Talk:Module 3-b: Digitization
From DL Curriculum Project
Instructions
1. Click an 'edit' link to type in your comments. Your evaluation may cover general issues concerning the module or a section of it, or you may make more fine-grained comments (e.g., on a particular section by referring to the section number or on a particular point by referring to the page and line number).
2. Add four '~' (without quotations) at the end of each comment. Your id, date and time will show up later.
3. Click the 'Save page' button on the bottom of the 'edit' page.
Module Objectives: Are the objectives appropriate for the topic?
Are the objectives observable? Will students be able to achieve the objectives, given the content in the body of knowledge?
The objectives seem to be too broad to cover 'digitization' module only. In my opinion, the learning objectives for this module may need to address more detailed learning outcomes with a focus on aquiring technical guidelines and specifications for various types of collections. Given the time (1 1/2 hour) allocated to this module, and the level of details in teaching and learning it, I don't think it would be possible to achieve these objectives. The three objectives listed may be overlapping with those in other modules (e.g., 3a, 9a, 9b, etc.). I am not sure of some topics in Body of Knowledge in this module such as Benefits of digitization to users (2) and selection materials (3-C)need to be included in it.
In my class of "Introduction to Digital Libraries" (face-to-face), I teach "digitization" like a hands-on lab style over five weeks with other conceptual topics such as collection management, organizing digital materials, DL platforms, and digital imaging. Specifically, in a two and half hours weekly class, the first 1 1/2 hour class is given to conceptual lecture listed above and the second part of the class is designed for application of the lecture using actual collections (mostly images), flat-bed scanners, software (e.g., Photoshop) and CONTENTdm, to create a small class project ultimately. In my case, I may need to allocate more time (more than five weeks) to this module than instructors in other programs, especially becasue the main campus library has not yet prepared to implement any digital library project, and we cannot get any technical support from them yet. So, application of the module may need to be flexible enough depending on the environment where teaching occurs. Yooe 00:17, 19 December 2007 (EST)
I spend 18 class room hours teaching this material, and every class evaluation from that section indicates that the students need more time to absorb the material. Most of the students that I have do not have sufficient technical background to understand the issues of digitizing in the 18 hours that I devote to this.Kowalczyks 09:46, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Section 3: Learning Objectives. It's not clear to this reader that this module will adequately expose participating students to the needed theory, standards, practice and hands-on skills that are noted in the learning objectives. In my own (face-to-face) course in Digital Imaging, these objectives are introduced over a period of at least four weeks. This includes 2.5 hours weekly of face-to-face class, much more extended readings and discussion, a technical concepts homework assignment, hands-on flat-bed scanning labs, creation of digital surrogates using detailed technical specifications based on existing standards and digitization best practices and detailed step-by-step directions, and one or two sessions of supervised assignment of metadata. Even in a one day workshop environment, one is unlikely to be able to address issues of metadata assignment along with the other concepts addressed, at least in my experience.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
In addition, I question whether uploading derivatives of digital photographs to a webspace provided by an instructor should be characterized as "developing and managing a small scale digitization project". I would be more likely to call it creation of a small scale pilot collection of digital images.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Section 4. I found the 5S Characteristics of the Module a bit confusing.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Section 5. As noted above, the allotted class time, class readings, and class homework assignment seem quite brief for the expressed objectives, unless the purpose of the module is to introduce concepts and skills relating to digitization in only a cursory way.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Section 6. Relationship with other modules. 4-b and 8a could use some editing to improve awkward phrasing.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Body of Knowledge: Does the module address all areas of the topic that need to be addressed?
Will the body of knowledge enable students to achieve the objectives? Are there any topics that you think are critical to add to the body of knowledge? Are there any topics on that you would remove from the body of knowledge?
It would be great if all listed topics in “Body of Knowledge” can be handled well enough within the time given to this module. If not, I would move ‘#2. Benefits of Digitization for Users’ and ‘#5. Digitization Process’ to different modules. The scope of ‘body of knowledge’ seems to be well organized to match the three objectives listed.
For me, it is confusing to see some of the resources in “Body of knowledge.” For example, Figure 6.1: Steps involved in digitization, Selection for digitizing under ‘#3. Digitizing Process.’ How are they different from those in ‘#10. Resources?’Yooe 00:21, 20 December 2007 (EST)
9. Body of knowledge. With the exception of part 5, Digitization Projects, the limited amount of detail makes it difficult to determine whether concepts will be covered in sufficient depth. Under "Digital examples" (page 3) , direct quotes should more precisely indicate how the reader would track down the source. Much of this section could benefit from line by line editing (e.g. lines 10, 12, 15, 35). I find it troubling that "Permanence" (line 20) is cited as a benefit of digital conversion, with no caveats regarding the precarious state of digital preservation at the present time. Yes, "Drawbacks" (line 21) notes Authenticity and Migration as potential problems. I would relabel this section "Drawbacks and Risks", and add mention of problems with longevity, intellectual integrity, permanence of storage media. Perhaps assign here Conway, P. (2000). II, Overview: Rationale for digitization and preservation.
