Forging a community of practice for digital library pedagogy: An update from the new Digital Library Federation Digital Library Pedagogy group

Eleanor Dickson (University of Illinois) and Elizabeth Kelly (Loyola University New Orleans) are the founders and co-chairs of the Digital Library Federation (DLF) Digital Library Pedagogy group, launched in late 2015 with the goal of building a community of practice around teaching with and about digital collections. In this post, Dickson and Kelly report on the activities of the group, sharing themes that have emerged and offering opportunities to participate in next steps.

The DLF Digital Library Pedagogy group’s founding reflects a growing interest within the DLF community in teaching with and about digital libraries. Many sessions at both the 2015 Liberal Arts Colleges Preconference and the DLF Forum in Vancouver centered on issues relating to instruction and digital libraries. Discussions surrounding these sessions prompted the formation of the group, largely through word-of-mouth after the DLF Forum. Over 150 members have joined since the group formed in December 2015.

“Digital library pedagogy” is a nebulous concept that can mean any number of things to the librarians, archivists, library school faculty, and digital humanists who have subscribed to the our email list. The initial activities of the group – two Twitter chats held in early January 2016 – were aimed at better understanding the role that the community wanted this group to play. One of our first Twitter chat prompts was: “How do you think digital library pedagogy differs from digital pedagogy?” Participants noted the importance of carrying the library’s long history of engagement with information literacy into digital realms with a focus on information over technology. As librarians we engage not only with teaching how to find resources but in the ethics of knowledge representation. The materials do matter, of course– digital archival and primary source collections are often a focus, and digital collections themselves are “examples of publishing openly.” Digital library pedagogy emphasizes exploring and examining beyond the surface by being more obvious about knowledge representation and empowering students to “no, really, THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU’RE DOING.”

Several overarching themes emerged from the chats:

Teaching & Pedagogy

The first was, unsurprisingly, aspects of teaching and pedagogy as they relate to digital libraries. Members of the email list vary in their professional affiliations and responsibilities, but many are librarians at academic institutions who are responsible for providing information literacy and technology instruction that often fall under the umbrella of digital humanities or digital scholarship. Others are library school faculty teaching a future workforce of digital librarians. Participants wanted to learn how to teach with resources that can be found in digital libraries including digitized museum and archives/special collections material, web archives, and social media content. Additionally, Tweeters expressed an interest in teaching digital stewardship[1. An excellent discussion of the difference between digital preservation, curation, and stewardship can be found at the Library of Congress Digital Preservation blog.], the process of creating, preserving, curating, and disseminating digital materials.[2.Especially appropriate as the DLF is now the host of the National Digital Stewardship Alliance (NDSA).]  Finally, the group mentioned the importance of digital library teaching resources that speak to diversity and inclusivity. As archivists and librarians work to acknowledge the role that bias plays in how we collect, preserve, and describe collections, we must consider how these biases are reflected and addressed in library instruction.

Resource Sharing & Skills Development

To better support teaching, the Digital Library Pedagogy group would like to engage in resource sharing and professional skills development. Ideas for sharing resources included the creation of a lesson plan or sample assignments “cookbook,” as well as class sharing or co-teaching, an exciting possibility for librarians and faculty with limited instructional opportunities interested in gaining experience in the classroom and receiving mentorship from more experienced practitioners. Group members need opportunities and support for developing professional skills. These could take the form of tutorials, webinars, workshops for learning how to use particular tools, developing lesson plans, and evaluating instruction.

Outreach

Finally, there is a need for best practices for outreach and collaboration. Library instruction and digital humanities/digital scholarship projects are often partnerships between librarians, archivists, teaching faculty, technologists, students, and others. How do successful collaborators initially make connections, and how do they maintain those connections? How can those who successfully cooperate with colleagues both inside and outside of their institution impart that knowledge and expertise to others?

Subgroups are currently forming around these three concepts. Those interested in joining a subgroup can add their name to a sign-up list, and be sure to join the Google group for up-to-date information. You can read more about the most recent Twitter chats in either the spreadsheet or Storyfied versions. Our next Twitter chat will be Tuesday, July 12 at 2PM and 8PM EST using the hashtag #DLFteach, and you can follow us at @ElizabethJelly and @EllieDickson. The full schedule of future Twitter chats is posted on the Digital Library Pedagogy webpage.

