Assistant Professor at Florida State University, School of Information
Apr. 7, 2016•0 likes•751 views
1 of 32
Collections Cubed: Into the Third Dimension
Apr. 7, 2016•0 likes•751 views
Download to read offline
Report
Education
Presentation accompanying the paper presented at the 2016 Museums & the Web Conference.
http://mw2016.museumsandtheweb.com/paper/collections-cubed-into-the-third-dimension/
6. SurveyMethod
» Qualtrics survey
» Distributed to community listservs and
social media
» Museum-L, MCN-L, AAM Media &
Technology, iDigBio, Museums & the
Web, SPNCH, etc.
» Primarily focused on North America
(but received a few responses from
UK)
8. Limitations
» Small number of respondents
» Significant survey fatigue (of more
than 100 starts only 48 useful
responses, 13 completed surveys)
» few art or historical museums
16. Access (n=20)
» Ad-hoc access via researcher requests
» some use of existing content systems
(ContentDM, WordPress, etc.)
» Lack of support of OpenGL
» curiously no mentions of Thingiverse or
other 3D social sites
20. evaluation
» Most respondents don't have a solid
evaluation plan in place.
» some web analytics tracking use of
materials
» no formal educational evaluation
» some pilot studies working with
educators
21. Challenges
» Institutional support
» Unknown value proposition
» Most projects relying on soft grant
money
» Staffing
» Hard to find people with 3D expertice
or experience
22. Challenges
» Rapidly evolving technical environments
» No long-term digital preservation
» Hardware/software changing quickly
» Lack of best-practice guidelines
» Evaluation?
» How are 3D collections being used?
» How can evaluation help grow support/
value?