Esri Story Maps can be a powerful tool to present your research. When done well, Story Maps are dynamic, interactive, and can use images and maps to enhance the presentation of your research agenda. When done poorly, however, Story Maps can obfuscate the point of your research, and distract viewers with too many bells and whistles. I believe that the most important factor in creating a Story Map is deciding which kind of Story Map to create. Creating your Story Map in a format that works for your research is an important step.
And that is why I’m here to tell you that, despite being the prettiest of the Story Map options, you need to think again before choosing Cascade.
You may call this blasphemy, but hear me out. Because Cascade is seen as being the most attractive Story Map option, Story Map users will try to force their project into a narrative it may not necessarily have just to use the prettiest Story Map. This does a disservice both to your work, as well as to those who would be interested in your work, but find it difficult to understand given the medium that it’s been presented in. Esri Story Maps can be a great way to get the word out about a project, but also a very public way to flaunt mistakes or misunderstandings about the project and its message. As a scholar, you need to choose the Story Map option that best suits the work that you’ve created.
Below are my suggestions of what to consider before choosing to use Cascade for your Story Map.
You may want to consider Cascade if you plan to…
- Use a lot of visual multimedia in your presentation. Cascade is a highly visual platform, and allows for a lot of integration between maps, images, and other forms of media, such as GIFs, videos, and even audio. In fact, in many Cascade presentations, the actual map can feel optional. Narrative and immersive sections provide a platform to showcase your non-map media in a way that emphasizes it to a greater degree than other Story Maps options.
- Tell a linear story with your presentation. If your research can be presented in a narrative, structured format, you should try Cascade. Cascade tends to be most effective when it feels like the user is reading the story
- Have a captive audience. Story Map Cascade is perfect for situations where people can’t (or have a strong incentive) not to close the window. Cascade could be the perfect accompaniment to someone doing a presentation, or creating something for a very specific audience. But if you are trying to market a project to strangers, they may just not have the attention span to deal with Cascade.
- Use different kinds of maps. Switching between different kinds of maps can, at times, be jarring in other Story Maps. Cascade allows for a narrative flow that can help give context to maps that may otherwise be jolting to the reader if they are flitting around another Story Map format.
You may want to reconsider using Cascade if you plan to…
- Create a more minimalist story. If you have one map that is the centerpiece of your Story Map, you may want to consider a format that emphasizes that particular map more than Cascade. Cascade works best when you have a number of multimedia pieces that you need to pull together.
- Present your research in a non-linear format. If your research is more non-linear, then it’s best to choose a Story Map option that allows users to skip around and play with the map a little more than Cascade does. Forcing your research into a linear story will probably lead to frustration and confusion among your viewers.
- Create a more interactive map. Cascade does not lend itself well to interactive maps. Sure, you can do it, but the format of Cascade lends itself less to viewers taking the time to click on individual components of the map.
Again, I don’t hate Cascade. I’ve seen it used well. But I’ve also seen it used poorly. Do you agree with me? Disagree? Let me know in the comments! And if you’re looking to get started with Esri Story Maps, or want to learn more about GIS, stop by the Scholarly Commons!