D. Dissemination and exploitation of finalized TNP products and outcomes of results

D.1 Identification of finalised outcomes

D.1.1 Identify
The TNP has many outcomes, including presentations and discussions by each of the working groups. In the overview below, only key outcomes are listed.

Outcome 1: Website http://www.uib.no/acohum. Started September 1996, continuously updated.

Outcome 2: Conference. A large international conference on The Future of the Humanities was held in Bergen on September 25-28, 1998. (Copies of the conference poster/brochure are included as an appendix). The conference was a major international event addressing many issues related to curricula, international cooperation, computational resources, changing discipline boundaries, ODL and relations with partners in society. The program consisted of the following contributions:


  • Experimenting with innovations in humanities teaching at UC Berkeley: The Humanities and Technology project
  • Advanced computing in the humanities: Why should one bother?
  • SuperinformationhighwayS and IntelliMedia 2000+: Bringing together humanities, science, and engineering
  • From Humanities Computing to Humanistic Informatics: Creating a Field of Our Own
  • Designing an IT course for humanities students
  • Can education bridge the gap between the cultures?
  • Art on the Internet: A modern approach that brings exhibits to life
  • Digital resources and network learning: A course on art history in the UOC
  • Digital archives - A way of integrating history teaching in Europe
  • Challenges for libraries as humanities resources: IT and the convergence of archives, libraries and museums
  • Computing for, in, and of the Humanities: An Oxford perspective
  • From on-line to on-target: Issues in the development and uptake of usable resources on the web
  • Digital resources in Humanities education

  • From the classroom to the Internet: Pedagogical and technological infrastructures for WWW-based learning
  • Emerging multidisciplinary educational issues in the area of spoken dialogue communication
  • Between Babel and bytes - The discipline of translation in the information age
  • LETRAC - Language Engineering for Translation Curricula
  • Teaching 'live' on the Internet
  • Catalysing web-based teaching with tutorial components
  • Internet and teaching: Lost in cyberspace or a dynamic junction?
  • From cooperative learning towards the virtual class - An experience in composition techniques.
  • Research in language and literature - Old problems, new solutions?
  • Standardization and automation in the production and management of electronic text resources
  • The PRODICOS project
  • The Orientalist Journal as multilingual corpus and pedagogical tool
  • Reincarnation or extinction of humanities in the digital age?
  • Towards the standardisation of curricula in computational linguistics in Europe
  • International strategies in phonetics education
  • Computing in Masters-level courses in the Humanities
  • Developing a model for academic collaboration using ICT
  • Beyond European cooperation in speech communication sciences education
  • Communication and cultural diversity in ODL: From a wired learner to a transnational citizen.
  • Beyond courseware as giftpaper: Computers as exploratory learning tools for the humanities
  • CALLMOO: An Internet platform for language learning
  • Pedagogical programs - From testing to presentation of curriculum
  • Information technology in the translation classroom
  • The Maerlant-project on computer-assisted learning of historical skills: Can hypertext supersede programmed instruction?
  • Development of a Russian language learning system on the WWW
  • A new, informational-cybernetic paradigm for the preparation of future teachers specialized in languages, literature, and art
  • Building international communities of scholars and teachers: H-Net, the Internet, and the university of the 21st century
  • FAQ: Computers and philosophy
  • Tracing student activity by web page reauthoring with a CGI script
  • Publishing in the Internet Age: Examples in the humanities and social sciences sector
  • Exploring the BNC with SARA
  • Human speech production using interactive modules and the Internet - A tutorial for the virtual university
  • Local and international achievements in speech and language processing
  • Beyond the collection of data: A corpus of translations and its interactive use in research on cultural dynamics
  • CHAMELEON and the IntelliMedia WorkBench: Integrating research from the humanities, science, and engineering
  • Cratilo: A software package for the lexicographical analysis of texts
  • Outcome 3: Book of abstracts. A 160-page book of extended abstracts of the conference was published in September 1998. The contents are the same as the program of the conference listed above. (Copies of this book are included with this application.)

    Outcome 4: Survey of Computational Linguistics Education in Europe. Results of the survey are published on the web (http://www.hd.uib.no/AcoHum/cl/cl-questresult.html), April 1999.

