Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
Author(s): EunJung Chang
Source: Studies in Art Education , Winter, 2006, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Winter, 2006), pp. 170186
Published by: National Art Education Association
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3497107
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3497107?seq=1&cid=pdfreference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Studies in Art Education
Copyright 2006 by the
National Art Education Association
A Journal of Issues and Research
2006, 47(2), 170-186
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning
in Museums
EunJung Chang
Indiana University
Correspondence
Inspired by the work of John Falk and Lynn Dierking, this article examines the
regarding this article
characteristics of museum visitors and their museum experiences in order to
provide recommendations for more meaningful learning experiences for future
visitors. A recent shifting agenda in museum missions is discussed in respect to
its visitors according to the following variables: demographic, psychographic,
may be addressed to
the author at Indiana
University, W. W.
Wright Education
and Dr. Lara Lackey of
personal and cultural history, and environmental. Also included are visitor
behaviors in relation to time, attention, label reading, and social factors. To
investigate museum visitors' experiences, Falk and Dierking's (1992, 2000)
Interactive Experience Model and Contextual Model of Learning are explored as
means for elaborating on the nature of museum experiences and learning.
Recent empirical studies also are examined in order to illustrate new responsive
methodologies for engaging museum visitors. In conclusion, it is emphasized
that museums can be effective public educational institutions when they meet
Indiana University for
the needs and expectations of a diverse population of visitors.
Building, 201 N. Rose
Ave., Bloomington, IN
47405-1006. E-mail:
euchang@indiana.edu
I would like to thank
Dr. Enid Zimmerman
their thoughtful reviews
of this manuscript.
In recent years, growing bodies of educators are investigating meaningmaking in museum experiences and education (Adams, Falk, & Dierking,
2003; Black & Hein, 2003; Falk & Dierking, 2000; Haanstra, 2003;
Hein, 1998; Hooper-Greenhill, 1999; Roberts, 1997; Silverman, 1995).
These researchers acknowledge that visitors come to museums with their
own agendas and construct their own meanings within museums.
Regardless of what the museum staff intend, visitors' different expectations, pervious museum experiences, and levels of perceptual skills mean
that museum experience is often personal and individual rather than stan-
dard and generic. As such, understanding different characteristics of
museum visitors and the nature of their museum experiences is important
to museum educators because visitors will continue to create what mean-
ings they can from their own encounters in museum educational practices. Thus, most importantly, museums today are increasingly expected
to respond to the public's needs rather than simply tell the public what
curators think they need to know (Hooper-Greenhill, 1999).
In this article, I address the characteristics of museum visitors, their
behaviors, and the nature of their museum experiences and learning.
Importantly, I discuss possible answers to the following questions: How
do visitors learn in museums? In particular, how do visitors construct their
own meanings from their museum experiences? Through an analytical
examination of Falk and Dierking's (1992, 2000) Interactive Experience
Model and Contextual Model of Learning, I set forth suggestions for
making museum experiences more meaningful for a diverse population of
visitors.
Studies in Art Education
170
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
Shifting Museum Culture
Museums in the 20th century often tended to be more concerned with
collections and research than with visitors and their education.
Collections have historically been of primary concern to curators, and
object-based research has been considered most important in the field
(Hooper-Greenhill, 1992, 1994a). Based on this focus, Kotler and Kotler
(1998) stated that museum staff in those early years might easily have
asked, "Is an audience necessary?"(p. 99). Over the past 10 years, however,
museum culture has begun to shift from focusing on collections to
communication with visitors. Museums are changing from static storehouses for objects into active learning environments for people (HooperGreenhill, 1994a, 1999). These institutions that once put their collections
first are now placing their visitors at the center of their activities. They are
building relationships with varying communities, investing resources in
attracting diverse visitors, and applying new concepts and methods for
helping visitors derive satisfaction and education from museum offerings
(Kotler & Kotler, 1998).
Today, virtually all museums focus on public service and education,
thus audience-based research has been significant because there has been
increasing pressure from within and outside museums to create effective
educational institutions for the general public (Hooper-Greenhill,
1994b). A series of reports by the American Association of Museums
(AAM) (1984, 1992) provided evidence of this trend. These reports
explained that "museums can no longer confine themselves simply to
preservation, scholarship, and exhibition independent of the social
context in which they exist" (1992, p. 8). Museums were therefore given
a direction to realize their mission as public educational institutions. They
also were encouraged to achieve greater inclusiveness in a democratic
society and reflect the diversity of our nation (AAM, 1984, 1992). In
other words, museum professionals were called upon to acknowledge and
respect race, ethnic origin, gender, economic status, occupation, and the
education diversity of its visitors and to reflect pluralism in every aspect of
their offerings (AAM, 1992). Since the early 1990s, the museum field has
settled firmly into patterns that emphasize successful relationships with
visitors, and consequently, the educational role of museums has become
significant (Hooper-Greenhill, 1999).
