the source code to the network to the doors of every college freshman.

Now, certain measures, it could be argued, are in place to reward financially those whose scholarship is oft cited, and therefore better. Yes, I do realize cash is important. However, the information if it is useful will make the money for you at large and not just in the cloistered sanctum of the classroom. 

You’re doing your job if you’re showing what the exploit is to the kids paying too much money to go to a school that will churn them out and close behind them the archives with which they can move beyond the institution. We must work together. As Genet from Miracle of the Rose writes, “From his head—or from mine—came the roar of an airplane engine. I felt in all my veins that the miracle was underway” (15). The sounds is technological philosophical change; its coming, at least, from one of our heads.

Jamie Rand: Blog Post 3

Discuss any of the readings that we've read in this class (except the Module 1 reading, which you've already discussed). What resonated with you? What did you like or not like? Did anything fit particularly well with your work at the time, or change your mind about anything?

The article that resonated with me was Phillips' "Where is the Value in Publishing?" The article asks where that value lies in a world where anyone can publish anything. To be honest, the question caught my eye as a philosophical question, not an academic one, but the article brought up a number of excellent points. Where, exactly, is the value in print, when "The Internet provides not just a ready publication route, but also opportunities to add value that an individual author would find it difficult to match[?]" Since short stories and novels are my largest interest, I couldn't help but wonder what it would be like to have webpage imbedded music for certain scenes. Or ambient sound. Or even certain dialogue or narration. The story becomes more than a story, then, making a synthesis of imagination and sensation. Is it even a story, if that happens?

In the article itself, I admired the fact that Phillips brought up both sides of the self-publishing debate: how with "online production and distribution" authors are spreading their work virally, but, on the other hand, how it "smacks of the vanity press." It's very much a conflict between the old ways and the new, and it will be intriguing to see how the battle resolves. (For my own part, I think things will eventually be Star Trek-esque, where almost everything is digital but for rare books.)

The article didn't really change my mind or answer my question, but like I said, that's a credit to its neutral stance on the issue. It did point out that publishers have to change their view of the "value-chain" in order to stay profitable, which made me consider something I probably should have thought about a long time ago: now is a bad time to be in the business of books.

Blog Post 3 - Hockman

The reading that most resonates with me is M. Dalton's "A System Destabilized: Scholarly Works Today." She makes saliently clear how ruthless and cut-throat the humanities have to be in order to survive and compete in contemporary culture. Our American society, our world rather, is vastly changing. Science has documentation and therefore reason to question what it means to be human. Quantum mechanics has found electrons in bacterial proteins, the key here being that proteins are the ultimate building blocks of cells.

More to the point, advancements in technology are going crazy. With touch-free video game consoles, hands-free car telephones, and voice recognition computers, how can a book made of paper and ink last? Well, this is our queue to sit between the two ferns. Professorships and tenure are based on scholarship, as Dalton warns. In a fast paced market, who needs inspirational teachers? In fact, why teach at all?

Clearly, I am being absurd. But, is this not what some ultra conservatives might say is the case? The humanities do not grow as fast as other disciplines, but we have to do our share to reflect the times. My research centers around the reciprocal influence of contemporary culture and thought/language. I want the freedom of expression to remain despite being in Wall Street's wake. Dalton's article invigorates me to action!

Blog Posts 1, 2

1:

Most of my research, like my work, is done haphazardly. My goal with research is less to find that one perfect document and more to finagle an understanding of an era from contemporary texts. Much of the research that I did as an undergraduate centered around primary documents and their recreations. Many of these works were old, fragile, and without proper annotation. The challenge that opens up before me when confronted with an enigmatic work is the thing that drives me to continue my research. My research tools in the past have been OskiCat, EEBO, JSTOR, the MED (Middle English Dictionary), Oxford Catalog, the Digital Scriptorium, and another Oxford Collection. These sources were able to allow me an understanding of the time period through offering an organized collection of the works. The best part of these sites is that several of them offer more than just prose or poetry. There are biographies, vitaes, illustrated editions, and histories.

I guess if my process had to be summarized it would go something like this: find interesting person/idea in time period, research person/idea through primary doc's, research person/idea through secondary docs, examine the affects of the person/idea on the larger scheme of time.

2:

I have to agree with Mike, who agrees with Quinn, who agrees with Hayley. The future of the literary discipline will take place in an almost entirely digital universe. Any marginal publications that are production intensive or costly will no longer have a physical form. The literary universe is merging with the digital one and there is very little that those of us who still value the aesthetics of books, libraries, and the literary process can do about it. I see the peer review process as moving further down this road as well. I can imagine a wiki styled site run by a community of experts, operating as moderators, that would allow peer discussion to take place in a healthy and productive environment. The movement into this digital realm will democratize the information so highly guarded in the top end libraries of today.

The notion of the 'invisible college' is interesting as it maps what many would see as a successful dissemination of information from the source. The invisible college is autonomous, run through the desires and whims of it's members. I believe that this structure is, like most resources on the internet, effective when dealing with the general, but not rigorous enough to cope with the abstract or specific. While these digital catalogues and communities may bring about a conversation, they certainly do not offer the final word.

Responding to Blog Post 1

Wow--it has been so interesting to read about everyone's different research interests and approaches to research.  There are a few comments, in particular, that I definitely want to respond to.

