Digitization: a term with little meaning over fifty years ago is now fundamental to

the operation of almost every museum world wide. From its beginnings as a way of
storing textual data that described museum collections to adding digitized images and
rendering museum collections accessible to the public via personal computers or
iPhones, digitization has changed the contemporary museum and the ways in which
visitors interact with museum collections (Drae !""#:$%"%&.
'hough the (orld (ide (eb ((((& can be a wonderful tool for museums
everywhere, there are significant museological issues as well as legal and ethical
concerns that need to be addressed. )ow do museum visitors view new online media*
(hat motivates them to go to the online museum resources and the museum* (hat has
digitization done to the museum* )ow can museums cope with digitized collections
when (by definition& the main attraction to museums was our encounters with ob+ects that
were thought of as ,authentic-* .ven the basic meaning of museum ob+ect must be
redefined perhaps because of the new media now available.
(oring as an intern and a volunteer at the /tlanta )istory 0enter (/)0& has
allowed me to see firsthand how web resources function and how visitors use these web
resources. 1n my interactions with museum visitors 1 discovered that there were
significant usability issues when trying to use web resources. For instance, the search
engine for the digitized photo collection would malfunction on occasion, taing users to a
completely different set of results than what they originally searched for. Dealing with
these technical issues made me wonder how visitors feel about these web resources. 1
decided to investigate the interactions among visitors and the museum via online
resources. 2y research 3uestions in this pro+ect are: $& )ow ,accessible- are online
museum collection archives to the several groups who use them* !& )ow do new
technologies (digitizing, databases, and online interactive resources& change museum
practices and what is their impact on visitors and their perceptions of the role of the
museum* #& )ow can we introduce new web4based applications to the museum public
and mae them feel comfortable using such applications*
'he online resources my research focuses on include six databases ('erminus,
Franlin 5arrett6s 7ecrology, /rchitecture Database, )arper6s (eely, /lbum, and
5alileo& that are available for use from home and at the 8enan 9esearch 0enter (the
facility that houses the archives collection&. 'erminus allows the user to find what is
available in the archives. Franlin 5arrett6s 7ecrology is a list of obituary abstracts and
death records that Franlin 5arrett collected bac in the early $%""s. 'his database
directs users microfilm reels where they can locate obituary records for specific
individuals. 'he /rchitecture Database provides a comprehensive list of architects that
created some of the buildings of Downtown /tlanta. )arper6s (eely retains a collection
of newspaper articles from the 0ivil (ar era. /lbum is the digitized collection of some of
the /tlanta )istory 0enter6s archival materials such as photographs, audio material, and
videos. 5alileo is a database that allows the user to lin with other subscribed websites,
lie .:;0<host and /ncestry.com.
For this pro+ect, 1 evaluated the usability of these databases through survey,
interviews, and participant observation. 1 was an intern for between =une !""% and
/ugust !""%, but 1 have continued to volunteer for 2elanie ;tephan, archivist at /tlanta
)istory 0enter, and the 8enan 9esearch 0enter. 1n this manner 1 maintain and further
cultivate my close relationships and rapport with the staff. 'he research 1 conducted at the
!
8enan 9esearch 0enter started in =anuary !"$" and ended in /pril !"$".
Authentic Objects?
:efore going further with my research, ,authenticity- must be addressed as it
pertains to museums ob+ects and archival material alie. /fter all, traditionally what
museums offered their visitors was the opportunity to encounter ,authentic- ob+ects>
material culture from the past or the exoticized other, or in the case of art museums,
famous artists. 1t was the fact that the ob+ects exhibited were ,authentic- (original, old,
genuine, touched by the hands of a famous artist or historical figure& that rendered
museums significant and visitors crowded to see such ob+ects of awe and wonder.
/ccording to )ilde ;. )ein, ob+ects are formed through acts of attention, and
through these different acts of attention they gain multiple lives ()ein !""":?$&. For
example, an ob+ect may become an important icon that connects a society ()ein
!""":?@&. (hen ob+ects enter the museum, their meaning can be changed again to suit the
museum6s interpretation ()ein !""":?#4?@&. / prima4facie value (value based on the first
view of the ob+ect& is then placed upon the item that is independent of its status when
outside of the museum ()ein !""":??&.
(hat maes an ob+ect ,authentic-* 2useums partly define authenticity as the
ob+ect being original and not as a forgery ()ein !""":A#B Cowenthal $%%!:$DE&. (alter
:en+amin also argues that the presence of the original ob+ect is the primary criterion for
considering it authentic (:en+amin $%ED: !!!&. 'he other aspect that would define the
ob+ect6s authenticity depends on examining it in relation to other nown paradigms such
as the age and the purity of the ob+ect ()ein !""":A#, Cowenthal $%%!:$DE4$DAB )oltorf
#
and ;chadla4)all $%%%:!#!&. 9ichard )andler shows how authenticity is a cultural
construct of the modern (estern world ()andler $%DE:!&. 1t is a concept that derived
from those of the (estern world who examined the untouched, unspoiled and traditional
cultures and material culture from non western worlds ()andler $%DE:!&.
(hile the definition of an ob+ect has not changed therefore (an ob+ect is a ,lump
of material world- Pearce $%%!: $?& the politics of ob+ecthood have ()ein !""":?$4?@&:
ob+ecthood is constantly defined and redefined because of the shifting perceptions of the
ob+ect ()ein !""":?$4?@&. <b+ects have many lives and are not looed upon the same
way ()ein !""": ?$4?@&.
1f the ,authenticity- of ob+ects exhibited lies at the core of the museum experience
then how does digitization of ob+ects and exhibitions impact that experience and even the
very definition of the museum* Does this mean that ,authenticity of ob+ects- is no longer
important or that the concept is now replaced by ,authenticity of experience-* ()ein
!""":E@4E?&.
Constructing New Experiences and Making Museums Accessible !he "igni#icance
o# $igiti%ed Collections and Archi&es
Digitizing collections and archives first and foremost permits museum staff to
search for and retrieve information efficiently (Drae !""#:$%"%&. Digitization allows for
better organization of archives and the ability to store more information (Drae
!""#:$%"%&. 'he chief benefit for museum professionals though is the ability to better
preserve the artifacts. Digitization means less tinering with the artifacts themselves.
@
Digitized archives of photographs, documents, artifacts, and film (F);, :.'/, 0D& can
be better preserved and permit easy access and duplication.
