Surviving Australia Evaluation Report - FINAL · Australian Museum: Evaluation Report – Surviving...

Australian Museum: Evaluation Report – Surviving Australia 1

Australian MuseumSurviving Australia Evaluation Report Chris Lang January 2012


Table of Contents

> Introduction 3

> Exhibition floorplan 4

> Exit Survey Results 5

> Tracking Methodology 12

> Time spent in the exhibition 13

> Levels of engagement 14

> Average engagement by demographic 15

> Most engaging areas 16

> Least engaging areas 17

> Selected quotes 18

> Critical appraisal by audience research intern 23


Introduction The Surviving Australia permanent exhibition was opened in mid-2008 and tends to receive the highest number of visitors out of all permanent galleries in the museum (according to visitor counts conducted in 2011). This study was conducted to gauge visitors’ preferences within the exhibition with the aim of producing a modified version to tour overseas.

A combination of face-to-face interviews and tracking surveys were conducted throughout 2011.

Additionally one of the audience research interns Irene Rubino wrote a critical appraisal of the exhibition.


Exhibition floorplan


Exit Survey Results 100 face to face surveys were conducted throughout 2011 of visitors who had just exited the Surviving Australia exhibition, or were in the process of visiting it. RESPONSES


What did you expect to see in the exhibition?

What would you expect an overseas version of this exhibition to look like?


EXIT SURVEY DEMOGRAPHICS

Where do you live? (Australian residents) 87% NSW 6% VIC 6% QLD 1% TAS


Tracking Methodology 60 tracking studies were made over the period from July 22nd to December 23rd 2011, between 10:00am and 4:30pm. Observations were carried out by Michelle Del Carlo and Jessie Lee, interns for the Audience Research unit, using paper forms to trace the routes taken by visitors and notes on how they engage with various display areas.

Visitors were classified as being an adult, teenager or child, and whether they came alone, with friends, as a couple, as a family, or a school group.

The observed behaviour of visitors at each area in the exhibition was divided into the following categories:

Engage (E) Visitor is clearly active and intently reads or uses exhibit

Attend (A) Visitor stops at exhibit with both feet still for at least two seconds

Skim (S) Visitor looks briefly at exhibit details but does not stop to attend

Ignore (I) Visitor passes within two meters of exhibit but fails to attend or skim

General tracking observations:

• 86% of those tracked were adults

• 10% of those tracked were children

• 3% of those tracked were teenagers

• 33% of those tracked were part of a family

• 25% of those tracked were part of a couple

• 22% of those tracked were in a group of friends

• 18% of those tracked were visiting the exhibition by themselves

• 2% of those tracked were visiting as a school group


Time spent in the exhibition Time spent in exhibition (% of visitors observed) 0-5 minutes 5% 6-10 minutes 12% 11-15 minutes 15% 16-30 minutes 45% 31-60 minutes 23% 61+ minutes 0% Minimum amount of time spent in the exhibition was 1 minute Maximum amount of time spent in the exhibition was 54 minutes The average amount of time spent in the exhibition was 22 minutes Average amount of time for males: 23 minutes Average amount of time for females: 22 minutes The matrix below shows the average amount of time in minutes spent by age and group type, where data is present.

Adult Teen Child ALL

Family 22 * 15 20

Couple 23 * * 25

Friends 31 12 * 28

Alone 17 * * 17

School * * 18 18

ALL 23 12 16 22 Adults who came with friends spent the most time in the exhibition, with average of 31 minutes. Teens who came with friends spent the least amount of time in the exhibition, averaging 12 minutes. * Insufficient numbers were observed to get an average for these group types.


Levels of engagement The degrees of engagement (Engage, Attend, Skim, Ignore) were quantified on a scale of 1 to 4 so that the average level of engagement for each area and for each demographic could be calculated. An average of 4 would mean that all those observed engaged with that particular section, while a rating of 1 would mean that everybody ignored it.

The tracking sheets show the location of each area within the exhibition.

