admin – Page 3 – Online Portfolio

Final Reflection

Building a prototype for Koreatowns in North Texas has been a challenging experience. This course has helped me to take a step back from the initial stages of my project and reconsider my audience. While learning about user-centered approaches to designing a digital project site, I encountered other challenges that I did not consider in the beginning. By studying the physical and digital spaces of a history museum, I was able to see things clearer. Also, studying various digital public history sites was very insightful. Learning about the different digital interfaces and digital tools, reading various scholarship on the digital public history, and testing digital public history sites have helped me to build a prototype.

I selected Omeka for the prototype because it was user-friendly and easy to navigate. It also allowed me to design my project site with creative freedom. The storyboarding technique, mentioned in Shawn Medero’s article “Paper Prototyping,” helped me to visualize the interface for Koreatowns in North Texas. In addition to storyboarding, I learned about the importance of testing and evaluating the prototype. I asked several people to visit Koreatowns in North Texas and provide feedback. Their comments helped me to see things that would be helpful for the audience when navigating the site. The comments from Dr. Leon were also helpful. My classmate’s review/feedback was helpful, but I think having more than one classmate to review the site would have been more helpful to gain more than one perspective.

Overall, I learned that building a prototype for a digital public history site is very challenging; yet the process is a great learning experience. This course has allowed to me explore things that I would not have done on my own such as building a prototype, accessing course materials, and learning different techniques to engage the audience. Since there is little information available online about the history and culture of Koreatowns and Korean Americans in North Texas, I was excited to build a prototype for the information to be available to the public. Finding time to take the images was a little bit challenging because I had to find the time to visit the places during the week and before sundown. After taking the images, I carefully selected the images that would be the best fit for the prototype. Before I learned to incorporate oral history into the prototype, I learned how to interview wonderful people who have close connections to the Korean American communities in North Texas. Another challenge that I encountered was the visual display of my images and text. I learned to experiment with different layouts of the images in Omeka. Writing short descriptions and narratives paved the way for me to understand my audience better. I had to consider the language usage and colloquialism, so I would not lose my audience to an abyss of words. Despite the challenges, I received so much support from the Korean American community. Finding the right people to interview was easy, but finding the time to interview them in person was a good challenge. Also, Dr. Sharon Leon has provided supportive and constructive feedback to lead me in the direction of learning something new in order to see the benefits down the road when I further develop my prototype.

Before the end of this semester, I revisited Michael Frisch’s article. In “From A Shared Authority to the Digital Kitchen and Back,” Michael Frisch explains the purpose of exploring: “Exploring, I think, is more interesting than searching, and it suggests a non-linear spatial imagination rather than a linear, tunneled one: one inhabits a space that is being explored rather than simply forging a narrowing path through it” (133). For my prototype, I came to a realization that I want the audience to explore instead of just search for information and images on the site. I want them to come away with some ideas or information that make them think about the reasons why Korean American history is rarely available online. Also, I hope their explorations and curiosities can help me to continue building the prototype. Ultimately, I want Koreatowns in North Texas to be our digital public history project by inviting people from different backgrounds and experiences to share in the building of the site as a community. The key to making the prototype available to the public would be an engaging collaboration with the audience. Echoing Corbett and Miller, “Honest sharing, a willingness to surrender some intellectual control, is the hardest part of public history practice because it is the aspect most alien to academic temperament and training” (36), I am steadily learning to take less control of my project and reconsider my audience. The question of “How do I engage my audience?” changed to “What are some changes that can be made to the prototype for audience engagement while connecting them to the purpose of preserving the history and culture of Koreatowns in North Texas and the Korean American experience?”

