In this second of a two-part series, Richard Ascough adds his voice to Sharday Mosurinjohn’s reflections on a new blog post assignment used in a course on Spirituality, Secularity, and Nonreligion taught through the School of Religion at Queen’s University. In the earlier post, Sharday noted that she learned two key lessons: that students are concerned about what it means to be “critical” in a public posting and that they do not have a level of digital literacy that one might expect in a generation that grew up fully immersed in digital technologies. In this follow-up post, Sharday and Richard discuss strengths and weaknesses in students’ digital literacy and explore how understanding one of the weaknesses might actually help us understand a particularly troublesome religious studies concept – what they consider a “threshold concept.”
What does it mean to teach or research religious studies digitally?
Does religious “data” make digital religious studies distinct within the digital humanities?
What is a digital religious studies research project you think more people should know about?
How can departments and the field better support digital methods and pedagogies?
Six scholars gathered at the AAR’s groundbreaking THATCamp to discuss these questions and more!
“Central to questions of authority is the ability to define the tradition; to define how scripture should be interpreted, and to tell orthodoxy from heresy.”
CDAS Conference 2012: Dying in the Digital Age
09-10 June 2012
Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institute (BRLSI), Bath, UK
The University of Bath’s Centre for Death & Society (CDAS) announces its 2012 summer conference. Our conference last year, Death & Dying in the Digital Age, was