The table below shows the average engagement for all observed visitors in each area, and the number of times each of the behaviours was observed:

Area Description E A S I naAverage

Engagement

1 Introduction / projection (Kidspace entry) 1 0 0 51 8 1.06

2 Blue Edge: Fish tank 8 21 9 8 14 2.63

3 Blue Edge: jellyfish to sharks 16 17 7 4 16 3.02

4 Blue Edge: wall cases 10 20 10 2 18 2.90

5 Deep sea interactive 6 8 3 18 25 2.06

6 Island Home: wall cases 7 15 7 9 22 2.53

7 Penguins 5 12 11 13 19 2.22

8 Stromatolite/sea level 3 3 3 19 32 1.64

9 Crocodile case 6 15 8 4 11 2.70

10 Backyards: live animals 11 17 8 2 22 2.97

11 Backyards: showcases 4 23 10 2 21 2.74

12 Backyards: touch table 6 16 8 9 21 2.49

13 Backyards: wall displays 6 13 12 7 22 2.47

14 Dangerous Australians interactive table 20 9 10 1 20 3.20

15 Dangerous Australians: snakes 2 4 5 31 18 1.45

16 Adapt or die: emu showcase 2 10 6 5 37 2.39

17 Adapt or die: other showcases / wall displays 3 7 6 6 38 2.32

18 Live crocodile tank 8 10 6 2 34 2.92

19 Adapt or die: desert 1 3 6 19 31 1.52

20 Digital stories 3 0 1 10 46 1.71

21 Specialists over time: wall displays 7 12 14 9 18 2.40

22 Diprotodon 12 14 15 8 11 2.61

23 Marsupial lion & powerful thylacine 10 16 18 7 9 2.57

24 Macropods 2 10 14 7 27 2.21

25 Where are they now? - Corridor 5 2 6 6 41 2.32

26 Where are they now? - wall showcases 6 3 10 3 38 2.55

The average level of engagement across the entire exhibition was 2.37.


Average engagement by demographic The below matrix shows the average amount of time spent by age and group type where data is present.

Adult Teen Child ALL

Family 2.17 * 2.42 2.23

Couple 2.52 * * 2.55

Alone 2.26 * * 2.26

Friends 2.39 1.90 * 2.31

School * * 2.61 2.61

ALL 2.33 1.90 2.45 2.37

This data closely reflects the time spent, with adults in couples rating the highest at 2.52 and teens who

came with friends rating the lowest at 1.90.

* Insufficient numbers were observed to get an average for these group types.


Most engaging areas

• Area 14: Dangerous Australians interactive table (50% engaged, 23% attended, average engagement 3.20)

• Area 3: Blue Edge (jellyfish to sharks) (36% engaged, 39% attended, average engagement 3.02)

• Area 10: Backyards live animals (29% engaged, 45% attended, average engagement 2.97)

• Area 18: Live crocodiles (31% engaged, 38% attended, average engagement 2.81)

Dangerous Australians interactive table The Blue Edge

Backyards: live animals Live crocodiles


Least engaging areas

• Area 1: Introduction / projection at Kidspace entry (98% ignored, 0% skimmed, average engagement 1.06)

• Area 15: Dangerous Australians: snakes (74% ignored, 12% skimmed, average engagement 1.45)

• Area 19: Adapt or die: desert (66% ignored, 21% skimmed, average engagement 1.52)

• Area 8: Stromatolite / sea level interactive (68% ignored, 11% skimmed, average engagement 1.64)

Introduction / projection at Kidspace entry Dangerous Australians: snakes

Adapt or die: desert Stromatolite / sea level interactive


Selected quotes

The below quotes are taken from peoples’ responses to three of the open-ended questions from the survey. Identical and irrelevant responses have been excluded.

What would you expect an overseas version of this exhibition to look like?

• A way to tie it in with that country • Australian animals, live animals. Reef fish a must. Projectors showing fish a must. Megafauna

- noone had ever heard of all this in all their education! • Comparing native species to theirs • Comparisons to native animals from that country • Don't gloss it over & make it flashy, just leave it as it is. Very important to have the sea life &

oceans as many people think Australia is a desert • greater emphasis on the actual risks from these creatures • if setup is similar to this exhibition, it would be awesome! • include possums & a few more standards • Includes animals belonging to that country • it should be the same, it's awesome • Lots of comparisons between species • Maybe more on sharks? • More about species during Aust Aboriginal time (ie pre-1788) • More emphasis on the Aboriginal relationship with the animals - Dreamtime, diet & hunting,

calls etc • More stuff about Australian Aborigines - the species that are still around from that time • Much more indigenous. It currently has a very modern museum style which doesn't feel

Australian to foreigners. Think: natural desert colours, sand dunes, hot bright sun etc, indigenous music. Definitely highlight Aboriginal involvement - bush tucker, surviving with nature etc.