Project Progress Update

For this week, I am facing a few challenges with language conversion, oral history content in OHMS, and a possibility of changing the title of my Omeka site. After I added a plugin for the Korean and English language display, I noticed a few issues. After contacting Reclaim about finding a way to display Korean and English in Omeka, I was directed to contact Omeka support. I hope I will finally get my answer. I created another WordPress site in case I could not find a solution for Omeka. In WordPress, I was able to find some great plugins for language conversion and display. However, I decided to continue with my project in Omeka and worry about the language conversion later. I changed the language back to English only.

I have been struggling a little bit with OHMS. I viewed the video tutorials and read the tutorial guides; however, I just didn’t understand the procedure. I was able to add my interview with Dr. Zo, a first-generation Korean American, to OHMS. However, the audio recording does not appear in the Preview. Now, I have to figure out the problem, so I can link it to my Omeka site. The audio recording is currently available on my Omeka site. After removing my first interview, I decided to upload an interview from Youtube. It is an interview with a famous musician, Allen Toussaint, courtesy of the Library of Congress. Here is the updated link to my OHMS annotation activity: https://ohms.uky.edu/preview/?id=35461. Unfortunately, the video is not available for Preview even though I added the URL in the Metadata.

After interviewing two influential Korean Americans, I am contemplating if I should change the title from Koreatowns in North Texas to North Texas Korean Americans. The interviewees provided wonderful and inspirational narratives about their journey to America (Texas) and how they have contributed to their Korean American community. Each interviewee expressed his or her own passion for community involvement. They did mention Koreatown Dallas, but I am gradually realizing that I need to let go or release my control of the project’s initial direction and see it from an inclusive and audience centered objective.

My next steps include oral history management, addition of social media plugins, additional video recordings, and testing the site with volunteers. I will be uploading and transcribing the remaining audio recordings of the 2 interviews. Before I add the plugins for social media, I need to create a Facebook account for the project site and a Youtube Channel. For Facebook, I can add an image from the Omeka site with a brief description and a title to invite audience participation. For the Youtube Channel, I plan to record a short video about one of the places in Koreatown Dallas or Carrollton to capture the audience’s attention. I might record a short food video from a Korean restaurant (if permitted by restaurant manager/owner) or a panoramic video of Koreatown Dallas or Carrollton and upload it to Youtube. Even though my project is in the early stages of a digital public history site, I will be asking for a few volunteers from different backgrounds and ages to view my site and provide a brief feedback. I might even ask my own students to take a look at the site as a classroom exercise on the rhetorical persuasion and audience engagement of a digital public history site that is a work in progress.

Project Progress Update

The challenges I am facing this week include language conversion, interview recording, and selecting a plugin for future mobile access. I managed to download a plugin for Korean language. However, only selected words (e.g. tags and Dublin core) in Omeka were translated into Korean, but the English words were unavailable. I am trying to find a way to include both Korean and English. Also, I have to double check each word that is translated into Korean because I am noticing that most of the words that were changed to Korean were just the Romanization of the English words. I would like to add the Korean word for that English word. For example, instead of translating “tag” into the Korean pronunciation of tag, I hope to find the actual Korean word for “tag” if it exists. Another challenge I am facing is the downloading and converting of the interview recordings. I changed from using Samsung Galaxy to the Apple iPhone, so I am learning how to use the recorder properly and download segments of the interview. I might resort to using the voice recording editor via the web. After reading the material and exploring the sites in Module 8, I am learning how to include a plugin that will allow me to include an app for possible mobile conversion of my project site. So, I am researching Bootstrap as a possibility.

A Reflection on the Complexities of Creating Public History for a Specific Place

Working on digital public history that is tied to a specific place has its advantages and disadvantages. The complexities include various parts of history that are to be covered about a specific place. Digital technologies have allowed the implementation of mobile devices such as the smartphone to view public history from different locations and spaces. For The Philly.org project, “Mobile augmented reality applications serve as a method for engaging with smartphone users as they conduct their daily tasks, rather than requiring them to visit a physical building or invest time in a laptop or desktop computer” (Boyer and Marcus). The audience is given access to the public history site from different locations and time in a digital space. To overcome the complexities of designing a digital public history for a specific place/location, project designers should consider the three responsive approaches: how they want it, when they want it, and what they want (Baer, Fry, and Davis). By studying these responsive approaches, project designers are able to use certain digital technologies to enable the viewing of public history from different perspectives.

