VisitScape
Mobile, web-based tools for
HE students on field trips
Giasemi Vavoula
University of Leicester
gv18@le.ac.uk
Fu...
VisitScape
Outline
• Educational Context
• The technology
• Evaluation methods
• Findings
• Emerging themes
G. Vavoula (gv...
VisitScape
Background – The Curriculum
• School of Museum Studies
• Two campus-based MA programmes,
with 4+1 taught module...
VisitScape
Background – Module 4 Museums and Regeneration:
The Regeneration Game
• 3-week group work to develop a “strateg...
VisitScape
Learning Outcomes
Knowledge Skills
• cultural, economic, social, and
political contexts of museums
• financial ...
VisitScape
Activity Subject Tutor
Workshop Group project induction session Module tutor
Lecture Museums and regeneration M...
VisitScape
Activity Subject Tutor
Workshop Group project induction session Module tutor
Lecture Museums and regeneration M...
VisitScape
Background – What students want from a study visit
• Survey in 2008-09 with students and staff at the
School as...
VisitScape
Background – What students want from a study visit
• Survey in 2008-09 with students and staff at the
School as...
VisitScape
Background – What students want from a study visit
• Survey in 2009-10 with students at the School
asked them t...
VisitScape
Background – What students want from a study visit
• Survey in 2009-10 with students at the School
asked them t...
VisitScape
Background – What students want from a study visit
G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1205/10/10
VisitScape
Background – Birmingham Study Visit
From the handout:
• “in order to understand museums ... we also need to und...
VisitScape
On this study visit you will become flâneurs. We will be taking a walking tour of parts of
central Birmingham a...
VisitScape
• 10.00: Arrive Hill Street. Take 45 minutes
exploring Chamberlain and Victoria
Squares and the civic spaces th...
VisitScape
• 10.45-12.00: Go to Birmingham
Museum and Art Gallery to meet
the principal curator, who will
talk to you and ...
VisitScape
• 12.00-13.00: Walk through Paradise Forum to
Centenary Way and Centenary Place, then along
Broadstreet to Brin...
VisitScape
• 13.00-14.30: Go to the Ikon
Gallery to meet the learning
curator, for a talk and a tour of
the gallery.
• How...
VisitScape
• 14.30-16.00: Walk back through Brindleyplace, Broad
Street, Centenary Square, Paradise forum and Victoria
Squ...
VisitScape
Background – Study Visit materials / resources
• Handout described above
• Separate list of questions for each ...
VisitScape
Background – (After the) Birmingham Study Visit
• Post-visit workshop
• In this workshop we will review your ex...
VisitScape
Student preparations for a study visit (in general):
• “skim read [materials provide by tutor] but didn’t go in...
VisitScape
exhibits
buildings
policies
mission
Technology to support Birmingham study visit
Physical space
Museums, square...
VisitScape
Collaborative Virtual Space: Requirements
• Access
• Information provided by tutor about the physical / organis...
VisitScape
HP iPAQ 614c
Business Navigator
•3G
•4-inch transflective
TFT display
•Integrated WLAN
802.11b/g;
Bluetooth 2.0...
VisitScape
System description
Upload content
Create content
G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2605/10/10
VisitScape
The trial
• 9 iPAQs with mobile internet running modified Mscape application
• 9 students in experimental group...
VisitScape
Also a trial of character...
• ... for participants and researchers 
• Weeks before the trial we found out tha...
VisitScape
The trial – how the groups compare per their ideals
G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2905/10/10
VisitScape
Findings: expectations for experience of the technology
• Structure the visit
• Learning
• Timely and detailed ...
VisitScape
Findings: expectations for visit in general
• Learning
• Look at the city, the regeneration funding/funders, th...
VisitScape
Findings –
What did groups
think of the visit?
Experimental group found it
slightly more:
-Engaging
-Relevant
-...
VisitScape
Findings – Individuals’ proximities to ideal
G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3305/10/10
VisitScape
• Hardware problems
• iPAQs froze regularly
• Interface problems
• Content upload interface complicated
• No pi...
VisitScape
• Guiding attention / focus
• “it was good that it told me what to pay
attention to”
• “there was a statue I go...
VisitScape
• Interaction with museum and academic
staff (and with PhD students)
• “conversations with real professionals
[...
VisitScape
Findings: actual experience of the visit - negatives
• Information overload
• Task overload
• Bad weather
G. Va...
VisitScape
• Hands-on training in advance of the visit
• Use own phone / other model
• “you already know how to handle you...
VisitScape
Emerging themes
• Fitting the technology into relevant activity
• Technology – coursework integration
• Is info...
VisitScape
“Cause if you don’t feel you are successful with it, there is
nothing pushing you to use it in more creative wa...
VisitScape
Acknowledgements
• SPLINT – Spatial Literacy in Teaching CETL (funding, hardware)
• Adam Rousell, University of...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Mobile, web-based tools for HE students on field trips

1,059 views
972 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,059
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Mobile, web-based tools for HE students on field trips

  1. 1. VisitScape Mobile, web-based tools for HE students on field trips Giasemi Vavoula University of Leicester gv18@le.ac.uk Funded by SPLiNT Spatial Literacy in Teaching CETL
  2. 2. VisitScape Outline • Educational Context • The technology • Evaluation methods • Findings • Emerging themes G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 205/10/10
  3. 3. VisitScape Background – The Curriculum • School of Museum Studies • Two campus-based MA programmes, with 4+1 taught modules, 8-week placement module, and dissertation module • Sessions for each module include 1-2 study visits to UK museums and galleries where students typically: • Attend lectures by / discuss with venue staff • Explore venue to analyse choices of objects, exhibits, designs, space layout, lighting, interpretation methods, visitor behaviour, etc. G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 305/10/10
  4. 4. VisitScape Background – Module 4 Museums and Regeneration: The Regeneration Game • 3-week group work to develop a “strategic bid” portfolio for the funding of a new capital development and/or programming for an inadequately funded local authority museum. • Taught sessions focus on skill development and the development of an understanding of museums and regeneration. • “The Regeneration Game aims to provide students with an understanding of museums and the contemporary political environment within which museums operate. It aims to equip students with knowledge and skills which will enable them to be strategic and pragmatic in their dealings with funders and potential funders.” • Assessment • Group bid portfolio (50%) • Individual oral presentation (50%) G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 405/10/10
  5. 5. VisitScape Learning Outcomes Knowledge Skills • cultural, economic, social, and political contexts of museums • financial needs of museums for capital development and programming • funding sources for museums • knowledge and understanding of theories and debates in relation to ‘culture- led’ regeneration • knowledge and understanding of the strategic development of funding bids • developing and testing oral presentation • working in an inter-disciplinary team • developing and delivering a pitch • advocacy • writing a strategic document and professional writing • understanding and objectively assessing a variety of different kinds of material and making critical judgements • high level problem solving skills for complex real-life problems • personal and professional self-reflection Background – Module 4 Museums and Regeneration: The Regeneration Game G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 505/10/10
  6. 6. VisitScape Activity Subject Tutor Workshop Group project induction session Module tutor Lecture Museums and regeneration Module tutor Lecture Museums and regeneration Guest lecturer Study visit ‘Culture-led’ Regeneration in Birmingham Module tutor Small group workshops Study visit discussion and feedback Module tutor Workshop Bid writing Module tutor Briefing The museum’s needs Guest curator Small group Surgeries with ‘Museum Committee’ Module tutor & Guest curator Workshop Presentation skills Module tutor & Learning Centre rep Background – Module 4 Museums and Regeneration: The Regeneration Game G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 605/10/10
  7. 7. VisitScape Activity Subject Tutor Workshop Group project induction session Module tutor Lecture Museums and regeneration Module tutor Lecture Museums and regeneration Guest lecturer Study visit ‘Culture-led’ Regeneration in Birmingham Module tutor Small group workshops Study visit discussion and feedback Module tutor Workshop Bid writing Module tutor Briefing The museum’s needs Guest curator Small group Surgeries with ‘Museum Committee’ Module tutor & Guest curator Workshop Presentation skills Module tutor & Learning Centre rep Background – Module 4 Museums and Regeneration: The Regeneration Game G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 705/10/10
  8. 8. VisitScape Background – What students want from a study visit • Survey in 2008-09 with students and staff at the School asked “How would you describe an ideal study visit?” (open-ended question) • Responses analysed as per descriptors used and yielded a list of study visit attribute values • Some could be paired as opposite values of one attribute, e.g. • Free-form vs. structured as values for ‘structuredness’ • Social vs. solitary as values for ‘sociability’ • Others could not be paired, e.g. ‘informative’, ‘well- prepared’ and ‘inspiring’ • Conclusions: • conceptions of an ideal study visit vary with individuals when it comes to certain visit attributes (some like it structured, some like it free-form) • Certain study visit attributes take values somewhere in the middle (has a structure but also allows for free-form exploration) • There seems to be consensus about the values of some study visit attributes (nobody wants an uninspiring visit) • List lends itself well to semantic-differential questionnaire... Attribute Attribute Values Preparation Well-prepared ↔ Ill-prepared Support Well supported ↔ Poorly supported Informativeness Informative ↔ Uninformative Inspiration Inspiring ↔ Uninspiring Excitement Exciting ↔ Boring Ease Challenging ↔ Trivial Activeness Active ↔ Passive Guidance Self-guided ↔ Prescribed Safety Safe ↔ Precarious Busyness Busy ↔ Leisurely Calmness Calm ↔ Hectic Execution Smoothly run ↔ Problematic Resources Resource-rich ↔ Resource-bare Pace Rushed ↔ Well-paced Interestingness Interesting ↔ Uninteresting Diversity Diverse ↔ Monotonous Collaboration Individual work ↔ Group work Relevance to course Course-relevant ↔ Course-irrelevant Structuredness Free-form ↔ Structured Novelty Novel ↔ Repetition Sociability Social ↔ Solitary Comfort Comfortable ↔ Tiresome Enjoyment Fun ↔ Tedious Engagement Engaging ↔ Disengaging Grounded Theoretical ↔ Hands-on G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 805/10/10
  9. 9. VisitScape Background – What students want from a study visit • Survey in 2008-09 with students and staff at the School asked “How would you describe an ideal study visit?” (open-ended question) • Responses analysed as per descriptors used and yielded a list of study visit attribute values • Some could be paired as opposite values of one attribute, e.g. • Free-form vs. structured as values for ‘structuredness’ • Social vs. solitary as values for ‘sociability’ • Others could not be paired, e.g. ‘informative’, ‘well- prepared’ and ‘inspiring’ • Conclusions: • conceptions of an ideal study visit vary with individuals when it comes to certain visit attributes (some like it structured, some like it free-form) • Certain study visit attributes take values somewhere in the middle (has a structure but also allows for free-form exploration) • There seems to be consensus about the values of some study visit attributes (nobody wants an uninspiring visit) • List lends itself well to semantic-differential questionnaire for evaluating actual visits Attribute Attribute Values Preparation Well-prepared ↔ Ill-prepared Support Well supported ↔ Poorly supported Informativeness Informative ↔ Uninformative .......... extremely very quite neither quite very extremely Well-prepared □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Ill-prepared Well supported □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Poorly supported Informative □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Uninformative Inspiring □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Uninspiring Exciting □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Boring Challenging □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Trivial Active □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Passive .................. G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 905/10/10
  10. 10. VisitScape Background – What students want from a study visit • Survey in 2009-10 with students at the School asked them to rate the relative importance of these values for an ideal study visit • Greyed (negative) values had to be left out (expecting that ‘uninformative’ etc. would get lowest rating) • Used the below design: Attribute Attribute Values Preparation Well-prepared ↔ Ill-prepared Support Well supported ↔ Poorly supported Informativeness Informative ↔ Uninformative Inspiration Inspiring ↔ Uninspiring Excitement Exciting ↔ Boring Ease Challenging ↔ Trivial Activeness Active ↔ Passive Guidance Self-guided ↔ Prescribed Safety Safe ↔ Precarious Busyness Busy ↔ Leisurely Calmness Calm ↔ Hectic Execution Smoothly run ↔ Problematic Resources Resource-rich ↔ Resource-bare Pace Rushed ↔ Well-paced Interestingness Interesting ↔ Uninteresting Diversity Diverse ↔ Monotonous Collaboration Individual work ↔ Group work Relevance to course Course-relevant ↔ Course-irrelevant Structuredness Free-form ↔ Structured Novelty Novel ↔ Repetition Sociability Social ↔ Solitary Comfort Comfortable ↔ Tiresome Enjoyment Fun ↔ Tedious Engagement Engaging ↔ Disengaging Grounded Theoretical ↔ Hands-on Well-prepared □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Well supported □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Informative □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Inspiring □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Exciting □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Challenging □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Active □ □ □ □ □ □ □ ........... On the block scale below, where the shortest block represents least important and the tallest is most important, please rate the importance of the following attributes of an ideal study visit: G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1005/10/10
  11. 11. VisitScape Background – What students want from a study visit • Survey in 2009-10 with students at the School asked them to rate the relative importance of these values for an ideal study visit • Greyed (negative) values had to be left out (expecting that ‘uninformative’ etc. would get lowest rating) • Used the below design: Attribute Attribute Values Preparation Well-prepared ↔ Ill-prepared Support Well supported ↔ Poorly supported Informativeness Informative ↔ Uninformative Inspiration Inspiring ↔ Uninspiring Excitement Exciting ↔ Boring Ease Challenging ↔ Trivial Activeness Active ↔ Passive .......... Well-prepared □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Well supported □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Informative □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Inspiring □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Exciting □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Challenging □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Active □ □ □ □ □ □ □ ........... On the block scale below, where the shortest block represents least important and the tallest is most important, please rate the importance of the following attributes of an ideal study visit: • Analysis problem: what does a rating of ‘7’ (most importance) for both ‘free-form’ and ‘structured’ mean for structuredness? • The person is placing equal importance on both • So importance rating averages for each opposite pair (x, y) were scaled add up to 8 using the formulas: and while for those pairs with omitted values (‘ill- prepared’, ‘poorly supported’, etc.), each omitted value was assigned the lowest importance rating of 1. yx x x   *8 ' yx y y   *8 ' G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1105/10/10
  12. 12. VisitScape Background – What students want from a study visit G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1205/10/10
  13. 13. VisitScape Background – Birmingham Study Visit From the handout: • “in order to understand museums ... we also need to understand how the museum, its programmes, its architecture, its visitors are connected (or not) to its wider cultural, economic and social context.” • Physical environment • Architectural statement about city’s civility, scientific advancement and creativity? • Plaques revealing funding / function? • Sculptures / memorials characterising the space? • Cultural environment • Museum programmes that involve particular communities? • What kind of visitors does it attract because of its location? • Social environment • Does the city / area look prosperous or economically depressed? • Are there new / old services around the museum? • Are there lots of people in the area? G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1305/10/10
  14. 14. VisitScape On this study visit you will become flâneurs. We will be taking a walking tour of parts of central Birmingham and visiting two very different museums and a department store: We will discuss your ‘findings’ at the study visit workshops so please ensure you take notes of the clues that you find and your analysis of what they tell you about Birmingham. You will be assisted by the prompt questions listed at the end of this document. You will find you get a lot more out of this study visit if you consult some of the materials listed in the study visit reading list on Blackboard. Background – Birmingham Study Visit • Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery was opened in 1885 and is located next to Victoria and Chamberlain Squares originally opened in the 19th century but which have undergone substantial refurbishment in the last 20 years. • You will walk through Centenary Place, a part of the city which has focused on leisure and cultural facilities to encourage regeneration of this part of the city centre. • You will walk through Brindleyplace, another regenerated part of the city, here you will visit Ikon Gallery which moved into its current building in 1998. • You will then walk back to the Bullring, a recently developed shopping centre located on a medieval market place which is the result of a major building project which opened in 2001. In Bullring you will visit Selfridges Department store. G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1405/10/10
  15. 15. VisitScape • 10.00: Arrive Hill Street. Take 45 minutes exploring Chamberlain and Victoria Squares and the civic spaces thereabouts including the public art and monuments and clues relating to these. • Ask yourselves who are the people, things memorialised in the public art and monuments here? • What do the various plaques say about the history and contemporary context of Birmingham? • What do you think the civic fathers of Birmingham were trying to communicate in the organisation of the spaces and buildings you see here? • Note the various plaques which tell you who, why and how various spaces, buildings and monuments were funded. Background – Birmingham Study Visit G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1505/10/10
  16. 16. VisitScape • 10.45-12.00: Go to Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery to meet the principal curator, who will talk to you and allow you to ask questions about the history of BMAG. Then take a self-guided tour of the Gallery. • What were some of the themes of the 19th century cultural regeneration which BMAG was part of? How did the founders of BMAG hope that the institution would lead regeneration? Background – Birmingham Study Visit Never Morning Wore to Evening but Some Heart Did Break Langley, 1894 G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1605/10/10
  17. 17. VisitScape • 12.00-13.00: Walk through Paradise Forum to Centenary Way and Centenary Place, then along Broadstreet to Brindleyplace. Note the ‘signs’ in the landscapes around you – monuments on display, public buildings and commercial outlets which front on to the Square and Brindleyplace. • What do you think is the function of these different spaces? • What do you think is the relationship between public spaces which are dominated by commercial leisure services and publicly funded leisure services? • How are Brindleyplace and Centenary Place different to the spaces around BMAG? • What do you think the city is trying to say about itself through these places? Background – Birmingham Study Visit G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1705/10/10
  18. 18. VisitScape • 13.00-14.30: Go to the Ikon Gallery to meet the learning curator, for a talk and a tour of the gallery. • How is the location of the Ikon Gallery different to BMAG? What opportunities and challenges do you think this presents? • What were some of the themes of the 21st century cultural regeneration which Ikon is part of? How does Ikon and its funders hope that the institution will aid regeneration? Background – Birmingham Study Visit Clare Rojas. We They, We They Installation, Ikon, 2010 Photo: Stuart Whipps G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1805/10/10
  19. 19. VisitScape • 14.30-16.00: Walk back through Brindleyplace, Broad Street, Centenary Square, Paradise forum and Victoria Square to the top of New Street and down to the Bullring. Notice the different distinct parts of the city and how they relate to each other. • How do you think the Bullring relates to the other spaces you have been? • What do you think Birmingham is saying about itself through the Bullring? • Note the exhibitionary techniques used to display different ‘artifacts’ within Selfridges, what are they? • What strategies does the store use to convey value and significance in different objects within the store? • How are the exhibitionary techniques in this store different to that of a museum or gallery? How are they the same? • How do you think the Bullring might effect Birmingham’s regeneration? Background – Birmingham Study Visit G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 1905/10/10
  20. 20. VisitScape Background – Study Visit materials / resources • Handout described above • Separate list of questions for each of the four locations • Pre-reading list: Primary texts: Davies, S., 1985, By the gains of industry: Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery 1885-1985, Birmingham Art Gallery. Hunt, Tristram, 2004, Building Jerusalem: the rise and fall of the Victorian city, Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Kennedy, L., ed., 2004, Remaking Birmingham: The Visual Culture of Urban Regeneration, Routledge. Sites and institutions to be visited: Victoria Square http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=913&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=682&EXPAND=251 Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery http://www.bmag.org.uk/ Centenary Square http://www.birminghamuk.com/centenary.htm http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=888&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=165 Brindley Place (look under ‘Info’ for ‘Brindleyplace history’) http://www.brindleyplace.com/ Ikon Gallery http://www.ikon-gallery.co.uk/ Birmingham Bullring http://www.bullring.co.uk/website/MenuTitleOnly.aspx?currentSectionId=05e70eec-3a28-43cc-8a6b-9007f15962a3&PLID=-1&LH=TopLevel Birmingham cultural context: Birmingham Changed: Background http://www.birminghamuk.com/aroundbirmingham.htm Birmingham Historic Environment Conservation www.birmingham.gov.uk/buildingconservation Statues and Public Art http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=884&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=1 Famous Brummies http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=31047&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=15 Other culture-led regeneration areas and projects in Birmingham: Jewellery Quarter Regeneration Partnership http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=12991&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=679&EXPAND=251 Museum of the Jewellery Quarter http://www.bmag.org.uk/index.php?type=element&maincat=1&subcat=2&subelement=3 The Custard Factory http://www.custardfactory.com/ Millennium Point http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=3150&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=11143&EXPAND=251 Think Tank museum http://www.thinktank.ac/ G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2005/10/10
  21. 21. VisitScape Background – (After the) Birmingham Study Visit • Post-visit workshop • In this workshop we will review your experiences on the study visit. Thinking about Birmingham and other cities you are familiar with we will discuss: • what you thought about the iconography of the different city spaces you experienced? • how you understood the museums in their larger urban context? • do you think culture-led regeneration is a successful strategy for economic, social and/or cultural development? • do you think culture-led regeneration enables access to culture? • does culture-led regeneration facilitate ‘social inclusion’? • The session is designed to further develop your understanding of both the history and the contemporary contexts of museums in urban environments. • The ‘Museums and Regeneration Reading List’ and the ‘Birmingham Study Visit Reading and Resource List’ … will be helpful for this session. G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2105/10/10
  22. 22. VisitScape Student preparations for a study visit (in general): • “skim read [materials provide by tutor] but didn’t go into much detail or do my own research” • “gave us so many materials that it was confusing” • “[I use] the bus journey [to prepare for a study visit]” • “everyone would read more if it was seen as obligatory, if they knew they had to bring that knowledge and materials to discussion. I know I would” • “not much” Note: some students do actually prepare  • But they bring along: • Course notes, notebook, camera, handouts • And they receive on the day (from tutor / venues): • More handouts, briefs, leaflets, maps G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2205/10/10
  23. 23. VisitScape exhibits buildings policies mission Technology to support Birmingham study visit Physical space Museums, squares, public art, commercial outlets, statues, monuments, exhibits... Organisational space Missions, policies, social and political agendas, economic targets... Conceptual space Historic meanings of museums, planning, visitor studies, exhibition design, education, inclusion, accessibility... topic topic concept concept concept concept concept Collaborative virtual space Accessing, capturing, sharing, reflecting G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2305/10/10
  24. 24. VisitScape Collaborative Virtual Space: Requirements • Access • Information provided by tutor about the physical / organisational space; and about the conceptual space • But: they cannot read too much on the go • Capture • Aspects of the physical / organisational space • Reflections on relevance of those aspects with conceptual space • Provide alternative to their notebooks • Share • Students reflect on relationships between all spaces and make those reflections, along with their captured materials, public and accessible by all other students / tutors • But not by those outside the course • Shared student content sits along information provided by tutor • Look back • Captured and shared materials are brought back in the classroom to aid the debriefing session G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2405/10/10
