So November is here and the semester is coming to a close way to fast. Only five more weeks left. I don’t really have a chapter draft right now, but the good news is the website is up and running – and actually has some content on it. In the next couple of days I am going to try and hammer out the first building – Kauke. Unfortunately, I probably won’t be able to launch that part of the site till later, on account of the images and other media that will be included not being processed in time. I’ll post some of the content later as soon as its fleshed out a bit.
That’s all for now.
One element in your proposal for an “alternative model” for IS is the criteria by which your secondary readers will evaluate your project (History IS Handbook, p 11). You’ve already negotiated the deliverables for your IS project, but we need to think about what scholarly criteria we’ll use to evaluate your historical and archaeological analysis. You, Dr. Anderson, and I will have to discuss this further, but I thought it might be helpful for you to look at some of the literature on evaluating student multimodal projects. Shannon Christine Mattern’s discussion of the MLA guidelines, in conjunction with the criteria outlined in the History and Archaeology IS handbooks might be a good place to start: http://www.wordsinspace.net/wordpress/2010/08/11/how-to-evaluate-multimodal-work/
History’s criteria are on p. 13-14 of the Handbook.