Download - MyWeb - Texas Tech University

CCAP Digital Data Collection System
Figure 7.4.
Example of a “Field Collection”
portal on a Lot form.
the information for each newly imported Lot
form had to be reentered in the lab computer
before artifacts could be checked in and
processed. This problem can be corrected in a
future version of the database but will require
an extensive re-design of the Lot form layout.
The greatest compromise, however, between
design and implementation was in the
maintenance of a separate “lab master” version
of the database for each site. Rather than
actually syncing the databases, the procedure
that developed was one that imported new data
from the field iPads into the lab master, but did
not export all the new data back to the iPads.
This approach prevented duplicate forms from
existing on the two field iPads, and that was one
of the greatest problems with having multiple
versions of the database operating in the field
at the same time, but it meant that imported
photolog entries and lab data (artifact catalog
and analysis data) were not sent back into the
field on the iPads. However, the greatest benefit
of having all of that information integrated into
the database is realized at the end of the season
when the data are being reviewed to prepare
excavation reports. Therefore, even though not
having the lab data available in the field is seen
as a weakness in the database, it is not a major
issue.
iDraw and the Learning Curve
In the original grant proposal, drawing plan
maps and profiles directly on iPads was
identified as the greatest time saving part
of the digital database. Unfortunately, the
learning curve on iDraw is steep, and none
of the graduate students attempted to use the
program extensively prior to being in the field.
Furthermore, because the project is a field
school, using the iPads would require that each
field school student be trained enough in iDraw
to understand the process. Therefore, I decided
that drawing plan maps and profiles on graph
paper would be quicker in the field and allow
the students to participate and learn important
skills (Figure 7.5). I still believe, however,
that with practice it is possible to create near
publication-ready field drawings directly on
the iPad.
iPads and Filemaker Go
Once the system for maintaining separate
versions of the database on each iPad had been
established, the system worked extremely well
in the field. All of the field forms seemed to
function as designed, and small bugs were
noted and corrected back in the lab (see Figure
7.3). One field on the Lot and Subop Definition
forms that gave us the most trouble was a
container in the lower right corner that was
designed to hold a sketch map of lot or unit.
Once we abandoned iDraw, as noted above,
we resorted to snapping pictures of either
the unit itself or the field drawing made on
graph paper. It was not until after excavations
had been completed that one of the graduate
students, Vince Sisneros, realized that the
“Get Signature” option, which appeared next
to “Choose from Library” and “Take Photo”
when you clicked on the container field, would
actually allow you to quickly and easily make a
sketch map. This wonderful surprise came too
late for the 2012 season, but will be useful in
the feature.
81