First of all, I am so glad that some of you, like Jess and Jennifer picked up on this idea of  research journal or a research record.  This is probably one of the most important things that I have learned as a "professional researcher" (i.e., librarian, or "glorious" person, as Jennifer wrote).  Although it seems like it might take a lot of time to record your steps, it actually SAVES a lot of time in the long run, because you don't end up repeating yourself.  You get a much better sense of what works, and what doesn't, and this helps you become a much better researcher in the long run.

I was also glad to see that many of you are really using this class as an opportunity to supplement either your work in another class or your creative pursuits.  Again, although the syllabus (and some of my communication) had used ENGL 5014 as an example of a course/research project that you could use as a starting place for this class, I want you all to feel comfortable using this class in a way that best suits your work and your research needs.

I'm really looking forward to reading the next group of blog posts!

Soraya's Scholarly Reflections

As Hayley and Quinn wrote, the future of peer review in indeed contingent upon the existence of on-line journals. The article, “Blog to the Future? Journals Publishing in the Twenty-First Century,” discusses how open access may be the way of the scholarly future. I also agree with Hayley that it is easier to efficiently discuss ideas, support each other’s work, etc. in an on-line format. I don't completely agree with Mike that on-line scholarship needs to lead to more bias. I feel that academia is already quite biased and in print form far fewer have access to what “scholars” write. I put “scholar” in quotations because I don’t feel that one needs to enter the narrow field of academia to call themselves a scholar. I personally don’t understand how it benefits society to have so many academics writing articles that no one outside of their field will ever read. I think it would be more beneficial to have people translating what is written in academia so that it can be used to educate the masses. Instead there is a lot of redundancy in academia and few people willing to look critically at the function of academic scholarship itself. I think it is beneficial for us as a graduate community to be able to have the type of discourse we have here on this blog to really see what our peers are thinking in a more efficient way.

On the other hand, I agree with Mike that it is great to have in person contact in our fields as well. In our program there is a lot of networking both in person and on-line (blogs, facebook, etc.) so I am part of an invisible college.

I find out about important works through personal recommendations, school assignments, conferences, etc.

Blog Post #2: Dana

I'd be out of my mind and living under a rock if I didn't agree with everyone and their mom that the future of peer review in the humanities depends on the abyss that is online publication. However, like Mike, I think the mechanism of online publishing deserves deeper consideration and criticism. For instance, Dalton's article addresses the issue of establishing quality assurance for the millions of circulating journals out there. To add to the resources given in Module 2 (e.g. evaluating Web Sites on Olin & Uris) the Ulrich and MLA sites do serve as an excellent way to sort through the credibility mess. However, access to these sites and to the online journals themselves is not available to every scholar. Angus Phillips brings up the overlooked point that internet access isn't available everywhere and that second and third world country scholars are set at a disadvantage in attaining these "preferential" resources. Regardless of whether you have high speed internet access or not, the trend towards online scholarship is inevitable.

I suppose I participate in an invisible college, which frankly is really just a silly way to say that I have mastered basic social skills. I gather scholarship relevant to my field by shamelessly trolling the internet, though I give equal weight to my Professor's suggestions. I do click around on Scholar and find myself forever indebted to links instructor's will post on a whim. As for putting information out there, I tend to discuss my interests (academic or benign) via social networking sites if not word of mouth. I use Twitter, Google+, and Facebook as a means for conveying my interests, and every once in awhile someone finds it useful.

Jess (Blog Post #2)

Maybe it’s a failure of imagination on my part, but I don’t see the nature or importance of peer review in the humanities changing significantly anytime soon. Yes, there will probably be a day when journals are almost exclusively electronic, but that won’t change the functional necessity and prevalence of the peer review tradition. As long as the “publish or perish” dictum remains the pithy rule of thumb governing professional success in academia, peer review will continue to be the organizing principle around which all scholarship is produced.

We have to remember, then, that articles are products—products you want to sell to the highest bidder, by which I mean publish in the best journals. It’s not good enough to merely publish an article because you’re competing with a pool of scholars who are all publishing articles, who are all vying for the same tenure-track positions. As we all unhappily acknowledge there aren’t very many of those going around these days, so the competition becomes even grimmer. This is why I disagree with Phillips when he says that, “a possible future development is a decline in emphasis on the journal title and brand.” Given the current and enduring scarcity of tenure-track jobs, brand is, and will continue to be, everything. As such, peer review is not just a way to legitimize scholarship, but also to commodify it— to give it a value on the intellectual market. Again, this is why the whole idea of open access articles seems a little bit like a pipe dream to me. Like Mike, I worry that OA would potentially lend itself to poor, lazy scholarship.

To be clear, I’m not saying that the current system of peer review is not sometimes completely arbitrary. The system certainly has flaws. But unless there’s a fundamental change in how we think of and conduct higher education in America, I can’t imagine the future of peer review in a very different light. It’s a pebble in a pond. I don’t think you can change the core of how we understand scholarship without changing the scholarly institutions.

As far as finding out about important works in my field, I ask my professors. I talk with them about who to avoid, who to seek, and what essays and articles are considered foundational in my line of study. Although I’ve only been to one major conference, I found that it was a very positive environment for discussing my own work, and learning from my peers about theirs. Ultimately, however, I think I may be a bit too new to graduate study to truly be a part of an invisible college.

BP2: Nial C. DeMena

The name "Invisible College" is cool because it has a transcendent ring to it. A scholarly word of mouth and a secret club. I'd like to be an invisible.