• Possibly different reptiles/larger range? • Stereotypical & non stereotypical animals. Dangers of Australia • Virtually the same just more explanation esp around location/habitats


What ONE aspect of the exhibition did you MOST like?

• All the penguins • Antarctic info / oceans & penguins • backyard animals / enclosure • Colour & lighting of exhibitions • Crocodiles • Dangerous animals • Diprotodon • Electronic board on ocean • finding the cuttlefish (cute) • Freshwater crocs - live animals instead of taxidermy • Having kids being able to sit and look at various insects/animals closely • historical aspect - overview of millions of years ago • I love the live animals, especially the crocs • Imagery across the blue walls • Interactive displays • Interactive table • It wasn't too crowded • Kids interactive exhibits • Leafy & weedy sea dragons • Life size figures • Live exhibits • Marine life - daughter loved "grabbing" the animals on the overhead projector • Platypus - to see how they live & how whole thing is arranged. The names of birds we have

seen. • Prehistoric animals & interactive table • Screens, the way its set out, penguins • Short docs about the importance of reef fish • Skeletons are amazing • Skulls of past animals • Sparky the python • Stroking the neck of the penguin. I was dying to know if they were soft or not soft. And the

diprotodon! • Stuffed animals • Tasmanian devil, the platypus home, diprotodon • taxidermied animals • the animals you can usually see in our lives • The Australian scenes - very imaginative, eg gumboot with redback in it (backyards) • The backyard section & the displays of dangerous sea life


• The bug collections • The crocodile - the case's history • The diamond python, outback stuff, shark thing • The diversity of animals, the diverse arrangements/layouts/displays & the interactive table.

The interaction between taxidermied animals is excellent & we love that. They tell a story & show personality (seal eats penguin, lizard eats possum, birds chat to each other, so lovely). Really adds to displays & informs viewers much more so than just static poses.

• The endangered animals - when they were last seen - Tasmanian tiger • The ghost-like images on the walls • The giant crocodile on the ceiling that surprises you as you walk underneath it • The giant wombat • The huge crocodiles • The insects • The interactive exhibits • The interactive table • The kangaroos • the lifesized displays • The lighting • The live creatures • The massive crocodile (in the display case) • The model snakes (under the big croc) • The moving images on the walls • The replication of extinct species • The stuff on swamps (flora) • The table and the seal eating the penguin • The taxidermy animals • the touch screen • The touch table - kids loved it • The water sound effects • They show you how they look - dangerous animals • Touch table -> shark • Touch tables! • Usually the table, but now the kids discovered the fish projections on the wall & they love that

(it wasn't working at other times) • Without a doubt - the shadowy images of marine animals as you enter (on the walls)


What ONE aspect of the exhibition did you LEAST like?

• Backyard • Bugs (liked them but was scared of them) • Bugs, they give me the creeps • Can't think of one • Couldn't really hear the short films • Dead birds overhead • Display tables could be a bit lower or have steps around to look inside for little kids • Horrible snakes • In my backyard • It was a bit too cold in there • It was not interactive • Lighting could have been darker for a more eerie effect • Lighting made it difficult to take pictures • Little bit cramped, hard to see everything. Bottlenecks of people • Live animals • love it all • more details on the snakes • More interactive exhibits • Moths • No dangerous plants • Not many things to touch • One of the films about collecting shrimp was a bit above the kids heads • Science stories (at end) • Screaming kids, parents who don't know how to control kids, especially at the touch/projector

table. Ruins it for the good kids, eg his daughter • Sea section - bit plain & generic • skeletons • Snakes - just not interested • Snakes - not really my thing • Stuffed birds • Taxidermy. She does not like taxidermy • That there is no flow • The aquarium because it had no fish • The confusing design & layout • The crocodile on the touch table takes too long to snap! Make it snap more! Or in a different

way! But I still love it • The handwritten signs/descriptions on the glass - hard for my young children to read easily • The live animals


• The live baby crocodile. Why do you need live animals in exhibitions? Really put off • The live frogs in a big cubicle - STRONGLY DISLIKED • The noise from building construction. Needs better lighting - can't read; spoken text hard to

understand. • The shells • The short doco on insects. Very boring. • The short film about killing insects • The shorts (films) about scientists • The small cages - like to be able to pat stuff (liked patting the stuffed penguins) • The spiders • The stuff on birds • The stuff on insects • there was no "path" to see things in order (a common complaint - TJ) • thought some of the animals (like the Zygamataurus) looked too unrealistic • Too many school groups • Too much on kangaroos/wallabies etc • Very noisy - noise from the dinosaur part travels • We didn't bother with any of the videos • Would like to be more child friendly / brighter lights / more interactive stuff / fun things /

lower tables to view (her daughter was too short)


