 |
Technology in Interpretation Readings: For Better or Worse: The Marriage of Interpretation and Computers |
|||||
|
Interpretation has its foundations in natural and cultural resources, often found in places where people go to escape modern civilization. Computers are man-made machines that have become essential tools of our society both at home and work. Although the fusion of computers and interpretation at first seems incompatible, the integration of technology into the interpretive profession opens new doors in the quest to connect people to the meanings of resources. However, computer technology also presents a host of challenges. Due to the dramatic increase in computer use over a relatively short period of time, very little direct research has been conducted to study the incorporation of computers into the interpretive field. The literature that does exist often discusses the effectiveness of computers in an exhibit, not the computer skills an interpreter needs to be successful. One part of this study is to gather information about computer skills from interpretive professionals in the field. The following documents provide a glimpse of computers and interpretation working together. Please choose a topic below.
A Historical View
A few modern-day resources give insight into the use of computers in interpretation. However, even a traditional source helps to shed light on the subject. Back in 1957, Freeman Tilden had the foresight to describe modern “gadgetry” in regards to interpretation. He writes, “So, whether one likes it or not, we are going to have more—and I should hope, better—mechanical devices aimed at multiplying the interpretive effort” (1977). Tilden believed that nothing could replace direct human contact, but with funding limitations, interpretation would rely more and more on non-personal means. Though he probably had no idea of the computer revolution, that pictures, photographs, movies, and sounds could be inexpensively incorporated into a single machine, he provided important insights into the gadgets of his time, namely tape players and slide shows. Tilden maintained that a good device is better than no contact at all. Similarly, good interpretation from a device is better than a poor performance from an actual person. However, devices are acceptable only if the interpretation is truly good. Poor interpretation from a device is much worse than poor interpretation from a person. In fact, poor interpretation from a device may be worse than no interpretation at all. Tilden ends the chapter with a simple warning; “Gadgets do not supplant the personal contact, we accept them as valuable alternatives and supplements” (1977). Computer Exhibits for Visitors
Though Tilden may not have had computers in mind when writing about “gadgets,” his insights definitely hold true today. Coming back to modern times, Larry Beck and Ted Cable in their book Interpretation for the 21st Century provide guiding principles for including computer exhibits in visitor and nature centers (1998). The advantages of using computers in centers are that computers respond to stimuli, they create new experiences, and they bring people to places and events they cannot go to in real life. Disadvantages of computer systems include being impersonal and often too complicated. Older generations, who may not be comfortable with computers, might find such displays intimidating. Beck and Cable (1998) also describe three attributes of a successful interpretive computer exhibit.
According to research done at various institutions, interactive computers strongly attract visitors, hold their attention, and promote learning. Fun seems to be the key to the interactive computer’s success, and most visitors enjoy them much more than static exhibits (Beck & Cable, 1998). In addition, computer interactives promote non-sequential learning. Slides and videos are embedded in the linear learning process; the visitor must watch from the beginning to the end to understand the true meaning of the exhibit. With computers, the visitor can choose which topics interest him or her the most, and how detailed information he or she might want. In essence, the visitor chooses the path and pace of learning, and diverse audiences are served (Beck & Cable, 1998). One aspect of interpretive computer technology that has been researched in-depth is the use of computers in exhibits. This research is accomplished primarily through visitor studies at museums. By reviewing the impact computers have on a visitor’s interpretive experience, we can glimpse both the strengths and weaknesses of interpretive technology. Do computers truly enhance the overall experience of visitors, or do they separate them from the real natural and cultural experience of the site? Positive Effects on Visitor Experience
Some research reveals that computers can enhance the interpretive experience of museum visitors. The positive aspects of computers seem endless: providing in-depth and layered information on almost any environmental or cultural topic, maps for traveling, efficient purchasing of items and tickets, and details about sites. Interpretation is based in factual information. With this wealth of information available, do computers actually increase people’s understanding of the information? Many studies have been conducted to determine how well people can learn from computers. In an article entitled “The impact of interactive computer software on visitor’s experiences: A case study,” Hilke, Hennings, and Springuel (1988) describe an experiment involving computers in a museum setting. The Smithsonian created a traveling exhibition called “Laser at 25,” which included a large variety of interpretive components, one of which was an interactive computer. When the exhibition moved from one museum to another, the computers were turned on for certain periods of time and were “out of order” for other intervals. This allowed researchers to assess the effect of computers on different aspects of the visitor’s experience. The researchers discovered that significant changes did occur in the museum experience when computers were included in the exhibition. Computers increased the visitor’s recognition of themes and content areas within the exhibition (Hilke, 1988). Researchers expected that people would remember the topics presented in the