Facts and Frameworks Revisited - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 21
About This Presentation
Title:

Facts and Frameworks Revisited

Description:

Facts and Frameworks Revisited. On Archival Use and User Metrics. Goals of Presentation ... fit appropriate methodology to stages of interaction with users ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:42
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 22
Provided by: paulc57
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Facts and Frameworks Revisited


1
Facts and Frameworks Revisited
  • On Archival Use and User Metrics

2
Goals of Presentation
  • assumptions
  • Facts and Frameworks
  • importance of metrics

3
Relentlessly Digital
  • 93 new information is digital (1999) (2003)
  • Near collapse of microfilm and loss of AV media
  • Overwhelming demands for online access
  • Archives / museums bid for relevance

4
Digital Archives
  • Archives in the digital world equals digital
    archives.
  • from digitization to managing digital assets
  • applying tried and true archival principles
  • both transformation and throw-back

Dramatic decline in the proportion of people who
care about, seek out, and use original artifacts
5
Digital Preservation and Use
  • Digital preservation begins with the creation of
    digital products worth maintaining over time.
  • value to a host of end users
  • inaccessibility equals non-existence
  • low use or no use could be fatal
  • For now, preserving digital archives for
    prospective use is unsustainable.

6
Archives and IT
  • Technology in archives plays competing roles
  • as museum exhibition
  • as publishing and outreach tool
  • as access system
  • as guarantor of authenticity (integrity)
  • Only the latter role is distinctively archival.

7
Goals of Presentation
  • assumptions
  • Facts and Frameworks
  • importance of metrics

8
Origins
  • Followed a study of presidential libraries
  • Bentley Library Mellon Fellowship
  • No overt focus on standardization
  • Establish a broad context for further study

9
Key Ideas
  • better understanding of users seems less a
    problem of will than a problem of method.
  • archival reference is both a service and a
    fertile ground for evaluation
  • fit appropriate methodology to stages of
    interaction with users

10
User Study Framework
11
What Still Resonates
  • Quality, Integrity, Value
  • Stages of developing deeper understanding
  • Fit methodology to stages
  • concrete to theoretical
  • comprehensive to selective
  • quantitative to qualitative
  • narrow to broad

12
What I Missed the First Time
  • Limits of linear model
  • Overly tied to reference processes rather than
    user behaviors
  • Not conducive to program evaluation
  • Not sensitive to time
  • NARA study Partners in Research was effort to
    address these issues little traction either.

13
What Has Happened Since 1986
  • SGML (ISO 8879) approved in 1986
  • EAD finding aids
  • Ubiquitous digitization
  • WWW
  • Digital libraries and digital preservation
  • Tangible socio-technical transformations

14
Goals of Presentation
  • assumptions
  • Facts and Frameworks
  • importance of metrics

From my perspective as a senior administrator in
an academic library who is particularly focused
on technology issues, but who cares about special
collections and archives blah, blah, blah
15
Quality of Access
  • Usability testing of websites, finding aids, and
    interfaces
  • Fundamental critique of EAD as an appropriate
    access mechanism
  • Connection between use of artifacts and use of
    digital surrogates

16
Integrity of Assets
  • Credibility and trust
  • Effectiveness of navigation and juxtaposition
  • Context and its value for access
  • Impact of transformed functionality
  • End-user assembled collections

17
Value of Archives
  • Whats the use?
  • Impact locally
  • Value added (cost/benefit analysis)
  • Impact of IP restrictions on scholarship and
    creativity, generally

18
User Collaboration
  • Since users are rarely autonomous actors
  • motivation based on group norms
  • dynamics of collaboration

19
Managing Archival Functions
  • If delivering context to end users is
    fundamental
  • If users rarely care about our organizational
    boundaries
  • If collaborative digital library development is
    our only hope over the long term
  • connecting the dots
  • clairvoyance enhancement

20
Lingering Doubts
  • Is standardization possible or worth the effort?
  • field consistency
  • content consistency
  • Is quantitative data useful locally or beyond?
  • Do metrics really contribute to justifying
    archives?
  • Are research agendas for academics only?

21
Thank you!
Paul Conway Director, Information Technology
Services Duke University Libraries paul.conway_at_du
ke.edu http//www.lib.duke.edu/its
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com