/ccess is important here: more people and different groups can visit and handle
collections that were once restricted to curators and specialists. Furthermore the museum
itself is no longer limited by its physical locationB people can visit any museum from
home no matter where the museum is located (8alfatovic !""!:%E4%A&. 2useums want to
reach out to people and digitized collections and archives are a way to do that ('omaiuolo
!""@:!%E&. Furthermore, using digitized collections and archives might also bring more
visitors to the actual museum because of the additional awareness through online
resources (Drae !""#:$%$"B 'omaiuolo !""@:!%E&.
Digitized collections and archives can also give some control to the visitors on
what they would lie to see. Fisitors choose what ob+ects they want to see, how they want
to see them, and often are able to build their own tour (Drae !""#:$%$"&. 9elin3uishing
control to the visitors supposedly improves the 3uality of the museum experience since it
is based on individual choices of what people want to learn about. <ften in fact, the
information presented on the museum web site differs from what is in the physical
museum ('omaiuolo !""@:!%A&B in the interactive environments created for the online
museum therefore visitors are more ,free- to choose and in effect in control of their
learning experience.
<nline searching as well as online museum visits creates new inds of learning
experiences in another way. <nline search tools used by museums for instance are not
different from general search engines such as google. (hat maes google uni3ue is that
user searches can follow non4linear paths. 'he use of hypertext as well as the ability to
?
search using engines modeled after google (or based on google& on museum web sites
means that online museum visitors may construct their own learning experience
following any number of possible pathways and based on their individual interests (see
0hen !""!: @@%, @?! for a similar discussion about online educational programs&.
Physical visits to museums do not permit such inds of learning experiences currently,
although more museums are now introducing hand4held electronic pads and computers in
their exhibits to achieve similar results. ;till however, the full potential to create one6s
very own museum experience is still reserved for online visitors.
'ede#ining the 'elationship between Museums and (isitors
A) (isitor*s +a%e
1f online museums visitors have more control over what they want to learn about
vis4G4vis actual visitors, would this not have a significant impact on the relationship
between museum and visitor* 'o understand how this relationship has changed we need
to turn to the visitor first. 5oing to a museum or visiting the museum website are both
geared towards what Fal and Dierling (!""D:DA& define as a learning oriented4
entertainment experienceB sometimes it is also nown as ,edutainment-. 'he 3uestion
therefore is how museum visitors learnB in this manner only will we be able to understand
how museums today can provide visitors the fullest possible learning experiences.
'he decision to go to the museum is a dimension of free choice learning (Fal and
Diering !""":$#&. Free4choice learning is self motivatedB in other words, the learner has
a choice of what, when, and how they want to learn (Fal and Diering !""":$#&. 'he
choice however is contingent to three overlapping contexts. Fal and Diering (!""":$#&
E
define these as: the personal, the sociocultural, and the physical. 'he personal context
involves learning when engaged in a meaningful activity, freed from stress and other
negative states, and having choices of what they want to learn (Fal and Diering !""":
#!&. 'he sociocultural context considers learning as a member of a group. 'he physical
context involves the environment within which learning taes place (Fal and Diering
!""":E?&. 'he physical context is not limited to the virtual or substantial environment
(Fal and Diering !""":?A&. 'his context can include the room a person is in, the wall
that he or she is staring at, or even the website6s design and how that person sees it. 1t
also includes how the artifacts are displayed.
People learn in two ways: through narrative and modeling (Fal and Diering
!""":@D4?$&. 'he narrative model presents the information to the individual in a story
form (Fal and Diering !""":@D4@%&. 9esearchers believe that story telling is the basic
means through which people organize, interpret, and predict the world around them (Fal
and Diering !""":@D&. 1t also can provide meaning and significance to events (Fal and
Diering !""":@%&.
2odeling is learning through observation and imitation (Fal and Diering
!""":@%&. 2uch of what we learn, both in character and behavior, is nonverbally learned
(Fal and Diering !""":@%&. 1t is only through watching and repeating what we see, do
we understand how to behave. 'ogether with the narrative model for instance historical
interpretators ,do- or ,perform- and thus allow visitors to observe se3uences of tass
(e.g. teaching flint napping or pottery maing involves both narratives and acts that
visitors observe and imitate& (0onversation with Dr. 2argomenou, /pril $D, !"$"&.
,) Museum $ispla-
A
2useums (both physical and virtual& use both learning models to create their
exhibits. /ccording to :arbara 8irshenblatt45imblett, museum ob+ects are displayed in
two ways: In-situ and in context (8irshenblatt45imblett $%%$:#DA&. 1n4situ installations in
a way enlarge the ob+ectB they expand its boundaries with recreated environments within
which the ob+ect was found or used. 'hus information for the exhibited ob+ect is
delivered indirectly, via the context>environments designed around it (8irshenblatt4
5imblett $%%$: #D%&. 0ontext installations on the other hand provide direct information
about the ob+ectB the ways this information is presented ranges from long explanations on
labels or panels, to charts and diagrams, to commentaries delivered via audiovisual
programs and other means (8irshenblatt45imblett $%%$:#%"&.
/lthough physical museums may use both in situ and in context displays
inevitably they will opt for one over the other. 'here are significant limitations for actual
museum exhibit designers, money, space, and on many occasions the museum mission
itself. /rt museums for instance would opt for in context exhibitions because of the very
nature of the ob+ects they exhibit. Firtual museums are not that restricted by money or
space, and given the open4ended and non4linear strategies of searching and lining
available to online users they are free to use both in context and in situ exhibition
strategies (often unlie the physical museum&. 'his includes for instance the ability of
online users to view ob+ects in a #4D format, or Henter6 virtual environments where
ob+ects or architectural pieces can be experienced in their entirety
(http: >>www.futureishere.biz>museumofbeauty is an example of an experimental such
pro+ect regarding the Fenus of 2elos&.
D
People go to museums to be entertained and for education. :ut it is a conscious,
free choice that inspires them in how, when, and what they want to learn at the museum.
Firtual museums may indeed give greater freedom to visitors, to choose what they learn
about. . :ut is free choice learning truly giving the best experience* /re museum visitors
gaining new nowledge or are they revisiting what they already now* * (hy would
they want to see an exhibit that might challenge their beliefs* 1t is important to see if
visitors are furthering their nowledge and why they eep returning to museums.
