Futures of Learning

Museums today seek a balance between the one-way transmission of curatorial expertise and the pluralistic modes of interpretation by visitors. New multimedia tours with their diverse voices and interactive functions are one way that museums are literally passing control into the visitors’ hands, providing a greater array of potential connections that require the visitor to select, categorize, and create. A result of emerging technologies in the mobile industry, mobile experiences in museums today encompass the traditional handheld audio guide, the cell phone tour, iPhone/MP3 players, and the newer multimedia handheld tour as well as a variety of mobile applications that go behind the tour model. This posting will first briefly discuss the current state of mobile tours and review noteworthy studies on the subject conducted by major US art museums and presented at conferences and in publications. It will then explore future possibilities for mobile tours as well as other uses of mobile devices in museums, including GPS for geotagging, QR codes, and downloadable content specifically suited to handheld wireless devices.

Some of the questions we can ask as we review these mobile tools are, do they provide visitors with more information, and if so, what kind of information? Is there any knowledge or skill required to use them, and do they teach specific learning tools and goals? Do they reinforce a curatorial narrative and order? Do they empower the visitor with more choices to create personal meaning, and if so, in what ways do they affect the traditional museum experience? Peter Samis from the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) talks about an Interpretive Goals questionnaire that their institution adapted from the Getty that helped them to integrate multimedia into programs and exhibitions across all departments (Samis, Museums and the Web, 2009). The form included the following questions:

• Please list one to three main ideas visitors will take away from viewing the exhibition. What objects or didactic components of the exhibition will help them learn this?
• Describe the rationale and originality of the project. Is the exhibition bringing new scholarship to the field, exposing an under-recognized subject, etc.? Why is this exhibition important now at SFMOMA?
• Please note other interpretive, multi-media components that should be considered (audio-tour, in-gallery videos, interactive features, blogs, etc.). Are you aware of existing media created by other organizations on this topic? 

All these questions reflect the high priority that museums now place on visitor reception and interpretation of information, rather than on the process of curatorial transmission or on the object-centered content itself. Increasingly, museums are seeking to augment the visitor experience through the use of mobile media.

Current State of Mobile Tours
Museum audio guides today can be placed into four different categories: 1) museum devices with number pads with manual or automatic activation, 2) personal digital assistants (PDAs) such as the iPhone, BlackBerry and other smartphones with operating systems and Internet connectivity, visual imagery, and manual or automatic activation, 3) mobile phones that are manually activated, and 4) audio files/podcasts that are downloaded onto MP3 players and other devices such as the iPod/ Touch. While most museums rely on manual activation by the user (pushing device buttons), some of the newer tours utilize automatic activation by infrared hotspots that are triggered when visitors enter the area of the object with the device; however, the play button still needs to be activated manually. Both the PDAs and the mobile phones are generally brought into the museum by the visitor; however, museums often have some for short-term loan.

SJMA (Chris Alexander)

One of the newest developments in handheld devices is the iPhone by Apple, featuring a telephone, iPod and iTunes, text messaging, a hybrid map, and Internet connectivity. Two museums in the US are currently experimenting with specific iPhone audio tours, the San Jose Museum of Art (SJMA) in California and the Denver Art Museum in Colorado. The SJMA has been working on this new tour (they call it a “gallery experience/tour”) since September 2007, which can be accessed at http://www.sjmusart.org/iphone. The iPhone and/or iPod Touch make it easy for the museum to update content and allow the museum more options for features, interactivity, and accessibility, according to producer Chris Alexander. The museum introduced the tour in conjunction with its exhibition, Robots: Evolution of a Cultural Icon (April 12 – October 19, 2008). The Denver Art Museum converted their existing audio tours to “an iPhone-based experience,” says project director Bruce Wyman. “This will let us push the idea of developing web-based audio content to gallery devices, see how our wireless coverage is working, and also see what sort of traffic we experience over the existing infrastructure so we can think about scalability” (message posted by Wyman at Muse Tech Central: Museum Computer Network Project Registry. One advantage to the iPhone (and other devices with Internet connectivity) is it’s ability to provide a mobile access point to the museum’s collection management system that controls the entire permanent collection, rather than just a few highlights or a temporary exhibition. A disadvantage, however, is that downloading podcasts and other information on these devices (including MP3 players) requires visitors to plan ahead before visiting the museum, which can be unreliable with the younger visitors that favor these devices.