EXHIBITION APPRAISAL FORM BACKGROUND The Exhibition Appraisal Form has been developed as part of the project, Museums Actively Researching Visitor Experiences and Learning (MARVEL). The project aims to understand and measure museum learning, with a particular focus on adolescents. MARVEL is a joint initiative between the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) and industry partners the Australian Museum, Sydney; Museum Victoria; the National Museum of Australia, Canberra; and Sovereign Hill Museums Inc, Ballarat. The members of the Research Team are: • Dr Janette Griffin, UTS • Dr Des Griffin, Consultant • Professor Susan Groundwater-Smith, University of Sydney/UTS • Dr Lynda Kelly, Australian Museum Audience Research Centre • Kimberley Pressick-Kilborn, UTS This form was developed and tested by members of the MARVEL Project Team, based on both literature and findings from previous studies that shaped the team’s approach to learning. REFERENCES Books McLean, K. (1993). Planning For People in Exhibitions. Washington: Association of Science Centres-Technology Centres. Serrell, B. (2005). Judging Excellence: A Framework for Assessing Excellence. Washington: Association of Science Centres-Technology Centres. Journals/journal articles Allen, S. (2004). Designs for Learning: Studying Science Museum Exhibits That Do More Than Entertain. Science Education, 88(Supplement 1), S17-S33. Various. (Fall 2000). Critiquing Exhibits: Meanings and Realities. The Exhibitionist. Various (Spring 2000). Thinking Critically About Exhibits. The Exhibitionist. Various (Spring 2001). Striving for Excellence in Exhibitions. The Exhibitionist. Websites Judging Excellence: A Framework for Assessing Excellence in Exhibitions from a Visitor-Experience Perspective (http://www.msu.edu/%7Edillenbu/EJ/home.html ) FURTHER INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK Janette Griffin Lynda Kelly [email protected] [email protected]


EXHIBITION APPRAISAL FORM The purpose of this form is to record your impressions of the exhibition in terms of the visitor experience and learning. It has been developed based on both literature and findings from MARVEL 1 that have shaped the MARVEL Team’s approach to learning. Not every question may be relevant, if that is the case then mark N/A. Also give examples of what you mean where possible. You could also use a camera to provide examples of the observations and claims you are making. EXHIBITION NAME/INSTITUTION Surviving Australia-Australian Museum APPRAISER NAME/DATE Irene Rubino, 20/10/2011 AUDIENCE: What audience do you think this exhibition is targeted to? (you can circle more than one) under 10 10-15 late teens young adult (18-30) seniors families X schools X special interests I think that the target audience of this exhibition is mainly families with children. In fact, elements such as interactives, hands-on corners, a questioning approach and the direct encounter with stuffed/alive animals are provided in order to attract the attention of children of different ages. However, I think that the process of meaning-making needs to be facilitated by an adult/ a docent (in the event of school-groups): in fact, texts are very long and I think that is unlikely that children read them. Given the theme of the exhibition and the length of the content provided, I would state that the exhibition is addressed to adults, too. In summary, I think that the structure of the exhibition offers several layers of interpretation and can then be approached with different depth by different audiences, suiting both children and adults. CONTENT 1. Exhibition content at right level for intended audience low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 2. Authority of museum clear, using strategies such as authored texts low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 3. Structure/themes/sections clearly delineated low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 4. Content is accurate low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 5. Exhibit content encourages links to visitor’s lives low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 5 X 6


Content Comments I think that the content of the exhibition is accurate; however, since the title of the exhibition is Surviving Australia, more information about why the animals presented have survived until now, how they adapted, and why they needed to adapt could be provided. Concerning links to visitor's lives, I think that this applies particularly to Australian natives; however, I think that foreign people can easily understand the connections, too. Moreover, I think that the exhibition can help them understanding the natural setting of the country and stimulate their curiosity about it. I think that the links to visitors' lives are particularly evident in the following parts of the exhibition: The Blue Edge and Our Backyard.