But there are rules of approach, and this here's mine:

Investors talk on how you have to make your money make money for you, well, as a novitiate scholar you have to have your colleagues and your ideas do work too. Your ideas are your common capital. I believe sharing your opinions to be a dangerous and stealthy enterprise and that you should be guarded when you let them escape you however trivial the situation. But there is a safe space for experimentation and testing, a lab of thought where you can gather together an informal focus group to test the validity and moreso, the common reception of an idea--mainly, you don't go to market without doing research. This "Invisible College" is a local sampling of the target audience and a web work with which you can enmesh your thoughts and have them catch in the wind, find a place, and dihisce. Or not. I take part.

Peer reviewing is useful under specific limitations: Your golden child of an idea, you know, the one that's grown up in the monastery of your mind with the rarefied but pure mountain air, you can't let it be kidnapped. You have to know the readership and therein lies the usefulness. How does this essay of mine react to these people, or those people, or them, and why? Though to bring it back, as Hayley points out, we're entertaining these notions never before having actually participated in them, which then is why from conversation to conversation we are learning the rules of synthesis and articulation. These are our peer reviewers, and only until I join, that is, participate in a network of published works, then and only then will I be able to tell you what future role peer-reviewing has. Boilerplate response: You have to share. Period. However, you can take precautions.

I learn about important works from, duh, other people. They know stuff. In spite of agreement, they can be referential subjects (and friends). Other ways are less fun. For instance, I take classes and names get mentioned in discussion, or there is significant, bibliographical name-dropping in articles, etc.

As for sharing, you have to ask yourself what you want to be judged on and whom you want to be judging you. When discussing, I try to be honest whilst not forgetting that I can be condemned for it. I share things I know I can share.

Peer-reviewing can lead to consensus and tacit monoculture. If it is to be successful it has to be open-ended and receptive to novelty. People whose work is outside the group can be excluded and stigmatized. Essentially, I don't want the smug alert going off.

Smug Alert
Get More: SOUTH
PARKmore...

Blog Post 2: Kevin: The Necessity of Cred-Checks

As Hayley points out, peer review is now dependent upon the direction of online journals and articles. As I mention in my earlier post, however, the technology must include a means of reviewing the credentials of those posting, lest the well of scholarship and subsequent dissemination of information be poisoned (as in the case of Wikipedia's widely publicized scandal). Tools such as Ulrich's and MLA (in this module, afore-linked) offer a central point of reference for more carefully strained information, but as Phillips notes, all scholarly publications are directed in part by financial concerns, so problems remain; open access (also mentioned by Phillips) poses a potential solution, but the decisions regarding publication will still encounter the obstacles of authorial credibility and money.

I think citation formats are an extension of the sense of greed that naturally flows from monetizing knowledge (which like water, food, healthcare, and shelter...should be free, in this bleeding-heart's mind;). MLA decides they want a comma instead of a colon and we run out and dutifully purchase the latest greatest edition of the handbook that reflects the change. Fortunately, (free) online resources stay up-to-date on the newest hems and save us bundles on paper (which also saves the trees).

My predictions about the future: Peer review will still thrive, though via online vehicles. The invisible college will continue to be an invaluable resource for scholars, since word-of-mouth greatly ameliorates concerns with source credibility.

Blog Post 2 - by Mike Roche

I agree with Quinn (who agrees with Hayley) that peer reviewing will increasingly be done online but I worry that this push (which seems ongoing) inevitably raises a concern: How do we (as scholars looking to read new, interesting work) know who can be counted on to offer up a qualified, unbiased peer review. The Blog to the Future? article showed us how the existence of journals helps manage "quality control". Discerning which new journal articles are worth looking at in the Sciences is made easier by the tools that show us how often they've been cited (in Google Scholar, for example). And though many journals in the humanities have made the transition to being web-based, there are so many more ways to conduct peer reviews now that so much else is being done online. (As someone who reads poetry collections, I often visit blogs of contemporary authors whose work I know as a reference. John Gallagher's blog, Nothing to Say and Saying It, is a good resource for any contemporary poetry reader!) However, I worry that the convenience of web-based peer reviewing might dilute the quality of it, and that the prevalence of peer reviews on the internet might actually serve as an impediment to finding the peer reviews that are actually unbiased and credible.

Though I do in fact participate an "invisible college" with blogs, etc., one of the reasons I'm in an MFA program is because I like the old-school, word-of-mouth way of communicating about my work. Instead of a low-residency style, distance-learning style program, I chose a traditional, full-residency program because I love the merits of the workshop (where fellow poets meet around a table to discuss each others' work).

Blog Post 2 -- by Cynthia Quinn White

In which I mention, toward the end, a scary museum.

I agree with Hayley that the future of peer review in the humanities is in online scholarship. Scholars, and humans seem to enjoy using the Internet, specifically social networking. I think that social networking is going to play a part in peer-review in the future. Already, peer-reviewed journals use devices such as "Submishmash" to communicate with authors. Journals' calls for submissions, conferences, and fellowships are posted in Facebook groups, such as "Writer's Colony." How fun!
I find out about important works in my field, poetry, by word-of-mouth (as I'm in a MFA program and we talk about such things), news articles, such as this one from the New York Times, and from the Twitter feeds of organizations such as poetshouse. Again, fun.
Now, when I get to the citation methods (such as those mentioned in our readings), the fun should dwindle. But it doesn't! I love creating a works cited page. I am familiar with MLA style and my copy of the MLA style handbook is creased and tagged with love. Knowing that a colon separates the city of publication and the publisher gives my soul a thrill. New York: Knopf, 1997. Beautiful! No, I am not being sarcastic. My nerd heart beats a little faster for a well-crafted works cited page.
So far I've learned about how to find information in places such as Addison. Now, I'm excited to be moving into the guts of research and am looking forward to the next module on special collections. Special collections, by the way, are fascinating. I may be skewing a bit off from the print world, but check out this creepy collection. And here's a list of scary museums.

