1. Scholars Tracking Archival Resources Ciaran Trace, Unmil P. Karadkar School of Information The University of Texas at Austin

2. Document management Scholarly use Study sources Drafting documents Revising documents Topic selection Reading extant lit. Selection and appraisal Arrangement and description Reference and access Preservation Scholarly work Archival processes

3. Mediated Interaction Spaces Policymakers Published policies

4. Methodology Policymakers Published policies Scholars InterviewsAnalysis

5. Research Questions Which devices do scholars use for note-taking and for managing primary sources in the reading rooms? Do archives’ reading room policies help or hinder scholars in note- taking and capturing primary sources while in the reading rooms? How do scholars manage primary sources and notes in the long term? Does existing software enable scholars to manage primary sources to their satisfaction? Which commonalities in strategies and tasks, if any, could serve as guidelines to design software for helping scholars in managing and tracking primary source documents in the long term?

6. Methodology Policymakers Published policies Scholars InterviewsAnalysis

7. Archive Selection

9. TARO Interface Thirty-six archives in the state of Texas Various institutional types –Academic institutions –Government (state and city) –Not for profit institutions

10. TARO Interface Provides access to –Finding aids –About archive page Does not provide access to –Policies

11. Policy Analysis Data gathering –Browse archive web sites –Locate policy pages (reading room and technology) –Record information in spread sheet Recording –Policies by devices –URLs and relevant text Citation Policies

12. Policy Analysis Findings 36 TARO Archives –Six have no policy descriptions Devices –Still (digital) cameras –Video cameras –Document scanners –Notebook computers –Cell phones Policies –Allowed, disallowed, conditional, unknown –Number of pages for each device

14. No mention of permitted or forbidden devices

15. Policy Analysis Findings Notebook Computer Still Camera Video Camera Mobile Phone Document Scanner Allowed2013161 Conditional13200 Disallowed132013 Unknown81125816 Tablets?

17. Variation in Policy Descriptions Access to policy pages –Home page, clear labels –Up to four pages for a device –Policies co-located with other content –No information Device use policies –Permitted and forbidden devices –Permitted devices with restrictions –No information ? ? ? ? ? ?

18. Methodology Policymakers Published policies Scholars InterviewsAnalysis

19. Archive Staff Demographics Three reading room managers –Oversee reading room policies and staff Background –Female –35-65 years –11+ years of experience –At 2 or more archives –Comfortable using devices

20. Archive Staff Interviews Questionnaire –Demographic information –Patrons’ use of devices in the reading rooms –Patrons’ use of archive’s services Interview –Current policies –Implementation of policies –Drivers and motivators for changes

21. Interview Findings Web site policies differ from implementation –Actual policies are more permissive –Staff interpretation Policy changes (infrequent) –Patron or staff requests –Response to technology Staff –Believe that patrons are familiar with policies –Few patrons ask questions

22. Methodology Policymakers Published policies Scholars InterviewsAnalysis

23. Scholar Demographics Four scholars –Two historians, media studies, rhetoric and writing –Post-doc, two advanced doc, masters Background –Three female, one male –Under 30 years –1 to 10 years of archival experience –At 2 or more archives –Comfortable using devices

24. Scholar Demographics Reading room managers –Oversee reading room policies and staff Devices –Still (digital) cameras –Video cameras –Document scanners –Notebook computers –Cell phones Citation Policies

25. Scholar Interviews Gather and manage primary sources Survey –Demographic information –Use of devices (reading room, personal workspace) Three sections + bonus –Description of a recent significant project –Activities in the reading room –Activities in personal workspace’ –Your dream app for helping with archival work

26. Interview Findings Need help with policies –Difficult to locate –Difficult to interpret –Vary between archives Uncomfortable asking questions –Environment –Want to fit in –Don’t wish to cause trouble Characterize archives based on policies Digital cameras are key devices

27. Implications for design Archives support use of –Digital cameras (mobile phones) –Notebook computers (tablets) Scholars desire activity-specific support Desired features –Policy overview –Simplicity of interaction –Use familiar metaphors

28. Archive List Replicates the TARO interface Simple interface –No extraneous elements

29. Policy Snapshot Mixed metaphors –Traffic light –WIMP interfaces (gray) Links –Collection page (TARO) –Archive home page

30. Feature Suggestions from Scholars Map view Nearby food options Comments about the archive! Add information about other archives

31. STAR Document Manager Seamless switching –structure and capture Generate metadata (filenames, notes, spreadsheets) Upload to DropBox

32. Ongoing Work Archivist interviews Scholar interviews and observations Coding of interview transcripts Design of document management app

33. Acknowledgements Contact star@ischool.utexas.edu http://star.ischool.utexas.edu John P. Commons Teaching Fellowship School of Information, The University of Texas at Austin Samsung iSchool Students Xiaowan Wang Zixiao Wang Participants Scholars TARO Reading room managers