Also, the implementation of digital technologies has created new ways of delivering oral history to the public. In reference to the Cleveland Historical project, Mark Tebeau explains, “Ironically, digital tools have presented us with new dilemmas precisely by presenting new possibilities, such as allowing us to more easily edit oral histories. As a result, we are brought closer to the human voice than ever before, no longer experiencing oral history as mediated by the transcript or interpretation”(33). With advanced technology, oral histories are transcribed, recorded, and presented in various ways to capture a wide audience. Paraphrasing Wineburg,“With this in mind, the Center for Public History + Digital Humanities has moved toward an activist model of curation in which team members develop interpretive stories that introduce historical and cultural contexts that challenge audiences to understand history in a new fashion—a practice in line with the process of historical research and thinking” (Tebeau 32). Instead of just listening to oral history online, the audience is allowed to think about history in a different way and derive ideas or questions that invite new approaches to the historical content.

Digital technologies have reinforced the concept of collaboration. Tebeau argues,“inspired by the promise of social history and the radical ways that oral history can restructure power relations, we moved toward curating the city in collaboration with the community, rather than curating it for the city’s many constituencies” (30). Digital technologies have enabled the concept of collaboration within the project community and with the community. “Of particular note, this collaborative oral history project pro vides a transformative way of understanding “place” and of moving beyond an emphasis on visual interpretive practice, in order to provide a deeper way of building interpretive stories for public humanities exhibitions on mobile computing devices” (Tebeau 25). Digital technologies have challenged the concept of traditional collaboration vs. non-traditional collaboration. By taking on a humanistic approach, project designers implement digital technologies to allow a wide audience to take part in contributing to the place specific, public history site.

Furthermore, digital technologies can be used to include a different type of communication and engagement with an audience in digital space. Presenting place specific, public history in a physical space versus a digital space can be challenging; however, digital technologies are being used in different ways to provide the audience with a similar experience as if they were touring the exhibit in person or sometimes presenting more ways of audience engagement. The location-based projects are user centered. The Murder on Beacon Hill project engages the audience to peer into what had happened in the past by providing an interesting narrative that speaks to the audience and takes them on a journey in digital space. The maps, images of the place in past and present, and the architecture invite an engaging communication between the site and the audience. The narrative is presented in segments to allow the audience to search different points of the digital history of Beacon Hill. Digital technologies have enabled the public history site to engage the audience audience by inviting them to explore a mysterious past and to question what had happened during that time and location.

However, there are some challenges when implementing digital technologies for a public history project. Digital technologies might inhibit the seamless transition from physical space to digital space. Some of the contents that are presented in the museum may not be available in digital space due to various issues. According to Hart and Brownbill, “The amount of content available on the app when out of the museum or exhibition is an issue for some, striking a balance between the in-museum and out of museum experience is challenging…A major challenge was to present all these types of content in a meaningful way.” Also, certain objects that can be viewed in a physical space might not be the same when viewed in digital space. For example, “Due to rapid technological changes, specifically in the technology used in mobile augmented reality or in placing objects in 3D space as in the case of PhillyHistory.org, implementing an augmented reality project requires an advanced level of technical knowledge” (Boyer and Marcus). Viewing objects in a physical space allows the visitor to have a 3D image of them. However, digital technologies need to be carefully selected to create the same effect as if the object was viewed in person in a digital space.

Another challenge is the access to mobile devices. For example, not everyone has access to smartphones. “Although the smartphone market is growing rapidly, many individuals do not own a device that would enable them to access an augmented reality application.” (Boyer and Marcus). By focusing more on mobile devices, the site begins to ignore the disenfranchised/marginalized audience.