Creative Commons LicenseThis written work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images and graphics may retain other licenses.
[wp_biographia user=”edickson”]

[wp_biographia user=”ekelly”]

Pedal to the Metal: Our Year of DH

How did Virginia Commonwealth University librarians John Glover, Humanities Research Librarian, and Kristina Keogh, formerly the Visual Arts Research Librarian, build a DH initiative from the ground up? In this post, they detail their process for dreaming up, planning, developing, deploying, and evaluating Digital Pragmata over the course of its first year. 

Impetus

ALA Annual in 2012 featured the first meeting of the ACRL Digital Humanities Discussion Group and a preconference entitled “Digital Humanities in Theory and Practice: Tools and Methods for Librarians.” The former contributed to the creation of dh+lib, and the general interest in both demonstrated the demand for things DH-related within ALA. They also inspired the two of us to create Digital Pragmata, an ongoing digital arts and humanities initiative at Virginia Commonwealth University, based primarily at VCU Libraries, which kicked off with an event series. We did this within an academic year, without a formal structure to accommodate the work, no local past initiatives to draw on as examples, and minimal visible on-campus DA/DH community. Digital Pragmata has grown VCU Libraries’ DH profile on campus, reached hundreds of VCU faculty and students interested in digital scholarship, and paved the way for us to offer new kinds of outreach and support.

First Steps

Early in July of 2012, the two of us met to review our recent liaison activities and plans for the coming academic year. Not for the first time, we noted that we were continuing to encounter faculty and graduate students at VCU interested in the digital arts or digital humanities, whether in scholarly, pedagogical, or creative capacities, many of whom weren’t prepared to “do” DH, and who seemed to be looking for community.

Multiple developments relevant to the digital arts and humanities are moving forward at VCU, but no unit on campus is currently devoted solely to the digital arts or humanities. This is somewhat surprising, as Virginia Commonwealth University is a large urban research institution, with an FTE around 31,752 and various departments, programs, and interdisciplinary centers working in these areas–including top-ranking arts programs. On the other hand, as is often observed, libraries occupy a neutral ground, and finding the right blend of people, place, and resources takes time.

Based on what John had learned at ALA in Anaheim, he broached the subject of collaborating to create a digital arts and humanities initiative based out of VCU Libraries, and Kristina enthusiastically agreed. After a brief discussion, we decided that we wanted a real shot at creating something sustainable that would dovetail with library and university strategic goals: not just a workshop, lecture, or online presence, but a combination of all three, with growth potential. We decided provisionally, at John’s suggestion, to name it “Digital Pragmata,” reflecting the drive toward usefulness at the core of “more hack, less yack,” as well as the general concept of “digital things.”

Our interest in the project was strong, but we faced various potential hurdles. In our time at VCU, no liaison librarians had run, let alone started, a project on the scale we planned. Initiatives from our division, Public Services (since renamed “Research and Learning”), had not by and large previously been characterized by agile project management. We didn’t know how many people we would have to convince or collaborate with, or whom to seek out as partners. We had never attempted a project requiring substantial financial support from our library’s leadership. Perhaps our biggest hurdle was overcoming our own preconceived notions, both of what constituted feasible projects for librarians at our level and what kind of support we could expect from our institution.

The Landscape

As part of our initial planning process, we studied other institutions’ approaches. We learned, for instance, that the Institute for Advanced Study at the University of Minnesota has established Digital Humanities 2.0, a collaborative working group “to investigate and create ways of advancing artistic creation and scholarly research in the humanities by exploring digitization and Web 2.0 technologies.” We also looked at SUNY Buffalo’s Humanities Institute (HI) Research Workshops, which sponsors guest lectures and hosts presentations of research in progress by faculty and graduate students from diverse disciplines.

We were particularly interested in initiatives based out of university libraries. A good model is the Digital Arts & Humanities Lecture Series developed and hosted by the Brown University Library and the John Nicholas Brown Center for Public Humanities and Cultural Heritage. This series closely aligned with our own goals of bringing together faculty and students from different disciplines engaged in digital projects.