computer program, but they were surprised to see that visitors who used computers could much more easily recognize themes from other exhibit components as well. The interactive computer exhibit seems to have sensitized visitors to other themes in the exhibition as a whole. In addition, the researchers found that the interactive computers did not detract from other exhibits in the hall. The computers seemed to be an effective supplement to the exhibition. This research supports the notion that computers enhance a person’s knowledge of interpretive concepts. Recognition of themes and content areas can be an important component of learning. Themes provide a person with broad overviews of the topic, and lead to the foundations of organized thought. An individual that reads a website about water pollution, for example, could go out to the local city river and recognize the pollution theme, making a link between the information he or she obtained digitally and the actual, real object. The study takes it even one step further, however. The same individual could see a factory in the industrial park, and recognize a completely different theme—air pollution. The computer has created a mental framework for the individual to conceptualize the environment in terms of broad themes. This can lead to an enhanced understanding of the natural and cultural world as a whole. In addition to the recognition of broad themes, the research identifies another significant contribution. Previous to this study, many museum professionals believed that computers drew people away from other exhibits. The attraction and interactiveness of a computer do cause visitors to spend more time using them. However, these same visitors spend just as much time at other exhibits as they would without the computer exhibit (Hilke, 1988). People may not be using computers at the expense of real-life natural and cultural experiences, but to supplement their actual experiences instead. In the book Interpretation for the 21st Century, Beck and Cable support the idea that computers enhance understanding (1998). Interactive computers promote non-sequential learning, by providing visitors with different paths. Unlike videos, slide shows, or talks, computer programs do not have a solid beginning, middle, or end. Visitors can choose which direction they want to move and how much information they would like to learn. Since every person has a different learning style, these choices can enhance learning for a very diverse audience. Studies and other resources show that computers can enhance learning, and thus lead to a greater understanding about the natural and cultural resources of a site. However, “understanding” is only one aspect of an individual’s experience in the natural world. Interpretation strives not only to enhance understanding, but also to facilitate a meaningful experience for the visitor. Can computers enhance those intangible feelings about a natural or cultural site? A few studies have focused more on the total experience, instead of the learning aspect. Douglas Worts believes that computers can enhance experiences at art galleries (1990). Traditionally, art galleries have been very cautious incorporating computer technology into the exhibition. Art gallery curators often believe that computers compete with art to attract the visitor’s attention. However, art gallery professionals also deal with the issue of connecting people with the art. Visitors that have not made this connection will have a less positive experience, thereby reducing the possibility of a return visit. To provide visitors with important information about art, interactive computers were constructed at the Art Gallery of Ontario in 1987 (Worts, 1990). The effect of these computers on the visitor’s experience was astounding. During phase 1 (without the computers), people were more quiet and subdued. In phase 2 (with computers) the entire social atmosphere of the gallery changed. Visitors talked more with each other, asked questions, and pointed at different parts of the artworks. The overall attitudes were obtained from visitors through a series of interviews. In phase 1, only 23% of the visitors rated their experience as “above average.” In phase 2, 70% rated their experience as “above average” (Worts, 1990). The research indicates that computers greatly enhanced the experience for most visitors to the art gallery. Worts concludes his article by saying, “…relevant educational material [from computer exhibits] is beginning to dispel some of the aura of ineffable ‘greatness’ often associated with museum objects. In its place, many visitors appear to be developing greater confidence in their ability to relate to cultural objects in a personal way” (1990). This quote epitomizes the notion that computers can enhance interpretation, creating connections between the visitors and the natural and cultural resources of a site. According to David Dean in his book entitled Museum Exhibition, the role of museums will be expanded in the future as technology continues to evolve (1996). Computers will be included in exhibitions, information will be placed on the Internet, and virtual museums will be created to provide access to everyone. However, the founding premise of the museum will not change. “The basic appeal of the actual object, the ‘real thing,’ will not diminish, but the intellectual curiosity engendered by exhibitions will find sustenance in information technology” (Dean, 1996). Like a museum, people visit natural and cultural sites to see “real things.” According to Dean’s hypothesis, the appeal of the natural and cultural world, the attraction to the “real things” like scenery, fresh air, and wildlife, will not be reduced, but computers will provide information to satisfy the visitor’s curiosity. Negative Effects on Visitor Experience Whereas the previous studies tend to support the positive aspects of computers on a person’s experience in an interpretive setting, other research reveals the detrimental effects of computers. This opposite view states that people spend many more hours staring into a computer screen, reducing the number of real, first-hand natural and cultural experiences. The computer, in effect, replaces recreation and activities that might otherwise be pursued in the natural world. Computers act as barriers to separate