There are both advantages and disadvantages in using mobile phones for museum audio tours in the US. The advantages include visitors’ familiarity with their own personal device as opposed to learning a new device that they would need to borrow from the museum while leaving a form of identification. The use of mobile phones saves money for museums as they don’t have to purchase and maintain the audio devices or staff their distribution points, and it is easier for museums to update content. Various mobile phone features today support pictures, text, and video, and provide an opportunity for visitors to leave comments on a centralized message center. Mobile phones also offer greater flexibility of movement with exhibitions that continue outside the gallery spaces onto the exterior spaces of the museum and beyond, and they can be used anytime (Proctor & Tellis, 2003; Tellis, 2004; Proctor, 2007).

Disadvantages, however, are just as notable. The first obstacle to visitors using their mobile phones is a general discomfort and uncertainty at using these devices in museums, as Lee (2008) found in a recent study. Though these finding pertain to use in a science center, it is safe to assume that the same holds true for art museums as well, as many museums still prohibit mobile phone use within gallery spaces. There is a danger to museums that encouraging visitors to use their mobile phones for tours inside the gallery may encourage them to use the phones for other functions as well, such as making telephone calls or taking photos of works in violation of museum photography policies, both of which could be undetected by security guards. It is also tiring for visitors to physically hold the phone to their ear unless they have an earpiece, and reception may not be adequate in all spaces, particularly in basement galleries that would not offer a high quality audio experience. If visitors don’t have mobile phones, the museum would have to accommodate by providing them for loan, and for objects outside the galleries, visitors would need to carry around a paper guide listing the phone numbers to call. As large exhibitions travel around the country, the phone numbers to call may be long-distance, requiring extra charges that visitors might not want to pay, particularly with foreign visitors who pay higher charges.

Tate Modern (Nancy Proctor, 2007)

One example of a successful mobile phone audio tour is at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, Art on Call. Upon dialing a central number (612-374-8200), multiple voices can be heard interpreting artwork in the museum’s collection and temporary exhibitions, including the curator, artist, visitors that leave comments, and even the voice of history from interviews in museum archives. As the Walker manages not only indoor gallery spaces but also an outdoor sculpture garden and public cultural programming within the city, the audio tour offers updated information related to all of these diverse activities with interviews from film directors and performing artists, as well as dining tips in the city and jobs and volunteer opportunities at the museum. Two important features of the program are TalkBack, which allows visitors to record comments or “audio notes” on their mobile phone, and Breadcrumbing, which keeps track of artwork that visitors access on their mobile phone tour inside the museum, and then makes this personalized playlist available on the museum’s website that offers further information on the works. The museum has a few iPods on loan for free at the Visitors Services desk. Some museums also offer interactive games as part of their mobile phone tours, both inside the galleries and online, such as Ear for Art: Chihuly Glass CellPhone Walking Tour at the Tacoma Art Museum in Washington (888-411-4220).

With the handheld multimedia tours using device owned by the museum, visitors can bookmark objects of interest during their physical visit, similar to breadcrumbing. After giving their emails to a museum staff, content in the devices is transferred electronically to visitors via an email with a link to the museum website, where they can then create what is now commonly referred to as “my collection” or “my gallery.” The attractive feature for museums is that not only do they acquire visitors’ emails, but they are also able to track if visitors go to their website, how often, and what are the more popular objects being bookmarked.

Walker Art Center (Robin Dowden, 2007)

SFMOMA commissioned a study (conducted by Randi Korn & Associates, Inc.) during its 2006 exhibition of Matthew Barney: Drawing Restraint. The study determined that visitors under 40 rated the podcast and cell phone tour higher than the traditional audio tour with the same content because of “the ability to access information on demand, familiarity and comfort with the device and low or free cost” (Samis, 2007, p. 23). Using a 7-point scale to chart visitor satisfaction from “Did not help me appreciate Barney’s art” to “Helped me appreciate Barney’s art,” the highest mean ratings for visitors was the podcast tour (6.2) and the cell phone tour (6.0), followed by the headset audio tour with a mean rating of 5.6.

In 2008 (Samis & Pau, 2009), SFMOMA conducted a study by Corporate Intelligence Group at Discovery Communications, Inc. (the parent company of AntennaAudio that created the audio guide), contradicting these previous results. The study covered three distinct exhibitions at the museum, showing a diminishing interest on the part of viewers to use their mobile phones as museum tours in favor of MP3 devices and handheld museum devices, for many of the disadvantageous reasons cited above. Surveying visitors about their preferred sources of information when visiting a museum, visitors were divided into two categories; audio guide user and non-audio guide user. The choices of sources were both analog and digital: audio guide, wall text, exhibition brochure, multimedia tour, tour guide (docent), catalogue, in-gallery video, tour downloaded to personal iPod/MP3 player, mobile phone tour. The results showed that the last option for both sets of viewers was the mobile phone tour. Audio guide users preferred the audio guide first, followed by the wall text and the exhibition brochure. Non-audio guide users preferred the wall text first, followed by the exhibition brochure. The study also determined that 62% of guide users (41% of non-guide users) strongly prefer to use a museum device rather than their personal mobile phone, and there was a strong preference to use personal iPod/MP3 player devices over personal mobile phones (49% guide users, 36% non-guide users).