Museum Visitors
Before museum staff can respond to the public's needs, they must first
know the characteristics of those who visit museums. Researchers have made
a considerable effort to address the question of who visits museums, but,
problematically, most studies have been based on using a simple demographic approach for defining visitors. In contrast, I will describe the charac-
teristics of actual and potential museum visitors according to the following
variables derived from recent research inquiries: demographic, psychographic, environmental, and personal and cultural history (Falk, 1998a).
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
171
EunJung Chang
Demographic Variables
Age. Museum-going is not evenly distributed among age groups.
Excluding school fieldtrips, elementary school age children represent a
significant percentage of all visitors, and for many museums, family
groups are the largest single category of visitors. Adults between the ages
of 25 and 44 and children between the ages of 5 and 9 are disproportionately the highest groups represented. Ten years of demographic surveys at
the Smithsonian museums revealed that half of Smithsonian visitors were
between the ages of 20 and 44, 30% were children, 16% were between 45
and 64, and less than 4% were 65 or older. In general, museum experiences peak for most adults between the ages of 40 and 50 (Falk, 1998a).
Adults between the ages of 25 and 44 are frequent visitors, and older
teenagers (adolescents) between the ages of 15 and 19 visited least
(Hooper-Greenhill, 1994a).
Gender. Women are only slightly more likely to visit museums than
men. In the adult population in the U.S., there are more women than
men, and they outnumbered men slightly by a ratio of 6 to 5 as visitors to
art museums (Schuster, 1991).
Race. African-Americans and other minority populations (in particular
Asians and Hispanics) are under-represented in museum attendance. Falk
(1998a) found "African Americans visit museums at a rate of 20 to 30%
lower than the national norm" (p. 40). Caucasians (in particular
Americans of European background) were roughly twice more likely to
have visited museums than other groups. Khan's (2000) research about
attitudes of ethnic minority populations toward museums demonstrated
that museums' exhibitions and programs are not culturally relevant for
most ethnic minority populations because they do not meet their needs
and expectations. Some possible explanations were lack of relevant objects
from their own cultures; lack of clarity about the provenance of some
items; language barriers; negative images of South Asian and African
people connected with disasters, poverty, and famine; and a colonial view
of history that portrayed African Americans as weak victims and slaves
(Hooper-Greenhill, 2001).
Education. Educational level is clearly correlated with attendance rate.
Schuster (1991) reported that 55% of museum visitors had some graduate
school education, while only 4% of the visitors had only a grade school
education. Variations of educational levels were also associated with attendance at different types of museums. Art museum visitors tended to have
the highest educational level, followed by visitors to science and technology centers and history and natural history museums. A majority of
visitors to zoos have a high school education or less (Falk & Dierking,
1992). The more highly educated an individual is, the more a museum
visit is likely.
Income. As income rises, participation rates also rise. In Schuster's
(1991) survey, 19% of those with incomes between $15,000 and $24,999
Studies in Art Education
172
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
visited museums as compared to 45% of those with incomes greater than
$50,000. However, although the participation rate is highest in the
highest income group, more than a third of art museum visitors come
from the $25,000 to $49,999 income group. Adults who are currently
students are disproportionately found in the lowest income groups, yet
their participation markedly differs from non-students in the same
income group.
Occupation. Schuster's (1991) survey reported participation rates
ranging from a low of 9% for blue collar occupations to a high of 49% for
white collar. Hooper-Greenhill (1994a) also described manual workers in
industrial jobs, where blue collar workers and where job security is low, as
infrequent visitors. In contrast, professionals in white collar professions,
who were secure and high-salaried, were frequent visitors.
Geographic Distribution. Adults who live in Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (SMSA) have higher than average rates for visiting
museums, whether or not they actually live in the SMSA's central city.
Participation rates of adults who live outside a SMSA were only two-
thirds of the average, while participation rates for the Northeast,
Midwest, and South were roughly 20%, with the rate in the West being
31% (Schuster, 1991).
Demographically, museum visitors are diverse groups consisting of
slightly more women and children (family groups) than men. They are
well educated, adults are mostly middle age, mainly professional people,
and central city residents. In particular, adults who are current students are
more likely to visit museums than other adults.