We also looked at developing projects in the digital humanities at VCU. Though there are a growing number of DH projects based in various departments, at our institution there has been no one central place or structure where scholars and students that work on digital arts and humanities projects can come together. VCU has, however, been working toward a number of initiatives that would offer the possibility of likely partnerships if we were to successfully establish a DH initiative. These include the Institute for Contemporary Art (ICA) and the Center for Advanced Research in the Humanities, which is currently recruiting for a Director. In addition, at the time, VCU Libraries was in the process of recruiting a Head for the newly conceived Innovative Media Studio, which will become part of the new addition to the James Branch Cabell Library set to open in Fall 2015. In the meantime, the continuing lack of one (or any) zone of interaction for those interested in this type of activity was becoming an increasing issue.

Stakeholders and Speakers

While we were waiting for final approval from the Libraries’ Administration, we set up meetings with people and groups inside and outside the library in order to begin laying our groundwork. We knew there would be many moving parts, but getting buy-in on campus was important. Our first meetings were with two targeted units outside the library – the Office of Research and the Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE). By bringing these units on board as named co-sponsors, we knew we could – from the start – increase our network of contacts. Their connections would also offer another venue for promotion.

After we received final approval, we met with stakeholders inside the library, including other research and collections librarians and department heads from Special Collections & Archives to discuss Digital Pragmata. Our colleagues offered many suggestions for potential speakers and knowledge of relevant projects around the country. Our web presence would not have been possible without the work of Erin White and Joey Figaro, members of the web team from our Digital Technologies department. Finally, we contacted and met with likely faculty and department heads around campus to publicize the events and our reasons for starting the initiative.

The speakers developed from a list we populated, as well as suggestions from others we spoke with during this initial process. We received one piece of advice that shifted our initial thinking about our first two panel sessions. It was suggested that outside speakers (i.e. non-VCU people) were more likely to elicit interest from faculty and students as we worked to establish Digital Pragmata. We decided to refocus our two panels to feature outside speakers, with VCU faculty acting as moderators for each event. Based on the initial advice, we felt this would garner interest in the concept, so that we could focus more on VCU projects down the road.

In the third week of December, we met with our supervisor, Bettina Peacemaker, and the Associate University Librarian for Public Services, Dennis Clark, to discuss Digital Pragmata. Administrative Council had met, discussed, and endorsed our proposal for two panels and a digital projects funding workshop, all of which would be designed to appeal to faculty and graduate students across the range of arts and humanities disciplines. We were given the go-ahead to begin planning in earnest, empowered to work with those colleagues we thought could contribute time or expertise, with the knowledge that we had financial support to make the event a success.

There was to be no task force, working group, or standing committee. In addition to this vote of confidence, we were simply asked to check in when we had questions or there were developments (e.g. speakers confirmed). This was simultaneously liberating and nerve-wracking: we had been entrusted with a high-profile project, the success or failure of which could affect the library and its perception on campus, students and faculty in our disciplines, and our own work life and careers.

Into the Weeds

Figure 1 - Digital Pragmata Mailer
Mailer

Our initial proposed budget was $600-$800. This, we argued, would be satisfactory to pay for light refreshments as well as travel, parking, and lunch to bring one speaker to each event from outside the Richmond metropolitan area. As our proposal’s parameters expanded, however, we were lucky to be approved for a much larger and more flexible budget, allowing us to offer honoraria for six outside speakers, travel and hotel accommodation for our out-of-town speakers, lunches for the speakers and university and library administration, receptions following two events, and gift bags for our speakers and moderators. Our process was heavily influenced by Gregory Kimbrell, VCU Libraries’ Membership and Events Coordinator, who both guided us and did or oversaw much of the events coordination work himself.

We spent a substantial amount of time trying to determine how best to publicize Digital Pragmata. One of the most important meetings in January was with our Director of Communication and Public Relations, Sue Robinson, with whom we discussed our overall publicity strategy and online presence. She helped us to think more effectively about our message and audience, and to target our promotion.

Facebook Page
Facebook Page

Sue, in turn, worked with a graphic designer on design concepts, one of which eventually led to the image that currently illustrates print materials like posters and mailers, and is the header image for Digital Pragmata’s blog, Facebook page, and Twitter feed (hashtag #digprag). Throughout the spring, colleagues, students, and faculty spoke effusively about the image’s eye-catching nature.

Showtime, and After

The March 26 and April 25 events each unfolded in similar fashion, on similar schedules. Library facilities and events colleagues ensured that our location, a multipurpose room seating around 65 people, was clean, with chairs set. Colleagues in library systems helped ensure that our technology was ready, and (see below) were indispensable when a travel debacle prevented one panelist from presenting in person. Colleagues from library events and administration helped to direct traffic, check attendees in, and keep everything running smoothly.

Our first panel, on March 26, had 49 attendees and focused on the “front ends” of digital projects, with speakers including Ed Ayers of the University of Richmond, Amanda French of the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media, and Emily Smith of 1708 Gallery. Each represented very different aspects of “front ends,” including Ed’s award-winning work creating many high-profile DH projects over the years, Amanda’s introduction to tools  for DH newcomers, and Emily’s experience with large-scale art projects involving image projection. The panel began with comments from multiple people, starting with John Ulmschneider, VCU’s University Librarian, and it ended with a Q&A session led by moderator Roy McKelvey, of VCU’s Department of Graphic Design.

Our second panel, on April 25, had 54 attendees and focused on the “back ends” of digital projects, with speakers including Ben Fino-Radin of Rhizome and MoMA, Francesca Fiorani of the University of Virginia, and Mike Poston of the Folger Shakespeare Library. These speakers took different approaches to the topic, including Ben’s work recreating and emulating defunct BBSes, Francesca’s process in building Leonardo and His Treatise on Painting, and Mike’s hands-on experience creating Folger Digital Texts. The panel began with comments from several people, starting with Dennis Clark, our administrator and advocate, and it ended with a Q&A session led by moderator Joshua Eckhardt, of VCU’s Department of English.

The funding workshop, held on May 2, had 20 attendees and ran somewhat differently. We chose not to film it, so that attendees might feel more free to speak about their own projects, though this wound up not being the case. Our presenters were Jessica Venable, from VCU’s Office of Research, and David Holland, from VCU’s School of the Arts, each of whom have expertise in grantsmanship and funding. Attendance for this workshop was lower than the panels, which was initially somewhat disappointing, but at twenty people, it was a tremendous turnout compared to most other VCU Libraries open workshops, particularly as it occurred during final exams.

Stumbles, Challenges, and Surprises

The main problems we experienced were those associated with the planning and execution of almost any event. These include issues such as when during the semester, day of the week, and time of day to schedule programming to allow for maximum attendance. Similarly, finding rooms on campus large enough to hold as many attendees as possible, without being too large for the number that do show up, proved a challenge. We also grappled with travel issues for our speakers, specifically a canceled flight that made it necessary for one of our panelists to present virtually from the Philadelphia International Airport.

Perhaps more unique to this type of endeavor were the problems we faced with audience expectations. If your proposed DH initiative is something completely new, the audience may be happy with almost any level or type of programming provided, having no real expectations. Later on, as our post-event surveys revealed, our audience attended with some expectations about the nature of the programming.

Attendee Survey
Attendee Survey

Different people want different things or all things – including lectures, conversational and networking events, and active learning opportunities. There was also some tension between an interest in the opportunity to learn something potentially new and innovative from outside speakers and an interest in (and even a demand for) Digital Pragmata’s role and perceived mandate to highlight VCU projects.

Various other results were unexpected. Many attendees were attracted to the topic of “digital scholarship” and “digital objects,” but came from departments outside the arts or humanities. Likewise, while we expected a positive response overall based on early conversations with stakeholders, only one survey respondent felt that the panel they attended did not meet their expectations. It was a pleasure to succeed, by and large, but the margin by which we passed expectations and the level of intensity of interest across the university was remarkable.

The Road Ahead

Attendees’ response to Digital Pragmata was overwhelmingly positive, and the year ended with the initiative counted a success by stakeholders inside and outside of the library. Survey comments heavily influenced our plans for 2013-2014, which gradually took shape over the summer. Upcoming programming will feature a blend of events, from a brown bag series to multiple large events, at and beyond the scale of Spring 2013.

The complexion of the project has changed with Kristina’s move from VCU Libraries to Indiana University, where she is Head of their Fine Arts Library, though she retains an interest in and hopes to continue to contribute to Digital Pragmata. John is now working with new partners at VCU Libraries, both to enlarge the initiative’s base of expertise and to accommodate a more ambitious schedule of programming for the new year. The project was time-consuming and sometimes exhausting, but it allowed us to engage with hundreds of faculty and students in the arts and humanities, as well as the broader VCU and local communities, teaching us about events planning, programming, publicity, outreach, and more about the digital arts and humanities in the process.