human beings from the natural and cultural experience; the virtual takes precedence over the real. Time consumption is a major concern when combining computers and interpretation. In museums, visitors spend much longer periods of time using interactive computers than any other type of exhibit. Again referring to the Hilke et al. study, which focused on the computer component aspect of the “Laser at 25” exhibition, computers held the participants’ attention longer than other exhibits. “Visitors who stopped generally stayed for some time—four or even six minutes was not uncommon. Such prolonged attention to a single station was never observed at other stations” (Hilke, 1988). Although four to six minutes might seem insignificant, in museums where hundreds of exhibits are vying for people’s attention, four to six minutes is a considerable time period. The Worts study at the Art Gallery of Ontario yielded similar results in regards to the time visitors spent on the computer (1990). During phase 1 (without the computer), people spent about 5.4 minutes in the gallery. After phase 2 was completed (with the computer), that time rose to 16.3 minutes. Almost 96% of the visitors used the computer exhibits in the gallery (Worts, 1990). Again, the computer exhibits were extremely popular, and held the audience’s attention much longer than other exhibits. People may be spending long periods of time on computers, but this does not necessarily affect their experience of the real natural and cultural world. Using computers, people can travel to natural sites throughout the world. In seconds, an individual can be crawling over crumbling rocks on the Galapagos Islands, swimming in the Great Barrier Reef of Australia, or climbing to the top of Mount Everest. Even local nature centers have included virtual tours of replanted prairies, wetland boardwalks, or forest trails. Are these valuable “natural” experiences? According to David Sobel in his book Beyond Ecophobia, the most valuable experiences are those that are real and first-hand (1996). Sobel claims that current environmental education in many schools fails to make the link between the abstract (virtual) and the concrete (real). For instance, students are taught about the destruction of the rainforest and the threatened animals that depend on tropical forests for survival. To the vast majority of students, these concepts are abstract—rainforests are too far away to be real. If a business is threatening to destroy a local meadow, students are unable to connect the similar “rainforest issue” with this real issue. According to Sobel, “Children are disconnected from the world outside their doors and connected with endangered animals and ecosystems around the globe through electronic media” (1996). Sobel (1996) encourages teachers to bring their students outside so they can bond with the natural world. Only then, he claims, will students develop attitudes that will protect nature. The concrete experiences are the ones that count. Virtual experiences, no matter where they take people, tend to be quite abstract if they are not coupled with real experiences. Humans have difficulty connecting purely abstract situations with reality. In essence, people that view natural and cultural resources through abstract means like the computer, have a vision of the world that is not based in reality. Their view is skewed by technology, detracting from their experience in the real natural and cultural world. Ann Mintz, in her book The Virtual and the Real: Media in Museums, more directly explores the differences between computer technology and the real objects (Thomas, 1998). The heart of a museum experience is reality. She cites several characteristics that make a computer experience artificial. Computers tend to enlarge or shrink pictures of real objects to similar sizes. Colors are not reproduced well from reality. Three-dimensions are flattened into two dimensions. The object has no texture. Mintz claims that experiences with real objects are much more powerful than experiences with computers (Thomas, 1998). Research has been conducted to study the overall “real” experience of visitors at museums. In 1994, an organization called Science Learning, Inc. brought together a group of museum professionals to discuss learning in museums. Participants were asked to share any “peak experiences” they might have encountered within a museum setting. “Peak experiences” are those that create a sense of awe, amazement, and in many cases are life-changing. All 50 participants chose an experience that occurred with a real object; not a single person chose an experience with technology. Another similar study led by Michael Spock came up with the same results. Pivotal learning experiences in museums were based on real objects, visitors, and staff, not information technology (Thomas, 1998). Powerful, life-changing experiences seem to occur in reality, not in the virtual world. People that explore natural and cultural resources at a site, like those that experience the real objects in museums, tend to have much stronger and more personal experiences. These experiences shape an individual’s understanding of and attitude toward the world. Computers tend to limit the natural experience a person might have by condensing reality onto a flat monitor. These studies support the notion that computers may detract from a person’s interpretive experience. Computer
Skills for Interpreters Although computer exhibits are a crucial part of interpretive technology, most students will not have the ability or time to create a computer program. This project focuses on computer skills that students will most likely use in their interpretive professions, including presentation, page layout, and graphic software and equipment.
From the early days of interpretation, one type of standard
program presented at natural and cultural sites was the illustrated
talk. Interpreters
understand the power of pictures. Visual cues often evoke emotions that words could never
create. The old cliché,
“A picture is worth a thousand words,” holds true for illustrated
talks. Thirty-five millimeter slides have traditionally been used as
an effective visual medium for showing images to groups of all sizes.
According to Regnier, Gross, and Zimmerman (1994), this “old”
technology originated in the 1930’s.
