Eveyr year at this time, I struggle with the structure of my course syllabi, and move bits an pieces around with wild abandon. At the end of my struggles, my course outline will be filled with headings like this:
** <2015-10-06 Tue> Spatial History
Thinking about the visual presentation of information, especially in map form
+ Franco Moretti, /Graphs, Maps, Trees/, ch. 1 ([[http://2012.hackinghistory.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/placing-history.pdf][Graphs]]
+ Knowles, A. K. “GIS and History.” [[http://2012.hackinghistory.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/pariser-filter-bubble.pdf][/Placing
History: How Maps, Spatial Data, and GIS Are Changing Historical Scholarship/]] (2008): 1–13.
+ Bondenhamer, David J. “History and GIS: Implications for the Discipline.” /Placing History: How Maps, Spatial Data, and GIS Are Changing Historical Scholarship/ (2008): 219-234.
+ Theibault, John. “[[http://writinghistory.trincoll.edu/evidence/theibault-2012-spring/][Visualizations
and Historical Arguments]].” Writing History in the Digital Age, March 23, 2012.
Unfortunately, the Seminar topics, labs, and readings do not always match up very well. It occurs to me that it would be preferable to maintain separate trees of seminar topics and labs, and merge them, so eg: