Lara: Thursday, June 9th
Today was a great leaning experience in navigating moments when plans do not turn out as one might initially expect. While I had expected the day to be oriented around testing questions and survey methods, knowledge and newly articulated considerations related by the exhibitions team demonstrated the further work that was necessary before a testing phase for the survey instruments could begin. The realization of next steps was informative, especially in terms of understanding the institutional factors involved in regulating internal and external audience research of the institution,which, understandably follow specific and delineated procedures.
As a result, the rest of my date centered around gathering sources to investigate standardized methods of evaluation utilized by the Penn Museum and other institutions. Unfortunately, the volumes I was most enthused in acquiring (specifically Serell's Paying Attention: visitors and museum exhibitions and Diamond's Practical Evaluation Guide) were all checked out from the University Library. Therefore, after lunch I went to the library to see if there were comparable volumes I could use instead.When I was unsuccessful with finding print volumes, I turned to the E-Journals available through the University of Pennsylvania online holdings (available to me because of a Penn Card I still have in possession from a course I took last semester) and found a load of online sources that I subsequently downloaded for reference and review. I intend to look over these sources this weekend.
At the conclusion of the day, Maeve, Isabella,and myself began the process of addressing the missing study elements including, but not limited to specifically articulating the mission and goals of the evaluation, brainstorming procedural methods intended for the survey, and coming to a consensus on future days to survey regularly. Currently we have planned to finish structuring a preliminary survey by Sunday, and a brainstorming session put into light some questions we were thinking about regarding the in-person survey:
As a result, the rest of my date centered around gathering sources to investigate standardized methods of evaluation utilized by the Penn Museum and other institutions. Unfortunately, the volumes I was most enthused in acquiring (specifically Serell's Paying Attention: visitors and museum exhibitions and Diamond's Practical Evaluation Guide) were all checked out from the University Library. Therefore, after lunch I went to the library to see if there were comparable volumes I could use instead.When I was unsuccessful with finding print volumes, I turned to the E-Journals available through the University of Pennsylvania online holdings (available to me because of a Penn Card I still have in possession from a course I took last semester) and found a load of online sources that I subsequently downloaded for reference and review. I intend to look over these sources this weekend.
At the conclusion of the day, Maeve, Isabella,and myself began the process of addressing the missing study elements including, but not limited to specifically articulating the mission and goals of the evaluation, brainstorming procedural methods intended for the survey, and coming to a consensus on future days to survey regularly. Currently we have planned to finish structuring a preliminary survey by Sunday, and a brainstorming session put into light some questions we were thinking about regarding the in-person survey:
- What elements of the research should we prioritize for the in-person surveys? Do we want this particular survey to investigate the current African instillation or visitor expectations for a future instillation? If both subjects are relevant, are two separate surveys needed?
- What are the best typology of questions to elicit comprehensive responses? Open-ended? Close-ended? Both?
- How many units are we intending to survey overall?
Comments
Post a Comment