The Future of Mobile Devices in Art Museums
The future of museum mobile tours is based on the promise of increased multimedia features, greater bandwidth capabilities, and a global network, all offering more choices and flexibility for visitors and greater opportunities for interactivity and user-generated content. For example, one trend that Peter Samis has discussed is the “Universal Access Policy” for museums. The Museum of Modern Art in New York, the Whitney Museum of American Art, and the Guggenheim Museum have all started offering audio tours free of charge to every visitor, resulting in increased usage from 3-4% to 20-61%. However, it must be noted that this change corresponds with an increase in admission fees of up to $20 a person (Museums and the Web, 2009).

In discussing ”The Future of Mobile Interpretation,” Kovin J. Smith, Senior Analyst for Enterprise Content at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, proposes the importance for museums to know their audience to best create interpretive platforms. Smith also suggests that inside the museum, visitors expect many of the same experiences and tools as on the website, particularly with the ability to access the museum’s entire collection at the touch of a button. Smith states, “With the ability to search, group, and filter every object, the device becomes a digital surrogate, an assistant, rather than a tour guide” (Museums and the Web, 2009).

In addition to tours, the mobile future also promises museums more opportunities to track visitors and their actions and to offer visitors a more participatory experience. For example, geospatial technology already exists but has not been widely applied to museums. It incorporates GPS (global positioning systems) or cell tower triangulation and is based on geotagging, which places coordinates onto works of art or locations on the earth. The coordinates can then be accessed from Flickr, which offers free links to geotagged “things” on a world map. New mobile phone technology allows users to put location tabs on video or still images, or to declare a specific location on a map and pull up images related to where one is physically located. Museums could geotag objects for visitors to access at locations external to the physical space of the museum, especially useful at archaeological sites, parks, and public art installations. These technologies represent a development of the current infrared technology applied to handheld devices that uses visitor location to trigger data from the tours.

QR codes (discussed in the in the previous post “Digital Media in Community Libraries, Part 1”) are also being explored for use in museums to encourage a more participatory visitor experience. While QR codes could have a variety of uses, in one pilot application called artsonomy, museum visitors use their camera phones to take a picture of a QR code accompanying a piece of art. They then type words that express their attitude toward the artwork and send these tags to a database that forms a visible tag cloud around the piece, which they can also view (Perrone, 2009). Thus far, artsonomy has been installed at the Norsk Telemuseum in Oslo, Norway, at the Museo dei Mercati di Traiano in Rome, and will soon be installed at Ara Pacis Museum, also in Rome (Perrone, personal correspondence). In the US, the use of QR codes in museums has not taken off (yet). As of May 2009, the Mattress Factory in Pittsburg was the first American museum to incorporate QR codes in the exhibition experience. In order to reduce the amount of printed material and engage visitors, the gallery has put QR codes on exhibition title cards, with each code containing different data, such as video, still images, and background information. QR codes obviously take a lot of planning and technical support. They are also not without their challenges, including inconsistent size (depending on how much data is encoded) and the necessity of designing content that is mobile friendly (Chan, 2009). It is interesting that the Museum of Modern Art in New York included the newer Microsoft Tags using HCCB (high capacity color barcodes) in their 2008 exhibition Design and the Elastic Mind, but as an aesthetic physical object in the physical museum, not yet as a participatory tool. Microsoft released its new tag in January 2009, offering higher density storage for easier mobile phone camera use. Many believe both of these technologies hold much promise for user interactivity and engagement in museums.

