CharlestonChapter.pdf Library Instruction for Digital Humanities Pedagogy in Undergraduate Classes Stewart Varner, Ph.D. Introduction The phrase “Digital Humanities” has been used to describe a wide variety of scholarly activity. So wide, in fact, it is increasingly difficult to use the term with any sort of precision. It is helpful, therefore, to think about digital humanities in terms of several sub categories. · Online Social Networking · Text Mining/Data Analysis · Data Visualization · Digital Mapping · Digital Libraries and Repositories · Digital Publishing · Digital Pedagogy To a greater or lesser extent, libraries have been crucial partners in several of these subcategories. Many libraries - and many more librarians - have been actively engaged with each other and with the wider academic community through social media. They have worked with researchers to create digital corpora for use in text mining and data analysis projects. GIS and data librarians are becoming common and some libraries have even built impressive spaces where researchers can explore this data visually. Digital libraries and repositories are no longer anything new but they do continue to evolve and have occasionally served as the inspiration - and even the foundation - for exciting open access publications based in the library. Libraries and librarians have also been part of the increasing popularity of digital humanities or digital-humanities-inflected pedagogy. However, these efforts have not generated the same level of interest as some of the others. Perhaps this is because course-based projects are not as sexy as large-scale, showcase projects. The lack of attention could also be due to a general lack of certainty about what “digital pedagogy” actually refers to. Like “digital humanities” itself, it seems as if the term could apply to any number of things and, as this chapter demonstrates, routinely touches upon or incorporates each of the subcategories listed above. Furthermore, at a time when the bulk of library instruction sessions consists of teaching students how to thoughtfully navigate online catalogs, course pages and online databases, isn’t nearly all of our pedagogy digital? Possibly; but this chapter explores a dimension of digital pedagogy that is in some ways an extension of traditional library instruction but is, in other ways, an entirely new pursuit. It will focus on practices that bring faculty and librarians into very close collaboration and create an opportunity for increased student engagement with a range of library resources beyond the catalogs and databases. This chapter begins with an overview of what professors talk about when they talk about digital pedagogy and a series of arguments for why librarians should be a part of that conversation. This is followed by a close look at four kinds of class projects that are particularly well suited to librarian involvement: digital mapping, text analysis, multimedia websites/online exhibits and Wikipedia editing. Before concluding, the chapter addresses some of the staffing, infrastructure and workflow questions that will undoubtedly arise when librarians become collaborators in digital humanities pedagogy. Because this chapter is necessarily an overview of a sprawling set of questions, concerns and possibilities, there are frequent pointers to more in-depth sources and examples. What is digital humanities pedagogy? Technology has, of course, been an important part of higher education for a very long time. Usually, though not always, falling under the purview of “classroom technology,” digital pedagogy is often seen in terms of smart classrooms, learning management systems and enterprise level software solutions. These tools are often valued for their potential to make some routine tasks easier or more efficient. However, there is a parallel, not necessarily connected conversation happening within the disciplines and among faculty about how to creatively and critically incorporate technology into assignments in ways that truly enhance student engagement and encourage them to confront how technology impacts the work they do. These professors are developing assignments that grow out of online culture, embrace multi-modal communication and create opportunities for students to approach course topics and materials from a variety of perspectives often using lightweight, easy to use digital tools. In addition to a growing presence in more traditional outlets, this grassroots approach to integrating digital humanities into course work is championed in journals like Hybrid Pedagogy (​http://www.hybridpedagogy.com/​) and JiTP (The Journal of Interactive Teaching and Pedagogy: http://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/). Both of these publications are peer-reviewed and freely available online. They tend to focus on concrete examples and practical explanations of assignments that use technology to truly enhance student work. JiTP actually has separate sections for sample assignments, tool tips and what they call “teaching fails.” The refreshing humility of the pieces and their focus on practicality reflects the fact that all of this is actually very new to many professors and they need concrete, step-by-step instructions for how to make the most of emerging technology. It also points toward an opportunity for librarians to partner with faculty who are interested in digital humanities pedagogy; not just because librarians excel at instruction but also because the library can provide access to the collections and tools that form the foundation of some