    Outcome 5: Handbook of Computing in Humanities Education. This product is scheduled for publication in August 1999.

    D.1.2 Prioritise
    The following list is ordered, with the most prioritized at the top:
    1. Outcome 5, the handbook (see above) is targeted at all institutions. It addresses issues concerning all stated objectives.
    2. Outcome 1, the website, is targeted mainly at project partners. It states the project's objectives and describes its activities, outcomes and results.
    3. Outcome 2, the conference, was targeted at teaching, research and planning staff at all organizations and institutions wanting to discuss the use of advanced computing in the humanities. It provided a forum for discussing issues concerning all stated objectives.
    4. Outcome 3, the book of abstracts, is targeted at all institutions and provides a written record of product 2.
    5. Outcome 4, the survey results, is targeted at institutions offering computational linguistics.
    D.1.3 Differentiate
    Outcome 1, the website, is targeted mainly at project partners. It currently has its main function in project-internal communication. It needs to be transformed into a quasi-permanent knowledge base (see below) if it is to be reoriented towards a wider target group. New audiences include teaching staff and education planners also in institutions and countries which are not yet using a large amount of ICT in the humanities.  Also students need to be targeted more directly. Finally, social partners for humanities education, mainly the archives, libraries and museums sector, need to be targeted.

    Outcome 2, the conference, addressed a wide range of objectives but has been an activity limited in time. It could be considered repeating this conference on an annual or biannual basis in order to reach a larger audience, but the current timescale in this application does not allow for sufficient preparation time.

    Outcome 3, the book of abstracts, addresses the same wide range of objectives as the conference but, being a written record of a one-time activity, it cannot easily be disseminated in its current form. A publication of full papers in book form has been considered but was not thought to the most effective means for reaching a wide range of audiences. However, elements of the book can be integrated in other forms of dissemination (see below).

    Outcome 4, the survey results, are a useful instrument for institutions offering computational linguistics, but would benefit from integration with other data from Non-European Languages and Speech Communication Sciences to reach wider uses and target groups (see below).

    Outcome 5, the handbook, is an excellent instrument for teaching staff as well as educational planners. However, it is being published as a book, not on the web. Transforming the information into a knowledge base on the web would increase maintainability and accessibility. At the same time, selective adaptation to new audiences allows efficient reuse of these existing materials.

    D.2 Internal quality evaluation

    D.2.1 Demonstrate the high quality of finalised products
    The conference had 187 pre-registrered participants and additional on-site registrations. The pre-registered participants came from 23 countries. An e-mail evaluation was carried out among all conference participants. The results (included in the 1998 annual report, not copied here) showed an overall very favourable impression, with criticism only on details. The Steering Committee concluded from this evaluation that the conference was very successful. Many academic fields in the humanities were represented. In addition, there was sufficient participation from humanities related organizations, companies and decision making levels, although representatives from the European Commission were conspicuously absent. There was good interactivity, good common understanding and a low level of 'selling campaign marketing'. The conference was a unique event in its way to transcend displine boundaries, national boundaries and professional boundaries at the same time. Thus, the event could, perhaps for the first time, focus on important meta-issues in the humanities and come to a redefinition of humanities in the digital age.

    The whole TNP was evaluated in 1998 by EEDS. The full evaluation report is available at http://gandalf.aksis.uib.no/AcoHum/eeds-eval.html. The summary of this evaluation report is copied below.


    1. The Aco*Hum thematic network was established to develop effective coordinated mechanisms for integrating advanced computing into the teaching of undergraduate and graduate programmes across Europe.

    2. The starting point of the project was that learning in the Humanities was being influenced by ICT and that teaching has to adapt to these changes. This stemmed from a recognition that computers alter the way people learn and this affects the way they would need to be taught.

    3. The project concept - that teaching and learning in the Humanities needs an approach to the application of new technologies which is critically different from that used in other areas of study - is a useful one.

    4. The project size was very large and represents a level of transnationality that has few parallels in Europe. It brought together a knowledge-base of combined expertise that can otherwise only be found in the United States.

