Hi Clayton, It really depends on the granularity of location tracking we want. The RFID/optical tracking is more difficult to install in the museum and is costly. More recently we used a simpler IR system that is a different approach, less accurate but easier to maintain, install, and less expensive. See this paper on our kurio system <http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1517712&dl=ACM> or the web site <kurio.iat.sfu.ca>.
Ron ----- "Clayton H Lewis" <[email protected]> wrote: > very useful references! > > > newbie question: would you say that the combined Radio Frequency > Identification (RFID) and optical position tracking system you used > for ec(h)o is a kind of thing we should be assuming can be available > as standard kit (robustness, cost, etc)? > > > > On Apr 25, 2009, at 8:55 PM, Ron Wakkary wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > Agreed! We've used variations of CI mixed with ethnography in the > past. Two instances involved museums. There were a few things that we > found to be very important that are not explicit in the draft but I'm > sure you've considered. It also goes without saying that each inquiry > became tailored to each institution to some degree so a generic > protocol is only a starting point. > > > * Repeat visits are a must or at minimum field visits were scheduled > over several consecutive days, e.g. a week. This allowed for refining > the protocol, targeting the inquiries, reflection, and follow-up. > * We relied equally on participant observation (which requires putting > the time in) as well as interviews. We targeted our observation work > at visitor experiences, institutional overviews, and targeted > stakeholder roles or functions, e.g. exhibit planning or content > management. > * We found that observing activities and workflows in museums are > difficult due to the project nature of museums, complexity, and > duration. We relied on a few additional techniques to observation and > interviews, namely go-alongs (targeted observation of activities), > video walkthroughs (videotaped talk-aloud sessions aimed at particular > work activities or situated discussion and demonstrations of > stakeholder perceptions of museum functions like an exhibit, for > example), and documents collection and analysis. These forms of data > collection allowed us to "triangulate" and reconstruct workflows and > activities. > * We also were committed to "reciprocity", meaning that data collected > and analyzed was presented back to informants and stakeholders for > correction and input. This also set us up very well for later > participatory design activities. > > > If it is helpful I can circulate or post a copy of an in-depth > internal report on requirements gathering we completed in our last > museum project, Kurio < http://kurio.iat.sfu.ca/ >. It covers our > methods, data, and analysis. > > > We also found information ecologies, based on activity theory to be a > helpful framework for designing the protocol and interview questions > and later analysis. This is particularly so with inquiries where > organizational and technology issues intersect. This approach helped > us to acquire high level or ecological understandings of the site but > also specifically with design implications. If you are interested see > our M&W 2005 paper: > > > http://www.archimuse.com/mw2005/papers/wakkary/wakkary.html > > > and for design implications in using an ecological approach see a 2006 > DIS paper: > > > http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1142405.1142448 > > > If you have trouble accessing any of these just let me know. > > > best, > Ron > > > ----- "Clayton H Lewis" < [email protected] > wrote: > > > > > excellent material! > > > > > can we work something in that asks about visitors with disabilities, > eg > > > > > are there aspects of your exhibit development process that address the > interests of visitors with disabilities? > > > > > are there things that you'd like to do to address the interests of > visitors with disabilities? > > > > > > > > > On Apr 20, 2009, at 10:19 PM, James William Yoon wrote: > > > > > Hullo, > > > I've put up a working draft of our exhibition designer interview and > contextual inquiry guide on the wiki (along with Word, Pages, and PDF > versions under the attachments). For the time being, it's one of the > child pages off of the main Engage page. The direct link is: > > > http://wiki.fluidproject.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6818521 > > > Feel free to comment and edit where things are missing or unfitting. > > > James > > > _______________________________________________________ > fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, > see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work > > > > > Clayton Lewis > Professor of Computer Science > Scientist in Residence, Coleman Institute for Cognitive Disabilities > University of Colorado > http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~clayton > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, > see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work > _______________________________________________________ > fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, > see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work > > > Clayton Lewis > Professor of Computer Science > Scientist in Residence, Coleman Institute for Cognitive Disabilities > University of Colorado > http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~clayton _______________________________________________________ fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
