Daejeon, July 27–31
Digital Humanities (DH) projects are often assessed by metrics (web traffic, visual design, etc.) relating to the final product. This focus on the end-product, however, forgets a key element in DH projects: the people. This proposal seeks to answer this largely missing question: how do we measure the success of the people and processes involved in creating DH projects? This study focuses on librarian-supported, student-led DH projects at Mississippi State University (MSU) and proposes a process-focused metric of engagement that reflects learning, collaboration, and curatorial decision-making.
MSU is a Carnegie Research 1, land-grant institution According to the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities, ‘land grant institutions’ were created under either the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1990 or the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 to educate the public of the state. These institutions’ primary research areas are in agriculture, and any information created by institution is to be shared with the public. According to a publication released by McKenzie Boyce through the MSU Extension Services ((see bibliography for reference), Mississippi is historically one of the poorest states in the United States, with 20% of the population living in poverty, almost 16% percent does not have a bank account, and less than 50% having emergency savings. These poverty factors have a dramatic effect on the children of the state, who become students at MSU (see Footnote 3). According to the Carnegie Classifications (see bibliography for reference) 23.6% of MSU’s students are from unrepresented populations and 29% of the students receive Pell Grants. A news article by Ashli Coggins from April 2025, cites that 38% of MSU’s students are first generation, which means neither of their parents attended college. Experiential Learning is a theory created by David A. Kolb, that focuses on how people have improved learning through experiences over other methods (such as lectures). Experiential learning exercises contain four parts (Experiencing, Reflecting, Thinking, Acting) and can contain transferable skills to help the learners better navigate life.
The focus on process over end-product comes from two points. One, DH pedagogy in educational practice is limited (Georgopoulou et al 2025). Two, humanities focuses on the end-product instead of the “messy” parts of “discovery and experimentation…where methodologies are used and developed (Mittell 2019: 228).” By embracing the malleable and “messy” parts of student engagement while they are creating their exhibits, we emphasize techniques and information that is applicable to their remaining academic careers and future professional careers (Kennedy 2017; Fredericks et al 2004). For this paper, we define student engagement along the lines of learning engagement, which narrows the focus to students' involvement or student work in the learning activities of DH projects (Wong / Liem 2022; Tracey / Hoiem 2017).
Our argument builds on educational psychology theories originating from Natriello’s (1984) participation model that student participation in school activities is an area to be studied. This includes Finn’s (1989; Finn et al 1991) concept to include behavior in the participation-identification model which provides a basis for evaluating how students interact with educational processes. We heavily focus on Salmela-Aro and Upadaya’s (2012) schoolwork engagement perspective model and add to it time and agentic engagement (Reeve / Tseng 2011) to focus on how the length of instruction and student agency effects how engaged they are with the materials. This aligns with our goal of centering students within the process, an aim shared by Geiger et al (2025) who seek to meet individuals where they are while helping them develop digital curation skills.
This literature review does not cover all topics that will be included such as experiential learning (Kolb / Fry 1975; Breunig 2005; Bethell / Morgan 2011; Quinn / Shurville 2009) and assessment (Yates et al. 2015; Gibbs 2006; Breunig 2005; Qualters 2010; Wilson et al. 2024).
To answer the proposed questions, we created a post and pre-course survey to give students in the two standing courses (one in the English Department and the other in Art) that have Omeka as an option for the final project. Students who were interested in Omeka took the pre-course survey and only students who completed the project took the post-course survey. The survey’s questions were designed to gather a baseline for the students’ knowledge and then see if they could expand on or retain their knowledge. The survey results combined with course parameter and expectations created with the faculty members (Giannetti 2017; Millson-Martula / Gunn 2017) and observational data allow us to evaluate the two main themes in our study: instructional contact time and student connection to materials.
Instructional contact time measures the frequency and depth of interactions between students and librarians, ranging from classroom-based instruction to one-on-one consultations. The contact reflects how students seek guidance on the project, and their ability to conduct a collaborative dialogue. Some metrics that support our analysis include metadata accuracy, page design, incorporation of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) principles, and software access data.
Connection to materials measures how much autonomy the students had in the curatorial choices of their exhibit, including selecting the item, and item interpretation. Assignment design plays a significant role in shaping this connection; therefore, assignment parameters and instructional scaffolding are integral to our analysis. These metrics allow us to contextualize student activity and instruction impact through a qualitative lens
Early observations from Arts and Humanities courses suggest that increased instructor and librarian engagements correlate with stronger student understanding and investment in the DH process. These people-centered metrics highlight areas of growth within the students that final products alone cannot be captured. We are still refining our survey instrument and data collections methods to most accurately capture the process over the final product.
By reevaluating what “success” looks like in Digital Humanities projects, this study argues for an assessment model that values the collaborative, people-centered process that shape DH work. This holistic pedagogical approach emphasizes inclusive teaching practices and better reflects the complex realities of student engagement while also emphasizing the transferability of technical and soft skills beyond Omeka, to other software, which will help them navigate the ever-changing digital landscape.