of the most innovative assignments. Why should librarians get involved? Most research librarians are engaged in some form of instruction. At its most basic, this includes explaining to students how to use the library’s various discovery systems and how to properly cite the resources they find. The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), in its ​Guidelines for Instruction Programs in Academic Libraries​, suggests that instruction is central to the mission of the library and “should be planned in concert with overall strategic library planning” (2011). These guidelines highlight “information literacy” as the goal of library instruction, defining it as “the abilities involved in identifying an information need, accessing needed information, evaluating, managing and applying information, and understanding the legal, social and ethical aspects of information use” (2011). However, Cheryl LaGuardia has challenged the use of this term. In her article ​Library Instruction in the Digital Age​, LaGuardia suggests that “[o]ur profession’s continued devotion to ‘information literacy’ just shows how far behind the times our national organizations are in acknowledging current realities” (604). For LaGuardia, students do not need help with information skills but with research skills and so she prefers the term “research literacy” (604). LaGuardia specifically mentions research skills like finding scholarly information and evaluating its quality. While her description of “research literacy” does not seem to depart very dramatically from the ACRL’s definition of “information literacy” it does indicate an intriguing shift in emphasis toward something more holistic. “Research Literacy” signals that the library is not only a storehouse for information but a connection point for all the parts of the research process. As digital humanities pedagogy becomes more common, librarians would do well to expand their concept of instruction to include the ability to find, evaluate and learn to use new tools for exploring, sharing, reusing and remixing research materials. Librarians have already taken steps in this direction by providing instruction for citation management tools such as Zotero, End Note and Ref Works. While in some ways innovations, these tools reflect the traditional focus of the library: the collection. However, many libraries are expanding their mission beyond the collection and embracing their role as ​productive​ space on campus. This is perhaps most clear in the rise of library based ​makerspaces​ that are outfitted with 3D printers, boxes of Arduinos and stacks of Raspberry Pi. Facilitating creativity in digital humanities need not be quite so hardware intensive but there are new tools and new skills to be added to the librarian’s repertoire. As the following section will explain, this should include tools and skills for performing digital mapping and text analysis as well as those for building both multimedia websites and online exhibits. This is not simply an attempt to jump on a bandwagon in the hopes of keeping libraries relevant for their own sake. Becoming active partners in digital humanities pedagogy is clearly an extension of research instruction which is the established domain of expertise for librarians within the academy. Furthermore, doing so will encourage greater use of library collections. Libraries have spent millions of dollars over the past three decades to purchase digital collections and digitize their own analog collections. In the hopes of encouraging creative uses of those collections, librarians have advocated for fair use and Open Access and generally put significant effort into making digital collections flexible. It should follow that librarians would also work with faculty and students to identify and utilize tools that will facilitate this work. Additionally, libraries may find that getting involved with digital humanities pedagogy projects is an effective and low-risk way to explore digital humanities more generally. Many libraries look back on a history of multi-year, grant-funded projects as the primary way they have collaborated with faculty who are interested in digital humanities. These projects have often placed significant demands on the library’s IT staff and have raised challenging questions about maintenance and long-term preservation. This is, in large part, why the very mention of digital humanities can cause anxiety for some library administrators. However, digital humanities pedagogy projects are almost always small scale because they tend to be limited to what can be done in one semester. They are also potentially ephemeral and may not require long-term maintenance or preservation. As such, these projects could be convenient opportunities for a library to experiment with digital humanities without signing up for an unsustainable commitment. What are some examples of digital humanities pedagogy projects? The Digital Research Tools Directory (DiRT Directory:​ http://dirtdirectory.org/​) currently indexes hundreds of tools that can be used for digital humanities projects and continues to add more. While the number of tools and techniques may seem unmanageable, there are certain genres of digital humanities pedagogy assignment that are consistently popular. In her article for Hybrid Pedagogy ​Introducing Digital Humanities Work to Undergraduates: An Overview​, Adeline Koh describes four general types of projects that are both common and ripe for library collaboration; digital mapping, text analysis, online exhibits/multimedia websites and ​Wikipedia