Psychographic Variables
Psychographic variables, according to Falk (1998a), describe "psychological and motivational characteristics of individuals" (p. 40). Under-standing this variable can help identify motivations of visitors who choose
to visit museums and those who do not. Hood (1983) was among the
first to study the psychographic reasons why people choose not to visit,
visit frequently, or visit museums occasionally. She found that people
make choices based on what will satisfy their criteria for a desirable leisure
experience. Frequent visitors valued learning, wanted to undertake new
experiences, and placed a high value on doing something worthwhile in
their leisure time. In contrast, non-visitors perceived museums to be
formal, formidable places, inaccessible to them because they had insufficient education to prepare them to read the museum code. Non-visitors
saw museums as places that invoked restrictions on group social behaviors
and on active participation. They claimed that, "sports, picnicking,
visiting, and browsing in shopping malls better meet their criteria of
desirable leisure activities" (Hood, 1983, p. 54). Occasional visitors were
distinctly different from frequent visitors in their social patterns and
leisure values. They tended to seek relaxing experiences, comfortable
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
173
EunJung Chang
places, and social interaction with others. Family-centered activities were
more important for this group than learning new things. In fact, occasional visitors more closely resembled non-visitors in their motivations for
attending museum exhibitions. Significantly, these findings by Hood
have been reconfirmed in recent studies (Falk, 1998a; Falk & Dierking,
1992; Hooper-Greenhill, 1999; Roberts, 1997). Most museum visitors
believed that they and their children should be learning continually,
searching for new information, and stretching intellectually. They
believed that education is an important lifelong process and an interesting
leisure pursuit. In addition, they also thought museums provided oppor-
tunities to expand their own and their children's knowledge base.
Museum visitors who value education also seek learning through many
forms such as by watching television; reading books, magazines, and
newspapers; and visiting performances. In contrast, studies often explored
that non-visitors' negative images of museums as being based on intimidation, discomfort, and other factors associated with exclusion (Dodd &
Sandell, 1998; Getty, 1991; Hooper-Greenhill, 1999; Merriman, 1997;
Moore, 1997; Selwood, 2001). Hooper-Greenhill's (1999) studies
revealed that most non-visitors to museums had a negative image about
museums as boring, cool, musty, gloomy, stuffy, and forbidding places,
and felt that a museum atmosphere was similar to being in a church or
temple.
Personal and Cultural History
Personal and cultural history is an important variable because of the
statistical relationship between childhood experiences and adult participa-
tion in cultural institutions. A study conducted by the Cleveland
Foundation found that having art education instruction and art or
cultural experiences as a child were likely to shape adult attitudes and
participation in the arts (Kotler & Kotler, 1998). Falk and Dierking's
studies (1992) also demonstrated that an individual's museum participation is influenced by early childhood experiences and parental modeling.
Early childhood leisure activities seem to influence adult museum participation. In other words, whether or not adults go to a museum is based
upon whether their parents took them to museums when they were chil-
dren. For example, minority groups, recent immigrants, and socioeconomic under classes often had fewer opportunities to visit museums as
children as compared to middle classes and tended not to visit museums
as adults. In sum, personal childhood history of museum attendance can
directly affect current leisure behaviors such as museum visits (Falk,
1998a; Hein, 1998; Kotler & Kotler, 1998).
Besides sharing personal history, museum goers often share similar
perspectives about cultural history. Bourdieu's theory of cultural reproduction explains the relationship between personal, cultural history, and
museum participation. In their now classic study, The Love of Art,
Studies in Art Education
174
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
Bourdieu and Darbel (1990) claim that art and education realms
contribute to social, economic, and cultural reproduction. These are
reproductions in which social, economic, and cultural status tend to be
maintained and are passed down from generation to generation; distinctions of leisure activities are found in this hierarchy about cultural repro-
duction. Without intervention, visitors will always be visitors while
non-visitors will always be non-visitors because, in order to interact with
the world of high culture, 'cultural capital' is required such as special
knowledge to decode and interpret how to appropriately respond, behave,
and dress in museums.
For those less equipped to operate in a museum setting, confusion and
misunderstanding are inevitable; this type of aesthetic appreciation is not
part of their world. For example, Leong (2003) found that non-visitors
perceived museums not for themselves, but for the upper-class only, that
everyone who visits museums is knowledgeable, and they dress up to visit
museums. Museum experiences reinforced feelings of exclusion for some
while strengthening feelings of belonging by others. Consequently, by
declarations about being accessible and inclusive to all, museums often are
characterized by "false generosity" (Bourdieu, 1993, p. 113). Bourdieu's
arguments are important in illuminating a gap between what the museums
claim to do and what they actually do (Giroux, 1992).
Free entry is also optional entry, reserved for those who, equipped
with the ability to appropriate works of art, have the privilege of
making use of this freedom, and who thence find themselves
legitimated in their privilege, that is in their ownership of the means
of appropriation of cultural goods ... and the institutional signs of
cultural salvation. (Bourdieu & Darbel, 1990, p. 113)
Environmental Factors
Museum visits usually depend on environmental factors such as wordof-mouth, advertising, and promotional campaigns. Word-of-mouth
references from friends, family, neighbors, coworkers, or colleagues are
the most important factor influencing museum participation. For
example, Colonial Williamsburg estimates that more than 80% of firsttime visitors and nearly half of returning visitors originally heard about
the institution from friends or family (Falk, 1998a); advertising and
publicity programs accounted for less than 20% of visits.