The materials and exploration sites for Module 8 have allowed to me consider how location-based techniques can be implemented into my project. The mobile format for my project will require some modifications and additional digital tools. Creating a seamless transition from the website to mobile app will be challenging; however, it will be an exciting challenge because it will adapt to the changing ways of viewing things on a smartphone and engaging my audience. At the same time, I am wondering if Iess is more when implementing digital technologies to capture a wide audience for my project.

Exploring Mobile History Site: The Sixth Floor Museum

For the “Exploring Mobile Public History” activity, I explored the The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza on my smartphone. The information and images presented on the website were viewable on the smartphone. The only drawbacks for viewing the site on the phone are the enlarged images and extended timeline information with images. On the phone, it is difficult to have a wide view of the images and timeline that are displayed across the screen on a computer or laptop. On the other hand, viewing the digital public history on the smartphone had some advantages. Based on the place-based or location-based techniques, the mobile site adhered to all three of the responsive approaches: how they want it, when they want it, and what they want. For visitors who are curious or unable to visit the museum in person, viewing the public history is accessible via the website. But, it is even more accessible for people who want to view it from their smartphones. The disadvantage will be for people who do not have cell phones or mobile devices. Also, if there is no WiFi, then there is no access. I was able to view the museum site on my phone while I was in an area that did not have desktop computers or laptops. Also, I was able to view the site while I was having lunch. As long as I had access to WiFi, I was able to view the site on my phone. By having access to the site via smartphone, laptop, or desktop, reflects that the site can be viewed with WiFi in different locations. Also, I could view the site when I wanted it. Instead of worrying about the Museum’s hours of operation, I could view the site whenever I wanted.

As for what I wanted, I was able to select different sections to view collections, timelines, shared memories, videos, and transcripts. Instead of reading about the history of the museum, I can jump to the next section and read about the assassination. I can also select Collections or The Legacy. If visitors at the museum do not have mobile devices or smartphones, the museum provides electronic devices for a voice driven tour. However, the mobile version does not provide a voice driven tour for visitors who want to use their own devices. The timeline presented in the “The Assassination” section closely resembles what is at the physical museum, so visitors get a similar experience. The images on the timeline are not viewable alongside the text when a specific part of the timeline is selected for closer viewing. The oral history in “The Collections Section” includes more transcripts than video recordings. The video recordings are linked to their YouTube Channel, and they are easily viewable on the smartphone. The audience engagement with the site is layered with different things. The Legacy section includes previously shared memories of the event, and there is a “Share Your Memories” tab to invite the audience to provide their stories during that time period or what they know about it.

The theory of history that The Sixth Floor Museum is putting forward is living history. Instead of teaching about the past in a single space, it engages the audience to trace the events leading up to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in a digital space. Also, The Sixth Floor Museum invites the audience to question what had happened and how the assassination of JFK is still thought provoking after so many years. The audience can envision the past while connecting with the present surroundings. For example, the site shows the physical spaces related to the tragic event from past and present. The audience can view the location of the assassination and where the sniper was positioned at the time. The site links to an Earthcam that allows the audience to view the Dealey Plaza from the sixth floor of the museum. The live camera shows cars, people, roads, buildings and other structures in today’s time. Placing the audience in the location of where the sniper was positioned during the assassination perfectly connects both digital and physical spaces together. Whether it is in physical or digital space, the The Sixth Floor Museum site engages the audience to think about history as living history.

A Reflection on Oral History in DPH Projects

Digital technologies have provided different ways of including and delivering oral history in a digital space. There are systems or software programs that are available to help project designers to include oral history in a digital space. For example, “The Oral History Metadata Synchronizer (OHMS), a web-based system, provides users with word-level search capability and a time- correlated transcript or index, connecting the textual search term to the corresponding moment in the recorded interview online” (Boyd 95). On the other hand, there are some challenges that complicate the practice of oral history. According to Boyd, “… it still remains underutilized because oral history can be a cumbersome resource to use, even in an online environment” (95). Initially, OHMS was developed for transcribed oral history; and it became a challenge in the digital space. Also, “Software designed to offer access to archived materials is not sensitive to specific challenges posed by oral histories” (Boyd 96).