editing​. This section uses Koh’s outline as a jumping off point to explore each of these types of projects and suggest ways that librarians can become crucial collaborators. New tools and techniques are constantly emerging, so it is pointless to try to explain how specific tools work in this chapter. However, the goals and methods of particular assignments need not be dependent on a single technology. In fact, because the tools change so frequently, it is vital for librarians to be prepared to evaluate new ones as they emerge in order to determine whether or not they are suitable for undergraduate assignments. To help with that, this section concludes with a discussion of some qualities users need to ask when deciding what tool to adopt. This points to the crucial consulting role that librarians can play in digital humanities pedagogy. Some professors may look to the library for examples of potential projects and advice on how to choose tools and design assignments. Just as librarians instruct users on the best ways to find resources in the collection, they can also show users how to use those resources in digital humanities projects. Mapping Projects: Digital mapping software has revolutionized disciplines like geography, city and regional planning and archeology. Software like Esri’s ArcGIG allows users to georeference maps and add layers of information to those map making it possible to explore the social, environmental, economic and political life of a place. However, ArcGIS is a very powerful tool with a very steep learning curve. As a result, it may be overkill for many digital humanities projects, especially those that are part of class assignments. Fortunately, there are several lightweight digital mapping tools that have made incorporating them into class assignments relatively easy. For example, Koh’s article points toward a project created by Gerry Carlin and Mair Evan that marks important places in James Joyce’s Ulysses using Google Maps (2014). This free tool allows users to label places on a map and add information about those places. Giving students an assignment to map a novel could encourage them to dig deeper into a text as they seek out geographic details. It can also help students understand the importance of the city and its spatial relationships to the text. In addition to literature assignments, Google Maps can be useful for history classes by making it simple to place historical events on top of contemporary geography. Another tool that can easily be incorporated into history and cultural studies classes in History Pin (https://www.historypin.org/). This free tool allows users to digitally “pin” images onto a map and organize those images into tours that can made available publicly. Several museums and archives have made images available for use on History Pin and users can augment these with their own collections. For both Google Maps and History Pin (as well as other mapping tools like CartoDB: http://cartodb.com/​; and TimeMapper: http://timemapper.okfnlabs.org/) no special technology is required. They are all web applications and users interact with them through their Internet browsers. Furthermore, none of these tools require programing skills - or even deep geography skills - and thorough documentations is freely available online. While the tools themselves do not require any particular technology or especially in-depth instruction to be used in classes, they provide an opportunity for librarians to suggest digitized collections that could be used to create unique projects. For example, digitized images of letters from special collections could be mapped using Google Map or, images from University Archives could be used to create campus tours with History Pin. Text Analysis: Text analysis is a general term that encompasses a variety of techniques that aim to identify broad patterns or characteristics in a collection of digitized texts. For some scholars, this kind of work is the original DH and it traces its roots to the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) and what was known as “humanities computing” (Schreibman et al, 2004). An important moment in the history of this particular field came in 2000 when Stanford literature scholar Franco Moretti used the term “distant reading” in an article in the New Left Review titled ​Conjectures on World Literature​. The term is a play on “close reading,” a standard method in literature studies that focuses sustained attention on specific chapters, passages and sentences in single texts. Moretti argues that this method is not adequate for studying entire national literatures as it requires scholars to focus on just a few, typically canonical, texts. In his article, Moretti states that distant reading “allows you to focus on units that are much smaller or much larger than the text: devices, themes, tropes—or genres and systems” (57). Using computers, Moretti found he was able to study hundreds of texts at once and gain insights that he would have been physically unable to recognize using traditional methods. There are several techniques that go under the names “text analysis” or “distant reading.” Sometimes, the research is relatively straightforward and relies on simple word counts and frequency comparisons. For example, in his book “Reading Machines: Toward An Algorithmic Criticism,” Stephen Ramsay describes how he used simple scripting to identify which words are distinctive to certain characters in Virginia Woolf’s “The Waves” (11-17). More elaborate processes such as topic modeling, named-entity recognition or