Visitor Behaviors
"Visitor behaviors are not random; there are patterns" (Serrell, 1997,
p. 121), and visitors make personal judgments about what exhibits they
attend and why. Without regard to the museum's intentions, visitors
direct their behaviors and experience museums in their own ways. Hence,
visitors' experience is not made up of what the exhibition offers, but
rather it consists of what he or she chooses to attend to.
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
175
EunJung Chang
Time, Attention, and Visitor Behavior
A number of studies focus on relationships among time, attention, and
visitor behaviors because these factors effect museum experiences and
learning (Chiozzi & Andreotti, 2001; Doering & Pekarik, 1997; Falk &
Dierking, 1992, 2000; Norma, 1993; Serrell, 1996, 1997; Shettel, 1997).
According to Serrell (1996), large exhibitions have different averages
for time spent than small ones; all things being equal, visitors turn right
and follow the right-hand wall through a gallery; exhibits near the
entrance often get more attention than those at the end; time for visitors'
attention is very limited; few people move into the center of an exhibition; groups with children allocate their time differently than groups of
only adults, but both groups may spend the same amount of time overall;
if visitors cannot understand or personally connect with part of an exhibit,
they skip it; and visitors of all ages are attracted to exhibit elements that
are more concrete and less abstract.
Serrell (1997) investigated the duration and allocation of visitors' time
in 108 museum exhibitions and established numerous indices that reflect
patterns of visitors' interactions with exhibitions. She found that visitors
who spend relatively more time usually are the ones who stop at more
elements and become engaged in more of what the exhibition has to offer.
Instead of spending more time at a few stops, the pattern seems to be to
spend more time by making more stops. For many exhibitions, visitors
typically spend less than 20 minutes in exhibitions, and they typically
spend less time in large exhibitions and diorama halls than in smaller or
nondiorama exhibitions.
According to Shettel (1997), time has been found to be one of the
most useful predictors of educational effectiveness, and it has been used
for this purpose in countless studies. It is also an important factor for
making meaningful museum experience and effective learning for a
diverse population of visitors (Falk, 1998b; Falk & Dierking, 1992,
2000). Conversely, researchers argued that time could not give adequate
information to measure overall effective museum experiences of visitors
(Chiozzi & Andreotti, 2001; Doering & Pekarik, 1997).
Label Reading, Social Content, and Visitor Behavior
Label reading behavior can be a significant variable for evaluating
museum learning because these exhibit texts are the essential learning
tools; whether or not visitors read labels can create very different learning
results. McManus (1989) observed 150 individuals' reading behavior at
five museum exhibits. It showed three types of label reading behavior: not
seen to be reading, brief glances at text, and attentive reading. Though
individuals read an exhibit text in either brief glances or by paying close
attention, visitor behaviors varied depending on group types, duration of
their visit, and how the text is read. In group visiting, one member usually
reads segments of a text aloud for his or her companions. In all adult and
Studies in Art Education
176
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
child-adult groups, visitors closely paraphrased texts and used phrases
from the texts in their explanations. In family groups, an adult would
read through a label, even though the label usually was directed at children. More than eight out of ten groups showed direct evidence of having
a member or members read exhibit texts, and seven out of ten groups in
their conversations echoed the labels' words so that the staffs points of
view were presented by proxy. In sum, not only do visitors read many
labels, but labels often set an agenda for discussion in an exhibition space.
Recently, the more that museums define themselves as primarily educa-
tional institutions, the more acute becomes the interpretive dilemma of
the museums (Pekarik, 2004). How much explanation is necessary or
proper about an object with an exhibit label? In the Cleveland Museum
of Art, Serrell's (1997) study demonstrated that more people read short
labels than long labels. Pekarik (2004)'s study of one of MoMA's exhibitions, which included nearly all the works with only basic identification
labels, revealed that none of the interviewed visitors pointed out the lack
of information. Because they did not come for information, they were in
the museum for their own reasons, primarily to experience something
new within museum experience. When they found objects that caught
their interests, they were content to investigate them from their own
perspective and draw their own conclusions. Pekarik's investigation might
seem to suggest that museums are better to minimize the information
with labels, but, contrarily, Pekarik concluded that the rise of the individ-
ualized, self-accountable museum visitors calls for museums to offer a
much wider range of presentation approaches with various interpretations
and information with multiple texts. Then, visitors will determine what is
beneficial and what is not for their learning. Instead, however, museums
often leave visitors alone with their thoughts without actual information
about objects. According to Pekarik (2004), museums need to become
more creative in distinguishing the range of their informational offerings
and in helping visitors make the choice that will shape their visit.
