# Historicizing Conceptual Invention Workshop: A Generative Procedure

<small>Disclaimer: This workshop will induce cognitive strain and struggle. (>_<)</small>

## On Analysis and Showing Your Work

In other forms of conceptual and theoretical work, showing your work, or leaving a breadcrumb trail of your interpretive process, is part of the larger end-game (cf. mathematics, science lab work, social science work). The Historicizing project requires a lot of breadcrumb-writing to invent, group, note patterns, and make claims about your mediational means.

In this workshop, you will come away with a deeper sense about how analysis projects of this sort involves writing about and through

	- particular concepts and theories that shape your own work and interpretations;
	- evidence and data;
	- how concepts relate to your comparison and contrasting of evidence and data;
	- what patterns and categories that you see emerging from those other writings;
	- etc. etc.

In short, what you write during your actual analysis processes is not exactly what ends up as carbon-copy content in your final historicizing project. Why? Because that's writing for you to help you understand and make connections and claims. It is not content for your audience. While you will certainly use and reuse and transform bits and pieces of such writing, I want you to understand that really good analysis takes time and writing apart from the concerns what its final form will be.

## Write-It-Out Workshop Prompts

1. Currently, what is your historicizing project's main problem / aim? What broader social dynamics or issues are linked to your mediational means and its use or development over time? (cf. Sarah's linking of Flash to broader issues of proprietary tech to solve open Web issues; Matt's linking of CSS media queries to broader contentions of “designer control”).

2. What conceptual tools will direct / guide your inquiry and analysis?

	- 2a. Define such concept(s) as X person defines it in your own words (cf. Haas' move with historical-genetic method, p. 212-213).
	- 2b. Define it within the scope of your own project?
	- 2c. Note any changes, adaptations, transformations, etc. between these definitions, if applicable. NOTE: This may only happen after conducting more analysis of your sources.

3. Write about the link between your project's aims and your conceptual tools. What relationship do you see between them and why? How do the conceptual tools aid your analysis? Your aim?

4. Choose between 4a and 4b, (or do both!), but add a note about your decision why.
	- 4a. Based on what you wrote in #3, modify the original provided historicizing matrix to suit your analytic method needs. In other words, change the structure, columns, tab names, add rows to it, etc. Sketch it out and then write about your modifications below. NOTE: You may not be ready for this yet! If you are unsure about what new column to add and why, write about why you think this way. And, what steps are needed to get there, e.g., looking back at your data.
	- 4b. Based on what you wrote in #3, reread your historicizing project and take copious notes about how weaknesses in your project. What areas could be addressed in more detail? What new implications or connections warrant more attention?