Gavin Jancke, director of engineering for Microsoft Research Redmond

Other mobile applications in museums include content tailored for mobile devices, text alerts, RSS feeds, and Twitter feeds. The Museum of Fine Arts (MFA) in Boston has designed a program that (for a cost) lets users wirelessly download objects from the museum’s collection to be used as mobile wallpaper. Such personalization of mobile phones is more commonly achieved through photos of family or celebrities, but the MFA clearly hopes that such a service will not only enhance its own revenue stream but also expand the visitor experience beyond the doors of the museum. Museum on the Go started in April 2007 as the first mobile phone museum portal, currently hosting downloadable images, Realtunes, and videos from 10 international museums, including the Victoria and Albert in London. They charge a comparable fee. The MFA, as well as other museums, also sends text alerts (for free) so subscribers can receive current information on events and discounts. Most museums today have RSS feeds with updated information on calendar events, staff blogs, podcasts, and news. Visitors can subscribe by going to the museum’s website or social media sites (such as Facebook) and can receive these on a mobile phone with Internet connectivity. Several museums are also sending Twitter “tweets” via subscribers’ mobile phones, but with mixed reactions as to their purpose. Museum consultant and blogger Nina Simon has suggested a range of Twitter uses for museums that go beyond one-way spam-like communication, such as providing “behind-the-scenes insight” and sharing visitor photos and comments. See the Brooklyn Museum of Art for an example of using Twitter and other RSS feeds.
Boston Museum of Fine Arts

When contemplating all of these possibilities, it is important to recall Peter Samis’ words of advice, “If the institution is going to delegate significant aspects of the interpretative load to new technology devices, then it becomes imperative that those devices be made as effortlessly available to users as the wall texts and artworks” (Museums and the Web, 2009). A recent study on mobile phone tours and audio guides at the Centre Pompidou (Traces du sacré, May 7 – August 11, 2008) in Paris by Vincent Puig et al. (Museums and the Web, 2009) also reveals lessons learned not only about audio tours but also the use of mobile media in general. Aside from suggesting the introduction of GPS to alleviate visitor difficulty with entering stop numbers, the article proposed the need for “innovative multimedia search and navigation tools” to cross-reference objects, information, and keywords.

Conferences
There are two very important conferences regarding handheld devices in museums that need to be mentioned. The first is the Tate Handheld Conference (September 4 and 5, 2008), co-organized by Jane Burton from the Tate Museum in London, and Nancy Proctor from the Smithsonian American Art Museum in Washington DC. The full audio from the conference is available to download from the Tate Events podcast. The Conference wiki is a wealth of information on the subject, listing conference topics, case studies, resources, an online course, people, and general conference information. The MuseumMobile wiki mentioned in Anne’s last blog grew out of the Tate Handheld Conference wiki, and is an important resource as well.

The second conference is the Handheld Online Conference “from audio tours to iPhones” organized by Learning Times, held online on June 3, 2009. The website presents recordings and discussion forums from conference sessions and biographical information on the speakers. A description of the conference from the website aptly describes the current and future state of mobile tours in museums, and is a fitting end to this post:

So are the new technologies doomed simply to replace the traditional audio tour with an even more sophisticated and bewildering, but no less marginal, array of solutions for providing museum interpretation? There is no specific technology or platform that will revolutionize our visitors’ museum experiences, but rather our visitors are transforming the museum visit themselves through new informational practices that they are importing to the museum from their Web 2.0 lives. WWW has come to mean ‘whatever, whenever, wherever’ and the question of the future of museum interpretation has become not one of what technology our visitors will prefer, but rather of where, when, and how they want to engage with the museum, both on-site and beyond http://www.handheldconference.org/about/.

Mobile tour creators:
Antenna Audio - http://www.antennaaudio.com
Learning Times - http://www.learningtimes.com
NousGuide - http://www.NousGuide.com
Heritage 365 - http://www.heritage365.com
Guide By Cell - http://www.guidebycell.com
Spatial Adventures, Inc. - http://www.spatialadventures.com
Museum 411 - http://www.museum411.com

References
Bressler, D. (2006, March). Mobile phones: A new way to engage teenagers in informal science learning. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2006: Proceedings. Archives and Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2006/papers/bressler/bressler.html

Chan, S. (2009, March 5). QR codes in the museum – problems and opportunities with extended object labels. Blog posting to fresh + new(er). http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/index.php/2009/03/05/qr-codes-in-the-museum-problems-and-opportunities-with-extended-object-labels/

Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek, CA: Rowman and Littlefield.

Föckler, P., Zeidler, T., Brombach, B., Bruns, E., & Bimber, O. (2005). PhoneGuide: Museum guidance supported by on-device object recognition on mobile phones. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series: Vol. 154. 4th International conference on mobile and ubiquitous multimedia (pp. 3-10). Christchurch, New Zealand.

Haley Goldman, K. (2007, March). Cell phones and exhibitions 2.O: Moving beyond the pilot stage. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2007: Proceedings. Archives and Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/haleyGoldman/haleyGoldman.html

Lee, S. K. (2008, September). Mobile phone use in a science museum: Toward a possibility of informal science learning. Paper presented at the Mobile Communication and the Ethics of Social Networking conference. Budapest, Hungary.

Low, L. (2006). Connections: Social and mobile tools for enhancing learning. The Knowledge Tree, 12. Retrieved April 13, 2008, from http://kt.flexiblelearning.net.au/

Mulholland, P., Collins, T. & Zdrahal, Z. (2005). Bletchley park text: Using mobile and semantic web technologies to support the post-visit use of online museum resources. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 24.

Perrone, A. (2008, September). Artsonomy. Paper presented at the mSociety Conference. Antalya, Turkey.

Proctor, N. (2007, March). When in roam: Visitor response to phone tour pilots in the U.S. and Europe. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2007: Proceedings. Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/proctor/proctor.html

Proctor, N. & Tellis, C. (2003, March). The State of the Art in Museum Handhelds in 2003. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2003: Proceedings. Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2003/papers/proctor/proctor.html

Puig, V., L’Hour, Y., Haussone, Y., Jauniau, C. (2009, March). Collaborative annotation system using vocal comments recorded on mobile phones and audio guides: The Centre Pompidou Exhibition Traces du Sacré. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2009: Proceedings. CD-ROM. Toronto: Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2009/papers/puig/puig.html

Rayward, W. B., & Twidale, M. B. (1999). From docent to cyberdocent: Education and guidance in the virtual museum. Archives and Museum Informatics, 13, 23-53.

Samis, P. (2007). New Technologies as part of a comprehensive interpretive plan. In H. Din & P. Hecht (Eds.). The digital museum: A think guide (pp. 19-34). Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.

Samis, P. (2007). Gaining traction in the vaseline: Visitor response to a multi-track interpretation design for Matthew Barney: DRAWING RESTRAINT. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2009: Proceedings. CD-ROM. Toronto: Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/samis/samis.html

Samis, P. & Pau, S. (2009, March). After the heroism, collaboration: Organizational learning and the mobile space. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2009: Proceedings. CD-ROM. Toronto: Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2009/papers/samis/samis.html

Schroyen, J., Luyten, K., Gabriëls, K., Robert, K., Teunkens, D., Coninx, K., Flerackers, E. & Manshoven, E. (2009, March). The design of context-specific educational mobile games. In J.
Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2009: Proceedings. CD-ROM. Toronto, Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2009/papers/schroyen/schroyen.html

Smith, K. J. (2009, March). The future of mobile interpretation. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2009: Proceedings. CD-ROM. Toronto, Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2009/papers/smith/smith.html

Tellis, C. (2004, March). Multimedia handhelds: One device, many audiences. In J. Trant & D. Bearman (Eds.), Museums and the Web 2003: Proceedings. Archives & Museum Informatics. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2004/papers/tellis/tellis.html

Walker Art Center. (March 2007). Final report to the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Art on Call Grant LG-20-04-0194-04. Minneapolis, MN: Robin Dowden, Director of New Media.

Woodruff, A., Aoki, P. M., Hurst, A. & Szymanski, M. H. (n.d.). Electronic guidebooks and visitor attention. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, CA.

THIS POSTING WAS WRITTEN BY SUSANA BAUTISTA AND CARA WALLIS

The previous posts discussed how libraries are responding to the opportunities presented by digital media. As noted, these opportunities also bring new responsibilities and dilemmas.  For example, consider the different purposes of an archive.  Is the purpose of the archive to serve as a repository of valuable materials?  To create a persistent collection that is accessible to a wide range of users?  To curate a collection that reflects and manifests a set of values about quality of content?  OR to preserve important cultural material for posterity?  Once an archive or collection is digitized, it still remains the business of the institution to define its philosophy in terms of its the purpose of its archive. What we learned is that the initial creation of digital collections and archives have prompted library professionals to engage in new discussions to clarify the core mission of their institutions in light of a changing information landscape. As a consequence, all libraries, from the largest national collecting institutions to the smallest community branch now find themselves having to address issues pertaining to digital content management, rights of information ownership, and the balance between privacy and access.  As these discussions unfold, they yield new visions for libraries in the future:  as portal, as repository, as a knowledge-making enterprise, and as a critical public service. 

Just as community libraries are reconsidering how to best address the opportunities and responsibilities made possible by the widespread availability of digital media, so too are museums grappling with the possibilities promised by new technologies.  Libraries and museums face similar questions in how to incorporate digital technologies in the service of the institution’s core mission.  The Institute of Museums and Library Services (IMLS) has as it’s core mission to “create strong libraries and museums that connect people to information and ideas.” The IMLS provides guidance and funding to several U.S. libraries (122,000) and museums (17,500) in support of programs and activities that encourage lifelong learning.  Digital technologies are crucial to these efforts:

Libraries and museums help create vibrant, energized learning communities. Our achievement as individuals and our success as a democratic society depend on learning continually, adapting to change readily, and evaluating information critically.  As stewards of cultural heritage, information and ideas, museums and libraries have traditionally played a vital role in helping us experience, explore, discover and make sense of the world. That role is now more essential than ever. Through building technological infrastructure and strengthening community relationships, libraries and museums can offer the public unprecedented access and expertise in transforming information overload into knowledge.  (Quoted from website)

The IMLS has developed several initiatives to realize this mission.