Social Contexts and Visitor Behavior
McManus (1991) found different behavior patterns and interactions in
museum behavior based on a variety of social contexts (cited in Durbin,
1996). Single visitors tended to read labels in great detail. They were 50%
more likely to read labels thoroughly than any other groups. When
compared to females, males who visited alone were twice as likely not to
participate with interactive exhibits. Single male visitors focused on the
text of labels, rather than on performances or activities in the museum.
Couples were characterized by lack of conversation in comparison to
other groups and nearly 50% of couples did not talk at all. On the whole,
couples tended to stay and read the exhibit labels for a longer time than
members of all the other groups. Groups with children were very likely to
play at interactive exhibits, have long conversations, and have longer visits
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
177
EunJung Chang
than other groups. These groups of children did not read labels unless
there were adults, but sometimes they did briefly glance at labels. Social
groups consisting of only adults appeared to pay the least attention of any
groups to exhibits. They read less than other adult individuals and spent
the least time at exhibits. This may be because the main focus in such
groups was social interaction within the group, so they paid less attention
to displays. Group visitors who had good social relationships and moved
around the gallery in closed units were more likely to engage in behavior
which would allow them to satisfactorily process information from
exhibits than those who visited alone. Visitors who communicate well
with each other also communicate well with museum staff and are apt to
ask questions and request other resources.
I investigated visitor behaviors in relation to time, attention, label
reading, and social factors. In result, visitor behaviors are significant for
evaluating different museum experiences and learning of a diverse popula-
tion of visitors. By taking a closer look at how visitors behave, museum
staff can make better matches between visitors' expectations and the
museum's objectives; more realistic decisions about exhibit and program
size; and more informed choices about different kinds of media and experiences museums might offer. Ultimately, all of this can lead to increased
visitor satisfaction with meaningful museum experiences and effective
learning in exhibitions.
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning
Falk and Dierking's (1992, 2000) Interactive Experience and
Contextual Learning Models are appropriate mechanisms for further elab-
orating on the nature of museum experiences and personal learning. The
Interactive Experience Model (see Figure 1) assumes all experience is
contextual and involves interplay of three contexts: personal, social, and
physical. The personal context includes motivations, expectations, interests, beliefs, prior knowledge, and experiences. The social context includes
co-visitation patterns and social interactions within groups, between visi-
tors and staff. The physical context includes institutional restrictions,
policies and rules, architecture, layout, activities, collections, and facilities.
Taken together, all three contexts form the Interactive Experience Model.
At any time, any one of these three contexts could assume a major impor-
tance in visitors' experiences, continually shifting interactions among
personal, social, and physical contexts. In other words, all three contexts
contribute significantly to visitors' museum experiences, though not
necessarily in equal proportions in all cases. This Interactive Experience
Model emphasizes that people create their own experiences and meanings;
they select what to focus on and weave these factors into their experiences. Hence, "each visitor's experience is different, because each brings
his or her personal and social context, because each is differently affected
Studies in Art Education
178
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
Figure 1. Interactive Experience Model.
Adapted from Falk and Dierking (1992).
by the physical context, because each makes various choices as to which
aspects of that context to focus on" (Falk & Dierking, 1992, pp. 67-68).
The Contextual Model of Learning (see Figure 2) is a refined version
of the Interactive Experience Model (Figure 1) and involves three overlap-
ping contexts: the personal, the socio-cultural, and the physical. Learning
is both a process and product of the interplay of these three contexts. The
Contextual model is "more descriptive than predictive" (Falk & Dierking,
2000, p. 10) because it embodies key factors that directly and indirectly
influence learning. In many studies, these key factors are confirmed as the
fundamentals of museum learning. The personal context consists of (1)
motivation and expectation; (2) prior knowledge, interests, and beliefs;
and (3) choice and control. Learning is facilitated when individuals can
exercise choice over what and when they learn and feel in control of their
own learning. Museums are quintessentially free-choice learning settings.
They more often than not afford visitors abundant opportunity for both
choice and control. The socio-cultural context consists of (1) within-group
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
179
EunJung Chang
Figure 2. Contextual Learning Model. Adapted from Falk and Dierking (2000).
socio-cultural mediation, and (2) the content of facilitated mediation by
others. Most visitors go to museums as a part of a social group; thus,
museums create unique milieus for collaborative learning to occur.
Interactions with docents, guides, and performers can either enhance or
inhibit museum learning. This physical context consists of (1) advanced
organizers and orientation so that people can learn better when they feel
secure and oriented in their surroundings; (2) exhibitions, programs, or
Web sites where learning is influenced by design; and (3) reinforcing
events and experiences that take place outside the museum setting. People
learn by accumulating understanding over time, from many sources in
many different ways. Subsequent reinforcing events and experiences
outside the museums are as critical to learning as events inside the
museum. Independently and collectively, these eight factors within the
Conceptual model significantly have potential to contribute to the quality
of museum learning.