sentiment analysis have also become more common. The Civil War historian Rob Nelson used topic modeling, a process that identifies groups of words that often appear together, to look for differences in the way the New York Times and the Richmond Dispatch reported on the war for his project called “Mining the Dispatch” (http://dsl.richmond.edu/dispatch/pages/home). Text analysis is often difficult for non-programmers but tools are beginning to emerge that significantly lower the barrier to entry. For example, Voyant (​http://voyant-tools.org/​) performs very basic word counts and produces simple visualizations (word clouds, frequency comparisons) through a very easy-to-use interface. Though more demanding that Voyant, Mallet (​http://mallet.cs.umass.edu/topics.php​) is a software toolkit that facilitates topic modeling. Neither tool requires much beyond a computer and a robust connection to the internet. Depending on the size of the digital corpus being studied, larger computers may be necessary. However, it is typically the technical know-how (including the ability to interpret results) rather than limits of the hardware that present the biggest challenges for scholars getting started with text analysis. While these tools and techniques are becoming common as a research method, they are also being recognized for their pedagogical value. For example, Paul Fyfe has written about an assignment he developed called “How Not to Read a Victorian Novel.” He asks his students to identify a novel they have not read, use a variety of text analysis tools to study it and then to write a paper on what they discover. He encouraged the students “to scrutinize any moment of frustration as ... an opportunity to change the kinds of questions they were asking” (3). Clearly they were not able to answer the same questions they would if they had simply read the book so the exercise succeeded in getting the students to look at literature from a new perspective. Exercises like this make excellent opportunities for collaboration between faculty and librarians. In addition to working with professors to identify appropriate tools for different assignments, librarians are well positioned to coordinate the development of digital corpora that are ready for study. For example, the University of North Carolina has made available the plain text files that run behind some of its most popular digital collections in order to encourage text analysis (http://docsouth.unc.edu/docsouthdata/). This may at first seem simplistic but the effectiveness of digital text analysis depends on the quality of the data the researcher uses. Digital corpora often need to be pre-processed before they can be properly analyzed. Librarians know what digital collections are available and can work with their partners to get them ready for study. Multimedia Websites and Online Exhibits: Since the beginning of the World Wide Web, there has been excitement about the ease with which people can share information with the rest of the world. Whether or not the web has always lived up to its democratizing hype is up for debate but it is true that professors and students now have some very exciting ways to share the work they do which differ in both degree and kind from the eight-page term paper. Some professors incorporate blogs into their courses to encourage discussion between students outside of the classroom. For example, as part of his Introduction to Digital Studies class at Davidson College, Mark Sample asks his students to take turns taking on different roles in the class’ WordPress blog each weeks (http://sites.davidson.edu/dig101/course-guidelines/blogging-guidelines/). One group, “The Readers,” are assigned to write responses to the assigned readings and post them to the class blog. “The Responders” are responsible for commenting on those posts and “the Historians” are asked to find some other resource online and connect it to that week’s topic or conversation. Other classes have utilized websites as a kind of digital publication for showcasing student work. This can be as simple as asking students to post their research papers on a publicly accessible website. However, one of the benefits of asking students to post their work online is giving them the opportunity to take advantage of all of the affordances of the web. For example, they can easily link to other resources and incorporate images as well as embedded video and audio files into their work. Students in Brian Croxall’s Introduction to Digital Humanities class at Emory University asks students to post the results of their final projects - including multimedia content - to the public course website (​http://www.briancroxall.net/s14dh/​) which, like Professor Sample’s blog, is built using WordPress. A third kind of course-based website assignment is the online exhibit. Usually connected to history or cultural studies classes, these projects are about getting students into archives, working with primary sources and using them to tell a story. Many online exhibit assignments use a tool called Omeka (​http://omeka.org/​ and http://omeka.net/); an open source content management system (CMS) specifically designed with libraries, museums and archives in mind. What separates Omeka from other CMSs is that it is built around the digitized item - rather than the web page or the blog post - so it is very good for organizing collections and highlighting individual items within them. The tool asks users to describe each digital item using Dublin Core and then allows them to assign those items to collections. Once