  25. 25. VisitScape HP iPAQ 614c Business Navigator •3G •4-inch transflective TFT display •Integrated WLAN 802.11b/g; Bluetooth 2.0 with EDR •Touch screen and stylus •Integrated microphone, receiver, 2 speakers and one 3.5 mm 4 pin stereo headphone jack •4 programmable keys •Voice recorder •GPS •3 Megapixel camera Mscape •Mobile media gaming platform, by HP •Maker: Map, defined regions, media associated with regions •Player: identifies region based on GPS and plays associated media • Everything pre-defined / pre-loaded on mediascape ASP.Net web-based application •Bespoke •Serves as data provider for user specified content •Data upload through PDA button, from the PDA storage media using the website interface. •Data is created on the PDA outside of the MScape application •The presentation of user content based on the user’s geographic location System description G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2505/10/10
  26. 26. VisitScape System description Upload content Create content G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2605/10/10
  27. 27. VisitScape The trial • 9 iPAQs with mobile internet running modified Mscape application • 9 students in experimental group; 42 in control group • Pre-visit (exp. group only) • Focus group • System demonstration • On the day • Pre-questionnaire on the bus (exp. + control groups) • Visit with tools (exp. group only) • Post-questionnaire on the bus (exp. + control groups) • Post-visit (exp. group only) • Focus group G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2705/10/10
  28. 28. VisitScape Also a trial of character... • ... for participants and researchers  • Weeks before the trial we found out that Mscape would be ‘discontinued’ • Days before the trial iPAQs become lost luggage • Turn up last minute, but decide to freeze in freezing weather • Technical support not available in person • Server overload with so many requests gives formidable 404 kind of message • But, perseverance (obstinacy?) won and we did go on…  G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2805/10/10
  29. 29. VisitScape The trial – how the groups compare per their ideals G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 2905/10/10
  30. 30. VisitScape Findings: expectations for experience of the technology • Structure the visit • Learning • Timely and detailed information • Interactivity • Sharing • Photo-documentation • Guide attention to surroundings • Distract attention from surroundings • Orientation • Physical • Conceptual • Physical-conceptual (“information about interesting routes before we start wandering”) • Internet access • Personal social networks • “Will we be penalised if we go on Facebook?” • Fun G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3005/10/10
  31. 31. VisitScape Findings: expectations for visit in general • Learning • Look at the city, the regeneration funding/funders, the cultural landscape • Look at museum in context • How museums fit into overall scheme of the city • Compare different models of regeneration • Personal interests • Visit specific site • Novelty of experience • Walk around the landscape G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3105/10/10
  32. 32. VisitScape Findings – What did groups think of the visit? Experimental group found it slightly more: -Engaging -Relevant -Interesting -Challenging -Inspiring -Exciting and slightly less: -Social -Comfortable -Self-guided G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3205/10/10
  33. 33. VisitScape Findings – Individuals’ proximities to ideal G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3305/10/10
  34. 34. VisitScape • Hardware problems • iPAQs froze regularly • Interface problems • Content upload interface complicated • No picture preview during upload  must rename picture after it is taken • “in the end I just took photos and saved them on the phone without uploading” • No control over map vs. content display • Mscape region identification random (e.g. Showing map while in region instead of content) • Log in obscured by hidden soft keyboard • Slow response times • Battery problems • Devices run out of battery half-way through the visit • Avoided to put on stand-by, as subsequent request for unlock led devices to freeze and require reboot • Network/connection problems • Simultaneous picture/comment upload attempts could not be handled by server • No GPS / reception inside the museum • Training problems • Lack of adequate prior training meant they could not operate devices unaided – had to learn the devices and the application • Distract attention / focus – duty • “I prefer just to explore the city, I don’t want to always track the machine” • “I don’t know if this way I missed out on other things” • “[with the technology] I would probably have stayed to the places we had to see” • “it can be really distractive in a way that you have this relationship with the device and you need to control it, you need to take pictures, you need to read” • “we were fiddling with it whilst the curator was talking in BMAG” Findings: actual experience of the technology – negatives “That was discouraging, cause I felt everyone else had gone and was enjoying that stuff when we were stuck with those devices making them work instead of looking at actual things.” G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3405/10/10
