AsianDOC Electronic Newsletter 1:2 (June 1998)
by Marilyn A. Levine (Lewis-Clark State College)
The Chinese Biographical Database (CBD) has been online for two months now. The public response to the CBD has been highly positive and the feedback received has been very useful in creating some improvements. I am considering moving the CBD to another server so that I can get the searches to link and other improvements intended are a boolean search capacity and a total report form. Depending on funding, I also would like to create a statistical and graphical analysis section. Currently the CBD now includes the following table listings: 2,200 Biographical figures 5,000 Source citations 2,500 Alternate Names 2,800 Positions 2,300 Affiliations 2,200 Career 1,700 Events 1,500 Education 400 Youth 165 Family Work will proceed over the summer, particularly in July on improving the linking, search, and report capacity. However, there are two issues that have emerged during this first phase of the CBD - 1). The issue of a shared, scholarly endeavor; 2). The issue of historical truth and the nature of evidence (this section also was raised in the H-ASIA listserver). These will be discussed below and I welcome any ideas and dicussion of either issue at mlevine@lcsc.edu I. The Shared Endeavor A main reason why I created an online, interactive database was the principle of sharing the information and pooling together the information to make the foundation and utility stronger. The idea is to utilize the data online and also to contribute to the database online. Although I have had many hits on the CBD and it has been extensively cited and linked in both online and written materials, I have found almost no one has caught on to the idea that they can contribute missing data OR new biographical entries. I streamlined the new biographical entry form, and will investigate ways to make contributions more "user-friendly" to perform on the site. Thus, the general response has been highly gratifying, I need to reflect on how the CBD can infuse the viewers with the understanding that it is a database for everyone to share. A couple of preliminary ideas include: *One idea may be to organize it as post secondary educational training in collaboration with interested Sinologists. I will be pursuing several grants that will create Edcuational Web sites, both K-12 and Post secondary, such that the sites utilize the online database. *Another idea may be that when the improvements of a linked, Boolean search, and statistical-graphical capacity is set up, people might be more motivated to invest time in strengthening the factual repertoire. II. Historical Truth and Evidence Issues A second issue that I would like to open up for discussion with colleagues that is relevant not just to the CBD - but also to our present state of the profession - the idea of evidence and historical fact. Currently, the Source Table is oriented towards written material that has been published. I also have developed an Archive Source Table and a Non-Written Sources Table [Interviews, Pictures, Films, Web sites, etc.] which have not been uploaded to the public Web site. I think many share with me the sentiment that standards of evidence that are not highly maintained will lead to faulty intepretation. A database is only as good as the validity of the information that is entered into the database. There is merit and validity in each type of source, and lack of merit and validity in each type of source. We all know that students and beginners often think that just because the computer gives certain output then that must be the truth, when in fact, sometimes that isn't the case. Thus, I want to pause and ask before I upload these two source tables: "What are the standards and criteria of evidence for archival sources?" "What are the standards and criteria of evidence for the written sources?" "What are the standards and criteria of evidence for non-written sources?" "In terms of biography, how much is colored by the personality of the figure in the later relation of events in memoir form, in oral interviews, in documentaries?" "When the statistical section is created, should the non-written sources or `generally soft sources' be excluded or presented in a mirror site that highlights two responses to the search and report results?" "What are the issues of interpretation that are effected by the inclusion of all types of evidence without dividing them in the results?" "Would a disclaimer and highlight of non-written sources in the Sources Result form and the general section overviews be advisable?" I have personally used all forms of these sources and have found them all useful. Yet I think this is a good opportunity for us to reflect on certain trends in the historical profession such as the growing rise of a belief in the relativism of facts, the issue of context, and the fluidity of interpretations. From my own point of view, I believe that we have a unique opportunity to set a standard of professionalism - scholarly professionalism in the new electronic milieu known as the Web. As historians, as teachers, as scholars - we are under no compulsion to adopt Business models of Web development or shoddy standards that give little substance and sometimes perpetuate inaccuracies that exist in much of today's media. Marilyn A. Levine Lewis-Clark State College ****************************************************** Marilyn A. Levine, Professor of Asian History Division of Social Sciences, Lewis-Clark State College 500 8th Ave., Lewiston, ID 83501 USA Phone (208) 883-3110 Fax (208) 882-8255 Chinese Biographical Database Web Site: http://exodus.lcsc.edu/cbiouser Other Web Sites: http://www.ets.uidaho.edu/levine/ ******************************************************
URL http://asiandoc.lib.ohio-state.edu/v1n2/dbs/cbdUpdate.html
|