digital tools – Page 2 – Online Portfolio

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is allowed to think about history in a different way and derive ideas or questions that invite new approaches to the historical content.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.

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.

Project Proposal for “Koreatowns in North Texas”

“Koreatowns in North Texas”

The proposed “Koreatowns in North Texas” project will convey the importance of preserving an unrecognized part of American history. Currently, there is no website that allows the audience to access information about the history of Asian Americans in Texas. Multiple Asian American communities in Texas continue to prosper, and they contribute to the socio-economic development of the surrounding communities. Unfortunately, the history of the Asian American communities goes on undocumented by the Dallas County and the Dallas Historical Society. The proposed project will help inform people about an important part of the Dallas cultural and socio-economic history in order to bring awareness to a diverse community. It will emphasize the significance of immigration and the sustainability of urban and suburban development in diverse communities. The project will begin with the Korean American communities of Dallas County. There are two Koreatowns in North Texas: Koreatown Dallas and Koreatown Carrrollton. Each Koreatown is different, but both of them play a significant role in their community.

The proposed “Koreatowns in North Texas” project will ask the audience history questions pertaining to what they know about the history of Korean American communities and their connection to the two Koreatowns in North Texas. Here is a sample of the following history questions: What do you know about Korean American history in North Texas? What historical information about Koreatown Dallas or Koreatown Carrollton would you like to learn? How often do you visit Koreatown Dallas and/or Koreatown Carrollton? Describe your personal connection to one or both of the Koreatowns. What do you think makes Koreatown Dallas and/or Koreatown Carrollton interesting? Describe your earliest memory of Koreatown Dallas and/or Koreatown Carrollton. Describe your fondest memory of Koreatown Dallas and/or Koreatown Carrollton. What do you think stands out the most in Koreatown Dallas and/or Koreatown Carrollton? (e.g. the architecture, the cafes, the building signs, etc.). Some of the statements were revised from questions to non-questions to encourage the audience to provide more information.

Also, the project’s website will include a collection of digital images, short descriptions/narratives to connect with the audience, and information about important people who have contributed to the sustainability and development of the communities. Another component will be added for audience participation; they will be able to add their images and narratives that are related to the development of the Korean American communities. Their contributions will help build a historical collection online. Also, it will include digital maps to show the locations and spatial components in order to depict community integration and neighborhood gentrification.

In order to inform, persuade, and engage the audience, the website will implement digital tools. Omeka, an open source web publishing platform, will be used to feature the images as items. After the metadata is added for each item, the items will be organized into Collections or Exhibits. A Geolocation plugin will be added for mapping the locations of the items. Another plugin, Juxtapose will be used to show a side-by-side map comparison of both Koreatowns. Also, it will be used to show a map comparison of Koreatown Dallas in 1980s or 1990s versus now. An additional plugin, Commenting, will be added for the audience to add their comments. A Zoom It plugin will be added to allow the audience to zoom into the image and view it from different angles. Eventually, a social media plugin will be added.

For the target audiences, there are four different personas. Persona 1 includes the 1.5 and 2^nd generation Korean Americans. They visit the Koreatowns with family and friends. Some of them have contributed to the building or development of Koreatown Dallas or Koreatown Carrollton. Persona 2 includes an audience who is non-Korean American but is familiar with Korean culture and history from different levels, and they visit the Koreatowns. Persona 3 will be the audience who does not know anything about Korean culture and history, and they do not know that Koreatowns exists in North Texas. Persona 4 is the audience that is comprised of first generation Korean Americans who moved to North Texas during the late 1970s to 1990s and they have contributed directly to the development of Koreatown Dallas, or they have very strong personal connections to it.

A Summative Blog on Audience, Engagement, and Co-Creation

Conducting research for building a prototype for a digital public history project comes with some interesting challenges. One of the challenges that I have encountered is creating a set of questions to find out more about my audience. During the early planning stage, I thought I had great ideas for whom the project will target. After interviewing my users, I realized I needed to revisit my set of interview questions. My questions were almost linear, and I needed to take less control and let the audience tell me what they are looking for. One of the audiences that I did not consider at the initial planning of my project is the audience who does not have any knowledge of both Koreatowns and Korean American history and culture in North Texas. If I could find a way to engage this type of audience, then I will have a better understanding of my audience.

According to Shlomo Goltz, “personas are one of the most effective ways to empathize with and analyze users.” Learning about personas and creating two personas for my project has helped to step back and see my project from another angle. Then, I began to understand my audience. I am currently in the process of creating a third persona to acknowledge another group of audience. Another challenge I have encountered is the technology aspect. I made the assumption that if my audience uses technology, then it will be less difficult to engage them. However, I needed to pay closer attention to different patterns of data and the data that was missing. Both users access social media, but the type and time spent for each one differs depending on what they need and want from each one. The users not only want to search for information, but they also want to learn and to be acknowledged. I plan to study more social media platforms in order to understand how each one serves a purpose for different audiences. This will help me to learn which ones serve a greater purpose in engaging the audience with the project, and it will help me to select the appropriate digital tools to engage my audience.

Furthermore, engagement becomes a key factor for keeping the audience interested, informed, and valued. They want to be part of the project in some way. Just like visiting and engaging in the physical spaces, the audience wants that similar experience in a digital space; and they want to leave a physical and digital space knowing that they have learned and/or contributed in some way. The shared inquiry between the audience and the project creators create an interesting dynamic. By inviting the audience to become part of the project, the level of engagement goes from minimal to valuable. Also, carefully researching the audience and the different types of engagement adds a humanistic approach to the project. I plan to integrate activities that both the audience and I can co-create or build the project together. In the meantime, I will continue to research the end goals of different users. Overall, the user research has helped me to view audience from a different perspective and how they play a significant role in the designing and planning of our digital public history project.