[wp_biographia user=”jglover”]
[wp_biographia user=”keoghkm”]

POST: Talking About Digital Pedagogy

In a post on the Cultural Heritage Informatics Initiative site, Ashley Wiersma, CHI Fellow and doctoral candidate in history at Michigan State University, examines the digital, the pedagogical, and the location of authority. She concludes:

The power of digital pedagogy lies in its innovative and disruptive nature, which urges scholars to re-examine educational structures long taken for granted. Courses burst out of their original containers as students and teachers alike discover links between and among various bodies of knowledge, thereby undermining arbitrary disciplinary borders.  Most importantly, digital pedagogy compels practitioners to search out new ways to engage students in the creative analysis of subject matter and together with them “discover how to participate in the transformation of [our] world.”

 

POST: Learning By Doing: Labs As Pedagogy

Cameron Blevins writes here about the challenges of teaching digital methods in a history classroom. Some of the experiences might ring true with librarians tasked with teaching information literacy, such as this:

My first lab, for instance, spelled out instructions in excruciating detail. Unfortunately, this led to exactly the kind of passive learning I wanted to avoid. I liken it to the “tutorial glaze” – focusing so much on getting through individual tasks that you lose track of how they all fit together or how you would apply them beyond the dataset at hand. The ability to teach early-stage technical skills involves a litany of pedagogical challenges that humanities instructors are simply not used to tackling.

How might librarians partner with faculty to avoid this scenario? What techniques have you discovered to help students from a variety of skill levels remain engaged throughout an instruction session?

RESOURCE: Digital Literacy and Digital Citizenship

Elijah Meeks (Digital Humanities Specialist, Stanford University Libraries) has shared notes from his presentation on the digital humanities to the Bay Area Teacher Development Collaborative, in which he makes a case for its importance at the high school level. The talk not only gives a useful introduction to key tools and projects in GIS, text analysis, and network analysis, but also raises some interesting points of intersection between librarianship and the digital humanities. Part of his discussion addresses the role of DH in improving information literacy:

When a student learns how to use a spatial or text or network analysis technique in a computer science course, they don’t dwell upon the ethical and social ramifications of its use. By bringing the digital into the humanities, we provide a space to question the effect of these pervasive techniques and tools on culture and society.

As librarians, do you use digital humanities methods, tools, or projects in your instruction sessions? Are there any information literacy instructors out there who incorporate DH into their curriculum?

 

TEI and Libraries: New Avenues for Digital Literacy?

In this post, Harriett Green looks at how libraries can use TEI to advance digital literacy. For further reading, the author has also provided a list of recommended resources.

A prominent theme of the TEI 2012 Annual Members Meeting and Conference was how to make TEI an even more viable tool for scholarly discourse and analysis. This theme was quite fortuitous, because this was the focus on my paper presentation at the conference: I am exploring how libraries should expand their involvement in TEI beyond applying it in their digitized collections, and I proposed that libraries can approach the TEI as a method of promoting digital literacy.

The Text Encoding Initiative, better known as TEI, is one of the longest enduring and core sub-specialties of digital humanities scholarship, and was first developed in 1987 by scholars who sought to make their digitized texts more flexible for computational analysis and mining.[1] Since the mid-1990s, the presence of TEI in academic libraries has largely been found in digital collections. There is a long and complex history of libraries creating rich digital collections with extensive TEI mark-up, contributing to research initiatives, and developing best practices on the use of TEI.[2]

But I believe that the current and future potential for the TEI in humanities research and scholarship can only be fully realized if TEI mark-up skills are continually taught in order to build a growing base of users. As such, I presented a paper at the TEI Annual Meeting that explored the questions: How have libraries and information professionals helped to sustain the TEI user community, and what are the possibilities for the future?

For the initial study presented in the paper, I interviewed five librarians from research libraries at the University of Illinois, University of Michigan, University of Virginia, and Indiana University who have been extensively involved in supporting and teaching the TEI at their libraries.  From their responses, I outlined three particular facets of library support of the TEI: Teaching, tutorials, and tools. In the interviews, I learned that librarians teach TEI encoding and XML to their campus faculty and students in environments ranging from graduate seminars to campus-wide workshops. Other librarians have created online tutorials that provide widely-accessible portals to self-directed learning of the TEI for their campus community and the larger scholarly community. And other libraries are developing databases and tools that facilitate text mining with TEI.