Studies in Art Education
180
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
In addition, the Contextual Learning Model includes a fourth important dimension: time. Looking at museum learning as "a snapshot in
time" is inadequate because "people do not learn things in one moment
in time, but over time" (Falk & Dierking, 2000, p. 10). Consequently,
understanding requires a longer view, and "learning is constructed over
time; as the individual moves within his or her socio-cultural and physical
world... meaning is built up, layer upon layer" (Falk & Dierking, 2000,
p. 11). Ultimately, learning can be viewed as a never-ending integration
and interaction of the personal, socio-cultural, and physical contexts over
time in order to create meaning. In other words, learning is viewed as
"the personal context as moving through time, as it travels; it is constantly
shaped and reshaped as it experiences events within the physical context,
as all of which are mediated by and through the socio-cultural context"
(Falk & Dierking, 2000, p. 11).
Implications of the Models
Visitors' learning experiences are contextual because they cannot be
viewed except in relationship to time as it relates to a particular place and
situation. Traditionally, however, learning has not been viewed in this
way. Theoretical models of learning usually have been divided into cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains with a great value placed on
cognitive learning. Based on this belief, museum professionals have
limited museum learning experiences to knowledge-based outcomes
(Adams, et al., 2003). The two models of Falk and Dierking's indicate
that learning cannot be easily divided into cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor domains but, rather, museum learning emerges as a
complex array of individuals' diverse personal, socio-cultural, and physical
contexts.
Additionally, current empirical studies have demonstrated that
museum learning takes place as a result of complicated interactions and
interrelations of personal, socio-cultural, and physical variables. Even in
the case of highly guided museum tours, visitors' learning experiences are
built on the interplay of these three contexts (Adams, et al., 2003;
Haanstra, 2003; Leong, 2003). Because visitors have varying life experiences, different levels of knowledge and different expectations, museum
professionals should not expect to find single standardized means to bring
meaningful experiences to a group of diverse individuals (Black & Hein,
2003). Understanding visitors' learning requires knowing something
about who is visiting, why they are visiting and with whom, what they are
doing before and after the visit, what they see and do in the museum, and
how all these factors interact and interrelate-all learning is a "cumulative, long-term process of making meanings and finding connections"
(Falk & Dierking, 2000, p. 10). Hein (1998), a leading authority on
museum education, stated, "in order to grow and learn from their
museum experiences, [museum staff] needs to understand what meanings
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
181
EunJung Chang
visitors make of their museum experiences. How can the educative value
of experiences be enhanced?" (p. 12). By understanding concepts
contained in the models discussed in this article, museum professionals
can come to know how important it is to study characteristics of museum
visitors, varieties of their learning process and behavior, and the nature of
their museum experiences so that visitors can be led to have meaningful
learning experiences.
Museum Experience Research
To be meaningful, museum research should be designed to be responsive to the reality of new paradigms such as the two models previously
described. Related to the Interactive Experience Model and Contextual
Model of Learning, Personal Meaning Mapping and Learner Report are
recent methodologies that respond to paradigm shifts in how we understand about the way visitors experience and learn in and from museums.
The Personal Meaning Mapping (PMM) is designed to ask visitors to
write down as many as possible words, images, or phrases related to prior
and subsequent learning experiences in an exhibition or in participation
in a program, and then ask individuals to explain why they wrote down
what they did. In several empirical studies conducted at the National
Museum of African Art (1998), the National Gallery of Art (1993), and
the Speed Art Museum (1999), the PMM provided rich insights that
could not have been gleaned from surveys, tracking, or interviews as to
how specified learning experiences effect each individual's meaningmaking process (Adams, Falk, & Dierking, 2003). According to Adams,
et al. (2003), the PMM has shown great promise in furthering understanding of the rich and complex learning experiences that result from
museum experiences. As PMM continues to be employed in future
studies, it will no doubt continue to evolve and spawn other related
approaches as yet unconsidered.
Moreover, by means of Learner Report (LR), Haanstra (2003) studied
how visitors experience a museum and how these experiences influence
their learning. The LR is similar to PPM because it also asks visitors to
write about their museum experiences. In contrast, the LR has headings 'I
have experienced/learned how...;' 'I have experienced/learned/discovered
that...;' 'I have experienced/learned/discovered that I...;' etc. "Complex
knowledge and skills are not 'behaviors' but rather mental programs or
dispositions stored in the memory to be used freely and consciously by
the learner" (De Groot, as cited in Haanstra, 2003, p. 37). Thus, if we
want to detect the complexity of learning experiences, we must ask the
right questions about what a visitor learned. The LR has been used
successfully for various learning evaluations in different museum settings.
It is not suited for testing 'fact and figures' knowledge, but is well suited
for exploratory studies into personal learning experiences in places such as
museums (Haanstra, 2003). The LR allows museum visitors to reflect
Studies in Art Education
182
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
authentically upon a wide range of emotional, cognitive, and personal
responses from their present and past experiences.