The American Folklife Center uses Oracle APEX for their platform. Groce and Lyons “expect the online platform developed for the Occupational Folklore Project to result in cost-efficient protocols for the acquisition of oral history materials from partners in geographically dispersed locations…to minimize the work of translating and mediating data that accompanies these acquisitions” (65). It allows the user to include content with less complications.

Another challenge is the cost of transcribing and auditing oral history. “The digital index has the advantage of being a true timecode; however, very few digital archival systems have been developed to automate the linking of the timecode representing the segment created to the corresponding moment in the interview” (Boyd 101). As a result, “Indexing in OHMS allows us to create a workflow that puts these interviews online much more quickly and efficiently at a very low cost” (Boyd 103). It is not cheap. So, OHMS developed a better option. Currently, OHMS is free. Also, OHMS is compatible with certain programs. For example, “As part of this initiative, OHMS is being developed as a plug-in, working seamlessly with other content management systems, including Omeka, Kora, CONTENTdm, and Drupal” (Boyd 96). There are helpful video tutorials (and transcripts) on how to use OHMS for annotating oral history.

Furthermore, there is a challenge of having too many topics. The Occupational Folkore Project, designed by the American Folklife Center, came up with a great solution. “To address this challenge, we again worked with our archiving and cataloging colleagues to develop a controlled vocabulary, a list of preselected words and terms designed to limit ambiguity and aid the search and retrieval of information” (Groce and Lyons 62). This solution created an efficient way to catalog the topics prior to the oral history interviews.

To ensure that the project site maintains its user centered focus, testing the site at various times is very helpful. Including oral history in a digital space presents another complication that can be good for the project designers. American Folklife Center uses Beta-testing, which they rely on volunteers from libraries, schools, organizers, etc. This allows the AFC to “use testers’ feedback to refine our [their] procedures and improve our protocols” (Groce and Lyons 65). Referring to Angela Colter’s “Testing Content,” “Whatever your budget, timeline, and access to users, there’s a method to test whether your content is appropriate for the people reading it.” Therefore, testing the site is a win-win situation for both the project designers and users.

The articles and project sites for Oral History (Module 7) have strongly influenced my proposed decision to add an oral history component to my project. Here is the link for my OHMS annotation assignment: https://ohms.uky.edu/preview/?id=35461. I plan to add interviews to complement the Exhibit items in Omeka. Also, the oral history component would be a great add-on for including and engaging the audience. I might consider adding an option for the audience to add their oral history of Koreatowns in North Texas by selecting one of the two options: text or recording (voice/video). They can upload a document or type their history in the space provided (with word limit), or they can upload a short video. The transcription of the oral history will be beneficial for me and the audience. I like the idea of the segmented transcription of oral history in OHMS. If either text or video includes Korean language, I will have to find a way to translate it in either format. Adding the oral history, in the form of text, voice, or video recording, reflects a humanistic approach to my digital public history project. The audience will be introduced to real people and their stories in order to make human connections in a digital space. The connections result in engaging and interesting communication that will help me improve my project.

