The conference has been very inspiring for me. I enjoyed getting an overview over the different research projects of the participants. We had very fruitful discussions and were able to discuss important research problems. I really appreciated the workshop about databases. Getting to know how relational databases are structured, helped me to get a deeper understanding of my chosen categories. The Unconference was something very new for me, I liked it though. The discussions covered concrete problems of our research and led us to inspiring ways of thinking.

I want to add some points of critique though. My phd-project is much more about networks of different actors and the transnational aspect plays just a marginal role, I couldn`t relate so much to the discussion of transatlantic exchanges in particular. Yet, there are some transnational influences, especially on a discursive level. Scientific discussions about the pedagogic aspects of outplacement took place on a transnational level. But here the exchange mostly concerned Germany and Switzerland and wasn`t linked to a wider geographical area. Hence, my critique would be that the conference emphasized transnational history over networks, which may not necessarily be transnational in nature. I wish that the theoretical and methodological part of network analysis would have been discussed more. In particular, I would have liked to address the temporal aspect of historical network analysis. I would have benefitted from a workshop on how you can visualize networks with a network tool. That would have been very helpful for my research project.

Nevertheless, it was stimulating to broaden my horizons and learn something new about transnational history. Interestingly, although the subject areas were quite different, on a methodological-theoretical level, others are facing the same questions and problems as me.