TECHNOLOGY: INNOVATION OR LIMITATION?

MUSEUM INNOVATIONS

BY: KEELAN CASHMORE

We live in a technological age. Every year there are more advances in technology. From cellphones to self-driving cars, the digital world is becoming reality. With these changes comes the advancement of technology not only for personal use, but also for commercial use.

As the digital world expands more and more museums are utilizing technology. Generally, this can help bring the museological world into the 21st century. However, there are some cases where these technologies might be more of a limitation than an innovation. A case study at The Rooms, in St. John’s, Newfoundland, illustrates some of the stumbling blocks museums professionals must overcome for new technology to be successful.

An image of The Rooms. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

Two exhibitions, From This Place: Our Lives on the Land and Sea, and Here We Made a Home, were developed with the express intention of implementing new digital technology. This technology included digital labels, digital hubs, and an interactive digital map and timeline of Newfoundland and Labrador. These exhibitions were designed to embrace technology with the goal of enhancing visitor experience, providing more information, lowering costs, and expediting exhibition changeover.

But, did the addition of this technology succeed?

Somewhat.

The digital labels were designed as touchscreens that allowed visitors to access pictures and information about each object within the display case. In theory, they would increase access to more in-depth information about the objects and would decrease the need for paper labels. However, that was not the case. 

An example of a digital label. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

First, the in-depth data needed to be rewritten, as it was in various forms of shorthand, and much of it was outdated. Then it was discovered that the labels and the museum’s database were not compatible. The information had to be uploaded by hand. Then the database crashed, wiping the labels. Thus, the work had to be uploaded, by hand, again. Another issue is that the touchscreens need to be re-calibrated frequently. Often a visitor will go to use the touchscreen, and nothing will happen. To combat this issue, paper labels were created, despite the original intent to eliminate them.

An image of the paper labels attached to a digital label. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

Overall, the general consensus seems to be that the cost outweighs the benefit of the digital labels, as they were more time consuming than intended, and paper labels were needed anyway. 

The digital hubs were meant to provide more “cultural heritage” by encouraging visitors to listen to traditional stories and folk music. The issue with the hubs is that they are quite time consuming to complete, and the editing requires a specific software with which employees are not familiar. Because of this, new equipment had to be purchased, and employees trained. To date, only two have been completed. This leaves sections of the exhibitions empty. 

One of the working digital hubs. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

Unlike the digital labels and the digital hubs, the timeline and map were successful. It did not take extra time to set up, there were no issues in developing or installing it, visitors appear to enjoy it, and it is aesthetically pleasing. The single issue with the timeline is the inability of museum staff to change the content. The initial plan was to add events as they continued to happen, but the only way to reprogram the timelines is through a firm in Toronto. Thus, new events have not been added. 

A zoomed-in image of part of the interactive timeline. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

A section of the interactive timeline. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

Other problems have also been mentioned, including the cost to run the machines day and night, as they cannot be turned off, the cleanliness of the touchscreens, and the fact that this “new” technology is often obsolete after a couple of years.

So, is it really worth it?

I think so. But, only if it works.

Here’s some questions to keep in mind when considering the effectiveness of implementing new technology:

1) Are the databases compatible with the software?

2) Are the employees trained in using this software? If not, am I willing to train them, or hire someone who is?

3) Does the benefit outweigh the cost?

4) If something goes wrong, am I capable of fixing it? Or will I need to call in a specialist? Is there someone at the museum well-versed in this type of technology (i.e. does the museum have an IT department)?

5) Will the visitors utilize it? Has it had success at other institutions? 

Visitors testing the new technology. Photo courtesy of Maureen Peters.

Overall, it's important to understand what type of technology is best for certain exhibitions and institutions. Being able to successfully discern and utilize the technology is what draws the line between limitation and innovation, and as the digital age continues, this line is going to become more prominent. 

ACCESSIBILITY: MORE THAN A BUTTON ON A DOOR

MUSEUM INNOVATIONS

BY: KEELAN CASHMORE

ac-ces-si-ble (adj)

capable of being reached

capable of being used or seen

capable of being understood or appreciated

If I asked you why accessibility in museums is important, what would you say? You might say something like “museums are for everyone”, or “every individual deserves the opportunity to experience museums”. And if you did, you’d be right.

But what defines accessibility?

Is it having closed captioning on videos? Or wheelchair ramps? Is it as simple as having changing tables in men’s washrooms? Or does it involve the strategic placement of seats in exhibits?

The answer is yes.

Examples of accessibility markers. Source.

But accessibility is also so much more than these physical adaptations to museums. It is bringing neurodiverse artists to light in the best way possible - exhibiting their work and showcasing their talent.

The Museum of Special Art (MOSA) in Bothwell, Washington, takes a brand-new approach to the idea of accessibility.

MOSA brings a new perspective and it is not a ‘typical’ museum. “… [MOSA] is a non-profit corporation developed to meet the current needs of children and special adults with disabilities by providing access to the visual arts, educational opportunities, career development, art internships, and work opportunities for artists with disabilities.” (Source.)

One of the current exhibitions, Unlimited, exhibits the work of autistic artists in recognition of Autism Awareness. This is exciting, as it brings a new voice to artists with disabilities and caters to artists of all ages and abilities.