• The Connection to Collections effort is a “national initiative to raise public awareness of the importance of caring for our treasures, and to underscore the fact that these collections are essential the American Story.”
  

• The Engaging America’s Youth initiative has been developed to create and sustain a Nation of Learners.
  

• The International Strategic Partnership initiative is designed to strengthen cross-cultural connections between U.S. museums and libraries and their global counterparts.

IMLS also sponsors an annual event called the WebWise Conference that brings together representatives from museums, libraries, archives, systems science, and education interested in the creation of high quality online content for inquiry and learning.  The first WebWise conference held in 2004 focused on the the notion of “sharing” online content.  Key issues addressed during that first conference included discussions about technical interoperability, the formation of collaborative partnerships to foster greater access to shared information collections, and funding and sustainability of technology-intensive services.  Subsequent conferences continued these discussions and branched into other areas of consideration such as: how to create digital resources for effective teaching and learning, how to engage learners of all ages, the meaning of metadata, the changing nature of stewardship and the preservation of digital collections, and the implication of Web 2.0 social networking applications.  Every conference has included presentations on the legal and policy implications of new digital media for the purposes of information sharing, information ownership, rights of privacy, and changing models of copyright and licensing.

The 2009 WebWise Conference was structured around the theme “digital debates” and included several talks on the need to nurture more robust collaborations among institutions and between an institution and members of its public. The talk by Nancy Proctor (from the Smithsonian America Art Museum) focused on how museums could foster creative collaborations using new technologies.

Nancy Proctor, “The Museum as Agora: What is Collaboration in Museums 2.0.”
WebWise 2009, Washington D.C.

Proctor begins her talk with the question: what is the museum in the web 2.0 world of information on demand?  In her talk she reviewed several projects that represent innovative attempts to create novel forms of collaboration among museums and members of the public.  She notes that these efforts did not begin with the development of Web 2.0 applications, but had been going on over the past decade.  Noteworthy projects that she discussed included:

Save Outdoor Sculpture:
This project took shape before the advent of social networking applications.  The aim was to collaborate with individuals to gather user-created content about outdoor sculptures.  The collaboration involved the Smithsonian American Art Museum and the Heritage Preservation Organization who worked with 7000 individuals to catalog condition reports on outdoor sculpture across the U.S.  The project data was recorded on paper, through email and photographs.  The result was the creation of an extensive database on outdoor sculpture that is now being imported into Google maps.

Fill the Gap: Sponsored by the Luce Center at the American Art Museum, this project enlists the collaboration of photographers to “fill the gap” in empty art display cases.  When an art object goes out for restoration or on-loan for an exhibition, there is a gap in the museum display cases.  This project asks photographers to upload images artwork to Flicker that might “fill the gap” in a particular display case.  The aim is to engage the members of the public in dialogue about the nature of the collection and to demonstrate the kinds of discussions that go on among curators about the presentation of art within the museum context.

The Wikipedia Loves Art Project: Led by the Brooklyn Museum, in collaboration with twenty other international museums, this project is structured like a scavenger hunt in that it invites people to visit museums and take photographs of artworks on certain themes. The photographs are uploaded to a Flickr site, and are then evaluated in terms of quality and thematic appropriateness.  The winning images are used to provide illustrations for Wikipedia articles.  Photographers (or teams) get full credit for any image used.

The Handheld Wiki: This project allows museum professionals to share expertise and experience on the use of handheld devices and mobile media.

In reflecting on these efforts, Proctor identifies the key elements of collaboration: 1) The creation of community and sharing practices, 2) the development of dialogue and storytelling, 3) integration efforts and the creation of relevance, 4) the development of trust and interdependencies, and 5) (most of all) the creation of fun experiences.  She notes that these project also highlight the significant challenges to fostering collaboration—including the fact that people are sometimes stingy with their contributions, that tasks must be prioritized, that intellectual property and brands must be respected and managed, and that quantity does not guarantee quality.  In her conclusion, she returns to her original question: what is the museum in a 2.0 world of information on demand?  To this she responds that the museum might best be considered as a distributed network of networks.  The Web 2.0 Museum is staged on different kinds of platforms:  onsite (at physical brick and mortar locations), online (at digital environments and sites created by the museum), online elsewhere (at digital environments and sites created and governed by others such as Flickr and Wikipedia) and on mobile devices.  As she reminds us, audience members and visitors might access the museum through any (or all) of these sites.  In reflecting on this phenomenon, Proctor asserts that the museum is transforming from the Acropolis (the remote shrine that keeps cultural treasures safe) to an Agora—a space for community, encounter and exchange.  For this reason, she argues that the museum is preeminently a collaborative space in digital age.