    5. However, from the outset the project was constrained by limited resources from both the SOCRATES/ERASMUS programme and partner universities. This immediately restricted what might be possible and led to a reappraisal of the project objectives.

    6. Limited resources meant that partners who could/would not support academic staff input dropped out, thus limiting the base of active participation.

    7. The first phase of the project, which began in the academic year 1996/97 included an exchange of information on the need for advanced computing in languages, history literature, art and other humanities subjects. It also involved exchanges of information on how institutions were addressing the teaching of new skills in advanced computing in traditional humanities disciplines.

    8. The first year was taken up with the organisation of the network and awareness raising both within partner universities and between partners.

    9. The second year had four main objectives:

    10. As the project evolved some of the original aims were modified in response to institutional concerns and practical considerations. The six working groups which were established focused primarily on exchanging ideas and providing an overview for specific discipline areas - rather than on implementing proposals.

    11. Network partners highlighted the following benefits from the project:

    12. The project was perhaps initially over-ambitious in attempting to bring together 104 universities from across Europe. Some of the original aims had to be modified in response to institutional and practical considerations.

    13. That the project had some successful outcomes was due to the individual commitment and enthusiasm from particular members of staff in several participating universities, and the early decision to have a three-tier management structure.

    14. There is a need for universities to integrate computing technology with the teaching of humanities - so that they produce students better equipped to work in a society where integrated ICT skills are in great demand.

    15. One major constraint was the inability of non-academic (ICT) institutions to access project funds. This limited participation by industry partners which is central to the employablity of students.

    16. One benefit from the project was the cross-fertilisation of the computational linguistics project with other humanities disciplines.

    17. Already the project has influenced changes in teaching and learning (in History) through the impact of ICT and the exchange of best practice in these areas.

    18. However, many humanities students lack IT experience, and as well as subject specific applications there is a need for two core curriculum topics:

    19. At least two research fields were identified with potential in the Fifth Framework RTD programme - speech recognition/computational linguistics and the evaluation of bias-free search engines.

    20. Particular projects were innovative in targeting new approaches to developing teaching material, and enabling students to acquire hybrid skills of value to industry.

    21. The transnational element helped enrich the experience of partners, identify common problems and enhance cultural understanding, which in turn led to the development of multi-lingual projects.

    22. The consensus from project partners was that the time scale of the project (two years) was too short to produce meaningful outcomes.

    23. However, initial outcomes are sufficiently promising to suggest that further work is undertaken - in the form of

    D.2.2 Specify and justify the assesment criteria and procedure
    See D.2.1.

