During the GWA project, the majority of submissions were made online. For the German EWA project, the majority (so far) stem from submissions days. Material from the last two EWA submissions days is still being catalogued (about 100 submissions to be added). EWA had a submission day based marketing campaign, postcard pick-up was over 70%. Whilst GWA targeted the local press, it also used social networking sites such as twitter, and in particular Flickr to engage with existing communities who may have something to contribute.
Overall, GWA submissions have fewer files attached than EWA submissions (on average 3.4 and 14.5). This can be attributed to the submission days in Germany being better staffed, and also suggests more material exists in the home in Germany.
The number of people contributing to the GWA and EWA is similar, around 450 +distinct individuals.
The number of files that are attached to each submission varies. Generally, GWA submissions have fewer files attached than the submissions made to the German project (on average 3.4 and 14.5 respectively). The difference is particularly marked in the submissions day contributions, where the German collection saw a considerable number of submissions with many files, for example long diaries, large photo albums and collections of related cards, letters and photographs. As a consequence, although the EWA collection so far has fewer submissions than GWA, the number of files collected is much higher.
Kate lindsay- Great War Archive
The Great War Archive: How audiences engaged with WW1 Kate Lindsay PI RunCoCo firstname.lastname@example.org @ktdigital
Project Aims <ul><li>To collect and make available online digital version of WW1 memorabilia </li></ul><ul><li>held by the public. </li></ul>
The Great War Archive (GWA) Year: 2008 Length: 16 Weeks Main Country: UK Collection Days: 6 Website: http://www.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ww1lit/gwa
People Contributing (EWA) Whilst audience data was not collected for the GWA, we do know that 1/3 of online contributors were uploading submissions on the behalf of someone else.
Observations <ul><li>The audiences of GWA and EWA were largely over 45 yrs and male. </li></ul><ul><li>The project audiences were often genealogists, military collectors and local historians. </li></ul><ul><li>Tapping into existing audiences, conversing with them in the spaces and places that they already existed led to effective engagement. </li></ul><ul><li>It is indicated that a significant proportion of our audience did not have the IT literacy skills to engage with the project via technologies. </li></ul><ul><li>Research needs to be done into finding “the hook” for younger audiences. </li></ul>