Although interpretive sites are still using slides to
successfully communicate, many are transforming their presentations to a
digital medium. Microsoft
PowerPoint is one of the most popular and user-friendly presentation
programs on the market today. Interpretive
sites, like Grand Canyon National Park, are scanning slides into a
digital format and storing them on computers. Ralph Jones, in an article written for the 2000 NAI Conference in
Tucson, Arizona, describes the conversion of transferring evening slide
programs into PowerPoint presentations at the Grand Canyon.
According to Jones (2000), traditional 35-millimeter slides have
several limitations that make the conversion worth the effort. ·
Two large
cabinets hold the 7,300 slides at the Grand Canyon, which takes up room. ·
Only one person
can use a slide file at a time. ·
It can take days
to look through and find enough slides for a presentation. ·
Over time, slides
degrade in quality. Many
become faded, scratched, or blurred. ·
Slides cannot be
altered or edited in any way (crop, add text, add borders) ·
Stock slides can
be extremely expensive, $10 to $75 each (Jones, 2000) ·
Digital slides
are stored on a network. All
interpreters in the park have access to the images at the same time, any
time. ·
The slides are
coded with keywords, which makes searching for and finding the correct
image simple and convenient. ·
A single CD-Rom
can hold nearly 1,000 images, enhancing the ability to transfer pictures
to computers not on the network. ·
Digital photos
never degrade in quality. ·
Image editing,
such as cropping, adding text, and re-coloring, can easily be
accomplished on the computer. ·
Stock digital
images are considerably less expensive than 35-millimeter slides: only
$30 for 30,000 photographs (Jones, 2000). Converting
traditional slides into a digital format can definitely prolong the
longevity of images and simplify many tasks for interpreters.
The true power of digital images to enhance an interpretive
experience, however, can only be revealed through presentation software.
The Grand Canyon is using Microsoft PowerPoint to create and
revise illustrated talks. According
to Jones (2000), “PowerPoint is a highly versatile multimedia tool
that can dramatically increase the professional look and interpretive
effectiveness of your presentations.”
It is possible to completely replicate a traditional
35-millimeter slide program with PowerPoint.
However, many interpreters use the available tools in PowerPoint
to enhance the traditional programs, adding unique transitions, text,
colored backgrounds, mysterious animations, sound effects, music, and
even video clips. Microsoft PowerPoint and other presentation programs can reduce the staff time needed to accomplish traditional illustrated talk duties, and can contribute to the professionalism and effectiveness of interpretive programs at a site (Jones, 2000). Page
Layout and Graphic Editing
Whereas PowerPoint is used to assist with the illustrated talk duties of an interpreter, page layout and graphic software can enhance the quality and increase the efficiency of creating interpretive panels, posters, brochures, newsletters, and other publications. Page layout, or desktop publishing, programs provide interpreters with a blank virtual easel on the computer screen. Just as an artist adds elements to create a whole picture, the interpreter adds elements to design an effective publication. Through a simple click of the mouse, the interpreter can insert text of any shape or color, add different styles of borders, change the background color of any object, insert images from a scanner, digital camera, or disk, and have full control over where each element is positioned. Graphic design software, on the other hand, provides interpreters with a myriad of tools for creating and manipulating images. According to Charles Milliken and Krista Kovach from the New Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail Route (1999), the increasing speed and graphic capabilities of modern computers have provided interpreters with the means to plan and prepare small museum and wayside exhibits in-house. Most desktop computers and page layout programs are well within the reach of an interpretive site’s budget. By providing interpreters with these tools, projects that may have been contracted out to design firms in the past can now be efficiently planned and prepared. Milliken and Kovach (1999) also list the computer technology equipment required to create exhibit labels and sign panels. This information is vital for the creation of a successful student Interpretive Computer Lab, which is one of the objectives of this project. The list of equipment that Milliken and Kovach (1999) recommend includes:
Although the authors do not recommend any specific software applications, they do mention that Adobe PageMaker and QuarkXpress are appropriate desktop publishing programs. The total cost of software and hardware can be purchased for about $5,000 to $6,000 (Milliken, 1999). Computer technology is growing at an incredible rate and even the Milliken and Kovach article from three years ago is somewhat outdated. For example, the Pentium 4 processor has replaced both the Pentium II and III in this short period of time. The article does, however, demonstrate the basic elements needed for a successful interpretive lab.
|
||||||
| Introduction | ||||||
| Related Readings | ||||||
| Results | ||||||
| Thesis | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For More Information, contact: Jim Buchholz Schmeeckle Reserve University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point (715) 346-4992 jbuchhol@uwsp.edu
|
All pictures and text are copyrighted by Jim Buchholz, 2002. No part of this website may be duplicated without written permission of the author. | ||||
