In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

• Digital Scholarship Roundtable: The State of the Field
• Sissi Liu, Derek Miller, Erin B Mee, Kate Elswit, and Sarah Bay-Cheng

In the seventy-fifth anniversary issue of Theatre Journal, former editor Joanne Tompkins in her essay “The Digital Turn: Research and Publishing in Theatre Journal” presents a grippingly thorough historization of the launch of the journal’s online platform in 2016, a key milestone in its development. She describes the initial plans for the online platform in what she calls a “two-part structure” that “presents the most straightforward narrative”: “essays that focus on theatre that is about or incorporates digital practices in the first instance, and essays on theatre that deploy digital methodologies as part of the structure of their critical endeavors.”¹ However, she also states that for theatre and performance practice and research more generally, “it does need to be [more] complicated” than the two-parter.² In response to Tompkins’s article and to the digital turn in theatre and performance in general, Sissi Liu, current chair of ATHE-ASTR Excellence in Digital Scholarship Award Committee, has invited prominent scholars and former chairs/committee members to reflect together on the state of the field of digital scholarship in theatre and performance. Each contributor addresses a complicated issue or takes on a series of productive questions: What kinds of digital scholarship are currently out there and how do we conceptualize them (Liu)? What questions might we ask to assess the current state of digital scholarship (Derek Miller)? Why should we all write/perform born-digital articles and how do we do so (Erin B Mee)? When is a widespread shift coming for digital methods in theatre, dance, and performance (Kate Elswit)? The roundtable concludes with an overview of how digital scholarship across the field in the past twenty-five years has shifted and evolved from digitalization to datafication (Sarah Bay-Cheng). Together, these contributions offer perspectives on what the field looks like now and where it is going.

A Taxonomy of Digital Scholarship Sissi Liu

Digital: using computer technology to generate, store, and process data; the opposite of analog. Scholarship: the production of new knowledge. When the two combine, the result is much larger than the sum of its parts, promising endless possibilities. Digital scholarship in theatre and performance studies has been growing since the early 2000s (see Sarah Bay-Cheng’s reflections below), and especially since 2015, when several theatre journals launched online sections and ATHE and ASTR together established the Excellence in Digital Scholarship Award. Since the COVID-19 global pandemic [End Page E-17] began in 2020, high demand in online platforms and new technologies has spurred a further proliferation of many forms of digital scholarship for a larger audience. As the shape of digital scholarship constantly evolves, an up-to-date taxonomy is needed to help conceptualize its many forms to navigate through the flux and to offer a key to understanding the state of the field.

Having served on the ATHE-ASTR Excellence in Digital Scholarship Award Committee for the past four years, I observe four fluid and intertwined categories of digital scholarship at present and in the foreseeable future: the disseminating, the searchable, the analytical, and the performative (fig. 1).³ The disseminating—a mostly non-data-centric category (where data assists the argument but is not the center of scholarly concern)—documents and shares information in the form of digital publishing; it is the closest to traditional scholarship, preserving its merits while generating new modes of scholarship in a digitized environment. The searchable comprises digital archives and databases, many of which start from manually digitizing, cataloging, and transforming print materials into datasets. The analytical, a data-centric category (in which both the form and content of the project centers on data), presents analyzed or processed data rather than raw data, using digital methodology and data science approaches. The performative, either data-centric or not, “performs” data with an emphasis on user experience and leans toward a creative performative project. Such categorization considers ways of treating data (raw, processed, or performed, each more technologically demanding than the one before) and the relations among scholars/creators and their readers/audience.

Click...

中文翻译：

---

数字学术圆桌会议：该领域的现状


以下是内容的简短摘录，以代替摘要：

• 
  数字学术圆桌会议：该领域的现状
• 
  Sissi Liu、Derek Miller、Erin B Mee、Kate Elswit 和 Sarah Bay-Cheng

在《戏剧杂志》七十五周年纪念刊中，前编辑乔安妮·汤普金斯 (Joanne Tompkins) 在她的文章《数字化转型：戏剧杂志的研究和出版》中，对该杂志在线平台于 2016 年推出的历史进行了详尽的介绍，这是该杂志在线平台的一个重要里程碑。它的发展。她描述了在线平台的初步计划，她称之为“两部分结构”，“呈现最直接的叙述”：“首先关注或结合数字实践的戏剧的文章，以及关于数字实践的文章”。剧院将数字方法作为其关键工作结构的一部分。” ¹ 然而，她也指出，对于更广泛的戏剧和表演实践和研究来说，“它确实需要比两人的表演更加复杂”。 ² 为了回应汤普金斯的文章以及戏剧和表演的数字化转型，ATHE-ASTR 数字奖学金卓越奖委员会现任主席 Sissi Liu 邀请了著名学者和前主席/委员会成员共同反思戏剧和表演数字学术领域的现状。每个贡献者都会解决一个复杂的问题或提出一系列富有成效的问题：目前有哪些类型的数字学术以及我们如何概念化它们（刘）？我们可以提出哪些问题来评估数字学术的现状（Derek Miller）？为什么我们都应该撰写/表演天生数字化的文章以及我们该怎么做（Erin B Mee）？戏剧、舞蹈和表演中的数字方法何时会发生广泛的转变（Kate Elswit）？ 圆桌会议最后概述了过去二十五年来整个领域的数字学术如何从数字化转向数据化（Sarah Bay-Cheng）。这些贡献共同为该领域的现状和发展方向提供了视角。

数字学术的分类 Sissi Liu

数字化：利用计算机技术生成、存储和处理数据；与模拟相反。学术：新知识的产生。当两者结合时，结果远大于各部分之和，带来无限可能。自 2000 年代初以来，戏剧和表演研究领域的数字奖学金一直在增长（参见下面 Sarah Bay-Cheng 的反思），特别是自 2015 年以来，多家戏剧期刊推出了在线版块，ATHE 和 ASTR 共同设立了卓越数字奖学金。自 2020 年 COVID-19 全球大流行[尾页 E-17] 开始以来，对在线平台和新技术的高需求刺激了多种形式的数字学术进一步扩散，面向更多受众。随着数字学术形式的不断发展，需要一种最新的分类法来帮助概念化其多种形式，以应对不断变化的趋势，并为理解该领域的现状提供一把钥匙。

在过去的四年里，我一直在 ATHE-ASTR 数字奖学金卓越奖委员会任职，我观察到当前和可预见的未来数字学术有四个流动且相互交织的类别：传播性、可搜索性、分析性和表演性（图。1）。 ³ 传播——主要是非以数据为中心的类别（其中数据有助于论证，但不是学术关注的中心）——以数字出版的形式记录和共享信息；它最接近传统学术，保留其优点，同时在数字化环境中产生新的学术模式。可搜索的内容包括数字档案和数据库，其中许多都是从手动数字化、编目以及将印刷材料转换为数据集开始的。分析性是一个以数据为中心的类别（其中项目的形式和内容都以数据为中心），使用数字方法和数据科学方法呈现分析或处理的数据而不是原始数据。表演性，无论是否以数据为中心，都会“表演”数据，强调用户体验，并倾向于创造性的表演项目。这种分类考虑了处理数据的方式（原始的、经过处理的或执行的，每一种都比以前的技术要求更高）以及学者/创作者与其读者/观众之间的关系。

  点击...