Accessible Archives: Case Study 2
Double Check
How might we organize, export, and transfer multi-media artifacts and ensure compatibility with third-party assistive tools?
Timeline
January to April 2021
3 months
Domains
Accessible Design
Participatory Design
Role
UX Researcher
UX Designer
Co-Designers
Mattie Lee
Mehar Nangia
Problem
Researchers have a difficult time accessing artifacts from the archive due to flat information hierarchy, poor compliance with web accessibility, and incomplete publication of artifacts.
Design Challenge 1
How might we design a system where both archivists and researchers are able to build on a more accessible archive experience?
Design Challenge 2
How might we ensure that all published artifacts meet web compliance?
Solution
Providing archivists and researchers a robust tracking system that prioritizes accessibility ensures that cultural heritage is preserved and shared in a way that respects and accommodates the needs of all individuals. To do this, there must be a checks-and-balances system that indicates whether or not an artifact meets web compliance and is accurately described by the provided metadata.
Accessibility Checker
Design Lead: Mattie Lee
Submitting Requests on a Single Artifact
Design Lead: Charlene Joy Dela Cruz
Submitting Requests on Multiple Artifacts
Design Lead: Mehar Nangia
Design Process
The following diagram represents the divergent and convergent thinking that occurs. Though the format of the project is presented in a linear fashion, I would often go back and forth between phases as our knowledge and insights grow.
Discover
Contextual Inquiry
User Research
User Interviews
Define
Synthesis
Problem Definition
Affinity Diagrams
Develop
Deliver
High Fidelity Mockups
Background Research
I looked into the tasks that archivists needed to complete from acquiring an artifact to publishing it to the archive. Understanding the digitization lifecycle informed the list of research questions asked during 1:1 interviews with archivists and librarians.
Pain Points
Navigating through an archive due to poor information hierarchy
Finding artifacts in archive due to poor search engines and tagging system which leads to lack of awareness of archive contents
Understanding artifacts due to insufficient metadata published
Pain Points
Providing accurate metadata for the artifacts submitted because they do not have the subject-matter expertise
Staying connected with researchers interfacing the archive due to poor communication systems in place (manual labor in sifting through emails, answering phone calls, word of mouth)
Hypothesis
Archivists are unable to keep up with the increasing requests to properly publish artifacts that meet accessibility standards due to resource constraints and insufficient institutional support. As a result, they often resort to publishing only the bare minimum information required for compliance, which inadvertently excludes people with disabilities from fully engaging with and benefiting from the historical materials.
Participatory Design Workshop
Our team and I collaborated with archivists and researchers with disabilities to identify which parts of our prototype aligns with their needs and current workflow. The goals of the workshop was to test our understanding in digitization process and identify main capabilities that best support our users' needs.
User Scenario
We walked through a scenario that reflects the archivist's tasks in the digitization cycle. Participants generally gave feedback in scenes where they experienced the most bottlenecks under tight deadlines due to external factors such as large-scale public events, unknown donors, poor communication systems, and more.
Wireframing
I focused on the user experience of requesting updates on a single artifact that has missing metadata or poor media quality, making it hard for third-party assistive tools to read.
Results
Archivists are unable to keep up with the increasing requests to properly publish artifacts that meet accessibility standards due to resource constraints and insufficient institutional support. As a result, they often resort to publishing only the bare minimum information required for compliance, which inadvertently excludes people with disabilities from fully engaging with the artifacts.
“We don’t currently make items more accessible for people with disabilities and we only run Optical Character Recgnition (OCR) on pdfs ... we also never tested on screen readers...”
Participant
Conclusion
By embedding accessible design into workflows, organizations not only meet legal and ethical obligations but also cultivate a more inclusive and effective platform for all users, promoting a richer and more equitable experience across the board.
