Project Outcomes
Project Outcomes
List any important outcomes or findings not previously reported:
The grant project achieved successful outcomes for both of its major goals:
Goal 1: 55,000 pages of historical records from the Las Vegas Land and Water Company, the Las Vegas Valley Water District, and the Union Pacific Railroad documenting the history of water management in Southern Nevada were digitized and made available online for viewing and download. The digitized pages were transcribed using OCR software and the records, previously inventoried in a Word document, were described with standardized metadata and controlled headings for enhanced discovery and access. The physical materials were processed and rehoused for preservation; in addition, providing online access will decrease the handling of the fragile paper documents. Finally, a story map (https://arcg.is/1aXLzG) was created to visualize and contextualize the collection.
Goal 2: UNLV held a second statewide workshop to deliver comprehensive recommendations for large-scale digitization projects and to provide attendees with practical information for undertaking their own digitization project. The workshop included panel discussions about UNLV’s grant project and the challenges of large-scale digitization, an overview of providing online access and digital asset management systems, and “boot camps” covering preparation for digitization, image capture, metadata creation, and finding external funding. Formalized workflows and tips were discussed and shared via Google Drive and paper handouts (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DMqZ_9GyaaEfHaHdf6T2xNM4EYHxW2hE). Participants were offered the option to set up one-on-one project planning or equipment consultations with speakers and an attendee list was shared to encourage collaboration after the workshop. The project team built continuity from the first workshop by analyzing feedback from the first workshop to plan the second workshop. The project team also surveyed attendees before and after the second workshop to find out what they were most interested in learning, what their background was, and what they learned from the workshop after it was over. 100% of attendees who completed the post-workshop survey agreed that they learned something, 15/17 felt confident about what they learned, and 16/17 said they are likely to apply what they learned.
Please briefly describe the importance of these outcomes and findings for future program planning:
Explain one or two of the most significant lessons learned for others wanting to adopt any facets of this project:
Goal 1, Digitization: We discovered that creating a list of prioritized subject, people, and group authorized headings at the beginning of the project ensured metadata was consistent and relevant to researchers. Although we could digitize all folders in a box, it was not always a valuable use of resources; selection still plays an important role, even in large-scale digitization projects. Finally, we learned about limitations of our equipment in relation to fragile text documents. Digitization was slower because of staple removal, disintegrating documents leaving dust, curled paper that needed to be weighted with glass, and thin paper that needed placement on blank paper for better readability.
Goal 2, statewide workshop: 1) The grant team sought to improve feedback from workshop attendees, addressing comments from the first workshop that participants desired more hands on learning and less theory and complex technical information. This year the grant team added Digitization Boot Camp with content tailored to participants requests. The sessions were smaller in size and more time was allocated for Q & A and participant-guided discussion.
2) The second goal as to provide a comprehensive overview of the activities funded by the grant with specific lessons examined as a case study. The panel session, “Challenges of Digitization" provided multiple perspectives on the project (curators, project manager, librarian/archivist, and student worker) and shared challenges and solutions.
3) A third goal of the workshop was to center the participant learning experience by reworking the workshop content, adding more time for Q & A and discussion, responding to participant’s priorities and offering one on one project planning consultations.
4)The final goal was to collect data on Nevada digitization to compare to previous year/note trends. Findings include: a critical need for statewide training on digitization, a strong interest in preservation issues, and the acknowledgment that many resource-challenged organizations are eager to digitize, but not necessarily at larger scale.
Do you anticipate continuing this project after the current reporting period ends:
Yes
Do you anticipate any change in level of effort in managing this project:
Yes
Explain:
UNLV has now undertaken several successful pilots, including this project, to test large-scale digitization strategies for photographs, visual materials, and textual records. The workflows that were developed will continue to be used for new digitization projects at UNLV. Recommendations have been made to the Nevada State Library, Archives, and Public Records to consider statewide training as a priority as the workshop has proven valuable to attendees, but may not be possible to sustain via annual grant funding.
Do you anticipate changing the types of activities and objectives addressed by the project:
No
Explain:
Was an evaluation conducted for this project:
No
Was a final written evaluation report produced:
No
Can the final written evaluation report be shared publicly on the IMLS website:
No
Was the evaluation conducted by project staff (either SLAA or local library) or by a third-party evaluator:
Third-Party
What data collection tools were used for any report outcomes and outputs:
Did you collect any media for the data:
What types of methods were used to analyze collected data:
Other:
How were participants (or items) selected:
What type of research design did you use to compare the value for any reported output or outcome:
