MW2009 Eval – page 2

6. General Comments

My favorite sessions were unstructured, unled,
brainstorming, and open, but with a topic and time limit. Unconference/Birds of
a Feather-like.

My least favorite aspect of the program was 30-40 min presentations
with speakers reading powerpoint slides, getting to all the points in their
papers as fast as possible. Maybe limit speakers to 5 min summaries, especially
those with papers. But really, everyone presenting should be required to post
notes in advance so that they feel less pressure to cover everything in a short
session. Q&A will pull out needed details and the audience should always be
prompted to join in a conversation with their experiences and opinions.

I’d like to see more time devoted to discussions of varied best
practices, problems, solutions, options.

I wish there was more time put aside for processing as a
group. I could have used a daily half-hour open forum like the closing open mic
period -- What did you learn, how’s it going, what’s not working?

7. Workshops

I’d like to take workshops on … 2.0 on the cheap, 3.0, online exhibit dev, handheld dev. I could go on and on ...

8. Id like to hear from talk to representatives of research
sites, communities, tools such as itools, flickr, twitter, facebook, etc, to discuss
what they wished we would do with their sites/tools, and what we’d wish they’d
change.

9. The best of the web

While I understand the value of giving an award each to 6
types of sites/businesses/institutions, I found it a boring, predictable
approach for such a progressive group.

But, to be consistent, “On-line Exhibition” would fit better
as “MLA site,” and that would make a place for many of the ideas discussed at
the conference such as user generated content, web/MLA crossover, and mini-web\r\r
technology on kiosks and handheld.

“Podast” could be generalized to the use of any media online,
text, image, audio, or video.

Alternative award categories could be more philosophical: best
representation of MLA, best user involvement, or more practical: best new software
or online tool/best new hardware.

Finally, shouldn’t all winners be “Innovative or
Experimental?”

I did not participate in voting. I didn’t have the time. I’ll
make time in the future.

I attended the awards. It was fun, but the best part was the
back channel stuff.

10. Follow up

I have started to pitch MW2009 ideas at work. First,
privately with my boss. That went very well. Next, my Dept – Curatorial. Then
to the Web team and higher-ups. Wish me luck.

What materials will be useful? Hard to know, but I’ll be
following the tweets.

11. Other

Stars: All were engaged for the whole conference. Their
energy and focus was very helpful. Gail from V&A, her workshop was especially
inspiring, Frankie, BrianK, Nina, and JonP.

Friday schedule was difficult for me, people entering and
exiting sessions, 11am rooms were over-crowded,
lunch ended 1.5 hrs early and some of us missed it.

I was surprised and impressed at the organizers for insuring
that everyone had a voice, from the opening tweet to the closing remarks, and
the respect presenters showed when they attended so many other presentations
and participated fully.

I can’t believe how much I learned. The experience was far
beyond my expectations. Although I doubt my museum will send me next year, I’ll
attend online.

Thank you all.