Assessing (isitor Experiences in the (irtual Museum (isitor "tudies and Museum
Assessment
1f physical and virtual museums want to provide their visitors meaningful
educational experiences, then the effort begins with understand who their visitors>users
are and their expectations and interests (0unliffe et al. !""$: !#!&. Fisitor studies in
museums help us see who is coming to the museum and evaluate why they are coming.
:ut what of the virtual visitor* (ill they have the same characteristics as physical ones
(0unliffe et al. !""$:!#!&* /ssessing both types of visitors is e3ually important in
understanding needs that are or not being met, and those that are ;uch assessments can
be applied to providing more effective museum learning experiences for visitors and a
better understanding of the target audiences(Fal and Diering !""": $A#4$A@&. /s well
as illustrating the needs of the visitors, systematic assessments of museum web resources
can also be used to investigate levels of usability, comprehension of the displayed
context, and web site design itself (Cang et al. !""E:$"@4$"?&. 'he following three
%
evaluation pro+ects demonstrate different ways in which visitor studies for online
resources have been implemented by museums.
2argaret 2cCaughlin et al. examined the Iniversity of ;outhern 0alifornia
(I;0& 1nteractive /rt 2useum and the services provided on the web site (2cCaughlin et
al. $%%%: $E@&. 'he authors investigated the different ways that online visitors can
communicate with the museum staff by installing a real time chat server (2cCaughlin et
al. $%%%:$A"&. 'he authors also observed the design of three online exhibits: ,9omance
with 7ature: /merican Candscapes in the I;0 0ollections-, ,Cight in Darness: (omen
in =apanese Prints of .arly ;hJwa ($%!E4$%@?&-, and ,'rinendes 2Kdchen ('he
Drining 2aiden&- (2cCaughlin et al. $%%%:$A"4$A$&. .ach of these exhibits showcase
art4pieces from different time periods and different cultures lie the =apanese shin nanga
woodbloc prints (2cCaughlin et al. $%%%: $A"4$A$&. 1 believe the online chat system
that the evaluators used was very problematic. 7ot many people used the chat room, and
when visitors did access it, there was no one else to tal to. 'he online chat room allowed
the visitors to tal with the curator at certain times and that seemed to be the only
ade3uate feature.

Pilar de /lmeida and ;higei Looi created a virtual tour guide that lead a tour to
a MF1 century Portuguese ship (/lmeida and Looi !""#&. /fter creating the character of
the tour guide, they then evaluated the feedbac from the visitors about the tour guide to
see if the online resources hindered or helped the experience. 'hough there were some
limitations, the virtual guide was a valuable resource for the visitors (/lmeida and Looi
!""#&.
$"
Daniel 0unliffe et al. evaluated the usability of museum web sites. 'hey
examined non4professional development sites (web sites designed by non computer
professionals& in an attempt to see how these sites affected the visitors6 ability to navigate
through the web site and comprehend the content (0unliffe et. al. !""$:!#E4!@"&. 'he
authors concluded that evaluation should be a central part of the ongoing process of web
development (0unliffe et al. !""$:!@%&.
1 thought this study was well organized. / lot of their evaluation methods seemed
appealing for my own research. 1 will also be incorporating direct observation and
interviews in my own pro+ect. 'he only problem 1 foresee is gathering web statistics. Cog
analysis may account for ,hits per page- but can not account for identifying if it is an
individual or multiple user(s& per computer (0unliffe et al. !""$: !@$&. 'he log analysis
also can not account for how long the individual used the online museum resources
(0unliffe et al. !""$: !@$&. Perhaps with more sophisticated web analysis tools, this
analysis can occur with better benefits.
(hile these evaluation pro+ects may have assessed different aspects of museum
web resources, they all demonstrated how evaluations can be used for the improvement
of museum web sites. /)06s evaluation will not only help improve its web resources, it
will also be establishing a dialogue between those that develop the resources and those
that use the resources.
Ethical Considerations
/ study from $%%% (8alfatovic !""!:%E& shows that fifty4two percent of museum
visitors expect to be able to download images. 'he study does not explain the various
$$
reasons for these downloads. )owever, downloading those images would pose a ma+or
ris to the intellectual property rights of that museum.
1ntellectual property rights broadly apply to anything created by the human mind
((1P< @&. 0opyrights are a set of legal rights that the author or creator of an original
wor has, including the right to copy, distribute, and adapt this wor ((1P< A&. 'he
copyrights law protects original wors from being reproduced without the permission of
their creator(s& ((1P< A&. 'here are some limitations to these laws though. 'he most
common (and the most troublesome for online museums& is the free use article which
basically states that reproduction of a wor can occur if it is for personal and non
commercial use, educational purposes, or for the purpose of news reporting ((1P< $!&.
'his is a ma+or issue that many museums are having when trying to digitize their
collections. /nother ma+or issue is that visitors want to apply ,free use- for themselves
when getting images from digitized collections (Drae !""#:$%"%&.
'here are some ways in which museums are trying to deal with copyrights.
=ennifer :artle, the intellectual property assistant for the ;an Francisco 2useum of
2odern /rt decided to as the artists6 permissions to show their wor online (:artle
!""@&. 0ertain 2useums have gone a different route. 'he /merican 2useum of 7atural
)istory, for instance, has set up a copyright disclaimer for their images online (8alfatovic
!""!:$"#&. <ther institutions are utilizing various methods such as restricting access to
certain types of data, embedding watermars into digital images, and maing it very
difficult to download the images (Drae !""#:$%$"&. 'hese solutions are temporary
though. 9eevaluation of copyrights and content distribution must occur since more and
more museums are becoming digital (Drae !""#:$%$"&.
$!
'here are also many digitization pro+ects that are combating against copyright
issues. 'he ;tanford Cibraries, for example, have digitized their library collection and
placed them on a program called ;econd Cife
(http:>>speaing.stanford.edu>highlights>;eeN;INCibrariesNinN;econdNCife.html&. 'his
computer program allows the visitor to virtually visit any site that is available. 'he
;tanford Cibraries 1sland in ;econd Cife houses several exhibits and the ability to loo
through manuscripts from the Firtual /rchive. (hen visitors clic on an image, a text
panel pops up that explains what the picture is. )owever, there is no option to download
or copy the image.