Hayley - Blog Post 2

I think that so much of the future of peer review in the humanities relies on the future of online journals and articles. As mentioned in the article, “Blog to the Future? Journals Publishing in the Twenty-First Century,” open access is on the rise, as well as less formal ways of reviewing scholarly work. For example, in an open system, fellow researchers can directly comment on an article, indicating its merits and/or downfalls. I would not be surprised if this system continues at the forefront of the evolution of peer review in the coming decades.

I usually find out about important works in my field via listservs, word of mouth (among my peers/instructors/professors), and research databases. In addition, I’ve never had the opportunity to discuss my research in a formal setting – besides class presentations; therefore, I end up discussing my research interests/work with others in casual conversation, which also serves as a helpful way to organize my thoughts and make sure they have grounding. I would, indeed, consider myself part of an “invisible college.” As mentioned above, the ways in which I discover important works within the humanities, as well as how I discuss my own work, all seem to fit into the description in Module 3 of an “invisible college” – “a sort of grassroots system of dialogue.”

On a broader note concerning my own, current research, I am with Cassandra, as she mentioned having trouble finding primary sources with which she would like to work. For our bibliographic work, I, too, am finding it difficult to pinpoint a specific topic to pursue, and find primary resources for, within my broad research interests. Also, using the “MLA International Bibliography,” I searched the “Journal of Medical Humanities,” which I mentioned using for my research, and found that it is peer-reviewed. I found this bibliographic resource particularly easy to use and beneficial when trying to decide whether I should continue to pursue a certain journal, etc. And finally, I attended a session on Virginia Tech’s Special Collections this past Friday, and was pleasantly surprised at the thousands of unique items held there – completely available for our research needs. I encourage you all to check it out: http://spec.lib.vt.edu.

Blog Post 2, Module 3: Jamie Rand

I don't have much experience with academic papers. I guess that sounds somewhat contradictory, but let's be honest: in undergrad, they were another hoop I had to jump through, an assignment to get done a few days before they were due; I'd spend seven or eight hours wired on caffeine putting something on the page and praying it had some accidental value. Then, of course, I came to the bibliography, where I was never too sure what the teacher wanted (MLA and APA and Chicago are just names to the lowly undergrad slacker), so I'd go online, and out of necessity, find a tool like EasyBib to do the formatting for me. Despite doing nothing but following the letter of the law and not the spirit, chances are I'd come back with an A or a B not because it was any good but because, somehow, most everyone else's papers were worse than mine, and mine, although garbage, looked great in comparison.

I guess that comes off as completely cynical, but it was my experience; like Michelle, I'm a creative writer, and so I always regarded academic papers as ancillary to my field. That being the case, I don't really have enough experience to answer for the first question in this assignment: What do you think is the future of peer review in the humanities? I can hazard a guess, mostly based on what I gleaned from the articles, but please don't consider it educated.

First: In the Journal of Scholarly Publishing, Angus Phillips states, way down in the conclusion, "We must also recognize that scholarly communication is changing. The system is global and increasingly based around communities that use a variety of collaborative tools, from social networking to virtual worlds. The journal article may be just one form of output from research. Repositories are accepting a wider range of media, including audiovisual clips and images, alongside documents." I agree with this. I sound like the boss in Dilbert when I actually have to use this turn of phrase, but...the paradigm of peer review is shifting, much like everything else in the publishing and research industry. And, much like Wikipedia, I think the majority of us will go to non-peer-reviewed sites to find out the basics, maybe dip our toes into new knowledge, but when we want to verify the truth, we'll go to those old gatekeepers of knowledge, the journals.

I'm going to be a little pert here and answer the second question--How do you find out about important works in your field?--with a snide answer: The New York Times Bestseller List. Popular fiction is what I like to read and what I like to write. I'm not looking for the truth. In point of fact, I'm looking for a good story, so I'm actually looking for a perfect lie.

Finally: the invisible college. Am I a part of one? Kind of. But that's kind of an impressive term for what it really is: sitting around drinking coffee and eating paninis and looking at each other's work, being jealous of great turns of phrase, being modest when your friend likes the way you characterized a person or described a scene. College, invisible or not, seems to me to be about education and the bureaucracy and rubber-stamping that entails; writing and reading for fun is more about learning. I'm a fan of the second far more than the first.

And I could really go for a panini right now.

Module 3 Post

As a creative writer dealing with poetry in particular, my relationship to the concepts of peer review, citation styles, and the invisible college may differ immensely from a student of literature. I will encounter citation styles and peer review as I construct academic papers for a few elective courses in literature. However, I do see how these concepts intersect my own course of study.

First and foremost, the concept of an invisible college pertains immensely to poem-making, as many poets, including myself, depend on blogs, social networks, and e-mail to receive feedback from both professional and nonprofessional writers. We also use these mediums to discover new and integral work of other writers. RSS feeds have been particularly useful for me in locating articles introducing new poets, creative writing commentary, and fresh work, and thus have become a crucial part of my invisible college.