Discussions and Suggestions for Future Museum Education
The substance of literature reviews on how demographic, psychographic, personal, socio-cultural, and environmental contexts effect
museum populations and individual behaviors can be explained in part by
the personal nature of museum experiences. Literature reviews by Falk
and Dierking (1992, 2000), Hein (1998), Hooper-Greenhill (1999), and
Roberts (1997) stress how visitors constructed their learning experiences.
Falk and Dierking's models demonstrated that museum learning is a relative and constructive process that is dependent on personal, socio-cultural,
and physical contexts within time and space. Situated in the body of
research reviewed in this article, the following are suggestions for museums
in order to provide more meaningful learning experiences for visitors.
First, museum experiences are personal experiences, so museums
should facilitate quality learning experiences that maximize visitors'
personal contexts of learning. Some possibilities are that museum educators should (1) reach out to the public, actively seeking to frame a positive
motivation and expectation for the public before they arrive; (2) provide
opportunities to construct connections between museum experiences and
visitors' personal lives; (3) supply a variety of entry and exit points that
permit learners to pick the point that best meets their personal needs and
expectations; and (4) develop museum experiences that offer open and
free choices and put the learners in control of their own learning.
Second, because museum experiences are social learning experiences,
museums should facilitate learning experiences that capitalize on the
social nature of learning, encouraging and fostering social interactions
with other visitors and museum staff. Some possibilities provide that
museum educators should (1) permit people to share experiences socially
and physically through educational programs and activities; (2) offer
opportunities where motivated novices can communicate with knowledgeable experts in an atmosphere of shared and collaborated goals; and
(3) create opportunities to combine knowledge and information, not only
through devices for assisting learning, but also through facilitators for
guiding learning.
Third, because museum experiences are physical experiences, museum
educators should facilitate appropriate physical contexts that provide
meaningful learning experiences for visitors. Some possibilities provide
that museum educators should design learning environments (1) where
visitors can navigate more spontaneously from one experience to the next;
and (2) where more attention is paid to comfort, cleanliness, and safety to
enhance learning in the programs.
Fourth, because museum experiences are cultural experiences, museums
should facilitate satisfying visitors' cultural contexts for learning. Some
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
183
EunJung Chang
possibilities provide that museum educators (1) recognize and respect
various values and norms of multiple cultures; (2) be sensitive to the
culturally appropriate language, gesture, and humor in educational
programs and activities; and (3) use educational examples not only from
one culture, but from various cultures in museum programs and activities.
Fifth, because museum experiences are social class experiences,
museums should make their facilities and environments accessible and
inclusive for the broader public. There are many social class barriers;
social-economically secure groups have had apparent cultural dominance
in society and more access to museums than minority groups (Bourdieu,
1993). Some people are often not free to choose; the 'freedoms' to choose
are really related to privilege that includes good education, good income,
professional jobs, positive childhood experiences, a background in which
the arts are valued, and advantageous geographic locations in metropolitan areas in the Northeast and West. Museums need to rethink the habit
of reinforcing notions of social and cultural exclusiveness, offering only a
pretense of democratic access, and conserving and reproducing a particular culture of one group.
Conclusion
Museum experiences are personal, meaning-making processes and
products. Hence, museum professionals need to investigate visitors' needs
in order to provide meaningful learning experiences for visitors. Audience
development should be a priority for museums. Once museum professionals have a better understanding of visitors' needs, they can make more
informed decisions about how to create the most meaningful exhibitions
and programs for their visitors (Falk, 1998b; Falk & Dierking, 2000).
When exhibitions and programs reflect visitors' voices and personal
contexts, visitors' museum experiences can be memorable experiences that
lead visitors to future museum participation and increased learning,
appreciation, and enjoyment. Silverman (1995) insists that the future of
museums for a new age lies in how well museums can and is willing to
meet the needs and expectations of a variety of audiences.
As set forth in the Interactive Experience and Contextual Learning
Models, in order to create meaningful learning experiences, understanding
museum visitors' various contexts is essential. In sum, meaningful museum
education lies in how museums best can understand their visitors. Thus,
successful museums in the 21st century must communicate effectively
with visitors, and inherent in this communication is the museum's ability
and willingness to become better listeners.
Studies in Art Education
184
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Interactive Experiences and Contextual Learning in Museums
References
Adams, M., Falk, J., & Dierking, L. (2003). Things changes: Museums, learning, and research.
In M. Xanthoudaki, L. Tickle, & V. Sekules (Eds.), Researching visual arts education in
museums andgalleries (pp. 15-32). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
American Association of Museums. (1984). Museums for new century: A report of the Commission
on Museums for a New Century. Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.
American Association of Museums. (1992). Excellence and equality: Education and the public
dimension of museums. Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.
