/
Robert P. Spindler rob.spindler@asu.edu Robert P. Spindler rob.spindler@asu.edu

Robert P. Spindler rob.spindler@asu.edu - PowerPoint Presentation

celsa-spraggs
celsa-spraggs . @celsa-spraggs
Follow
344 views
Uploaded On 2018-09-24

Robert P. Spindler rob.spindler@asu.edu - PPT Presentation

June 2014 An Evaluation of Crowdsourcing and Participatory Archives Projects for Archival Description and Transcription Archival Description Digital Libraries Moving in Different Directions Acquisitions by Repository linear feet ID: 677590

participatory archives social crowdsourcing archives participatory crowdsourcing social archival methods improving projects quality improve 2013 university engagement robert transcription

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Robert P. Spindler rob.spindler@asu.edu" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Robert P. Spindlerrob.spindler@asu.eduJune, 2014

An Evaluation of Crowdsourcing and Participatory Archives Projects for Archival Description and TranscriptionSlide2

Archival Description, Digital Libraries Moving in Different Directions

Acquisitions by Repository (linear feet)

Department of Archives and Special Collections 1990-2014

 

Fiscal

Year

Arizona

Collection

Chicano

Collection

Child

Drama

Labriola

Center

Special Collections

University

Archives

Visual

Literacy

 

TOTAL

1990-91

50.50

163.00

 

 

 

327.00

15.00

555.50

1991-92

499.20

200.85

 

 

 

238.60

15.00

953.65

1992-93

308.70

19.95

 

 

 

125.73

1.30

455.68

1993-94

239.97

43.67

 

0.06

 

207.76

0.50

491.96

1994-95

3,772.41

99.18

 

0.04

 

140.42

17.65

4,029.70

1995-96

130.16

49.00

 

0.97

 

217.10

1.27

398.50

1996-97

185.82

25.30

 

3.37

 

229.20

0.87

444.56

1997-98

167.50

56.00

 

5.31

 

258.58

12.00

499.39

1998-99

450.91

38.15

 

1.62

 

381.92

28.77

901.37

1999-2000

80.08

72.85

 

40.04

 

161.77

3.00

357.74

2000-01

104.09

14.02

 

8.68

 

289.61

15.00

431.40

2001-02

211.35

26.56

 

18.04

 

123.82

3.04

382.81

2002-03

576.08

70.54

172.00

19.12

 

312.93

6.00

1,156.67

2003-04

265.03

27.27

34.38

22.50

22.71

573.95

1.00

946.84

2004-05

169.48

33.12

593.33

14.25

33.03

476.06

.50

1,319.77

2005-06

46.54

10.54

313.45

38.92

84.18

153.87

 

647.50

2006-07

41.65

28.41

20.00

20.00

15.33

354.86

1.50

481.75

2007-08

177.87

45.51

63.00

13.25

8.50

229.44

11.00

548.57

2008-09

168.16

46.00

60.50

2.00

17.98

169.76

6.00

470.40

2009-10

26.26

54.75

262.25

20.20

7.50

293.61

0.00

665.57

2010-11

67.91

23.00

31.30

5.25

9.00

45.21

1.70

261.57

2011-12

130.75

71.00

152.50

11.75

11.00

165.85

.25

543.10

2012-13

2,109.65

8.25

62.25

62.25

11.27

39.33

0

2293.00

2013-14

104.48

1.0

96.50

15.0

3.0

48.45

0

268.43

TOTAL

10,084.55

1,227.92

1,861.46

322.62

223.50

5,564.83

141.35

19,505.43Slide3

Museums, then Libraries, then archives…What

Happens After “Here Comes Everybody”: An Examination of Participatory Archives Society of American Archivists Annual Meeting, 2011 

Dr

. Robert B. Townsend

(Chair & Commentator)

Deputy Director

American Historical Association

Kate Theimer

 

ArchivesNext

Exploring the Participatory Archives

Dr. Elizabeth Yakel

 

University

of Michigan

Credibility in the Participatory Archives

Alexandra Eveleigh

 

University College London

Crowding Out the Archivist? A British Perspective on Participatory ArchivesSlide4

Crowdsourcing, Crowdfunding and Social BehaviorCrowdsourcing has its origins in early 21st

century crowd funding initiatives. There are important distinctions between crowdsourcing, social engagement and participatory archives.

While large numbers of individuals visit crowdsourcing projects, few make sustained and

useful contributions

. Powerful feelings of ownership, belonging and connectedness are derived from feedback

provided

by the crowdsourcing system or the associated community, and these feelings along with a

sense

of

shared authority

motivate the most dedicated participants. Slide5

Isto Huvila and shared authority (2008)

Huvila’s progressive view of participatory archives is characterized by “

decentralised

curation, radical

user orientation

, and contextualization of both records and the entire archival process”.

“Rethinking the relationship between official and unofficial knowledge is probably the main challenge that

cultural

institutions have to face when undertaking a crowdsourcing process

.”

Huvila

,

Isto

, Participatory Archive: Towards

Decentralised

Curation, Radical User Orientation,

and Broader

Contextualisation

of Records Management, Archival Science, Volume 8, Number 1

(

2008),15-36

.

Carletti

, Laura, UK , Gabriella

Giannachi

, UK, Dominic Price, UK, Derek

McAuley

, UK, “

Digital Humanities

and Crowdsourcing: An Exploration”, MW2013: Museums and the Web 2013

Conference

, April, 2013. Slide6

Theimer, Eveleigh and Participatory Archives

Participatory archives seek public contributions of work or information that expands our useful knowledge of culture and history. It is more than conversational social engagement as seen in Facebook or Flickr. Slide7

Methods – Improving QualityProject developers have experimented with a number of methods to improve the quality of knowledge or

metadata production by combining social participation with standards or systems based solutions. Projects seem to be moving toward separate professionally curated and socially curated spaces, although

linkages

between the spaces are clumsy and manual in most current applications. Slide8

Methods – Improving QualityMediation can improve quality, but it is work-intensive and can leave the host institution vulnerable to

claims of censorship, especially when the rules of engagement are not clearly stated in advance. Participants may have an expectation that their posts will be permanently preserved. Peer mediation

can be

more effective than professional mediation. Slide9

Methods – Improving QualitySeveral technologies can be used to improve quality such as heat maps, transcription version

comparisons, personalization features and reward systems. Open source gaming solutions for improving

metadata

quality are now available.

“Computational techniques” can be applied to extract, normalize, and disambiguate terms used in social

tags

. Slide10
Slide11
Slide12
Slide13
Slide14
Slide15

Robert P. Spindlerrob.spindler@asu.eduJune, 2014

An Evaluation of Crowdsourcing and Participatory Archives Projects for Archival Description and Transcription