Hi Everyone,


My colleague, Kristen Schuster, Lecturer in Digital Curation at King's College, 
London and myself, are excited to announce, that we have been approved to 
contribute to a book chapter, for a publication called, "Digital Humanities and 
Libraries: Altered Domains of Partnerships, Questions, and Tools," published 
through Elsevier. Our research will compare how digital humanists access, 
retrieve and manage their digital assets for various projects in comparison to 
the role of cultural heritage institutions in providing those various digital 
assets.


We have developed a survey that will help us contextualize our empirical 
knowledge of image access and use in cultural heritage institutions. The survey 
consists of ten questions, and should not take more than 20 minutes to 
complete. We would very much appreciate your input and opinion on issues 
relating to image access and use in your discipline and work.



GLAMs and Digital Humanities<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/666NKNM>


For more context on our book chapter, we welcome you to read our proposal, 
provided below.


Thank you in advance,

Sarah Gillis
Assistant Registrar, Image Management
Worcester Art Museum


&


Kristen Schuster

Lecturer in Digital Curation at King's College, London


Proposal:

Digital humanities (DH) scholarship has increased the demand for access to 
digital surrogates (referred to as digital objects going forward) produced by 
galleries, libraries, archives and museums (GLAMs). Online access portals play 
an essential role in providing DH scholars with access to the digital objects 
produced by GLAMs. The growing importance of online access to institutional 
holdings requires the development of strategies for the better understanding of 
end-user needs. This research will describe the role information professionals 
working in museum collections can play in maximizing the discovery and use of 
digital objects for DH scholarship.  Particular focus will be given to the 
types of tools, practices and frameworks that  provide access and permission to 
use digital objects.  These assessments are not aimed at characterizing 
humanities scholars as unaware or uninterested in the functional elements (i.e. 
metadata) which underpin information access portals. Instead, we argue that it 
is more likely they are not familiar with the systems and frameworks that 
produce and provide access to digital objects. Disciplinary interests and 
knowledge require researchers to describe their use of digital objects in ways 
their peers will understand. In particular, art historians have niche research 
areas that allow them to explore and describe art and architecture in critical 
and interpretive ways. Expertise based in research can influence methods and 
strategies for searching and using digital objects. These methods and 
strategies may not overtly appear in curatorial statements or scholarly essays; 
however, they do influence what might be included in a digitally curated 
exhibition or project.
    There is a body of literature that addresses tensions and challenges in 
providing metadata for art library and visual resource collections. Studies 
done by Fear (2010) and Roth-Katz (2005) show that information professionals 
(such as librarians) need to balance general search terms with discipline 
specific knowledge. Striking such a balance, researchers argue, increases the 
likelihood of users finding the items they need. What is missing from this body 
of literature, however, are assessments of museum collections that use digital 
objects for various purposes. There is a need, therefore, to examine 
digitization policies and procedures in museums in order to better understand 
how a broader range of information professionals (such as collection 
registrars) use metadata to facilitate access and use of collections. Reviewing 
levels of metadata creation offers an opportunity to examine how metadata 
supports the curation of digital objects. For instance, considering the needs 
influencing the creation of technical, administrative, descriptive and 
preservation metadata for digital objects, makes room for assessing metadata 
needs from multiple vantage points (i.e.an<http://i.e.an> art historian and 
collection professionals).

The expertise gained through scholarship is vital; however, the disciplinary 
requirements expected of scholars limit how they describe the digital objects 
incorporated into their DH projects. These limitations present particular 
challenges for information professionals working in GLAMs as well as visual 
resource centers. This chapter will discuss methods information professionals, 
working directly with museum collections, can use to create meaningful systems 
for cataloguing, digitizing, and preserving digital objects. A description of 
access and use policies (such as copyright and image access) which promote 
effective digitization projects, will segue to a discussion of metadata 
practices and tools that better facilitate the management, use and reuse of 
digital objects. A detailed description of policies and standards for metadata 
creation and revision will frame the description of tools for embedded 
metadata. Describing the nature of embedded metadata will facilitate a 
discussion of methods for promoting access and use of digital objects produced 
by museums within DH projects. Overall, addressing the skills and knowledge 
information professionals can provide for the creation of metadata in museums 
will highlight an understated facet of interdisciplinary work taking place in 
GLAMs.

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

Reply via email to