Black, M., & Hein, G. (2003). You're taking us where? Reaction and response to a guided art
museum fieldtrip. In M. Xanthoudaki, L. Tickle, & V. Sekules (Eds.), Researching visual arts
education in museums and galleries (pp. 117-133). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Press.
Bourdieu, P., & Darbel, A. (1990). The love ofart: European museums and theirpublic. Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1993). Thefield ofculturalproduction. New York: Columbia University Press.
Chiozzi, G., & Andreotti, L. (2001). Behavior vs. time: Understanding how visitors utilize the
Milan Natural History Museum. Curator, 44(2), 153-65.
Dodd, J., & Sandell, R. (1998). Building bridges: Guidancefor museums andgalleries on
developing new audiences. London: Museums & Galleries Commission.
Doering, Z., & Pekarik, A. (1997). Why time is not quality? Curator, 40(2), 249-252.
Durbin, G. (1996). Developing museum exhibition for lifelong learning. London: Museums and
Galleries Commission.
Falk, J. (1998a). Visitors: Who does, who does not, and why. Museum News, 77(2), 1-13, 38-43.
Falk, J. (1998b). A framework for diversifying museum audience: Putting heart and head in the
right place. Museum News, 77(5), 36-41.
Falk, J., & Dierking, L. (1992). The museum experience. Washington, DC: Whalesback Books.
Falk, J., & Dierking, L. (2000). Learningfrom museums: Visitor experiences and the making of
learning. Washington, DC: Whalesback Books.
Getty Center for Education in the Arts. (1991). Insights: Museums, visitors, attitudes, expectations.
Malibu, CA: Getty Center for Education in the Arts and J. Paul Getty Museum.
Giroux, H. (1992). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education. New York and
London: Rortledge.
Haanstra, F. (2003). Visitors' learning experiences in Dutch museums. In M. Xanthoudaki,
L. Tickle, & V. Sekules (Eds.), Researching visual arts education in museums and galleries
(pp. 33-48). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
Hein, G. (1998). Learning in the museum. London and New York: Routledge.
Hood, M. (1983). Staying away: Why people choose not to visit museums. Museum News, 61(4),
50-57.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1992). The educational role of the museum. London: Routledge.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1994a). Museums and their visitors. London: Routledge.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1994b). Museum and shaping of knowledge. London: Routledge.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (Ed.). (1999). The educational role of the museum. London and New York:
Routledge.
Studies in Art Education
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
185
EunJung Chang
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2001). Cultural diversity: Developing museum audiences in Britain. London:
Continuum International Publishing Group-Pinter.
Khan, N. (2000). Responding to cultural diversity: Guidance for museums and galleries. London:
Museums and Galleries Commission.
Kotler, E., & Kotler, P. (1998). Museum strategy and marketing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Leong, J. (2003). Art museum education in Singapore. In M. Xanthoudaki., L. Tickle., &
Sekules (Ed.), Researching visual arts education in museums and galleries (pp. 49-64).
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
McManus, P. (1989). Label reading behavior. In G. Durbin (Ed.), Developing museum exhibitions
for lifelong learning(pp. 183-188). London: Museums and Galleries Commission.
McManus, P. (1991). Visitors: Their expectations and social behavior. In G. Durbin(Ed.),
Developing museum exhibitionsfor lifelong learning (pp. 59-62). London: Museums and
Galleries Commission.
Merriman, N. (1997). Museum visiting as a cultural phenomenon. In P. Vergo (Ed.), The new
museology (pp. 149-171). London: Reaktion Books.
Moore, J. (1997). Poverty: Access andparticipation in the arts. Dublin: Combat Poverty Agency
and the Arts Council.
Norma, N. (1993). Understandingyour consumers through behavioral mapping. Parks and
Recreation, 28(11), 59-62.
Pekarik, A. (2004). To explain or not to explain. Curator, 47(1), 12-18.
Roberts, L. (1997). From knowledge to narrative: Educators and the changing museum. Washington
and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Schuster, J. (1991). Introduction: Who are the visitors to art museums? The audienceforAmerican
art museums. Washington: Seven Locks Press.
Selwood, S. (2001). Markets and users. London: The Museum, Libraries and Archives Council.
Serrell, B. (1996). Using behavior to define the effectiveness of exhibits. In G. Durbin (Ed.),
Developing museum exhibitionsfor lifelong learning (pp. 140-143). London: Museums and
Galleries Commission.
Serrell, B. (1997). Paying attention: The duration and allocation of visitors' time in museum
exhibitions. Curator, 40(2), 108-125.
Shettel, H. (1997). Time - is it really of the essence? Curator, 40(2), 246-249.
Silverman, L. (1995). Visitor meaning-making in museum for a new age. Curator, 38(3),
161-170.
Studies in Art Education
186
This content downloaded from
132.174.254.103 on Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:30:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms