What does History@Work publish?
Full-length blog posts: We publish original, full-length posts, typically between 700 and 1,000 words, on topics about issues in the field of public history. We consider our primary audience to be other public historians, and we expect pitches (more on how to pitch below) and posts to reference and build on the existing field of public history writing, reflection, and practice. For example, a post about a controversy over a public memorial or museum exhibit should reflect some awareness that this is not a first-time or unique occurrence. What is new?
For big projects or discussions, we sometimes break-up the posts in series. We have a limited capacity to edit series, so pitches for a series should make the case for why a series is necessary to explore a given topic. Examples of series include: a six-part Q&A about the exhibition The Mere Distinction of Colour at Montpelier and a series of posts responding to Hamilton: An American Musical. Both of these examples related directly to content published in NCPH’s journal The Public Historian, but that connection is not necessary for editors to consider a series pitch. See, for example, our in-progress climate emergency series. Before you pitch a series, consider whether it might make for a better contribution to a journal such as The Public Historian.
Project Showcase blog posts: Project Showcase posts are mainly descriptive and tend to be between 250 and 500 words. For examples, see some of our previous posts in this category.
Prospective post topics (full-length or Project Showcase posts) include but are not limited to:
- defining public history through practice
- doing Public history [in an anti-democratic public sphere]
- intersections of public history and other types of community building related to religious life, foodways, planning and development, etc.
- community engagement and public history
- cross-departmental or cross-university public history projects in post-secondary settings
- teaching, pedagogy, and public history in post-secondary education settings and community settings
- new models for public history in higher education, especially in non-elite settings
- discussions about where non-historians seek out history
- intersection of design and historic preservation or redevelopment
- ethics in public history
- labor and volunteering in public history
- physical and emotional safety of public history workers
- sustainability and public history
- identity-based storytelling related to Black history, latino/a history, LGBTQ history, etc., not associated with yearly commemoration activities
- disability history, disability justice, and access and inclusion for disabled people in public history settings
- material culture in public history
- doing digital public history projects with community partners
- repatriation, return, and public history, especially in non-museum settings
- issues in digital history (such as data integrity and sustainability)
- responses to or pieces that complement The Public Historian content
- NCPH-related content (such as related to operations, Board committees, and other NCPH-sponsored activities)
Current special calls:
- We are recruiting pitches about generative AI and public history. Prospective volunteer writers can read more about the call for pitches in this word doc or this pdf. Pitches are being accepted via [email protected] on a rolling basis.
Other: We also publish specially-commissioned posts by regular History@Work contributors, NCPH staff, volunteers, members, editorial and other special contributions related to or printed in The Public Historian, and others. These posts range from reflections about our working groups to Q&As that complement museum exhibition reviews published in our journal The Public Historian to how-to’s about programming we run. We aim to making the publication process sustainable and accessible for our contributors and editors.
Learn more: If you want to learn more about getting from pitch to post, check out this webinar NCPH’s New Professional and Student Committee’s hosted recently. You can always email us too!
How can I submit a blog post for consideration?
If you have a pitch for a blog post for the History@Work editors to consider, you can email it to us. The pitch should be one-three paragraphs. You may have already drafted a prospective post, but please send the pitch only. Do not send drafts. We will return full drafts. Check out examples of successful pitches here (pdf | word doc). Send queries about publishing to the editorial team: [email protected]. We will typically be back in touch within two weeks.
Do you publish everything you receive?
We do not publish everything we receive and reserve the right to refuse publication at any point during the editorial process. If we think your post would be better suited to another venue, we will make that suggestion so we can help you get your work out there.
Do you publish writing that has been published elsewhere?
No, we only publish original posts. We do not publish posts that have been published elsewhere.
What guidelines should I keep in mind as I write my draft?
Style: All posts should be:
- written in accessible, jargon free language for a general audience in a way that embraces complexity and critical and intellectual rigor. We accept posts written in a variety of voices ranging from the journalistic or scholarly to the provocative, wonky, or reflective.
- clear, well-reasoned, and supported by evidence as needed to make your point. Citations must be integrated into the text or hyperlinked (no footnotes).
- accessible to a general educated audience with an interest in doing history in public.
- informed by some sense of the practice and politics of public culture. For example, a post about a controversy over a public memorial or museum exhibit should reflect some awareness that this is not a first-time or unique occurrence.
