Activity Summary:
- Reorganized the Methods page. Added a series of definitions to reinforce the distinctions being made between the archive and the exhibit, as discussed in previous Curation Note 2.
- Moved link to Literature Review from the top of the page into a list of all Methods chapters to acknowledge the role of scholarship in shaping the archivist’s perspectives.
- Relocated the discussion of why transparency in methods is important to the bottom of the page to keep the emphasis on the methods themselves.
- Created a Task List to keep track of the digital work that needs to be completed and any follow-up work that I would like to take on in future iterations of the site.
Reflection:
This session was really about finding a better visual representation for how I was conceptualizing the inclusion of a literature review into the project. As part of the discussion with my chair after the prospectus, it was decided that a traditional literature review should be included in the born-digital dissertation as a way to allay any concerns that could be raised over the scholarly validity of the unconventional dissertation form I had chosen to pursue. In the first iteration of the exhibit, I had included the literature review as a link out from the top of the Methods page, as shown below. This link was followed by a discussion of why transparency in archival methods is important.
Although I was satisfied with this placement initially, I began to feel increasingly uncomfortable with the presentation in this way. For one thing, it felt like it was taking a position of priority at the top of the page that I was not sure it should have, particularly over the other chapters related to methods of developing the archive that I wanted to showcase in this section. I also did not like the way it felt “tacked on” as an extra piece of the project, not fully integrated into the whole, which did not feel like it represented accurately how I felt about the scholarship I had been researching related to the dissertation.
Ultimately, I realized that the Methods section was designed to document, and thematically organize, all the ways that the archive was being actively and passively shaped. In that sense, the literature review, as a presentation of relevant scholarship and the way I see the dissertation addressing the fields involved, was a kind of influence over the archive. What I had read and what I was learning about the significance of transparency and the need for archivists to do the generative work of creating new artifacts for more equitable representation in the archival record were significant factors in how I conceptualized the projects. That educational preparation was as much a method as the other factors shaping the project, so it made sense to include the literature review with the other method chapters. In the video below, I narrate a screencast recording detailing the decisions and rationales for the changes made to the Methods landing page, specifically the location of the literature review.
Access the video at this permanent link or embedded below: https://youtu.be/2Htok7iABxQ
In addition to relocating the literature review, the content for this page was also revised. I decided to add a series of definitions to help clarify the distinctions being made between the archival methods (what went into building the archive as the totality of artifacts created and organized) and the digital exhibit (a separately designed and curated user experience). I added a list of each methods chapter and a description of what aspect of the archival creation it details. I relocated the discussion of transparency to the end of the section. These changes are also discussed in the screencast recording, but this reorganization seems to better represent the project’s intentions and inherent arguments about the archival processes.
I also created a new Google Doc titled “Task List,” as a way to start keeping track of the work that I needed to complete on the project, especially in terms of the digital exhibit, as well as what I had completed. I also thought this would be a good way to show the work that is represented by the exhibit, which can sometimes be less visible than a text-based written chapter. Especially since in just these first few notes, I am starting to see that work invested in one session may only last until the following session where that work is undone or reimagined. The Task List allows me to keep a record of the efforts while also recording the ideas for work that I may want to address in future iterations. A screencast of the Task List is offered below to show the length and organization of the document. There are bullet points to organize the tasks broadly, but I have also used the space to do some freewriting about design ideas, to keep track of certain articles or quotations that may be useful in future work, and subjects that need to be addressed in future curation notes. I think that the Task List represents the reality of digital design processes as recursive and dynamic. Work to develop certain aspects of the project often require redesign as the ideas develop and priorities shift. The work is rarely moving in a linear direction from start to finish; many design features need to be addressed simultaneously, or a temporary feature is added to facilitate the work elsewhere that will then need revision. Whether a similar list is created by other scholars working in digital design or another process is used to capture the flow of ideas that exceeds the pace of their being rendered, it is clear that some method for documenting the process will need to be established so ideas are not lost over time.
Access the video at this permanent link or embedded below: https://youtu.be/stVid2kiofM
I also created a new Google Doc titled “Task List,” as a way to start keeping track of the work that I needed to complete on the project, especially in terms of the digital exhibit, as well as what I had completed. I also thought this would be a good way to show the work that is represented by the exhibit, which can sometimes be less visible than a text-based written chapter. Especially since in just these first few notes, I am starting to see that work invested in one session may only last until the following session where that work is undone or reimagined. The Task List allows me to keep a record of the efforts while also recording the ideas for work that I may want to address in future iterations. A screencast of the Task List is offered below to show the length and organization of the document. There are bullet points to organize the tasks broadly, but I have also used the space to do some freewriting about design ideas, to keep track of certain articles or quotations that may be useful in future work, and subjects that need to be addressed in future curation notes. I think that the Task List represents the reality of digital design processes as recursive and dynamic. Work to develop certain aspects of the project often require redesign as the ideas develop and priorities shift. The work is rarely moving in a linear direction from start to finish; many design features need to be addressed simultaneously, or a temporary feature is added to facilitate the work elsewhere that will then need revision. Whether a similar list is created by other scholars working in digital design or another process is used to capture the flow of ideas that exceeds the pace of their being rendered, it is clear that some method for documenting the process will need to be established so ideas are not lost over time.
Follow-Up on Curation Notes 2 Next Steps:
- Continue refining the overall design. This session did work to address some of the lingering design questions I had in the previous session. The reorganization of the Methods landing page is a step in the right direction, but I am still wondering about the validity of the division I have established between the archive and the exhibit. It is always going to somewhat artificial to impose boundaries and divisions between areas of a project that are, ultimately, far more interdependent that the separations would suggest. It may still be necessary to redesign the horizontal page separations.
Next Steps:
- Confront the need to purchase the site upgrade.
- Before I go much further with the project, I will need to decide whether to go with the free site or purchase the upgrade. I really do not like the insertion of banners and ads on the free site. It definitely undermines the professional quality I want to achieve, and it significantly limits design features, such as using a grid layout for images and adding anchors to collapse text under headings to give a cleaner look to the page. If I can get the overarching design settled, then upgrading would be the next step before spending too much time uploading and arranging images and text.
- Finalize the design of the overall layout.
- Although there is always a process of redesigning that takes place, I want to move into uploading and arranging the artifacts. In order to do that, I want to feel that the design is settled. I think it could be harder to make changes the more content is added, so finishing the underlying structural design is necessary.
Considerations:
- Accomplishing and reaccomplishing; recursive design
- Ideas and execution. The thinking and imagining that takes place while working on the digital design outpaces the ability to execute those ideas. There is a flood of creativity, but the time needed to develop one idea is quickly overwhelmed by the running list of things that need to be accomplished.
- Funding will continue to constrain possible design decisions.
- The way in which we create boundaries around stages of development is artificially introducing divisions between types of decisions where there is actually more interdependence. Although these divisions helps manage the workload and create some structures within which we can operate, it can lead to the false impression that how we create can be compartmentalized without affecting other areas of the design.