Indeed, the postings in this next section will consider a range of practices that museums are using to create new collaborative experiences for and among their visitors.  We focus on the use of digital media in two general types of museums:  the art museum and the science/technology center.  Art museums with large collections are strongly aligned with libraries in providing archival services and face issues similar to those of libraries relating to the digitization of collections, providing access, and protecting ownership rights.  While other museums such as science centers and technology museums are less focused on the collection of artifacts as they are on the staging of particular experiences with new technologies or the demonstration of basic scientific principles.  We consider the efforts going on in art museums as separate from those that are happening within the context of the science/technology museums only for the purposes of organization of the background research.  The postings will discuss how museums have moved from a focus on digital collections to the project of creating a web presence for visitors.  One posting will look at a variety of on-line museums experiences including museums in Second Life and teen web sites.  A later post will examine new practices of media making, playing, and tinkering that are now offered by various museums as a way to connect the physical and the virtual for the purposes enhancing visitor learning experiences.  The final posting in this section will consider specific edge projects that are designed to explore new learning opportunities in a digital age.  The trajectory of these postings track the changes going on in museums from providing access to information to staging new forms of participation.

In their research on digital media and learning, Jenkins, et al. (2006) and Ito, et al. (2008) highlight the importance of informal learning environments in the acquisition of new media skills for young people. Libraries, like schools and after-school programs (Peppler & Kafai, 2007) can provide access to media production tools and become sites where young people ”hang out, mess around, and geek out” with these tools together. Along with the game based activities mentioned in a previous post, community libraries have recognized their potential to be sites that foster multiple modes of learning. Libraries have long hosted traditional literacy programs and within the ALA and its Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA), game programs and other media workshops are seen as a continuation of those efforts. Skills training with digital tools can also be understood as a continuation of libraries’ role in teaching patrons information seeking skills (Tuominen, Savolainen & Talja, 2005). Media workshops in music, video, blog, podcasts and game production are also considered outreach efforts that can bring young people into the library space and introduce them to other library services like loaning books. The ALA and YALSA provide guidelines for ways librarians can utilize free software programs and platforms to create workshops and resources for young people to produce media content from blogs to short films. Many successful media programs in public libraries result from partnerships with media professionals within the local community as well as funding through local arts councils and other grant-making bodies.

Teen Tech Week

Beginning in 2005, The YALSA has sponsored annual Teen Tech Weeks and provides resources for libraries to create technology themed activities. One resource is a wiki site where librarians can share best practices and their plans for Tech Week. For 2008’s “Tune In @ Your Library” theme, Joseph Wilk created a “Getting Started Guide” for ”Making Music with Teens.” The guide lists specific web-based software and freeware programs teens can use to mix audio selections found through the Freesound Project database. The YALSA also sponsored a song contest for teens to create and record their own songs. The winner was Michelle Visent, a student at Felix Varela Senior High School in Miami, FL, with her song “Library.”

“The Library: teen tech week song” on http://www.archive.org

On the wiki for the 2008 Teen Tech Week, Stephanie Iser of the Kansas City Public Library system shared her experience partnering with a local arts organization, Hip Hop Academy KC, which held showcases and workshops on hip hop elements, such as break dancing, turntablism, and rhyming.

While many Teen Tech Week activities are based around video games and consoles, library programs included digital photography workshops and video creation activities. The YALSA has run mini grant competitions in which libraries submit plans for Teen Tech Week that yield $400-$500 to support the library’s creative use of technology programs for the week. Libraries have used the funds to purchase Flip video cameras and audio editing software. The 2008 Teen Tech Week Mini Grants were made possible by Teen Tech Week 2008 Corporate Sponsor Dungeons & Dragons, a subsidiary of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. Other sponsors supported the 2009 Teen Tech Week grants.