- limited to your format’s word count. In order to publish as much as we do, in most cases, we cannot work with drafts over 1,000. We strive to publish essays that are high-quality but quick reads.
Images: We publish at least one image with each blog post, preferably one for every 250-300 words. Images should at least be 300 dpi. Images should be referenced in the text. Authors should provide captions and credit lines. It is the author’s responsibility to secure permission to publish online in perpetuity. You can read our full image guidelines here: Word doc | pdf.
Accessibility: Posts and media should conform to standard guidelines for accessible web content, many of which are outlined here. For example, authors should provide appropriate alternative text that History@Work editors can include in the metadata of the image(s) you would like us to publish (see guidelines linked above for more info). In addition, all supplementary text material should be offered as a Word Document as well as a PDF. We will help you with this as needed.
See also our style guide on disability-related language. You can access that here: word doc | pdf. Feel free to use this with your own editing team or organization.
I want to write a post that is longer than 1,000 words. Will you publish that?
No. We tend to stick to shorter pieces here at History@Work but would be happy to talk to you about how to shorten your prospective contribution to conform to this requirement. Get it touch if you want to discuss your idea.
Alternative publication venues: If you have a longer piece you’d like to publish, we suggest you consider submitting a manuscript to NCPH’s peer-reviewed journal The Public Historian (TPH), published by the University of California Press. Learn more about what TPH publishes here.
Do you accept posts written by more than one person?
Yes!
Do you accept pitches from writers who currently have something in the pipeline?
No. If you currently have something in the History@Work publication pipeline, please wait to send a new pitch once that piece is published.
If I start the editorial process, what can I expect?
The process varies on a case-by-case basis. But here is a list of steps most writers can anticipate completing after the History@Work editors express interest in considering your draft:
Editing
- After we accept your pitch and before you draft an essay, we’ll email you comments and suggestions for edits from the Lead and Affiliate editors who have been assigned to your post.
- After taking a look at those comments and suggestions for edits, you will email us your edited draft back. Sometimes we’ll go back and forth with this a few times, always providing you with clear deadlines for drafts. Please keep “track changes” on throughout the editorial process.
- There are many factors that affect how long it takes us to edit your draft. Sometimes it takes a few days, and sometimes it takes a few weeks! Regardless, we’ll keep you updated on its status so you know where you stand.
Copyediting
- Once everyone is happy with the content (including any images you want to publish) and we add the post to the web template, our copyeditor fixes any errors we haven’t caught such as typos and repeated words. Occasionally the copyeditor hyperlinks text to direct our readers to additional, relevant information on your topic. If the copy editor has any content questions, we will bounce those back to you.
- For logistical reasons, we don’t typically run this final, pre-publication draft by writers unless you make a special request to do that. We will, of course, immediately correct any errors or make reasonable clarifications after publication should the author request those changes be made.
Timing
- Most of what we publish gets posted within a one-two months after you first get in touch with us. That said, when we publish your posts varies based on what else we have in the pipeline. Immediately before and after the NCPH annual meeting in the spring is usually our busiest time of year. Blog posts submitted and edited in the spring, therefore, may mean the post will go through a longer publication timeframe. No matter what, we’ll let you know along the way what we can anticipate in terms of timing.
Promotion
- Once your post is up, we will promote it on our social media (Twitter and Facebook). If we feel the post might make for a good, longer contribution to a journal such as The Public Historian, we might suggest you consider developing it further.
What if I change my name and/or pronouns after my piece is published?
If your name and/or pronouns change after your piece is published and you would like us to update your authored or co-authored post accordingly, please get in touch with the editorial team: [email protected].
What other digital content does NCPH publish? Can I submit contributions to any of them?
NCPH publishes a variety of free digital content, available on its web site, ranging from best practices documents to e-publications inspired by issues of The Public Historianto back issues of Public History News. NCPH’s journal The Public Historian is available to members and others with subscription access. You can access many of those publications from here.
History@Work regularly includes an “Around the Field” post with items of possible interest to public historians. These items, along with additional NCPH-specific news, are also included in the weekly Public History News Update which is distributed via email to NCPH members. To submit an item for possible inclusion in these listings, fill out the form at http://ncph.org/around-the-field-form/.