Peer review seamlessly extends from the idea of the invisible college for creative writers as expressed in the above paragraph. Outside of the personal workshop, peer review is often carried out online. The major difference I see between scholarly peer review and simple online peer review of creative works is that scholarly peer review offers validation to articles. Peer review of creative works merely helps the writer revise pieces, but does not give the piece more clout, integrity, or importance. It is possible that if a book of poems is chosen by a certain renowned poet, that would add value to the work and would cause it to be picked up by more readers and fellow writers.

Peer review in the humanities does seem to be rapidly changing, particularly with online networking and publication sites. Now it may be more nebulous whether your reviews are coming from actual scholars, which, for writers of literary articles, could be useless. However, I enjoy that publications of scholarly work were begun to reach all matter of readers, and it seems exciting to me that all matter of readers may now provide feedback.

Citation styles will no doubt impact my academic writing, should I decide to pursue it beyond the bounds of classroom assignments, and the variety of styles will definitely impact how I may format works in order to publish them in certain literary journals. As Soraya Palmer wrote in her first blog post, I feel that a lot of my research for my coursework will come from personal experiences which won't require citation. However, occasionally it could be useful to cite a work that may have influenced a poem, and I would definitely have to research that process.

Blog Post 2 - Cassandra Hockman

Clearly, peer review within the humanities and, more specifically, within the study of English is very important for the success of the university and academia. Our job as scholars is not only to keep up with our specialty, but to make sure our peers are up to standard as well. Therefore, I see the future of peer review remaining the same, if not becoming even more important.
More recently, I have found significant work within my interest by speaking with current scholars. Fortunately, I am grateful for my advisor and enjoy the potential for collaboration. During my most recent library search, I found several of his books enduring and helpful (http://www.faculty.english.vt.edu/gardner/academic.html). In addition, I plan to communicate with my peers and network to further my expertise. As we discussed last week, conferences are great opportunities to meet other scholars and explore new paths in your own research.

Research topics aside, it's interesting and valuable to note the importance of scholarly achievement to faculty positions. As we read in Module 3, some universities have specified requirements for the tenure track positions. This information does not come as a shock, but it does bring my subconscious ruminations into cognition; the world of the humanities is stark without its own valuable defense. I do hope that despite the fierce inter (and intra) disciplinary competition, those of us passionate for the extension and liberation of learning will successfully prevail.

No matter how I learn my own research technique, I like to read and write; more so, I like to play with what I've read through language be it written, spoken, or some other visual. I take time to create with words and sketches, and very much enjoy the evolution of thought. Research for me: I read anything I can get in my hands while personal existence drives me. (As both Soraya and Michelle have said.)

P.S. In case anyone's interests include Pop Culture...

BP1: Nial C. DeMena

I see bibliographies, search engines, and your Project MUSE sites as an aggregation. You're pulling in vast quantities of information and with that the "white noise" just in terms of the volume.  It's your job to sort through that. Ten-percent maybe have immediate use. What doesn't have use sits there in your mind for awhile. You can use it later.  But I guess I'm not shy in the collection process. How do you know you don't like it, or you will, until you read it?

The research is in the ten-percent. These books are what's leftover. You read, condense, translate and organize according to your caprice. You're making the work of a scholar you're own: understanding it, organizing it to your liking, making use of it, dismissing it--the reactions are yours. I like to chart. If it doesn't chart, I probably don't understand it. Comprehension for me is in the visual register. The charts, which are not necessarily preconceived, are my reactions I use as primers for me to write. 

I start at the typewriter. I stand up--because you think on your feet--and face my charts and write the connections, focusing on the play language and keeping up with my thoughts, and the implications of the ideas I've written down from my readings, however jumbled or banal or brilliant (or shit) they are.

I take my charts, my free-writing on the typewriter, and sit at the word processor and hammer away.



On a more general note:
Wikipedia sucks in my experience. Comic books and their longer form, the graphic novel; scenes from movies; comments I make haphazardly and write down; an unintentional pattern in a chart I made; an idea I co-opted from video game design, or architecture, or biology; these grease the wheels of creativity in my brain. Proper rest, sun light, a diet of tea and coffee and snacking, help me keep vigilance. As for the rest, it's an alchemy of common sense, intuition, and a fear of making an epic mistake. And I check when I don't know and try to do as much as possible at one sitting. Using Boolean characters helps once in a while. Knowing the terms to generate the hits you want, or search engine efficacy, makes a difference in the amount of time spent.

In the end, my research method is to visualize the person who takes three hours to do a term paper and scores better than you do. How would they do it faster, better, and more efficiently? The less time I can take to do what I want, the more time I have to spend on another problem. I will find a topic from my notes, chart it, play with it on the typewriter, and try to be original in my language and argument.

Blog Post 1-Jennifer Schrauth

Research was always something my mother was good at and I was (and still am) not. Like me, my mother likes to know things, but whereas I am lazy and limit my intake of knowledge to what I can absorb through stumbling through books, attending classes, and performing basic web searches, my mother searches until she finds the exact answer she's looking for, wherever that search may take her.