Museum of Special Art banner. Source.

MOSA places a special emphasis on both the historical preservation of the art, and the art itself. These can be outlined as such:

1) “ Because of the physical and/or developmental challenges these artists face, it can be difficult to access the visual arts. Many have limited access to art programs, materials, adaptive equipment and may not have the advocacy skills needed to care for their artwork and submit their work for exhibitions...  it is imperative that we preserve the historical value of artwork created by artists with disabilities for future generations to come.” (Source.)

2) “The artwork itself is so profound and inspirational and comes from a unique viewpoint of artists with disabilities. Many of these artists who have developmental, physical disabilities, or traumatic brain injuries, who face day to day functional challenges rise above all odds to create the most beautiful masterpieces.” (Source.)

Museum of Special Art. Source. 

So – why is MOSA important?

MOSA is important not only in terms of museums, but in terms of equality in general. MOSA plays an integral role in breaking down barriers for artists with disabilities. Personally, I think this is a fantastic take on accessibility. Instead of developing ways to make a museum accessible to people with disabilities as patrons, MOSA makes them the focus.

Something else I discovered was that MOSA also provides an Open Studio, where artists with disabilities can create the artwork of their choice. I think this extension to the museum is a good way to further foster a love of creativity within artists with disabilities. Instead of simply being a building in which artists with disabilities can display their work, MOSA creates a welcoming and experimental space. For any artist, acceptance and opportunity can have an incredibly positive impact on both their work, and who they are as an artist.

Museum of Special Art banner. Source.

It is incredibly important to recognize differences and diversity in artists and open museums to new forms of artwork. I am absolutely thrilled to see that MOSA is pushing that boundary and I hope museums like MOSA will soon become the “norm” rather than an “innovation”.

CLOSING TRADITIONS; OPENING MINDS

MUSEUM INNOVATIONS

BY: KEELAN CASHMORE

Who remembers taking field trips in grade school? I know I do. And I tend to remember them as some of the best days of actually being in grade school. There was nothing like spending the day somewhere else. It could be a museum, a zoo, a historic house, or a science centre. It didn’t matter at all. What mattered was we were still learning, but also experiencing something outside of the classroom and getting the chance to try something new.

The Magic School Bus. Source.

At this point you’re probably wondering Keelan – why are you talking about field trips? What does that have to do with museum innovation?

And to answer that, I’m going to tell you about Chevron Open Minds, a program I learned about when I started my internship, that operates at The Rooms in Newfoundland. Essentially, Open Minds invites teachers to bring their students to the museum for class for an entire week!

Chevron Open Minds Logo. Source.

“This innovative program is based on the Open Minds education concept, which emphasizes the value of allowing students to slow down and become immersed in new and engaging learning environments. Students participate in a curriculum based, interdisciplinary program developed by their teacher in consultation with the Chevron Open Minds Coordinator. Each week is unique and is based on the needs of the teachers and students.” (Source) 

Naturally, I was curious to see if this program was offered anywhere else in Canada. I was thrilled to find that it also operates in Calgary, Alberta, with the Calgary Zoo, Glenbow Museum, Cross Conservation Area, and the Telus Spark Science Centre, and in Fort McMurray, Alberta, at the Heritage Village.

In learning about this program, I was curious – why don’t more museums and schools adopt the Open Minds program?

From what I learned in conversation with instructors, and my own research, there are several reasons why Open Minds wasn’t as common as I thought it would be (Source Implementing the Open Minds Education Concept in your Community):

1) Museums and schools tend to view each other as “peripheral” – Education programming is considered an “add-on”, not an integral part of the museum experience.

2) In the school world, field-trips are thought to be “frivolous” or “non-essential” inclusions into the curriculum, as opposed to “legitimate” learning pathways.

3) Schools are not necessarily considered the “real world” and being consistently “locked” in classrooms can limit the kind of learning taking place.

4) Museums tend to place children through a series of activities without focusing on what they already know or what they want to learn – and they often have little involvement from the teachers.

5) There is a disconnect between the two, and it takes a willingness on both sides to be able to work together and make the program successful.

Essentially, Open Minds strives to bring schools and museums in sync with each other. Instead of having a field trip with little to no context and a limited link to learning, the museum and instructors work with the curriculum to maximize learning. This incorporates new experiences and provides a new and enriching environment outside of the classroom.

Personally, I think this is incredibly important. Not just for children as students now, but also in fostering a lifelong appreciation for learning in museums, and how the combination of these different worlds can help individuals think and grow in new ways. So often students get bogged down with school and homework, and instead of fostering enthusiasm and eagerness for learning, the focus is on completing assignments and memorizing enough information to pass an exam.

By promoting a want for learning, these programs are also promoting a different interpretation of museums. Instead of thinking of museums traditionally, as places filled with old objects where patrons must be quiet and not touch anything, students will hopefully see them as dynamic spaces where history comes to life, and where visitors are free to explore and experience them as individuals.

Source.

Overall, I think this link between “structured learning” and “field trips” will aid in helping children develop an appreciation for something my peers always thought of as “boring”. I look forward to seeing how this program develops, and how it helps shape the next generation of future museum attendees (and scholars)!