  35. 35. VisitScape • Guiding attention / focus • “it was good that it told me what to pay attention to” • “there was a statue I got information from the device about and otherwise I wouldn’t have noticed it” • Recording / capturing • Shaping behaviour • “it made me start looking for [interesting, but not necessarily relevant] things to photograph” • Sharing • “we were all taking photos e.g. in the Imperial War Museum, but no one was documenting them or sharing with others” • Real-time: “it’s different that just having a camera and taking pictures and documenting when you come back home, because you can document and put it there and somebody [...] can come and access it [there and then]” • Informative • Info about the context of artworks • “these tools are effective and very informative” • “gave context to stuff I saw with info I wouldn’t get by seeing these buildings, sculptures, squares” • Instant, real-time sharing • Of information, discoveries, viewpoints • Satisfaction • “batteries aside, it was really enjoyable having these devices, I do like handheld equipment” • Orientation • Physical orientation • Task orientation Findings: actual experience of the technology - positives G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3505/10/10
  36. 36. VisitScape • Interaction with museum and academic staff (and with PhD students) • “conversations with real professionals [curators] were quite enjoyable. It is good to find out what happens in the real world” • “staff were really kind, we got some coloured pencils” • Short bus journey • Walk around, explore • Visit specific sites • Self-initiated learning • Learning • By observing rather than reading only • Reflective experience on how museum influences city and vice versa • Focus on the context of the museum as a physical space within the city • “easier in Birmingham [to map concepts from the coursework to the visit] than mapping exhibition design [in other visits]. Because everything was bigger and we had to walk through it” • Had the framework to look for information Findings: actual experience of the visit - positives G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3605/10/10
  37. 37. VisitScape Findings: actual experience of the visit - negatives • Information overload • Task overload • Bad weather G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3705/10/10
  38. 38. VisitScape • Hands-on training in advance of the visit • Use own phone / other model • “you already know how to handle your own phone” • “I want to have the pictures I take as my own, so I had to take the photos twice” • “the device was heavy and bulky”; “was like the big cell phones of the 90s”; “iPhone would have worked much better” • Sharing • Within small group – increased interaction and collaboration • and filtering: “there are so many things that interest you, you can’t upload everything for everyone” • Use for photodocumenting and sharing rather than information push • “on the spot information is probably available physically anyway. But we can’t always remember what we documented and we can’t carry around a piece of paper” • Technology interface • Change upload interface • Preview of photos during upload • Option to upload immediately after taking picture • Add voice connection with other groups • Integrate other media (audio – but transcribed; video) • Better integration with coursework • “link its use to preparing some assignment might be more interesting” • “we could all upload photos and then identify some forms of display or [...] whatever they were asking you” • Use for reference / guidance when needed Findings: what would students change G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3805/10/10
  39. 39. VisitScape Emerging themes • Fitting the technology into relevant activity • Technology – coursework integration • Is information push passé? • Provide lens to look at world instead • Sharing culture • Photo-documentation • Physical-conceptual orientation • Mindful that activity will shape behaviour (beyond your intentions) • ‘made me look for interesting things to photograph’ • ‘constrained me in terms of where to go’ • Shared device • Intermittent rather than continuous use • Context can be perpetual • Student in Bullring complains he could no longer upload a photo he had taken in Victoria Square G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 3905/10/10
  40. 40. VisitScape “Cause if you don’t feel you are successful with it, there is nothing pushing you to use it in more creative ways” Museum Studies student, 2010 G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 4005/10/10
  41. 41. VisitScape Acknowledgements • SPLINT – Spatial Literacy in Teaching CETL (funding, hardware) • Adam Rousell, University of Leicester (development) • Alex Moseley, University of Leicester • Lisanne Gibson, University of Leicester (study visit tutor) • Sandy Pearson, University of Leicester (IT support) • All campus-based 2009-10 Museum Studies students who took part in the trial! G. Vavoula (gv18@le.ac.uk) 4105/10/10

×