Of course I had to do research in my undergraduate, though most of it was more scientific than literary. Like Robert, I did a good deal of my research online through online databases and ebooks. Typically I would play around with different combinations of subjects, key words, and boolean phrases until I found enough articles. If I was unable to glean sufficient data from home, I would go to the campus library and ask a research librarian to help me find more information in print. If I didn't do a citation immediately after finding the article, I would typically end up with the hard copy I had printed out with no idea of which database I had found it through or how to find it again to properly cite it. To avoid this headache, I, like Jess, plan to take Towheed's advise on "recording the research route."

For my research this year, I expect that I will begin about where I usually do, through using broad subject search vehicles like Google Scholar, Wikipedia, websites, and databases to gain general knowledge and help key in on a specific subject before moving on to search spots with more specific information. I expect that as I get further into my research I will go to the library more than once and will inevitably enlist the help of a research librarian, because they are glorious people who know a lot more about research and the ins and outs of the library than I ever will.

In regards to novel writing, I treat every experience as research. My novel inspired by West Indian folklore was very based in the primary research of my going to Trinidad for eight months. I do not think I could embark on this novel without that research. Interviews (formal and informal), coursework at one of the national universities, daily observations and journals all helped me formulate my research as did a concerted effort to explore new parts of the country. I wrote letters to scholars and journalists writing on the topic of my interest. Most of my secondary research was done at the university as most West Indian academic discourse is done at this university. Now that I am back I am still organizing the large amounts of research I undertook while in Trinidad which can be a overwhelming process.

My love for folklore relates to my feelings towards history and research—that storytelling is history and that personal experience is a very important part of research. This is why I began research on the topics of the emphasis of salt in folklore (something I saw a lot of in my time in Trinidad and in reading Trinidadian folktales). Similarly, a large component of magical realism and literature based in folklore takes a lot of research from Shamanism—a religion that I found difficult to research while in Trinidad or even at home in NYC. I was excited to see the vast amount of research at the library here at Virginia Tech as well as journal articles and e-books on Google Scholar, Addison, and Summon. Like both Jess Cohen and Dana, I prefer hard copies of articles to on-line resources. I enjoy physically going to the library and finding older books, speaking to librarians, scholars, or people with different types of expertise in their prospective fields. A decent on-line resource to get an initial feel for folklore is called: http://www.monstropedia.org/. Like Mike Roche, I am also a fan ofhttp://www.google.com/, http://scholar.google.com/, , and Google Books.

Blog Post 1 - Cassandra Hockman

Until I began graduate school two weeks ago, I thought doing literary research was an easy task. "I know how to use the library," I thought. Easy as pie! Boy, was I wrong.
Fortunately, the Virginia Tech library system has thorough research tools such as Summons and Addison. I was also happy to learn the Library of Congress numerical system and the ease of the website's navigation, a step further from last week's homepage tutorial.
Initially, I plan to begin my research by performing a general search on our library's journal systems, Summons and MLA International. Although I have done a general search on Google, I do recognize the need to take care in using online sources, and I followed most of those found on Cornell's library site.
At this point, my research interests center around contemporary writers, so I need to prepare myself to expand my search in case I do not find sufficient material. I do not look forward to this difficulty, but am open to suggestions as our research progresses. At this point, our bibliographic search seems even more taxing because I have yet to find primary sources of which I would like to work. However, I recognize the need to find a thematic element, a tying together of written strings.
Outside of our research topics in particular, I am most grateful for the bits about networking and learning through collaboration. It is essential for some of us to become active members in organizations such as the NCTE (http://www.ncte.org/) and participate in conferences, of which many can be found here (http://cfp.english.upenn.edu). Graduate students from another university have told me of this great resource.
I wish us all good fortune.

Blog Post 1 - Meaghan Russell

Alongside a smattering of research for creative writing, as Mike discussed, I will be undertaking some formal inquiries for my literature class this semester.

In the past, I have begun critical essays (research-based and otherwise) by asking genuine questions, i.e., open-ended and inspired by true curiosity. I have not begun with a topic, though a topic is present in the final focus question I develop, the question I eventually endeavor to answer in the form of a thesis. I usually begin with seemingly relevant bits from the primary text or texts (my focus of critical study), write some questions, consult criticism on JSTOR or a similar database, narrow my focus question(s), return to the text(s), and repeat this process as I write and refine my focus question. At some point, I formulate a tentative answer. I organize related information (text from the novel/play/poem in question, critical sources, etc.) in a rough outline with supporting points. My real thesis does not usually emerge until I reach my first draft’s conclusion. The research and writing process is recursive, so difficult to tease out. I spend a lot of time rereading. Like Robert, I follow tangents and, in theory, do not regret this habit.

For the research-based essay I will write this semester, my literature professor has suggested I read a few particular articles that represent scholarship to-date on Victoria Cross, the author whose writing will be my focus. Some of the primary material I want to read may be out of print and difficult to find, in which case I will make use of ILL. After I have read more of Cross’s writing, I will try to figure out what kinds of questions have been explored by critics.

Jess Cohen: Blog Post #1

I didn’t realize until my senior year in college that all the time I spent reading and synthesizing secondary sources before writing a long course paper actually constituted research. Until then, I always associated the concept of “research” with the more empirical fields of study. In my lower level English classes, we were usually required to cite 3-5 sources, which I did more to follow the rubric and get a grade, and probably not deliberately enough to actually be considered research. But by the time I found myself in 4000 level seminar courses with 15 to 20 pages papers, I realized that the purpose of these papers was not just to see how well we could engage with a given novel or poem, but also how we understand the critical conversations surrounding those texts and how we enter ourselves into those conversations.

