Designing my project took some time, patience, and creativity. Modules 4 and 5 prepared me for a different outlook on designing my project and overcoming some minor challenges along the way. By exploring the suggested project sites in Module 4, I was able to understand how each project tries to engage the audience in different ways. Reading the articles that explain the process of designing the project was very helpful. The information on metadata was also helpful. In “Why Collecting History Online is Web 1.5,” authors Sheila A. Brennan and T. Mills Kelly convey the importance of metadata: “Without a metadata schema, however, your project is doomed to a lack of interoperability with other collecting projects that potentially threaten its longevity.” Adding metadata and adhering to the Dublin Core provided the additional practice I needed for describing my items.
Learning to add items to a collection in Omeka provided an insight into viewing it from the outside. I had to keep the audience or personas in mind when I was making the digital collection. I had to carefully select items that might trigger the interest of my audience. Also, I had to think about the interface for my project. I selected Omeka instead of WordPress because it was best suited for my project. From the article, “Generous Interfaces for Digital Cultural Collections,” “Generous interfaces provide rich, navigable representations of large digital collections; they invite exploration and support browsing, using overviews to establish context and maintain orientation while revealing detail at multiple scales. Generous interfaces use multiple, fragmentary representations to reveal the complexity and diversity of cultural collections, and to privilege the process of interpretation.” With Omeka, I can add layers of information that allow the audience to select their digital experience. Instead of a linear navigation, Omeka features sections that the audience can select in different order.
The storyboarding activity in Module 5 provided an insightful look into my project site. At first, I had the images categorized into 2 collections and 1 exhibit. While storyboarding, I realized I needed to go back to two personas because it was becoming too much. Also, I switched from 2 Collections and 1 Exhibit to 3 Exhibits. I redesigned my storyboard images while I considered two personas: primary and secondary. By constantly thinking about how the user might navigate the site, I was able to see what changes I needed to make to make it more user friendly and engaging. According to Shawn Medero, “Paper prototyping can also help improve the final product: the prototyping stage is the right time to catch design flaws and change directions, and the flexibility and disposability of paper encourages experimentation and speedy iteration” (“Paper Prototyping”). By drawing each screen, I came to the conclusion that I needed a section that allowed the audience to take part in this project. So, I added two additional sections: Cultural Events and Remembering Koreatown. Similar to the Hurricane Digital Memory Book, Baltimore Uprising, and A More Perfect Union, I added sections that valued the audience’s experience and contributions in order to build the project to its full potential. I also came to the conclusion that I would like to add another language, Korean, to my site after viewing Gulag: Many Days, Many Lives. Including another language in one or more sections of the site will add another level of audience engagement. Overall, the storyboarding activity provided an opportunity to reassess the narrative that I want to present in each exhibit as well as engaging the audience to share their narrative interpretation.
As always, content is very important. In Erin Kissane’s article, “A Checklist for Content Work,” she argues that “good content is user-centered.” While working on the infrastructure of my Digital Public History project site, I had reconsider the content. I had to think about the goals that I want my users to accomplish when they visit the site. This part is a work in progress because “content must adopt the cognitive frameworks of the user” (Kissane). I need to work on the diction and tone to capture my audience’s attention.
Modules 4 and 5 have shaped my thinking process for designing my project site. At times, I had to stop myself from doing too much and just think about it. When I was gathering my sources, I had to reconsider my personas. I realized that I had to scale down my personas from 4 to 2. Also, I had to think about the items and how they were going to be displayed. I had to revise the metadata and descriptions. This part is still a work in progress. In agreement with Suzanne Fischer, I had to “seek patterns” and take the time to think about my project because “synthesis is a creative skill that public historians can learn and teach” (“Developing your Synthetic Powers”). By looking for patterns in my project, I was able to pinpoint certain things that I had to scale back on since less is more.
I didn’t want to overwhelm my audience and lose their attention. I had to take a humanistic approach with technology. Therefore, maintaining a clear communication with the audience via the interface is very important when designing a Digital Public History project.