Project Progress Update

The challenges I am facing for this week are drafting a set of interview or oral history questions, deciding on voice recording or video recording of my interviewees, and redesigning some of the Exhibit pages in my project site. After making the effort to contact influential Korean Americans in North Texas, I have received positive responses. I am in the process of scheduling a time and place to meet two people (first generation Korean Americans) who will contribute to my project. The interviewees speak Korean and English fluently, so the transcripts of the interviews will be a challenge if both languages are used. Another challenge is that I am still trying to figure out how to include Korean language for some of the description of the Exhibit items. Since my Korean is not the best, I might ask someone to proofread and edit my Korean. Also, I have to go back to the drawing board or storyboard and redesign a page or pages for the Exhibits in Omeka because I might add a voice recording or video recording to complement some of the Exhibit items. I will explore plugins for uploading the recordings in Omeka; however, I am currently learning how to annotate oral history by using the OHMS (Oral History Metadata Synchronizer). I am also learning about the different digital files and conversions for the interview recordings. The readings and site explorations for Module 7 have inspired me to look at my project from a different point of view and to revisit the concept of user centered exhibit when oral history becomes part of the project site.

An Update on the Progress of “Koreatowns in North Texas”

The challenges that I am currently facing with my digital public history project are gathering more information about both Koreatowns, finding a plugin to add Korean language, and searching for before and after images of both Koreatowns. In order to overcome the challenges, there are a few steps or goals that need to be followed. First, I will reach out to two or three, first-generation Korean Americans who are knowledgeable about one or both Koreatowns. I would like to find out more information about the zoning of Koreatown Dallas and how it has changed over the three decades. Also, I would like to learn more about the historical information about the different plazas in Koreatown Dallas. As for Koreatown Carrollton, I want to know more about the group who advocated for the historical marker to be placed in Koreatown Carrollton. It also brings up the concern that a historical marker is not placed in Koreatown Dallas, and if there is one, I would like to know why it is not visible like the one in Koreatown Carrollton. The other step is to acquire images of Koreatown Dallas from the 1980s and 1990s. I would like to have access to the before and after maps and/or designs of Koreatowns Dallas and Carrollton. For the second goal, I will search for a plugin that displays both Korean and English languages for item description and other information. For the last goal, I plan to add more description and historical information for the items that are currently on my project site; and I plan to add more images for the Koreatown Carrollton Exhibit.

A Reflection on Doing Local History or Affinity-Group Community History Mediated by Digital Technology

Working on local history or an affinity-group community history mediated by digital technology invites various challenges. One challenge involves communication via the digital space. Selecting the right interface to present the public history contents requires carefully paying attention to the audience, design, and content management. Another challenge is creating ways to engage a broad audience. The digital public history site needs to be displayed in different ways to capture the audience’s attention in order to engage them. According to Gutterman, “Digital history scholars have emphasized the need for interactivity, but most digital history Web sites fail to attain this goal” (“Outhistory.org” 102). So, various digital tools or plug-ins have to be tested in order to find the right ones for engaging a broad audience. The third challenge would be designing the project’s site with various digital tools to create and share historical knowledge with a broad audience. For example, Outhistory.org invites the audience to “Create Content” and to share their stories “Tell Us Your Story.” They allow the audience to take part in building the digital public history site. Whether the audience is a scholar or someone from the general public, the digital technology must be accessible and user-friendly. The last challenge is to constantly keep the communication open for collaboration of new and shared ideas to maintain the digital public history site.

After carefully reading the articles and viewing the project sites of local history or affinity-group community history, I have noticed several things that I need to consider with developing my project. I am in the process of looking at another plugin to add to my project site. The plugin would be for a timeline. Another thing I would like to consider is reorganizing the featured sections. I may order the sections differently. Also, I would eventually need to test the site with actual users, people who represent my proposed audience/persona. Testing the site will help me see the flaws and gain knowledge about my real audience. To broaden my audience and to encourage more people to contribute to building the Koreatowns in North Texas project, I would like to add a Korean language feature; so I can include both English and Korean. Also, I have learned that I need to collaborate with more people who have knowledge about the Koreatowns and Korean American history in North Texas. The collaboration will help me with designing a bigger picture for my project. Therefore, while I am selecting the digital tools and designing the interface, I have to keep in mind the audience and the communities throughout the development of the project.

A Reflection on how Modules 4 & 5 have shaped the thinking process for designing “Koreatowns in North Texas”

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.