organized into collections, items can be used in exhibits and contextualized with content written by students. For example, Professor Cathy Moran Hajo worked with students at New York University to build a collection of 1830 images related to Greenwich Village History and then organize those images into 75 student-curated exhibits (​http://gvh.aphdigital.org/​). Thanks to emergence of content management systems like WordPress and Omeka, it is very easy for students and faculty to build these blogs and websites. Though there are usually simplified versions of these platforms available free of charge and hosted externally, many colleges and universities have officially adopted at least one for the purpose of allowing members of their community to make work public while maintaining their institutional affiliation. While using the technology is relatively simple, hosting a local installation is no small undertaking. Managing updates and establishing processes for creating user accounts can be very tricky depending on the tool. Because these projects can include many moving parts, librarians can guide faculty through planning the entire lifecycle. Even if hosting local instances is not possible, librarians can still work with faculty to incorporate free and externally hosted versions of these tools into course work. One role is to simply act as consultant and explain what each tool does and why one might be better than another for a particular assignment. Once a class adopts a tool, librarians can be valuable partners in instructing students how to use the tool. This can include both technical instruction and also guidance on intellectual property rights and fair use. If the project is going to use images from special collections, the librarian can help the professors think strategically (and realistically) about digitization and also instruct students on proper metadata practices. This is particularly important in Omeka projects that depend on good metadata for organizing and searching collections. Wikipedia editing: Scholars and librarians have a complex relationship with Wikipedia. The crowd-sourced digital encyclopedia seems to circumvent traditional means of establishing authoritative information. On the other hand, its size, ubiquity and frequently surprising level of trustworthiness have made it difficult to ignore. This anxiety over Wikipedia is particularly obvious in the classroom. Some professors flatly refuse to allow students to cite it as a source. Others have taken more of an “if you can’t beat them, join them” attitude and have encouraged students to become Wikipedia editors, at least temporarily, in the context of a Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. A Wikipedia Edit-a-thon is an event where people meet for the express purpose of improving Wikipedia. These events are usually tightly focused on improving a specific aspect of the resource such as adding more women scientists or African American artists. While an edit-a-thon requires more time than a typical class session, planning and participating in one could be developed as a class project. Contrary to popular fears, there are actually several mechanisms in place to combat unverifiable information and “vandalism” in Wikipedia. For example, there are limits to how many new users can request editor accounts at once and a sudden flurry of unexpected activity can set off moderator alarms. Therefore, Wikipedia advises groups planning to host edit-a-thons to plan ahead by creating an official project page on the Wikipedia:Meetup site and inviting several experienced editors to advise new users. Detailed instructions of planning and hosting an edit-a-thon can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_run_an_edit-a-thon​. Libraries and librarians can be involved in Wikipedia edit-a-thons in several ways. For example, the library could be the perfect venue for such an event particularly if it is happening on the weekend and/or involves participants from more than just one class. Also, there is a good chance some librarians are also active Wikipedia editors and could help show those who are unfamiliar with the process how it works. In the case of a targeted event, librarians could prepare in advance by developing lists of suggestions for work the participants might do. These could be suggestions for subjects that need to be added as well as existing subjects that need further development or additional citations. Most importantly, librarians can be there for the editors and work with them to find the kinds of verifiable information Wikipedia requires. To this end, they may want to identify and organize appropriate resources for the participants in advance. Evaluating digital tools: One of the real benefits of digital humanities pedagogy projects is that they encourage experimentation. However, there are still pros and cons for each tool and it is important to ask some questions before investing time and effort even if the stakes are relatively low. While every tool will raise its own specific questions, below are a few general questions users need to ask about any tool. Exports Many digital tools are used to create some kind of image, chart, map or table. When evaluating a tool it is important to consider what the tool actually allows you to do with what it creates. For example, Voyant allows users to download image files of the visualizations it creates that are easily embedded in websites. Other programs don’t offer this functionality and force users to resort to relatively low-quality screenshots if they want to use