Difference between revisions of "CLIO Design"
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Overview== | {{DevelopmentPage}} | ||
== Overview == | |||
The CLIO project drew inspiration from inclusive, humanitarian and universal design philosophies and processes. Our design process relied heavily on the MUSETECH model for its granular evaluation of museum technology projects. | The CLIO project drew inspiration from inclusive, humanitarian and universal design philosophies and processes. Our design process relied heavily on the MUSETECH model for its granular evaluation of museum technology projects. | ||
{{See|The MUSETECH Model}} | {{See|The MUSETECH Model}} | ||
| Line 23: | Line 25: | ||
Numerous proposals were drafted for CLIO and its precursors with each one improving on the last by widening the scope. These proposals are provided to illustrate the design process and evolution of the CLIO project from its inception. | Numerous proposals were drafted for CLIO and its precursors with each one improving on the last by widening the scope. These proposals are provided to illustrate the design process and evolution of the CLIO project from its inception. | ||
{{See|CLIO Design Proposals}} | {{See|CLIO Design Proposals}} | ||
{{DevelopmentNavigation}} | |||
Latest revision as of 10:15, 17 May 2022
Overview
The CLIO project drew inspiration from inclusive, humanitarian and universal design philosophies and processes. Our design process relied heavily on the MUSETECH model for its granular evaluation of museum technology projects.
Designing With The MUSETECH Model
As a team, we used our monthly workshops to consider each of the 121 Evaluation Criteria and our answers to these questions helped form the foundation of the project. As the scope of the project changed and new design proposals were considered, these evaluation criteria were re-visited and re-assessed. This continually evolving process guided our research, design and evaluation. By building upon the strengths of previous design proposals and workshopping the weaknesses, we were able to adequately assess each criteria.
Process
Consideration
During workshops, we maintained a list of major considerations that we felt needed to be taken into account for CLIO to succeed within our host site and the GLAM field at large. These were overarching themes, concepts and philosophies that we used to both expand and constrain our design, research and evaluation.
Observation
During every stage of the development of CLIO, we often utilized passive observation as a key tool to understanding our audience and the purpose of our project. By observing subjects as they currently interacted, we could devise approaches to integrate into or modify an existing paradigm.
Interview
Between workshop sessions, we would frequently utilize directed interviews and freeform conversations with professionals at the host sites. Interviews and discussions were not always directly related to the CLIO project and often served as an avenue to help understand the institution. By leveraging free form conversations with both related and unrelated parties, we were better able to understand how CLIO could fit into the museum's ecosystem and receive the support it needed.
Proposal
Numerous proposals were drafted for CLIO and its precursors with each one improving on the last by widening the scope. These proposals are provided to illustrate the design process and evolution of the CLIO project from its inception.