That being said, since the concept of literary research is still relatively new to me, my research style is haphazard at best. Like Dana, I prefer hard copies of essay collections to electronic journal articles. The problem is, I normally go to the library without really knowing what I’m looking for, and end up checking out 15 different books. I attribute this mostly to indecisiveness and impatience; I’m a chronic second-guesser, and I also always want to have a clearly defined argument before I’ve even articulated a research question. These are bad habits I hope this course will help me change. I’m already planning to heed Toheed’s advice this semester by “recording the research route” I take. This will help me keep my research both organized and focused.

For my Intro to Grad Studies assignment, I’ll most likely avoid wikipedia, because, as Kevin mentioned in his post, the information provided is not always reliable. Throughout both high school and college, my teachers openly repudiated the use of wikipedia as a citable source, so I think I’ve internalized their caution. True to form, I’m still trying to decide between a few different topics. To do so, I’ll use Towheed’s hierarchical approach to research whereby I’ll compare what’s available online at JSTOR, Project Muse, and other databases. From there, I’ll search Addison, and once I’ve perused my hard-copy sources, I’ll consult their bibliographies for breadth.

Uren - Blog 1

I’ve written several papers for which I incorporated sources found through databases such as Ebscohost and, once, ECCO (Eighteenth Century Collections Online). I’ve used InterLibrary Loan services to get access to books and articles that weren’t available online—I’ve been reprimanded for not thoroughly tracking down available resources, a failing that was one part haste and two parts sheer volume of possible avenues (dozens of databases, etc.). I’ve used WorldCat (which Towheed mentioned) to see what libraries had a book I needed; my alma mater happened to have it and I’d planned on stopping by, but I ultimately dropped the project.

I research inefficiently. Getting better at using research tools might help, but the biggest two problems I have are personal habit: 1) I read my way off on tangents and 2) I don’t “always record the route [I] take,” as Towheed would have me do, so I end up having to double back and re-check and document sources, which slows me down. (Notice how useful that advice can be for us and our students as we avoid plagiarism, as well as wasted time.) Part of my inefficiency is good: I read widely on topics that I’m writing about, a tendency that benefits the final project but not my schedule.

My first step toward creating bibliographical content for the wiki will be deciding on a topic. None of my courses require a research paper, per se, but there are various topics I’ll be looking through at some point.

Where I Go And What I Go There For

I was trying to figure out what to write. I had a big paper due for my 20th century British Short Fiction class and the uncanny (unhomely) objects in Elizabeth Bowen's short fiction intrigued me. Items such as shoes and fireplaces have evil powers (like Jamie, I guess I was into the devil) in her short stories. The ominous machinations of Bowen's "things" often accompany characters' attempts to save or find a home. I saw the possibility of connecting the modernist attempt to cope with an unstable environment with Masahiro Mori's Uncanny Valley graph. I used scholarly articles on thing theory and Bowen. When I read a relevant piece of scholarship, I would go to the bibliography and look into finding the source materials that the author used. As was mentioned in our readings, I employed a hierarchical approach to information gathering: Internet, to school library, to major library. I started with Google Scholar a lot of times. At my school we didn't have a search device like Addison. I wish I could've gone to the Harry Ransom center (also mentioned in our readings) because it houses a major Elizabeth Bowen archive. My research methods worked and I still enjoy reading the paper I wrote.

Blog Post 1: Kevin, the Reluctant Tech Convert

My first real experience with research was in 11th-grade AP English. I had to team up with 3 other people to find what we could on Sylvia Plath...and we had to present the paper. Unfortunately, we had few of the resources available today in 1994. The school library nor the local library presented us with many options other than primary sources--and the ones available were not so helpful. I viewed research as an unfruitful pan for gold long after I was finished with Ms. Plath.

By the time I finally became serious about completing my undergrad in 2005, the research landscape had undergone a huge shift from limited print resources that were clutched stingily to the hearts of faraway universities...to the great information share of the vast caches of internet sources that sprouted in the ether. My freshman year, I was lost in unfamiliar territory. My experiences with computers were at that point fairly limited. I'm still learning, but I've worked hard to get up to speed.

I began with Wikipedia, though unlike Jamie, I tended to use it as a tertiary source in almost everything I turned in. My early profs didn't seem to mind so much--but after the widely-reported flaw in Wikipedia's review of credentials (whereby an unqualified hack altered hundreds of articles from Baywatch to heart surgery)--I stopped using it as anything other than a quick review of a given subject.

I felt like a research beginner for a long time, much like Dana , Hayley, and Michelle feel now (though I suspect a touch of extra humility, since they seemed to have a decent approach in the works;). By the time I finished my BA, however, I felt like I had a pretty good idea where to look. I made a special trip to VT's wonderful Newman Library to research a paper that ended up having legs in several different directions. The paper, "The Shared Cycle: Daoist Principles in the Appalachian Writings of James Still," helped me complete an independent study, was cropped and submitted to become a finalist at WVU's Annual Literature Symposium (the link direct to Concord's writeup of the previous year, as I could not find the article for 2010), was also extended and greatly altered for an application to VT's Philosophy MA program (a failed app, as it turned out)...and was finally reconfigured for my VT English application (thankfully a successful one).

Throughout the course of the research I've done thus far, I've familiarized myself with JSTOR, the MLA International Bibliography, Google Scholar, and a few others (many of which are mentioned in the Towheed article. I intend to continue use of these resources, but I'm also excited about the additional resources offered at VT, such as Summon and Addison.