the images elsewhere. When building entire websites or exhibits, this question can be even more important. Both WordPress and Omeka allow users to export entire sites. This can be useful if a scholar moves to another institution or if the original institution decides it can no longer maintain the site. It should be noted that individual Omeka exhibits cannot be separated from their collections. This means that if students individually build exhibits as part of a class project, they cannot simply download their part and take it with them after the class is over. Data Storage and Intellectual Property Digital humanities pedagogy projects which are entirely or in part public may require special considerations about privacy. First, instructors will want to confirm that tools and assignments comply with FERPA regulations. Just as obviously, librarians will want to be vigilant about intellectual property rights and make sure students and faculty understand what kinds of content can and cannot be incorporated into public projects. In addition to copyright concerns, librarians should also pay attention to restrictions that may be part of donor agreements for items in special collections. Additionally, it is important to become familiar with the terms and conditions that govern the use of the tools they choose. This is particularly important with free tools that may claim certain rights over user-generated content that is stored in the application. Documentation Documentation refers to the instructions and notes that are available to help users understand how to use a tool. Some tools are extremely well documented with user manuals and how-to videos. Other tools, usually boutique projects developed for specific purposes, have virtually no documentation. For open source and/or free tools, documentation is particularly crucial because there will not be a customer service representative available to troubleshoot the project. In addition to (or, if desperate, as a substitute for) documentation, look for detailed, user-created tutorials and instructional videos. Tools with large user communities often have online forums that can be very helpful but check to see if they are currently active. Stability The legitimate concern that libraries and archives have for stability is often at odds with the rapid pace of technological change. It is unreasonable to ask for a tool be available and stable for even five years but there are strategies for identifying tools that will at least get a class through to the end of the semester. Look for a track record and a large user community. If many people are depending on a tool, there are better odds that it will persist or that a forward migration plan will emerge. Regardless of how stable a tool seems to be, it is important to ask the question and manage expectations appropriately. If a project needs to live for at least a couple of years, a more conservative approach will be necessary. However, if a project is more ephemeral, that could be an opportunity to experiment with something that is interesting but less stable. If something goes wrong, collaborators will likely be more understanding if everyone understood from the beginning that the project was not meant to last. Therefore, being clear about everyone’s expectations from the beginning is very important. Usefulness The bottom line for any pedagogical tool is whether or not it is useful. Usefulness can be subjective but, in general, useful tools have at least two qualities: they add a new dimension to the way students engage with course material and they are not so distracting that they keep students from learning. For example, students working on an Omeka exhibit will have to describe each item in their collection with Dublin Core. This can actually be a powerful way for students to wrestle with primary sources. Furthermore, the knowledge that their exhibits will be public adds an additional opportunity for students to demonstrate what Virginia Kuhn and Vicki Callahan call “critical intentionality” (306). They suggest in “Nomadic Archives: Remix and the Drift to Praxis” that, while students may be more engaged because their work is public, “part of being digital deeply is means being discriminating about how, when and where one places one’s work and information online” (306). The other end of that spectrum is when the technology gets in the way. For example, students who attempt an overly ambitious text analysis project may find that they spend so much time trying to make the technology work that they only superficially deal with the course material. Technology can also be distracting is when there is simply too much of it. In his article “Tired of Tech: Avoiding Tool Fatigue in the Classroom,” Brian Croxall found that his urge to create opportunities for his students to experiment with digital tools resulted in underwhelming work and student frustration. When technology is meant to enhance a class rather than define it, tools must be chosen with care and purpose. “Letting our students know what we hope they will learn … by using a new tool helps them understand that they are being set a new and unfamiliar task not out of sheer caprice but rather with a pedagogical goal in mind” (253). How can a library get ready to collaborate on digital humanities pedagogy projects? By focusing on free, easy to use tools and restricting development to the confines of a course, digital humanities pedagogy projects usually require less investment from the library than other types of projects. However, less investment does not mean no investment and libraries that want to get involved will need to take steps to be ready. This includes looking at staff, infrastructure and workflows to see if this new work can be managed or if any changes need to be made. Staff Where the responsibility for providing digital humanities pedagogy instruction should fall will depend on how a library is organized as well as its institutional culture. In some libraries, there may be dedicated instructional staff who would be able to add these tools to their set of skills with relative ease. For other libraries, it may be the subject liaisons who should take on this role. Whoever winds up doing the actual instruction, this is a good opportunity for cross training where staff share their skills with others. This not only increases the number of people who are able to collaborate with classes but also helps raise awareness about what kinds of projects users are interested in and what tools are being used. Infrastructure Most of the examples presented in this chapter require no special infrastructure beyond what is typically found in a research library. The exception to this would be content management systems like WordPress and Omeka that can be installed locally. Regardless of whether or not a library wanted to officially offer a tool that requires local hosting, some dedicated “sandbox space” can be extremely useful for testing and evaluating emerging tools. Of course, the presence of a sandbox implies that someone is responsible for managing it and providing assistance when a tool or technique needs to be tested. Workflows The decision to collaborate with classes on digital humanities projects will likely lead to many other decisions. If a library is going to offer Omeka for class projects, who will be responsible for managing user accounts and how long will projects remain live? If a project requires digitization of items from special collections, how will those items be added to the queue and how will they be delivered to the class? Regardless of the project, who in the library will be responsible for instruction and how will that be reflected in their job description? If a project is to result in a public facing product hosted and maintained by the library, what guidelines for scholarly integrity and quality should it meet? There are many ways of dealing with each of these scenarios that will depend on local circumstances and goals. It will save time and frustration if paths through these decisions can be established early and projects can be guided along with relative consistency. Conclusion Digital humanities pedagogy has an experimental, DIY sensibility and uses technology to help students engage course material. There is an ongoing active conversation among faculty who share assignments and tools with one another and it is important for librarians to be a part of that. By partnering with professors who are teaching digital humanities techniques librarians can build on their role as instructors and reflect the emerging identity of the library as an active and productive space on campus and not just a warehouse of primary and secondary sources. Furthermore, connecting the library to digital humanities work will create new ways for users to work with library collections and give the library a low-stakes way to experiment with emerging tools. Some common ways for libraries to collaborate with classes include creating digital maps, performing text analysis and building multimedia websites and online exhibits. As interest in these kinds of projects grows, more tools and techniques for building them emerge. By remaining current on developments and trends in the field, the librarian can be an important partner and consultant. However, to support librarians in this capacity, libraries need to establish effective training opportunities for staff, ensure proper infrastructure is available and create workflows that will facilitate innovative work. Works Cited ACRL Board of Directors (June 2003. Revised October 2011). Guidelines for Instruction Programs in Academic Libraries. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/guidelinesinstruction Croxall, B. (2013). Tired of Tech: Avoiding Tool Fatigue in the Classroom. Writing and Pedagogy, Vol 5, Issue 2, 249–268. doi: 10.1558/wap.v5i2.249 Fyfe, P. (2011). "How to Not Read a Victorian Novel." Journal of Victorian Culture, Vol. 16, Issue 1, 102-106. Koh, A. (2014, August 14). Introducing Digital Humanities Work to Undergraduates: An Overview. Hybrid Pedagogy. Retrieved from http://www.hybridpedagogy.com/journal/introducing-digital-humanities-work-undergraduates-ove rview/ Kuhn, V. and Callahan, V. (Year of publication). Nomadic Archives: Remix and the Drift to Praxis. In Hirsch, B. Editor, ​Digital Humanities Pedagogy: Practices, Principles and Politics​ (291 - 308). London: Open Book Publisher. LaGuardia, C. (2011). Library Instruction in the Digital Age. Journal of Library Administration, Volume 51 ​, ​Issue 3 ​, 301-308. doi: 10.1080/01930826.2011.556948 Moretti, F. (2000). Conjectures On World Literature. New Left Review, 1, January-February 2000, 54-68. Retrieved from http://newleftreview.org/II/1/franco-moretti-conjectures-on-world-literature Ramsay, S. (2011). Reading Machines: Toward an Algorithmic Criticism. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Schreibman, S., Siemens, R. and Unsworth, J. (2004). The Digital Humanities and Humanities Computing: An Introduction. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemens, and J. Unsworth (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/