2. UCL Centre for Digital Humanities
UCL Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis
3.
4.
5. Processes
How the Project Started
• Share Academy funding
• QRator wanting to expand project reach
• Made connection through LMG Share
Academy Event
16. Practicalities
Evaluation: Exit Survey
Made a comment
9% 17%
5% Read the text information
provided by the museum
Read other peoples' comments
17%
21% Thought about the question
asked by the museum
Don't know
31% Other
17. Practicalities
Non-payers
OAP Group
Corporate
events
Child
Adult Group Group
Early Years Group
Key Stage 2 Group Adult Individual
Student Group
OAP
Child Individual
Individual
Student
Individual Family
Other concession
Individual
19. Practicalities
visitor contributions
total number of visitor contributions for each current question
Show or Hide 70
Plain Truth 56
Brand Britain 48
Conserve or Display 33
Brands 33
Shoppers Choice 31
21. visitor contributions
Category breakdowns from each of the six QRator iPads
45
40 39
35
30
27
25
25
Axis Title
20 noise
20 18 18
17 17 On museum
15 On Topic
13
12
11 11
10
10 9 9
7
5
5 4
0
Brands Shoppers Choice Conserve or Display Brand Britain Show or Hide Plain Truth
Axis Title
24. Recommendations
• make sure scope and scale are SMART
• Internal advocacy
• Clear Communication process between
collaborative partners
• Build in Evaluation
• Incremental change
• Take risks
• Don’t forget dissemination and marketing
25. Next Steps
• Future content opportunities
• Blueprint for Other Museums
• Future collaboration together
26. Questions
• Anna Terry
• anna@museumofbrands.com
• Claire Ross
• claire.ross@ucl.ac.uk
• Steve Gray
• steven.gray@ucl.ac.uk
Editor's Notes
undertaking a collaborative project between Two academic departments (UCLDH and CASA), and The Museum of Brands.
UCL Overview
Overview MOB -Brand heritage collection showing 150 years consumer culturecharity, independent museum ‘self-funding’ through admissions, corporate events, retail and publishing
Before we talk about the Project at the Museum of Brands. Here is a bit of context about the pre-cursor project in the Grant Museum of Zoology at UCL.
www.talesofthings.com
Installation - need to stop people getting out of Qrator and stealing ipads – unsupervised tunnel- Secure mounts also prevents our access to ipads- visitors determined to tamper, good knowledge of ipads- ergonomics -Grant Museum too high, MOB too low. Future for equipment- robustness testing. hoping three years minimum without spend - MOB has to let batteries run down each night as we can’t access off switch on ipads- monitor damage or theft
Evaluation - overview exit surveyVisitor Exit Surveys were administered to random visitors from 15 February to 21 March. The survey was composed of five questions - made up of multiple choice and open-ended - asking visitors about their individual interactions (or lack thereof), positive and negative aspects of their experiences, and any improvements or comments. The surveys collected responses from 64 anonymous visitors with 234 responses to the five questions. This provided a rich dataset for the analysis of visitor experiences and interactions.While only 17% of respondents stated that they made a comment, over half (52%) read the information: either the question(21%) or the comments (31%).
Visitors to the Museum of Brands – 1 month evaluation period. The evaluation period is one of two busiest times of the year for student groups Feb is often MOB busiest month of the year – overcrowded at times.MOB visitor demographic Slide suggestion: pie chart of visitors during evaluation period. Adult Individual1764Child Individual83OAP Individual325Family108Other concession Individual20Student Individual 428Student Group1468Key Stage 2 Group186Early Years Group39Adult Group173Child Group250OAP Group39Corporate events382Non-payers179Total5444
Evaluation ObservationsFrom 13 February to 21 March, 9 observation sessions were conducted totaling16 hours. The average time for each session was 107 minutes. The total number of visitor groups observed using the iPads is 54, Referring to number of group/individual interactions. In total, 85 (35 males and 50 females) visitors were recorded interacting with the QRator iPads.
Data from the six QRator iPads was collected by archiving contributions from 13th Feb to 24th March 2013. Each individual visitor contribution was simultaneously uploaded to the ‘ToTeM’ master database on the Tales of Things website, followed by the QRator website pulling the data about each current question from the master database and integrates these comments within QRator online. These comments were then aggregated together based on the current questions originally asked by the museum. This resulted in a corpus of 271 visitor contributions, totalling 2,288 words and 854 unique words, providing a rich dataset for the analysis of visitor experience. Monitoring visitor comments- Staff time approx 10 mins every other day or more after large school group- some post moderation - policy to delete only nonsense. Foreign languages more likely to be deleted
Subjective. Visitor contributions were categorized qualitatively using open coded content analysis where each comment was read and categorized. The visitor contributions were read sentence-by-sentence and coded in order to identify recurring behaviours and how they might relate to one another. Despite the simplistic categorisation it is possible to see how visitors are relating to and interpreting their museum experience. The largest proportion of the comments about the museum (38%) with many of the visitor comments focusing on opinions of the museum as a whole. This raises the question of whether a digital technology used in this way promotes of an opportunity for visitors to make meaning from their whole experience, rather than engage with the exhibit specific content and interpret the exhibitions themselves. 32% of visitor comments fell into the category of on topic; triggered predominately by the QRator interface and questions posed by the museum curator, suggesting that visitors are inspired to share their own experiences, thus co-constructing a public multiple interpretation of museum objects.
When focusing further it is possible to see that some of the current questions produce higher levels of on topic comments than others. Show or Hide – the disgraced celebrity in current news question. Associating questions with provocative current events more likely to provoke a response.
