NEH Grant Draft

May 09, 2018chevron-down
39 Discussions (#public)
7 Contributors
NEH Grant Draft
··
PreviousNext

Background

DH Advancement Grant Guidelines:

Also found at this link: https://www.neh.gov/files/grants/digital-humanities-advancement-grants-june-5-2018.pdf


Key Dates:

  • NEH draft by May 4th

  • Final to MIT by 28th

  • NEH deadline June 5th


Key Points:

  • Level II awards (from $50,001 to $100,000) are larger grants that can be used for more fullyformed projects that have completed an initial planning phase. Level II proposals should therefore include a more articulated plan of work leading to concrete and tangible outcomes, such as working prototypes; detailed plans for upgrading existing or defunct projects in need of substantive revision, enhancement, or recovery; test beds; or demonstration projects.

    Digital Humanities Advancement Grants at both Level I and Level II stages support activities for periods of performance (award periods) up to eighteen months.

  • The creation or conversion of a scholarly journal is NOT permitted (although the implementation of new modes of scholarly publication is permitted).

  • As a taxpayer-supported federal agency, NEH aims to ensure that scholars, educators, students, and the American public have ready and easy access to the wide range of NEH-funded products. For the Digital Humanities Advancement Grants program, such products may include software code, algorithms, digital tools, reports, articles, and websites. For projects that lead to the development of such products, all other considerations being equal, NEH gives preference to those that provide free access to the public


Evaluation Criteria:

  1. The intellectual significance of the project for the humanities; for a project developing new infrastructure or scholarly methods, its potential to enhance scholarly research, teaching, and learning in the humanities.

  2. The feasibility of the plan of work, and the appropriateness of the project’s methods and use of technology.

  3. The quality of the conception, definition, organization, and description of the project and the applicant’s clarity of expression.

  4. The qualifications, expertise, and levels of commitment of the project director and key project staff or contributors.

  5. The reasonableness of the proposed budget in relation to anticipated results.

  6. The quality and appropriateness of project plans for data management and (if applicable) sustainability.





PreviousNext

Discussions


Labels
Sort
New Discussion on May 11
Suzanne Wallen: who?
New Discussion on May 11
Suzanne Wallen: it is best not to use “we” but to identify the Press or the editors, etc.
Suzanne Wallen: it is best not to use “we” but to identify the Press or the editors, etc. Some readers will not know who “we” is.
New Discussion on May 9
Noah Springer: Matt Gold suggested adding Scalar and Fulcrum. May be good plan. He writes “I think the key point about all of the other platforms in your environmental scan is that none of them focus as explicity...
New Discussion on May 8
Noah Springer: Can Nick speak to any of this specifically? How about Ece?
Noah Springer: Also, can Travis provide any language about how the analytics data will be stored?
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: Would let MITL handle data mgmt (archiving & preservation): https://libraries.mit.edu/data-management/
Suzanne Wallen: MIT Libraries most likely does not have the capacity to manage this data. Someone should speck specifically to the data management team or to Nance McGovern.
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: This Mellon-funded project is closest to what we are proposing to the NEH.
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: This is really important. Many of the platforms referenced (most funded my Mellon) are more mature than PubPub, and have developed a robust feature set. We’ll need to identify 3-4 functions/featu...
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: let’s add author-informed analytics
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: change to “Current”
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: lack of funding or a viable business model, most likely. It’s very hard to sustain community engagement over time.
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: also MLA Commons, still activehttps://mla.hcommons.org/
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: also MLA and CNI
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: Are we reviewing dynamic, iterative projects along with or in lieu of ‘finished’, ‘static’ DH projects?
Noah Springer: I would think that we would review mid-stage and evolving projects as needed, but they would have to be relatively robust.
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: replace with “sectors”
New Discussion on May 3
TE
Terry Ehling: replace with “engaged”
New Discussion on May 2
TE
Terry Ehling: Suggestions from the roster of attendees at the recent Duke DH workshop:Cheryl Ball, Director, Digital Publishing Collaborative, Wayne State http://ceball.comEli Mylonas, Director, Center for Digit...
Underlay got deleted
Noah Springer: I moved the Underlay content that we had in the narrative over here, but somehow it didn’t stick. It’s possible I accidentally forgot to paste it, but we will need to rewrite
TE
Terry Ehling: I wonder if we should mention the Underlay at all in the context of this proposal. Catherine, your thoughts? Based on our meeting with Danny yesterday, this initiative is highly speculative (and ...
TE
Terry Ehling: I just surfaced this article that was posted to arXiv last month:https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.03198.pdf“Knowledge Graphs in the Libraries and Digital Humanities Domain” [dated stamped 8 March 18]If ...
1 more...
New Discussion on May 1
Catherine Ahearn: Not “sure,” but are finding out through XYZ and will evaluate at the end, etc tec
New Discussion on Apr 30
Catherine Ahearn: Reminder to ask Terry about the environmental scan
TE
Terry Ehling: Hi all —The Mellon proposal for the landscape analysis is under review. I’m hoping that our program officer at Mellon will loop back to me this week, to either confirm that the last draft has been...
Issues not addressed
Noah Springer: Do we need something regarding:1) Diversity2) Pedagogy
New Discussion on Apr 30
Noah Springer: How will we evaluate the effectiveness of these reviews? Do we want to create an official type of survey to send out to reviewers, DH project managers, and committees?
New Discussion on Apr 30
Noah Springer: Laura: Could you add some detail to this introduction section? Do we have specific examples of DH projects not getting the appropriate recognition?
New Discussion on Apr 30
Noah Springer: Here is the specific website I am basing this content on: http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/imr/about-media-res-0
New Discussion on Apr 30
Noah Springer: What other conferences would we like to demo at? I have a list of other DH conferences, but I feel like it would be nice to get some conferences not limited to DH specifically, such as a Software S...
New Discussion on Apr 28
Catherine Ahearn: I didn’t want to get too into the weeds with the Underlay, but let me know if this is too confusing and needs to be expanded.
Noah Springer: I feel like we need something here that is clear that Underlay is experimental, and that we will have full use of Portico to maintain our archives. I know this will be more spelled out in the DMP, ...
Noah Springer: I also think we need some detail about the back end of PubPub here. What are the specific affordances of PubPub that will be tested by Born Digital? How will we test those, and how do they benefit ...
New Discussion on Apr 28
Catherine Ahearn: Noah, I thought you could speak best about this!
Environmental Scan
Noah Springer: I plan on this section to start with brief discussion of more traditional methods of DH eval (associations, journals). Then move into more digital platforms (closer to us). Explain how we will be d...
Workplan
Noah Springer: Do we want reviews quarterly? one of the issues with quarterly reviews is the delay between the review’s release, and the project. Projects could change drastically if the reviews are delayed for a...
Catherine Ahearn: What did Laura say on this point? Terry made a good point about these needing to be timely, so perhaps a quicker publishing model is the better way to go here? Like we discussed last week, we can t...