A 2009 mini grant winner was the Hennepin County Library in Minnesota. According to the wiki, the library planned to use the

“Teen Tech Week Grant a “Party Like It’s Teen Tech Week” event to celebrate creative uses of technology by and for teens. The party will be hosted by our Teen Advisory Group from whom the idea for the grant originated. The main event will be a workshop on Circuit-Bending led by Librarian Camden Tadhg, who will be trained by the Science Museum of Minnesota. In having a staff member train for this event, rather than bringing in an outside presenter, we hope to spread this knowledge throughout the Hennepin County Library system with a “train the trainer” model. Additionally, our Teen Tech Squad will work one-on-one with teens in using rich media creation software such as Scratch, GIMP, Audacity, and ArtRage. The highlight of the day will hopefully be a Circuit Bending Jam Session where we will record the teen participants making music with the instruments they create during the Circuit Bending workshop.”

Ongoing Workshops

Many libraries host workshops that do not involve digital media, with poetry and comic workshops especially prominent. Crafts such as knitting and bead work are also taught in library classes and workshops. The following are a few examples of libraries and their media workshops:

The Carvers Bay Digital Arts Experience (DAE) is a collective effort of the Georgetown County Library System and the Cultural Council of Georgetown County, with funding from the Gaylord & Dorothy Donnelley Foundation and the Francis P. Bunnelle Foundation. The 12-week course was designed to expose middle school students to the basic concepts and skills required to complete digitally oriented audiovisual projects. The ALA Gaming Toolkit site lists the workshops as exemplary of digital arts workshops.

-webjunction.org

As part of ALA’s Libraries, Gaming and Literacy Initiative funded by the Verizon Foundation, 10 libraries nationwide received grants to implement creative game design and gaming programs. The San Pablo Library of California’s Contra Costa County Library System received a grant to implement a music literacy program called Make Music at the San Pablo Library. According to the Library Journal blog,

“activities include: music enrichment assemblies, creative writing workshop featuring a song writing contest, musical Jeopardy, performances by local teen musicians, music composition workshop featuring hands on experimentation with music composition software, music video games like Wii Music and Rock Band, an “Iron Musician” competition, a build your own musical instrument contest, and more.”

The South Orange Public Library in South Orange, NJ hosted a 3 part poetry video workshop run by a local poet and video teacher. Funded by the Edison Media Arts Consortium, the workshops led participants through creative writing, filming and editing processes. The library also hosted a night that featured a screening of all the videos.

The Metropolitan Library Service Agency of the Twin Cities region in Minnesota will be sponsoring video workshops as part of its ”Quiet on the Set” competition this summer, in which people are invited to create short videos about local libraries.

The Pioneer Library System in Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma is partnering with a local video teacher to hold videography workshops in several branches this June. The two hour workshops are meant to take small groups through pre-production, filming and editing steps. The events are part of the library system’s “Express Yourself” Summer Reading Program and are sponsored by the Oklahoma Arts Council.

Additional Resource:

The book Get Connected: Tech Programs for Teens is a compilation of tech programs from YALSA and compiled by Rosemary Honnold.

References

Ito, Mizuko, Sonja Baumer, Matteo Bittanti, danah boyd, Rachel Cody, Becky Herr, Heather A. Horst, Patricia G. Lange, Dilan Mahendran, Katynka Martinez, C.J. Pascoe, Dan Perkel, Laura Robinson, Christo Sims, and Lisa Tripp. (with Judd Antin, Megan Finn, Arthur Law, Annie Manion, Sarai Mitnick and Dan Schlossberg and Sarita Yardi) Hanging Out, Messing Around, Geeking Out: Living and Learning with New Media.  Cambridge: MIT Press, Forthcoming.

Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robinson, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Building the field of digital media and learning, 1-68.

Peppler, K. A., & Kafai, Y. B. (2007). From SuperGoo to Scratch: Exploring Creative Digital Media Production in Informal Learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(2), 149-166.

Tuominen, K., Savolainen, R., & Talja, S. (2005). Information Literacy as a Sociotechnical Practice. The Library Quarterly, 75(3), 329-345. doi: 10.1086/497311.

“A Closer Look at the Winning Libraries” http://www.libraryjournal.com/blog/1130000713/post/1940043994.html

“Videography workshops coming to area libraries” http://www.news-star.com/arts/x1083525314/Videograhphy-workshop-coming-to-area-libraries

“Teen Poetry Video Workshop” http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/yalsa/newsandeventsb/teenpoetryvideo.cfm

“Video Production Workshop” http://dentonlibrary.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/video-production-workshop-the-north-branch/

Teen Tech Week Wiki http://wikis.ala.org/yalsa/index.php/Teen_Tech_Week

“Summary of Effort and Result for the Carvers Bay Digital Arts Experience” http://www.webjunction.org/programming-and-outreach-for-young-adults/articles/content/454476