'he Iniversity of 0olorado Digital Cibrary uses something completely different
to combat copyright issues. 'his collaborative pro+ect (among the three
campuses that mae up the Iniversity of 0olorado system, the /nschutz 2edical
0ampus and the /uraria )igher .ducation 0enter& includes areas such as art,
architecture, landscapes, social sciences, aerial photos and more
(https:>>www.cu.edu>digitallibrary>about.htmlO&. 'his extensive digital library officially
launched in =anuary !""D. ;ome of these photo collections are strictly for students,
faculty, or staff members only. 'he photo collections that are accessible for the public
always have a disclaimer that is shown before the visitor is taen to the next page.
'he /tlanta )istory 0enter (/)0& utilizes a simple but effective way to protect
their copyrights. ,Foices /cross the 0olorline-, one of /)06s digitization pro+ects that
launched in /ugust !""%, has over a hundred interviews with people of /tlanta who
contributed to the 0ivil 9ights movement. /)06s goal was to show a clip of some of the
interviews online so visitors can see these wonderful oral histories. 1nstead of creating a
$#
website, they used a popular one called Lou'ube that allowed them to post their clips
(youtube.com&. /lthough the museum may share the video with anyone, there is a logo of
/)0 embedded in the clip so it is not easily taen and used as someone else6s wor. .
!he Atlanta .istor- Center
5eorgia6s museums use online resources for their collections and exhibitions. 'he
5eorgia /3uarium, for instance, uses webcams so visitors can view three different parts
of the museum online (www.georgiaa3uarium.org&. (hile the visitors watch each of the
webcams, information is displayed on the website about a particular animal or gallery.
'he 5eorgia 2useum of 7atural )istory is another example. Featured on its site, is a
wildlife gallery (http:>>museum.nhm.uga.edu&. /s visitors ,wal through- the gallery,
they can read descriptions of each of the animals displayed and different habitats.
1n my view however, the /tlanta )istory 0enter (/)0& is perhaps the museum
that uses virtual environments, digitization, and the web in the most efficient and creative
ways. 'he /tlanta )istory 0enter or once nown as the /tlanta )istorical ;ociety started
in the early $%""s with a group of intellectuals who were interested in collecting the
history of /tlanta (www.atlantahistorycenter.com&. From there, the museum slowly
expanded to ac3uire two historic houses (2argaret 2itchell )ouse and the 'ullie ;mith
Farm& and the 0heroee 5ardens. 1n addition to the main museum building, 2c.lreath
)all was also built to accommodate the 8enan 9esearch 0enter where museum archives
are curated. 'oday the /)0 is a non4profit organization focusing on collecting, curating,
preserving, and educating the public on the history of /tlanta. 1n effect, the /)0 utilizes
all inds of web4based media for its collections and its exhibitions.
$@
1n my pro+ect 1 wored with the /tlanta )istory 0enter, specifically at the 8enan
9esearch 0enter. 2y main goal was to investigate how authors, researchers (both student
and non student&, and history enthusiasts use /tlanta )istory 0enter6s web resources such
as 'erminus and /lbum to conduct their own investigations. /mong the most popular
topics for /)0 online visitors are /tlanta6s involvement with the 0ivil (ar, the boo and
movie Gone With the Wind, and the $%%E 0entennial <lympic 5ames
(www.atlantahistorycenter.com&. /s people access the museum and archive websites
more fre3uently it became apparent that online visitors represent not one but many
different communitiesB with different interests, expectations, and even political agendas.

/nternship that brought about m- project
'his research pro+ect was developed from my internship at the /)0 during the
summer of !""%. During my time as intern, 1 was given two ma+or tass to complete. <ne
of the main ob+ectives of my internship was to encode the collection records to a new
database using an ./D (.ncoded /rchival Description& program, PoMygenQ Mml .ditor.
(ith 2elanie ;tephan, 1 was able to fully comprehend ./D programming and why we
were upgrading to a new program. 'his type of programming would change the
database formatting to allow the researchers to access a more detailed record of what is in
the collection.
/nother ob+ective that 1 had to accomplish during the summer was the digitization
of several different types of videos, ranging from :etacam videos to regular F); tapes.
Ising a 2ac, 1 imported the videos to the archives6 hard drive. 1 then chose various clips
from the videos so they can be showcased on Lou'ube to advertise what the /tlanta
$?
)istory 0enter is offering. 'his was an exciting pro+ect because 1 not only had the chance
to observe the diverse pro+ects the /tlanta )istory 0enter too part in, but 1 also got to
see what the museum has to offer to its audience>members through the internet.
/s well as woring with encoding and digitizing, 1 wored with visitors of the
8enan 9esearch 0enter at the /tlanta )istory 0enter. 'he reading room>library offers a
wide array of services, including a chance to loo at newspaper articles, building permits,
and much more on microfilm, a very large collection of genealogical materials for those
wanting to research family members that grew up in /tlanta, and the ability to see parts
of the archives collection.
'his internship afforded me an ,insider6s view- into aspects of museum practices
that that 1 would not have been able to observe otherwise. First and foremost of course, it
permitted me to build rapport with museum staff as well as with regular museum visitors
and users of the archives that proved crucial for my practicum research.
Methodolog-
1n this section, 1 discuss what methods were used for this evaluation pro+ect and
why they were used. 'o help mae sure the data being received from participants is
accurate and clear, a method called triangulation was applied to this evaluation pro+ect.
'riangulation is when more than one ethnological method is used to help maintain the
soundness of the overall interpretation of results (<69eilly !""D:$?@&. For this evaluation
pro+ect, rapport, participant observation, surveys, and interviews are utilized.
2y research 3uestions included: (a& identifying different user groups, (b&
assessing how easy it is for users access museum archives, (c& assessing how easy it is for
$E
the museum to explain the use of online archive resources to the users, (d& assessing the
views of users about the role of the museum given their online experiences, (e& assessing
how the available online resources change traditional museum practices (collection,
curation, exhibition, education&.
'he idea of course is to assist in the /tlanta )istory 0enter6s effort to improve its
interaction with the public but also provide a case4study that would be useful to other
similar institutions.
,uilding and Maintaining 'apport
1 first had to establish rapport with /)06s staff and continue to networ
thereafter. /s 1 mentioned, 1 began as an archives intern and was involved in two
digitalization pro+ects. /long with those tass, 1 also assisted in the 8enan 9esearch
0enter, filling copy orders and helping visitors with their research. 'hese responsibilities
allowed me to wor closely with the staff members. 'his evaluation pro+ect includes not
only visitors who conduct their research at /)0 but the staff members as well. )aving a
strong relationship with the staff members is ey to this pro+ect. /fter the internship
ended, 1 maintained 1 continued to volunteer with both the 8enan 9esearch 0enter and
2elanie ;tephan at the /)0.
0articipant Obser&ation
Participant observation allowed me to examine how the museum functioned from
various angles and how technology now plays a greater role in museum practices. 1t
allowed me to gain perspective on what 1 was trying to evaluate, so 1 focused both on the
$A
design and the usage of online research tools. Participant observation also gave me a
chance to build rapport with visitors and a closer understanding of how they used
museum online resources for their specific research pro+ects. . <f course, 1 could not
observe them at wor or at homeB participant observation in this pro+ect was limited to
my encounters with visitors and web users at the 8enan 9esearch 0enter only.
"ur&e-
1 compiled a brief survey to assess /)0 visitors6 impressions of the web
resources they use. . 2y main ob+ective with this survey included collecting information
from a random group of users who might be interested in responding after using the
8enan 9esearch 0enter computer center. 'he idea was that this information would permit
me to better contextualize the more open4ended interviews. Furthermore, 1 could collect
data that may be 3uantified and would eventually assist the museum in creating an
assessment tool for their visitors and web4users.
2y internship and later my volunteering wor (participant observation& helped me decide
what inds of 3uestions 1 should as and how 1 should formulate them. /long with
3uestions that re3uired visitors to rate different online experiences, 1 included a feedbac
section. 'his, 1 thought, would give a chance to the survey participants to write their own
comments. 'he 3uestionnaires were left at the 8enan 9esearch 0enter and staff was
instructed to suggest that different visitors tae the 3uestionnairesB 1 actually ended up
involved in much of this since 1 was volunteering at the 0enter anyway. 1 got $" users
who responded to these 3uestionnaires. For a complete copy of the survey and the
consent forms, please see the appendix section at the end of this practicum.
$D

/nter&iewing
1 used interviews to explore individual experiences as well as better understand
who and why is visiting the /)0 and using its online resources.
. 'he semi structured type of interviewing was what 1 chose for this evaluation pro+ect.
;emi structured interviews leave conversations open to what the visitor wants to tal
about (his>her experiences and why he>she chose those specific web resources& while
eeping the interview organized. 1 was able to see if a problem was occurring with the
web resources by hearing an individual describe their struggles or dislies with the
resources.
'hough the semi structured format was followed for interviews with both staff
members and researchers, the 3uestions were tailored differently for each group. (hen 1
interviewed staff members of /)0, 1 typically ased 3uestions pertaining to databases
most often used to help patrons and personal problems that they saw when woring with
the different resources. (hen 1 interviewed researchers, 1 typically ased how they came
across /)06s resources and why they are using them for their research.
1 interviewed six individuals. For a complete copy of certain 3uestions that were
ased in the interviews and the consent forms, please refer to the appendix section. 'he
different components of my methodology described above were geared towards specific
ob+ectives. 1n other words, my internship was my first introduction to the museum and
my first step into building rapport and identifying staff and visitors important for this
pro+ect. Participant observation was expected to assist me in formulating my 3uestions in
surveys and interviews and of course in getting to understand the specific online tools
$%
myself. ;urveys were expected to help me understand who the ,visitors>users- are at the
8enan 9esearch 0enter, what databases are most often accessed and why. Furthermore,
survey results would help me better contextualize my interview results. Finally interviews
were customized and oriented towards specific members of the staff and specific visitors
that my exposure to the museum through my internship and volunteering indicated would
be important for this pro+ect. For a complete copy of the interview, please see the
appendix section at the end of this practicum.
'esearch Expectations
From my internship and participant observation, 1 expected to find that the
usability /)06s online resources would not be too problematicB that minor problems such
as not nowing which ey terms to put in or glitches with the databases itself would be
the most common identified by staff and users. 1 expected that many of the users would
be able to use computers with some ease. 1 also expected that computer problems would
be reflecting age group and therefore be characteristic of the older generation of users
whereas younger visitors would view new technologies as an asset (with excitement
even& and be silled in using them. .
'esults
"ur&e-
'en individuals answered the survey. .ight of the ten surveyed were overall
satisfied with 8enan 9esearch 0enter6s online resources. <ut of these ten, seven were
regular users of the 8enan 9esearch 0enter6s online resources. 'he remaining three who
!"
were not answered only the sections that focused on one4time or non4regular users. . ;ix
of the seven that regular users also access these resources from home (in other words not
from the 8enan 0enter computer lab& 'he fact that six out of ten people are accessing
resources without any staff help, from home, indicates that there is a basic understanding
of how these databases and search engines wor and therefore they could be considered
overall accessible. 1t is significant to point out that five of the respondents return to these
databases once every one or two wees. 'he database most often visited by users in
'erminus whereas )arper6s (eely is the one visited less often.
7ine out of the ten individuals surveyed rated email as the most desirable way to contact
the 8enan 9esearch 0enter reference staff with the phone being the second most
desirable.
'he following two statements: ,1f more of the archival materials were available
online, 1 would prefer to wor at home>office rather than at the 8enan 9esearch 0enter-
and ,1 would much rather have a staff member near to assist me with my research- were
to be rated by those participating in the surveys. Four out of the seven that use the online
resources regularly both agreed with the former statement and felt neutral with the other
statement. 'his also indicates to me that users are relatively silled in using online
resources and appreciate the ability to wor from home or other locations rather than
come to the 0enter.
/nter&iews
1 interviewed six individuals: four 8enan 9esearch 0enter reference staff
members and two researchers. 1 discovered that 'erminus was also used the most among
!$
the interviewees but there were issues that came up with the use of 'erminus, which do
not show up at the surveys. 7ot nowing which sub+ect terms to use for searches on
'erminus was a common problem for interviewees. 2any of the interviewees taled
about wanting the finding aids on 'erminus to be updated. /nother issue that came up
during the interviews was the technological difficulties that would delay completing
research in a given amount of time. 1nterviewees finally stressed their wish to be able to
access digitized maps.
$iscussion
'his evaluation pro+ect shows how 8enan 9esearch 0enter visitors are using new
online media provided by the /tlanta )istory 0enter. Databases such as 'erminus,
/lbum, and Franlin 5arrett6s 7ecrology are being used to conduct genealogical
research, /tlanta historical research, and more. 'he visitors that came to the 8enan
9esearch 0enter were mostly 0aucasian and middle aged. 'heir interests varied greatly
from researching their families to civil right movements. ;ome were students, others
were teachers conducting research. 2ost of the time it was visitors conducting personal
research however. 'here were an e3ual number of men and women who visited the
8enan 9esearch 0enter.
'he primary motivation to continue doing research online for most of these visitors is the
availability of multiple databases and the fact that these are made accessible not only in
the museum but also from other locations. (oring from home or the office is a ma+or
attraction to the web resources of the museum. . 'he incentive to come to the museum to
do more research is due to the fact that only part of the collection is digitized. :ut it is at
!!
the museum, that the visitors may as research 3uestions and receive help from a
reference staff member.
/uthenticity, in this instance, is not +ust (or necessarily& about what is ,original-
in the /)0 collection. For instance /lbum is a database that is used often, and it is the
experience that comes with exploring this digitized collection from wor or home that is
stressedB however since the entire collection is not fully digitized coming to the museum
still enhances the experience and may be necessary 1nterestingly, both surveys and
interviews mentioned technological glitches and problems: networ failures, computers
stalling, databases being slow, computers crashing&. (hat happens to visitor experience
in these instances* 1n other words, can things be not as ,perfect- as they appear to be
perhaps* 1nsights gained from interviews in particular helped me explore this 3uestion
further.
"eeing 1ith 2our .ands
Cucille (name changed for the purpose of this paper&, one of the researchers 1
interviewed, was the first to comment on how she would rather come in person to see a
collection. 'hough Cucille explained how digitization ,would mae RherS life so much
easier-, she rationalizes that when it came to searching for materials to research, she
always preferred actually touching the material. ,Partly this is generational of me as 1
came up in a card catalog era and so 1 still ind of cling to the paper trail and to pic the
brain of the archivist- (interview, February $#, !"$"&. For over !" years, Cucille has
researched how the civil war affected 7orthern and ;outhern families. ;he utilized
technology when she couldB gathering information from various museum databases
!#
(including /)06s 'erminus&. (hen it came to actually examining materials, Cucille
preferred the authentic ob+ect to researching +ust online.
<nce 1 taled with Cucille, 1 thought she may have been leading me to my
assumption that there may be a generational gap between those that prefer researching in
person and those that research online. 2r. 9edding would show me that there may be
other factors involved with people having computer issues.
/ntellectual 3a%iness
'he young staff geneaologist, who 1 call 2r. 9edding for the purpose of this
presentation, described digitization as a ,misuse of technology-. <ut of everyone 1
interviewed and surveyed, 2r. 9edding stood firm with his belief that digitization, for the
most part, is actually disadvantageous for researchers (interview, 2arch !E, !"$"&. )e
went on to explain, ,'hey RresearchersS go to the internet, search for one thing, and then
+ust stic with researching online- (&. )e goes on to further explain that most users that
search online now4a4days only limit their searching to digital environments.
(hat he said was surprising to me given the expectation that younger generations
would be more open and accepting of technological advances, especially computer
applications and online resources. <ne of the significant insights 1 gained therefore was
that at least where it concerns /)0 online resources it is not so much generational
differences in using computers that impact research 3ualityB it is the maturity and
experience of the researcher. /fter looing over the +ournal logs of my participant
observation, 1 also realized that during my wor at the 0enter 1 mostly helped those who
claimed ,to have never really done this ind of research- beforeB not those who were not
!@
raised using computers from a young age. (hile 1 did not as for ages when 1 helped
these individuals, 1 could tell when 1 helped older patrons from younger ones and their
ages actually varied. ;peaing with my interviewees further supported this observation
that perhaps it is not age at all or computer sills, but not having enough experience
doing research at the basis of usability problems with online resources.
'he database, 'erminus affords an excellent example of how an online tool that is
relatively problematic eeps being used because of its content and the 3uality of research
that it supports despite the fact that there are other alternative resources which although
cannot fully replace its functions may serve to overcome some of its problems. <nce
again, content and 3uality of research appear to be more significant to museum online
visitors than technical problems or alternatively technical efficiency. . ;urvey and
interview results both confirmed that 'erminus is used 3uite fre3uently by a lot of
individuals. :ut 'erminus still has many issues. . 1nterviewees and survey participants
stressed problems with Finding aids, comments ranging from ,need updating- to
,needing more information added to 'erminus-. (ith all its flaws, 'erminus is used and
preferred by those visiting the 8enan 9esearch 0enter.
En&isioning a Museum at the .uman "cale
.valuation pro+ects can be used in many different ways. 'hey can examine
usability issues, web flexibility, and web design for instance. 'hey can show how web
resources affect visitors, as is the case with /)06s evaluation pro+ect or can show the
effects of change from a physical museum to a virtual one. <ne thing is certain:
.valuation must be ongoing in order for changes to occur. .valuation results from ten
!?
years (or even two years ago& might not necessarily reflect what visitors want now. /nd
by using ethnological methods lie participant observation, surveying, and interviewing,
the visitors6 voices can be heard.
'he purpose of this research was to find how accessible were the online resources
that /tlanta )istory 0enter offered through the 8enan 9esearch 0enter and how to
improve the interactions between visitors and museum archives through technology.
From the results 1 have gathered, it appears that those using online databases find these
resources satisfactory and in fact such users tend to visit the 8enan 9esearch 0enter
(physically or virtually& 3uite fre3uentlyB in other words, these are returning, not one4time
visitors. 'he observation is significant since returning visitors constitute a primary target
population for museums, and the /)0 is of course no exception. Furthermore,
evaluations based on the experiences of such visitors may be seen as profoundly
informative as regards to what needs to change.
1 therefore return to 'erminus, the database most often used, and the pressing
re3uirement to improve ey terms in the search engine and to update the finding aids.
Fisitors expressed frustration with the fact that not everything is included in the database
and with the 3uality of printing provided. :esides +ust 'erminus however, there seems to
be a need for more parts of the /)0 and archival collections such as the ;anborn maps to
be digitized, which means that the museum may consider investing in this undertaing.
0omplaints ranged from stressing how occasionally databases are ,down-, there are
networ failures, and computers at the 8enan 0enter may crash. /s one ey consultant
for this pro+ect pointed out politely (sic& there are some ,user non4friendly issues-.
)owever, my research also provided me with insights regarding the role of online
!E
resources in facilitating visitor learning within (and outside& museums. Fisitors to the
8enan 9esearch 0enter are not there merely for entertainment purposes. .n+oying the
experience is part of why they visitB but it is the 3uality and content of what they learn
that they value. <f course the 8enan 9esearch 0enter, by definition attracts specific inds
of visitors, which is why perhaps the group of people 1 surveyed and interviewed consists
primarily of returning visitors. 'hese are people who are engaged in some ind of
research, either personal (e.g. family history& or for school, or may be scholars. :ut they
do come bac (virtually or physically or both& and they appreciate the experience as well
as the content.
<f all my interviewees, the young genealogist surprised me the most because of
his argument against digitization, which somehow reduces the authenticity of
experiencing the ,real- archival materials. )e was the only one however, to mae that
distinctionB the rest of the people in this study did not mae any statements as to whether
or not they considered their online interactions with museum holdings as less authentic.
1n the particular case of the 8enan 9esearch 0enter>/)0 of course, given that parts of
the collection are not digitized yet, visitors still have to come to the museum and
physically see or access the documents or ob+ects they need. 'hus the fine line between
digitized and physical ob+ects and claims of authenticity attached to one versus the other
remains blurry for the moment. 1t might be interesting to see however, how perceptions
alter as the collection becomes digitally available only.
From the perspective of the museum staff one significant concern is how to
introduce and promote online resources to the general public. /n easy solution is to use
common networing applications and sites such as Faceboo, 'witter and Lou'ube. /)0
!A
actually uses all of these venues. <ne of the archivists 1 interviewed, 'racey (name again
changed for protection of the person&, explained how their Lou'ube account was used for
the ,distribution of materials-. 1t helps promote events that are taing place at /tlanta
)istory 0enter while also showing what ind of collections /)0 has to offer.
1nterestingly however, my survey results indicated that it is primarily word of
mouth rather than internet sites and advertising that led visitors to the 8enan 9esearch
0enter. 1t is interesting to see once again in this study how technology itself does not
increase awarenessB rather it is ,old4fashioned- human communication and interaction.
(e may perhaps consider therefore how perhaps a meaningful museum learning
experience and environment is not necessarily one that is technically advanced, or
,efficient-B that at the end a museum as a learning institution is about people and for
people, and should be scaled to nurture human needs not technological advancements and
optimal performance.
2y research for this practicum was geared towards the specific needs of the
8enan 9esearch 0enter. 1 tried to investigate the assets and problems of its databases and
search engines, see what wors and what does not wor as well as it should for visitors
and staff alie. 1 used ethnographic methods and they afforded me significant insights not
only on usage and accessibility issues, but on more theoretical concerns regarding
authenticity, 3uality of learning, and 3uality of museum experience in general.
1n my view therefore this small pro+ect may be significant beyond evaluating
/)06s online resources. 1t affords a number of new 3uestions worth of further research
and interrogation regarding how technology may be integrated into the museum so that
museums do not lose what is most significant about themB not the ,authenticity- of their
!D
ob+ects but their ,humanity-. 'heir focus and mission to educate ,us- and to challenge
our perceptions and notions about ,ourselves- through their exhibitions, collections, and
active involvement in our communities.

:ibliography
/lmeida, Pilar de and ;higei Looi
!""# 1nteractive 0haracter as a Firtual 'our 5uide to an <nline 2useum
.xhibition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 2useums and the (eb,
!""#.
!%
:artle, =ennifer
!""@ 0opyright 0learance for <nline 1mages: / Cesson Cearned. 2useum
7ews (2arch>/pril 1ssue&.
:en+amin, (alter
$%EDR$%??S 'he (or of /rt in the /ge of 2echanical 9eproduction . In
1lluminations. )arry Tohn, transB )annah /rendt, ed. Pp. !$%4!?#.7ewLor:
)arcourt, :race U (orld, 1nc.
0hen, ;herry
!""! / 0ognitive 2odel for 7on4Cinear Cearning in )ypermedia Programmes.
:ritish =ournal of .ducational 'echnology ##(@&: @@%4@E".
0unliffe, Daniel, with .fmorphica 8ritou and Douglas 'udhope
!""$ Isability .valuation for 2useum (eb ;ites. 2useum 2anagement and
0uratorship $%(#&: !!%4!?!.
Drae, 2iriam /.
!""# 2useums and Digitization. In .ncyclopedia of Cibrary and 1nformation
;cience, Folume #. 2iriam /. Drae, ed. Pp. $%"%4$%$$. 7ew Lor: 2arcel
Deer, 1nc.
Fal, =ohn )., and Cynn D. Diering
!""" Cearning from 2useums: Fisitor .xperiences and the 2aing of 2eaning.
(alnut 0ree: /lta2ira Press.
)andler, 9ichard
$%DE /uthenticity. /nthropology 'oday !($&: !4@.
)ein, )ilde ;.
#"
!""" 'he 2useum in 'ransition: / Philosophical Perspective. (ashington:
;mithsonian 1nstitution Press.
)oltorf, 0. and ;chadla4)all, '.
$%%% /ge as /rtefact: <n /rchaeological /uthenticity. .uropean =ournal of
/rchaeology !(!&: !!%4!@A.
8alfatovic, 2artin 9.
!""! 0reating a (inning <nline .xhibition: a 5uide for Cibraries , /rchives,
/nd 2useums. 0hicago: /merican Cibrary /ssociation.
8irshenblatt45imblett, :arbara
$%%$ <b+ects of .thnography. In .xhibiting 0ultures: 'he Poetics and Politics of
2useum Display. 1van 8arp and ;teven Cavine, eds. Pp #DE4@@#. (ashington:
;mithsonian 1nstitution Press.
Cang, 0aroline , with =ohn 9eeve and Ficy (oollard
!""E 2useums and the (eb. In 'he 9esponsive 2useum: (oring with
/udiences in the 'wenty4First 0entury. 0aroline Cang, =ohn 9eeve, and
Ficy (oollard, eds. Pp. %%4$"@. )ampshire: /shgate Publishing Cimited.
Cowenthal, D.
$%%! /uthenticity: 'he Dogma of ;elf4Delusion* In (hy Faes 2atter: .ssay
on Problems of /uthenticity. 2. =ones, .ds. Published for the 'rustees of the
:ritish 2useum by :ritish 2useum Press: Condon. Pp. $D@4$%!.
2cCaughlin, 2argaret, with ;teven 5oldberg, 7icole .llison, and =ason Cucas
$%%% 2easuring 1nternet /udiences: Patrons of an <n4Cine /rt 2useum.