    D.3 Dissemination and exploitation methodology

    D.3.1 Describe your general strategy
    The general strategy will be (1) to secure the maintainability of the information compiled in the first three years (2) to make it more accessible for a wider group of audiences, (3) to merge it with other data, in cooperation with the TNP on Speech Communication Sciences and the TNP on Languages, and (4) to exploit it by spinoffs targeted at specific groups. Target groups are specified for each outcome in D.3.2.
    D.3.2 Specify the actions, tools and actors
    Six actions are planned, each aimed at disseminating or exploiting one or more outcomes (please refer to D.1.1).
    1. Knowledge base. The paper publications (outcomes 3 and 5), together with other information collected in the life of the project, will be merged and transformed into a knowledge base, which will function as a permanent source of reference, accessible via an Internet resource using tools on the web (outcome 1). It will contain links to analyses, proposals and recommendations, computational resources, examples of on-line teaching and learning materials, and a database of organizations, institutions and course curricula. It is hoped that the result will become an established and recognized repository of information on the use of IT in humanities courses. Target troups will be teaching staff and educational planners.
    2. Merging TNP results. The working group on Computational Linguistics and Language Engineering and the working group on Computing for non-European languages will merge their results (outcome 4 and parts of outcomes 3 and 5) with those of the TNP on Speech Communication Sciences, to produce a common set of analyses, proposals and recommendations, especially with respect to curriculum innovation and ODL methods and covering also speech and multilinguality. Target groups will be institutions offering a wide range of natural language and speech related curricula, including multilinguality. With respect to the latter issue, a broadening of focus on the study of European and non-European languages will be undertaken, in cooperation with the TNP on Languages and in cooperation with the CAMEEL project.
    3. Guidelines on best practice. The working group on Textual Scholarship and Humanities Computing will, in cooperation with the ALLC and on the basis of existing results (parts of outcomes 3 and 5), compile a set of guidelines, based on best practice, targeted at teaching staff. The guidelines will be directed at (a) planning and developing courses that exploit computing, (b) using digital resources as a key teaching resource, and (c) methods for teaching and assessing such courses.
    4. Plan for training and retraining programme. The working group on Textual Scholarship and Humanities Computing will, in cooperation with the ALLC and on the basis of existing results (parts of outcomes 3 and 5), produce a plan for a training and retraining programme, also aimed at teaching staff, especially staff not yet integrating computing techniques in their teaching activities. New EU member states and Eastern European Countries joining SOCRATES are particular targets.
    5. Student awareness. All working groups will make a plan for an information spreading and awareness raising program, targeted at students and prospective students.  The objective is better information about the possibilities for studying humanities computing to young people considering either studies in humanities or in computing. This is an exploitation action based on selected results (parts of outcomes 1, 3 and 5).
    6. Continuity. The maintenance of parts of the website (outcome 1) will be secured in cooperation with the Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing and Oxford University. The outcome of this exploitation action will be a policy document for permanent integration of education-related activities into the activities of the Association.
    D.3.3 Specify a detailed work programme in table format
    In the fourth year, the project will be managed by dividing participation into the following 3 working groups, each responsible for specific actions:
    1. CL - Computational linguistics and language engineering
    2. NEL - Computing for non-European languages
    3. TS - Textual scholarship and humanities computing
    The coordinator and Steering Committee are responsible for monitoring progress in the activities. The coordinator will request monthly reports from the working group chairs.

    Delivery dates:
    dates action responsible outcomes
    Aug. 1, 2000 1 all (managed by each working group) Knowledge base on web
    May 1, 2000 2 CL, NEL (in cooperation with TNP on Speech Communication Sciences) Joint document on language, speech and multilinguality
    May. 1, 2000 3 TS, with ALLC Guidelines on best practice for teachers
    Feb. 1, 2000 4 TS, with ALLC Detailed plan for training and retraining programme
    June 1, 2000 5 all (managed by each working group) Proposal for student awareness programme, materials on web
    March 1, 2000 6 coordinator, ALLC Policy document 

    dates partners objectives
    Oct. 1999 TS, ALLC planning of actions 3 and 4
    plan for knowledge base, action 1
    specifications for action 5
    Nov. 1999 CL, NEL (in cooperation with TNP on Speech Communication Sciences) review cooperation between TNPs;
    inventory of joint objectives;
    strategy for common document, action 2
    plan for knowledge base, action 1;
    specifications for action 5
    April 2000 Steering Committee, ALLC monitor progress;
    work out policy document, action 6

    D.3.4 Demonstrate the added value and expected spin-offs
    The activities of the 4th year dissemination actions will result in information, analysis, proposals and recommendations being permantly available through the web. The expected added value and spin-offs lie in the following:
    1. The expected outcomes will give confidence to departments and institutions that are interested in implementing humanities courses with computing components, but that are not certain how best to proceed. The added value here is in the conversion of a theoretical publication into a practical guide.
    2. The wider dissemination of information on humanities computing in Europe will create confidence in the future of European languages and culture in the digital age and generate the possibility of spin-offs in the preservation and transformation of European cultural heritage.
    3. The expected outcomes can be of use in providing background information for the preparation of future actions under SOCRATES and other EU programmes.
    D.3.5 Describe how the project will be monitored and evaluated
    After the comprehensive evaluation of the project in 1998, resulting in a 23-page evaluation report, it is not considered absolutely necessary to repeat this exercise in a formal way. However, actions 1-5 will provide for possibilities of feedback from the users in the target groups. This will mostly done through web feedback forms.
    D.3.6 Indicate the working languages of the project
    The primary working language is English. The secondary working languages are Spanish and German. Outcomes will first be disseminated in English, but parts of the materials in the knowledge base, especially on issues dealing with multilinguality approaches, will be accepted in any language serving relevant purposes.