A Summary of User Research

From my research, I have learned that I need to broaden my audience. Initially, I did not consider interviewing people who have never visited the two Koreatowns and/or have no knowledge of Korean culture and history. Instead, I focused on people who have an interest or have some connection. Another thing I need to consider is asking users what they would like to know about Korean American history and culture in general instead of specifically Korean American history and culture in the North Texas area.

Regarding social media, I did not ask the purpose for using each one. Fortunately, the interviewees added that information without me asking. I have to reconsider how social media plays a significant role in their daily activities. In order to understand my users and broaden my knowledge of social media, I might consider using more social media than my usual two.

After reviewing the user interviews, I realized that I might have to make some changes to my project ideas and plans. It seems as though that my questions have focused too much on what they know about Koreatown and Korean history and culture. Due to my controlled focus, I focused less on audience. I have learned that I need to give up some control. In the article, “A Shared Inquiry into A Shared Inquiry,” Corbett and Miller argues Ronald J. Grele’s point: “A shared inquiry is a deliberate decision to give up some control over the product of historical inquiry” (20). So, I had to ask myself, “What can I learn from my audience in order to gain their attention and to engage them in a dialogue with the project?” I might consider adding a blog page for users to add their personal memories about Korean culture and connect them to their reasons for visiting a Koreatown. This page will help me learn about my audience and how they can contribute to building the project. I also need to consider the spatial components and how they affect the relationships or communications in Koreatown as well as the digital space. Instead of just searching the project site, I have to encourage the audience to explore it because “it suggests a non-linear spatial imagination rather than linear, funneled one: one inhabits a space that is being explored rather than simply forging a narrowing path through it” (Frisch 132). Therefore, the interviews have taught me that I have so much more to learn about audience and I need to revise my project ideas and plans.

A Response for the Comparative Review of the Digital Public History Projects

With advancing technology and globalization, digital public history projects have progressed over time. A comparative review of the digital public history projects in three different phases reveals noticeable changes from the projects that began as content focused to projects that are content and audience focused. At the same time, the creators of the projects had to consider the digital space. For example, the digital public history work during phase 1 is more content driven. The technology might be outdated, but the historical content plays an important role in all three projects in this phase. In the first example, “Blackout History Project,” some of the hyperlinks were no longer working. Also, phase 1 includes minimal audience engagement; however, there is more audience engagement in the last two projects of this phase. The images, videos, and audio recordings provide different ways of viewing the historical content; and they allow the audience to think about history differently. “Blackout History Project” and “The Progress of a People” seem to centralize the historical content as if it was presented in an academic manner (e.g. lecture); however, I can see that all three projects were reflecting a shift or change in making public history available to a broader audience. A basic mapping tool appears in the third project: “The Great Chicago Fire and the Web of Memory.” The digital tools used in phase 1 projects convey the importance of beginning to engage the audience with the historical content through a digital space for the contextualizing strategy, which Sam Wineburg defines it as situating “the document and its events in time and place” in order to be “Thinking Like a Historian.”

For phase 2, the digital public history projects include more digital tools, audience engagement, and recognition of collaboration. In addition to educational resources, a project’s site presents other ways of engaging with a general audience. Phase 2 includes less hyperlinks and more embedded links and images that can be clicked on for more information. Also, phase 2 includes more galleries or exhibits for the scanned images of documents and other artifacts. Phase 2 projects invite the audience to think like a historian in the intermediate stages of contextualizing, close reading, and reading silence. “Jasenovac: Holocaust Era in Croatia” introduces the audience to public history that might have been hidden or rarely exposed. “A More Perfect Union: Japanese Americans and the U.S…” is another project that presents historical content that most U.S. history books only provide a snippet of information. “Raid on Deerfield” introduces the audience to view the history of English settlers and their conflict with the French and native allies. The phase 2 projects represent social injustice in different countries, and they convey the importance of global perspectives in order to share public history in a digital space.

In phase 3, the digital public history projects include updated digital tools, collaboration, and more audience engagement. The projects that collaborate with a museum and local historical society or library are “Lincoln at 200” and “Bracero History Archive.” Some of the project sites such as “Bracero History Archive” and “Operation War Diary” encourage the audience to contribute to the project. Also, some of the projects use social media to collaborate with the audience and spread the word about the project. There is also a search option in two of the projects. The digital tools in phase 3 are more advanced in presenting the historical content and engaging the audience. Some of the projects have both audio recordings with transcriptions for ADA compliance. The “Manifold Greatness…” is a great example. Some of digital public history projects have resources for further reading and for classroom purposes. By including more collaboration, audience engagement, and advanced digital tools in a digital space, phase 3 projects introduce the audience to the strategies of contextualizing, close reading, using background knowledge, reading the silences, and corroborating.

Furthermore, good digital public history work should continue adapting to the changing and advancing technology, updating websites, presenting historical content that challenges the audience to “think like a historian,” adding more scholarship, finding ways to engage the audience to understand the value of researching public history, and acknowledging a diverse audience. With all of these things in mind, it is also best to continue updating the guidelines for reviewing digital public history work.

In the field of digital public history, there are several promising new directions. It will create more grants and fellowships for scholars to think like a historian and bring awareness of missing or rarely known part of public history to a wide audience. Also, this field will steer in the direction of global digital public history projects that will reach out to an even wider audience for cultural and historical understanding. Soon, almost every major institution or organization will begin to hire public historians. This field is unique in the sense that it brings academic and non-academic passions together for a greater purpose. The humanistic approach to digital public history comes into fruition when it becomes an inclusive rather than exclusive way of audience engagement and participation along with collaboration from academic and non-academic institutions or organizations.