Download - Participatory Exhibition Design
Participatory Exhibition Design:Inviting Visitors to Be Part of the Process
Silvia Filippini Fantoni, Indianapolis Museum of Art
The Collection
User-centred Approach
Visitor-Centered Approach
New Exhibition Development Process
• Non-art Museums• Detroit Institute of
Art• Oakland Museum of
California• Denver Art Museum• Brooklyn Museum
Inspiration
Principles
Curator
Layout with
Designer
Content
Idea
Checklist
Other Inter. tools
Public Programs
The Old Exhibition Development Model
• Interdisciplinary core team is created at the start
• Core team includes:• Curator(s)• Interpretation
specialist• Evaluator• Designer• Project Manager
1. Process is more collaborative
Core team
Layout
Content
Idea
Checklist
Other Inter. tools
Public Program
2. Interpretation Specialist Plays a Key Role
• They represent the visitors’ needs at the core team table
• They lead the development process
• They ensure that learning theories are applied
• They are involved in the content development process
3. Identify Big Idea and Outcomes
The landscapes and rich cultural traditions of the Southwest fueled the imaginations of early 20th century artists like Georgia O’Keeffe.
The evocative still life paintings produced by these artists provide a fascinating example of art’s capacity to document the essence of a place.
Big Idea
Learning Outcomes
• The Southwest art scene: Visitors will learn about the early 20th century phenomenon of artists visiting the Southwest
• Defining still life: Visitors will expand their understanding of what a still-life is and what it can convey.
• Creativity: Visitors will be able to express their creativity using the works in the exhibition or elements of Southwestern culture to create their own still lifes.
• Attitude: Visitors will develop a positive attitude toward the museum as a place to explore their creative impulses as well as a place to learn about different cultures.
Learning Outcomes
• Big Idea and Learning Outcomes are used to:• Create Interpretive plan• Develop interpretive
material and experiences• Inform exhibition
structure and layout• Finalize checklist• Support exhibition
planning by staff• Evaluate the success of
the show
4. Incorporate testing and evaluation throughout the process
Methods
n=576
Art Deco Automobiles Duesenbergs Automobile Masterpieces Concept Cars0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
21% 21%
27%
31%
Front-End: Automobile Design
Formative: Robert Indiana
Visitors’ interests:
• Artist’s life (30/40)• Inspiration (30/40)• Process/technique
(26/40)• Artist’s or other’s
explanation about the meaning behind the work (7/40)
Formative: Star Studio
Design Thinking Workshop
Visual Identity Testing
Summative: Exhibition Evaluations
• Assess if learning outcomes have been met
• Assess if expectations regarding level of satisfaction, and use of interpretive tools have been met
• Identify problems that might be addressed in future exhibitions
• Audience demographics & psychographics
Results
Before
After
Better integration and usage of interpretative tools in the exhibition
30-50% 40-60%
46%60%
Successful implementation of participatory projects
40%
60%24%
4,000
Increased visitors attendance
• 44,000 ca. visitors in 2012-2013
• 81,000 ca. visitors in 2013-2014
Increased Satisfaction Level
• Snapshot: 4.49/5• Beauty &
Belief:4.62/5• Ai Weiwei: 4.68/5• Matisse: 4.73/5• Robert Indiana:
4.73/5• Face to Faces:
4.80/5
Outcomes Beauty & Belief Robert Indiana
1 73% 97%2 67% 86%3 67% 79%4 60% 79%5 47% 62%6 40% 34%7 30% 24%8 23%
Key Messages are Communicated more Effectively
• Resistance mostly from curatorial staff
• Resistance from other institutions that are not willing to modify their shows
• More time-consuming
• More contentious
Challenges
• Refine the process• Extend it to non-paid
exhibitions and permanent collection
• How do we apply the process to non-traditional exhibitions?
Next Steps
Questions?