[pullquote]The teaching of XML and TEI can be a crucial way for libraries to make new inroads with their constituents in digital and information literacies.[/pullquote]In my analysis, these interviews began to reveal that through these research services for the TEI, libraries can promote digital literacy: The dissemination of TEI through instruction and research services can be critically linked to concepts of digital literacy. The librarian interviewed from Virginia strongly felt that “I feel that TEI is still an important thing for faculty and students to know, and I still continue to support it.” The librarian from Indiana University also noted that in the English graduate course she taught on applying TEI for the Victorian Women Writers Project, the way that students read texts was transformed: “It changed the way they read,” she said. “You could see it when they were encoding that they were reading every single word and noting every punctuation mark, and that they were reading in a way they hadn’t before.”  As such, faculty and students’ ability to translate texts into a format for digital use could be construed as a skill falling within the tenets of digital literacy.

Two definitions for digital literacy, drawn from among several working definitions, are most appropriate for this discussion. Education researchers Aharon Aviram and Yoram Eshet-Alkalai created a now widely-adopted 5-part holistic frame for digital literacy that contains the sub-areas of photo-visual literacy, reproduction literacy, information literacy, branching literacy, and socio-emotional literacy.[3] The other definition is a comprehensive framework proposed by the DigEuLit Project, which defines digital literacy as:

The awareness, attitude and ability of individuals to appropriately use digital tools and facilities to identify, access, manage, integrate, evaluate, analyse and synthesize digital resources, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others, in the context of specific life situations, in order to enable constructive social action; and to reflect upon this process.

In this light, the TEI is well positioned to be considered as a partner in outcomes for digital literacy. As more and more texts are digitized, TEI is a critical tool for digital publishing initiatives and facilitating the text mining research and distant reading of a corpus of thousands of digitized texts.  The teaching initiatives, learning objects, and educational tools for TEI profiled in this paper as well as other existing ones, all empower students and faculty to build digital literacy skills in creating, analyzing, and preserving digital manifestations of texts and textual data they study in their research.  As Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan articulate in an EduCAUSE Quarterly editorial, “Using the same skills used for centuries—analysis, synthesis and evaluation—we must look at digital literacy as another realm within which to apply elements of critical thinking”[4].

SGML, the initial mark-up language used for the TEI, was recognized early on as a critical tool for education and an 1996 Computers in Libraries article notes that “TEI gives students in today’s educational system access to historical and current information.” TEI, the article states, was among the types of SGML mark-up that “provide steppingstones to address issues of information access and reuse in education and research”[5]. Digital literacy strives to create learners who are critically thinking about the ways in which they engage and manipulate digital resources.

Melissa Terras notes in her study of the TEI By Example tutorials that “It is understood that much intellectual and temporal effort goes into marking up textual material with suitable granularity to facilitate in depth analysis and manipulation of textual material”[6]. Libraries are institutions that are committed to the promotion and teaching of information literacy, and the teaching of XML and TEI can be a crucial way for libraries to make new inroads with their constituents in digital and information literacies. Ultimately, I see libraries do have a role in helping educate users in the digital tools used for DH research, and ultimately, I believe we can help more and more scholars revise their research methodologies to adapt to digital scholarship.


[1] Richard Giordano, “The Documentation of Electronic Texts Using Text Encoding Initiative Headers: An Introduction,” Library Resources & Technical Services 38, no. 4 (1994): 389-402.

[2] See the recently-updated “Best Practices for TEI in Libraries,” Version 3.0, October 2011.

[3] Aharon Aviram and Yoram Eshet-Alkalai, “Towards a Theory of Digital Literacy: Three Scenarios for Next Steps.” European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (2006).

[4] Barbara Jones-Kavalier and Suzanne L. Flannigan, “Connecting the Dots: Literacy of the 21st Century,” EduCAUSE Quarterly 2 (2006): 8-10.

[5] SGML Open Staff, “SGML in Education: the TEI and ICADD Initiatives,” Computers in Libraries 16, no. 3 (1996): 26-28.

[6] Melissa Terras, Ron Van den Branden, and Edward Vanhoutte, “Teaching TEI: The Need for TEI by Example,” Literary and Linguistic Computing 24, no. 3 (2009): 297-306.