9 Andover, MA: Northeast Document Conservation Center (NEDCC). Retrieved
10 November 2, 2007, from http://www.nedcc.org/oldnedccsite/digital/ii.htm. I don't feel that this should be suggested reading for instructors, but rather assigned reading for students.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Page 3, line 27 - rendering is software dependent. Kowalczyks 10:02, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Page 4, line 3. I don't feel that preservation should be listed as a benefit for users.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Page 4. Section 3. Digital Process. Awkward phrasing, needs editingPerryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Page 4. line 8-9. Consider relocating for later discussion.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Page 4. line 27. Finances. what about storage?Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Page 5. Lines 1, 3, 6, 28 need editing.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Page 6. Lines 31-37 need editing for consistency.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
There is no discussion of how to determine the functional requirements for the digitized objects or levels of use. Kowalczyks 10:02, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Readings: Are the readings the best and most appropriate for the topic?
Are there any readings that you think are critical to add to the list? Are there any readings on the list that you would remove?
I would add the followings to Section 10.C-Standards/Rationale. Digital Master Images-Sample Technical Specifications for Photograph Collections http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/tp/DgtlMastersSamplSpecsSelctdRcmndFinal7_2004.pdf NC Echo guideline for digitization. http://www.ncecho.org/guide/toc.html
I would suggest NINCH. Selecting materials: An iterative process ( http://www.nyu.edu/its/humanities/ninchguide/III/) as one for the required or recommended reading section.Yooe 01:18, 19 December 2007 (EST)
Well, I am not familiar with all readings listed, but at least the readings assigned to students (requeired + recommended)look appropriate for the topic and manageable. Yooe 01:26, 19 December 2007 (EST)
Section 10c. I would move Besser (lines 30-33) to required reading for students. Ditto for Conway (page 8, lines 8-10). I would list Puglia and Vogt-O'Connor (page 8, line 1-6) as suggested reading for students.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
What about assigning technical standards/best practices such as Western States, California Digital Library, etc. etc. at least to be skimmed? File naming standards (e.g. TASI). And many other resources (e.g. PADI, CHIN, LC) at least for awareness.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Learning Activities: Are the activities appropriate for the topic?
Will students be able to accomplish the activities, given the content in the body of knowledge? Will the activities enable students to achieve the objectives? Can you think of any other class activities appropriate for this module?
I think that students will be able to accomplish the exercise stated, if more detailed guidelines are given to them. Specifically, 12 (3) needs a more detailed guideline and 12 (4) needs an institution specific guideline. It will also be needed to ask them to document the digital imaging process and settings including the files of digitized images. In my class, I use a similar assignment as this before the class moves to a larger group project. Students are asked to digitize three images (instead of five here) and to create three different files, a master and two derivatives. They are also asked to create metadata, to set a search setting and to assign controlled vocabulary using CONTENTdm. They do documentation of the digitized images and report the procedure. While they do this small project, they will be able to think of all important aspect in digitization as listed in “Body of Knowledge.” Yooe 01:21, 20 December 2007 (EST)
I have a number of concerns about the learning activities. 1. The term digital object is misused. In general, the term digital object refers to the work (a FRBR like definition) with multiple instances of files for each work. (#2 lines 5 - 7). This should state "create two derivative images - one for full screen viewing and one thumbnail." 2. These is no mention of creating an archival master file for each object. Understanding how to create and store an archival master is the most important part of digitizing. 3. Digital photograph is fine, but there is no mention of creating digital images of photographs or pages of text. Students need hands on experience with analog to digital more that born digital.Kowalczyks 09:57, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Section 12, page 8. lines 37-39. vague, needs editing.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Section 12, page 9. How will students learn how to create derivative images? Will they decide upon their own digital specs and if so, how? Any mention of standards here? What schema and thesauri will be used for metadata creation (lines 8-9).Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Will there be no exposure to flatbed or other scanning techniques? Discussion of the pros and cons of different approaches to digitization depending on the characteristics of materials?Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Level of Effort and Prerequisites: Is it feasible to teach the module as it is currently constructed?
Is the level of effort required in class appropriate to the scope of the body of knowledge? Is the level of effort required prior to class appropriate? Is the prerequisite knowledge required sufficient for students to comprehend the body of knowledge?
Definitely more time and effort will be required to accomplish the contents of the body of knowledge. Students may need to have some knowledge on specific software like Photoshop and Dreamweaver as prerequisites, and need to learn basic skills of using a flat-bed scanner during the class.Yooe 01:31, 20 December 2007 (EST)
No on all counts. It seems to me this module seems to be expanded substantially.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
It is certainly possible to cover the material as stated, but it will not serve students well. Each bullet point could be a 1.5 to 3 hour session. I spend 3 hours on formats, 1.5 hours on color, 1 hour on selection, 3 hours on quality control, etc. Kowalczyks 09:45, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Overall Structure of the Module: Is the current module well structured?
Can the topics and their corresponding resources be easily divided? Is there a clear mapping between the objectives and the content of the body of knowledge section? If not, how could the objectives be mapped to the body of knowledge more clearly?
I think so, but as I mentioned earlier in the Objectives section, the Objectives 1 & 2 may need to be rewritten to demonstrate more measurable learning outcomes. Yooe 01:40, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Additional Comments
I agree with Perry, and my comments on this is in the Objectives section. Yooe 01:34, 20 December 2007 (EST)
Returning back to the Learning Objectives, it seems much more attention needs to be focused on page 1, lines 12-18: Explain technical standards, selection criteria for digitization, and the digitization process. Discuss the critical issues and challenges of digitization (e.g., their potential uses,legal and financial considerations, preservation, and technical feasibility/standards). Develop and manage small scale digitization projects. There appear to be many holes in the module's attempt to address these objectives, unless, as stated previously, the curriculum is intended as a very basic introduction to the issues that would be expanded upon in subsequent coursework.Perryc 18:00, 2 December 2007 (EST)
