Breakout – Evaluation of visualization

Provide E/PO Particpants definitions of necessary evaluation concepts.

• Front End – What do the audiences know, interests?
• Formative – Evaluate prototypes
• Back End (summative) – Do people learn the specific objectives?

Identify and Share Effective Visualization Tools

Policy – Should NASA follow NSF and require evaluation?

Identify Best Practices

• Test preexisting animations on key concepts.

Common misconceptions – Maybe more?

• Multi-wavelength observations
• Space Time
• False color

NASA should fund the development of the above 3 prototype projects to evaluate and to publish and share with the educational community and visualization producers.

NASA and NSF could require publication of evaluation someplace. Post them to Dome-L or other listerseves.

Points

• Many of use try to communicate too much. If you can’t say it in a few sentences it is too complicated.
• Force production group to define the communication points early.
• Create a matrix showing best practices for specific media or venues and audiences.

Evaluation of interactivity (def: person used a tool that changes the outcome).

• NASA should do some evaluation of prototype interactives so that they can provide suggested best practices for interactivity.
• Collect best practices (even including anecdotes) between sites and consolidate into a guidance document. Identify more than the above-identified three misconceptions. Importance of context. For example, getting from point A to B requires continuous context.

Results must be compiled in a way that helps educators communicate in a way that scientists and producers can understand.

Guidence about best practices about labeling, etc. for print.

High level summary – review article.

Take Rachael’s work on literature review as a starting point and expand.

NASA needs to provide best practices for non-visual data.

Identify concepts that are not best communicated through visualization.