#$
In Doing 1nternet 9esearch: 0ritical 1ssues and 2ethods for .xamining the
7et. 2argaret 2cCaughlin, ;teven 5oldberg, 7icole .llison, and =ason Cucas,
.ds. Condon: ;age Publications, 1nc. Pp. $E#4$AD
<69eilly, 8aren
!""D .thnographic 2ethods. 7ew Lor: 9outledge.
Pearce, ;usan 2.
$%%! Museums, Objects, and Collections: A Cultural Study, ;mithsonian
1nstitution Press, (ashington, D0.
'omaiuolo, 7icholas 5.
!""@ Pixels at an .xhibition. In 'he (eb Cibrary: :uilding a (orld 0lass
Personal Cibrary with Free (eb 9esources. :arbara Vuint, eds. Pp. !%#4##$.
2edford: 1nformation 'oday, 1nc.
'rant, =
$%%D (hen all Lou6ve 5ot is ,'he 9eal 'hing-: 2useums and /uthenticity in
'he 7etwored (orld. /rchives and 2useum 1nformatics $!: $"A4$!?.
(orld 1ntellectual Property <rganization
7.D, Inderstanding 0opyright and 9elated 9ights. 7ew Lor: (orld
1ntellectual Property <rganization.
#!
(ebography
/tlanta )istory 0enter
!""% /tlanta )istory 0enter )omepage. /tlantahistorycenter.com, accessed
<ctober !A, !""%.
5eorgia /3uarium
!""% 5eorgia /3uarium (eb0ams. 5eorgiaa3uarium.org, accessed
<ctober !D, !""%.
5eorgia 2useum of 7atural )istory
##
!""% 5eorgia 2useum of 7atural )istory )omepage.
http:>>museum.nhm.uga.edu,
/ccessed <ctober !D. !""%.
;tanford Iniversity
!""% ;ee the ;tanford Cibraries6 1sland in ;econd Cife.
http:>>speaing.stanford.edu>highlights>;eeN;INCibrariesNinN;econdNCife.html,
accessed <ctober !D, !""%.
Iniversity of 0olorado ;ystem
!""% 0uDC Digital Cibrary. https:>>www. cu.edu>digitallibrary>index.html,
/ccessed <ctober !%, !""%.
Loutube
!""% /)0 clip. http:>>www.youtube.com>watch*vWb'Lr2z@e;@s,
/ccessed <ctober #", !""%.
#@
/ppendix /
(isitor 4riendl-? Museum 'esources "ur&e-
A5 $o -ou use the 6enan 'esearch Center*s online resource like !erminus or 4ranklin
+arrett*s Necrolog-?
Les 7o
:. .ow o#ten do -ou use the resources 7!erminus8 Album8 +arrett*s Necrolog-8 etc5) at the
6enan 'esearch Center?
<nce every $4! wees
<nce every $4! months
<nce a year
Ised it only once
<ther: explain
C5 / learned about the 6enan 'esearch Center #rom
1nternet search
7ewspapers> 2agazines
'elevision>7ews
'elevision>0ommercials
Person
/t ;chool
From the local library
Fisiting the /)0
<ther:
$5 2ou pre#er to learn about exhibitions and e&ents at the Atlanta .istor- Center #rom
1nternet
7ewspapers> 2agazines
'elevision>7ews
'elevision>0ommercials
#?
Friends> (ord of mouth
;chool
Cocal library
(hile visiting the /)0
/)0 2ailing Cist
<ther:
E55 9ser 0ro#ile Answer i# -ou answered 2E" to :uestion A
$. 1 found out about the 8enan 9esearch 0enter6s online resources from :
1nternet search
7ewspapers> 2agazines
'elevision>7ews
'elevision>0ommercials
Person
/t ;chool
From the local library
Fisiting the /)0
<ther:
!. Lou use the 8enan 9esearch 0enter primarily for (pic !&
;chool pro+ects (teacher&
;chool pro+ects (student&
Family history research
/tlanta 0ity )istory 9esearch
9esidence>7eighborhood 9esearch
#E
Photographs 9esearch
/rchitecture 9esearch
5arden 9esearch
0ivil (ar )istory 9esearch
<ther: explain
#. (hich of the following online resources do you use most ($ being most used4 ? being
rarely used&
/rchitecture Database
Franlin 5arrett6s 7ecrology
'erminus
)arper6s (eely
5alileo
/lbum
45 .ome;O##ice Access 7outside the Museum)
Answer this section onl- i# -ou use the archi&es #rom home;-our o##ice;school
librar- 7not in the museum)
$. Lou regularly use the 8enan 9esearch 0enter6s online resources (pic !&
/t school
Cocal library
/t )ome
;chool Cibrary
From the office
<ther: (explain&
!. 5iven your experience using the 8enan 9esearch 0enter6s online resources outside the
6enan 'esearch Center ,evaluate the following statements:
#A
,1f more of the archival materials were available online, 1 would prefer to wor at
home>office rather than at the 8enan 9esearch 0enter.-
;trongly /gree /gree 7eutral Disagree ;trongly Disagree 7ot
9elevant
,1 would much rather have a librarian near to assist me with my research.-
;trongly /gree /gree 7eutral Disagree ;trongly Disagree 7ot
9elevant
+5 'ate the #ollowing list o# options to contact 6enan 'esearch Center re#erence sta##8 <
being the most desirable and = being the least desirable5
.mail
Phone
2ail
Fax
.5 E&aluation o# online archi&es
$. 9ate the following online resources based on how easy they are to use ($ being the
easiest, ? being the most difficult to use&
;uggest ways in which to improve the online resources
!. ;uggest ways in which to improve the services offered in the 8enan 9esearh 0enter
#. <verall your experience using the 8enan 9esearch 0enter6s online resources have
been
.xceptional Fery ;atisfactory ;atisfactory 7eutral Insatisfactory Fery
Insatisfactory 7ot applicable
#D
/ppendix :
Vuestions that 1 typically ased:
$& (hat database do you use the most*
!& )ave you had any problems with any of the databases* )ow*
#& (ould you change any of the databases* )ow and why*
@& )ave you had complaints about any of the databases*
?& Do you thin the users understand how to use the databases*
E& /re there any current digitizing pro+ects that you are a part of* 1f not, are there any you
would lie to start*
A& (ould you lie more of the collection to be shown* (hy or why not*
#%
@"