For my upcoming research paper, I plan to start with these online resources, then move on to print. As of now, I think my subject matter will likely be William S. Burroughs (one of my favorite authors/miscreants from the Beat Generation) though the amount of material out there might end up redirecting me.

Mike Roche: Blog Post 1

In my own writing, research is the cure to my writer's block. Often, I will find I can't complete the next line of a poem because there seems to be no information on the topic left in my head on the particular subject I'm writing about. When this happens, it's usually a good time for me to go looking for interesting facts. If I'm writing a poem about astrophysics I will usually Google it and see what kind of stuff shows up, or like Jamie mentioned in his blog, use Wikipedia. It's not usually a lot of information I need, just some clarification here or a tidbit there to give me some inspiration and keep me writing. And as we read in the reading, Wikipedia is frequently updated; so it can often reflect recent changes in a scientific topic like astrophysics.

The way I research for this class will be different, though. I've learned from the readings that I need to start paying more attention to my sources' credibility, especially when writing a scholarly research paper. This week's reading emphasized the need to verify the credibility of our sources. One helpful way to evaluate it, I found, is by looking at the publishing company. Is it a traditionally "big-name" one like Harper-Collins? Or if it's not, is it at least a university press? Just noticing this stuff will be very helpful when I am collecting sources for research papers.

Jamie's flawed research skills (not to be emulated) Blog Post One

Honestly, my research skills--at least for my fiction--are rudimentary at best. When I want to add verisimilitude to my story I go full cheese and look up the article of interest on Wikipedia. Generally whatever information I find there I'll work in as description or exposition and it's enough to satisfy me. (If, however, I need to be more specific, I go old school: I take a trek to the local library and check out books on the topic).

For research papers, it's kind of a different story. As an example, in an undergrad history course (History of Witchcraft and Magic), I was assigned a paper on a fallen angel and all-around charming lad: Satan. Besides opening the Wikipedia article (and using that article's citations as a jump-off point), I went to Google Scholar and typed in the keyword (to wit: Satan) and up cropped about seventeen thousand articles, books, and essays on the guy.

As for the essay for this class: I plan on using Google Scholar, of course, and Wikipedia to get an idea of my topic, but I really want to try Addison and see what that's all about. (Also, Michelle brought up Project Gutenberg, which I had completely forgotten). And about the topic itself? Who knows. Sometime between then and now there'll be something I read or something I learn in class that intrigues me, something I don't know much about, and that'll be my catalyst.

Dana - Blog Post #1

My research method is elementary at best. As an undergraduate at VT I used Newman library search tools like Addison but never became proficient in the site itself. Like Michelle, I'm fond of Google and Wikipedia as starter sites for personal research. When it comes to scholarly research however, I'm a hard-copy kind of girl. I prefer books as references and will choose those over an online database or journal article any day. Consequently, this has caused me a considerable amount of research grief in the past and has severely limited the kinds of research I've allowed myself to explore.

The screencast in Module One of the Newman library homepage enlightened me to all the ways I failed to use my own library as an undergrad. Module Two's reiteration and deeper discussions of Addison and Summon by way of tutorial links built on the general information of Mod One and gave me a better idea as to what kind of research each tool focuses on. Also like Michelle, I found Towheed's reminder of how to refine Google searches by ~, +, and - functions to be helpful.

As far as my own research goes, to get a vague and general start I'll probably begin with a generalized masculinities search on Google Scholar since my interest is interdisciplinary in nature. I'd like to get a brief overview of what research is out there concerning perceptions of masculinity in American literature. Because masculinities and femininities as a comparative study is generally new, I may be limited in my research to new articles. Dependent on publication dates and the availability of sources, I'll narrow my literature focus based on either on author or decade and then pursue a Summons search. I'm not sure I will indulge in Towheed's suggestion of joining a research community since I've never tracked my own research trajectory before. However, I am interested in charting my bibliographical findings by way of either Endnotes or RefWorks (probably the latter since it doesn't seem to require software).

Hayley's First Blog Post

My research style up to this point has been quite rudimentary. I mostly searched in Addison, and tried to stick with JSTOR or Project Muse as an undergraduate, because I did not know a whole lot about evaluating information sources and wanted to be sure that what I was using was scholarly.

To begin researching for the wiki and the ENGL 5014 essay, I plan to use Summon—the “brand-new ‘library search engine.’” This is an especially attractive resource for me, because, as an undergraduate here at Virginia Tech, Summon did not exist yet. I know I want to research in the field of Medical Humanities, or illness in literature, so I hope that with thought, time, and Summon I will be able to refine this broad research interest into a manageable topic that fascinates me. Once I find this topic, and a few search results that seem dependable, I will begin evaluating/analyzing the information resources each result comes from, using, for example, the site (http://olinuris.library.cornell.edu/ref/research/skill26.htm) included in Module 2 for guidance. I will also use the specialized collections that were suggested to me when working on the Module 2 assignment: “Humanities International Complete,” and “Literature Research Center,” as well as related journals I already know of: “Literature and Medicine” and “Journal of Medical Humanities,” which Summon linked to here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/104920/. This site is very exciting for me, as it includes all articles that were published in the journal from 1997 on. Also, I would like to complement the scholarly journal articles I find with novels—which Module 2 described as primary sources—that depict different facets of medicine, illness, and dying.