What Makes a Witch? A Salem Witch Trials network analysis

Tags:
dla (28)
ematelski (7)
fall 2018 (11)
Using network analysis and the Salem Witchcraft Papers, students will write a research essay that combines both qualitative and quantitative primary sources.

Overview

Students will begin this scaffolded project by annotating the Bridget Bishop trial transcripts, which have been scanned and transcribed at the Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive. This close reading of the sources will prepare them for the next assignment, a short essay—What Makes a Witch. In this assignment, students choose an accused witch from the Salem trials and—using the transcribed court records—identify what neighbors said about the individual that made them a so-called witch and how the accused witch attempted to defend him or herself. Now that they’re more comfortable with the transcripts themselves, the assignment moves on to a network analysis of the persons involved in the Salem witch trials.

Because the network data collected during the fall is not yet complete (there were more accused witches than students in HST 225), each HST 201  student will similarly be assigned an accused witch. They will do a close reading of the court documents related to that individual and record information regarding secondary individuals who appear in the documents. 

Finally, using the data that my HST 225: Salem Witch Trials course assembled in the fall and this new, more complete data, students will employ Palladio to make new observations about the Salem Witch Trials that a reading of the court documents alone cannot satisfy.
 
The final assessment will be a more substantial research paper that utilizes both qualitative (court documents) plus quantitative (network analysis) primary sources.


(Back to top)

HST201 Contemporary Approaches to History, Spring 2018

Tags:
dla (28)
ematelski (7)
fall 2018 (11)

Notes

No notes yet.

Outcome summary

Students successfully transcribed and annotated the 17thcentury documents. Using Annotation Studio is relatively user friendly, but in the future using Google Docs, which students are more familiar with, will achieve the same goals for this part of the assignment. Students were also able to successfully use these documents to write their shorter paper (“What Makes a Witch”).  

Data collection takes more time, however, this is the nature of the assignment. It’s important to give students enough time out of class to complete this part of the assignment as it can be a tedious task. We worked through sample documents on the board so they knew what I was looking for in their own data entry. 

Students were more comfortable employing Palladio than Gephi. Palladio only requires students drag and drop one file whereas Gephi employs two files that need additional manipulation once they’ve been uploaded. In the future, I may only require students use Palladio and give them the option to try out Gephi on their own. However, students were at the minimum able to incorporate one screen-shot from Gephi successfully, even if their use of the program was minimal and basic.

Students were less confident/able to use the numerical component to social network analysis. 
 The filter option on Palladio turned out to be the most helpful for students. They were able to successfully zoom in on one individual or kind of individual and do a close reading of that information against the master social network map.  Students were less familiar talking about numbers. They know how to use direct quotes from court documents, but they don’t know how to talk about graphs/charts/quantitative data in the same way. Too often they simply reported the numbers they found instead of analyzing what those numbers meant for their thesis statement. Students will benefit from more in-class tutorials where they can work with sample data sets in Palladio/Gephi as well as workshops on analyzing charts, graphs, etc, and bringing that information into an argumentative assignment. 

Materials