COMFORT 1. Exhibition is attractive and entices the visitor to enter low average high N/A 1 2 3X 4 5 6 2. Lighting is sufficient to read text & see objects low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 3. Sound is contained (no interference) and at appropriate level (can hear it) low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 4. Visitor can immediately see what exhibition is about low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 5. Temperature at right level for comfort low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 6. Text and graphics at the right physical position and height low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 7. Text and graphics at the right font size low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 8. Text and graphics positioned so that objects are related to labels low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 9. Sufficient places to sit and rest low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 10. Displays at level that takes account of various heights and mobility of visitors low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 Comfort Comments: I think that the introductory panels present at both entrances of the exhibition are not very attractive, despite they are lightened. Moreover, the panel located in the Blue Edge area is not very well visible, because it's not located at the front, but on the right side of the entrance. Concerning texts, I found them pretty long and not very easy to scan/skim (e.g. there are no bolded words), even though they communicate useful information. Moreover, I found the process of reading them physically tiring because of the lightening of some panels (light comes from behind the panels) and the use of the color white to write the texts. I found the process of reading texts written on transparent surfaces tiring, too (see Appendix, fig. A).


I found particularly effective the long interactive table in the section Dangerous Australians: I think that it arises excitement and it facilitates social interaction. However, it would be beneficial to improve technical aspects (especially reaction time). In addition, I think that touch screens located in the Blue Edge area are not very well positioned: in fact, it's easy not to notice them. Display levels are not always appropriate, in my opinion: for instance, in the Blue Edge area the jelly-fish and the octopus are not very visible, especially for children (display level is too high See Appendix, fig. A). Display level is absolutely appropriate in other exhibition areas, instead (e.g. section Adapt or Die, displays about megafauna).


COHERENCE 1. Logical links between exhibits and different sections of exhibition are clearly signposted low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 2. Directions about use of hands-on exhibits clear and easy to understand low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 3. Text clearly written and in logical sequence low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 4. Placing of labels relative to objects to enhance understanding low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 Coherence Comments: The different sections of the exhibition are generally clearly signposted, but I think that the Where are they now? area is easy to miss: in fact, it is located aside and there are not clear signals that invite people to visit it. I think that this area is important because it offers an interpretative framework of analysis, therefore I would suggest to make it more visible. CHALLENGE 1. More than one perspective presented low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 5 6 X 2. Promotes question asking low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 3. Opportunities for visitor to reach their own conclusions/explore further low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 4. Promotes/provokes thinking about issues low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 Challenge Comments: I think that the exhibition promotes thinking and question asking; however, I would have inserted more explanations about why the animals survived, how they adapted and what are their special characteristics.


CONTROL AND CHOICE 1. Visitors able to make decisions about their path through exhibit low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 2. Interactive devices easy to understand and use low average high N/A 1 2 X 3 4 5 6 3. Experiences come in variety of formats for different ways of learning low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 4. Visitor able to understand meaning regardless of what path they follow low average high N/A 1 2 3 X 4 5 6 Control and Choice Comments: As previously stated, I think that directions about the use of touch screens and interactives should be improved: in fact, in some cases directions are not present at all/the interactive is not very well visible and therefore it's easy to skip it and not to use it (see Appendix, fig. D). Then, I would say that the exhibition is more enjoyable if entered from the Dinosaurs gallery: in fact, the interpretative framework of analysis of the exhibition is mainly presented in the Adapt or Die and Where are they now? areas (even though the exhibition follows a constructivist approach and each section can be understood at a certain level for itself). Moreover, the Adapt or Die section offers a sort of link with the Dinosaurs gallery, since animals that became extinct are presented, too. Finally, I would add that the exhibition is least enjoyable if entered from the Indigenous Australians section: in fact, introductory panels are not present in this area and signals that help visitors orientate themselves in the new exhibition space are not present as well; as a consequence, starting to visit the exhibition from this point could be confusing (see Appendix, fig F). COLLABORATION 1. Exhibition encourages discussion and sharing of information low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 X 5 6 2. Group able to cluster around an exhibit low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 5 6 X Collaboration Comments: I think that social interaction is mainly facilitated by the direct encounter with stuffed and alive animals, by the long interactive table in the Dangerous Australians section and by the questioning approach followed throughout the exhibition.


CURIOSITY AND CONTINUING LEARNING 1. Exhibition explicitly encourages visitors to explore further beyond, e.g. via websites low average high N/A 1X 2 3 4 5 6 2. Associated events and programs clearly indicated low average high N/A 1 2 3 4 5 6 X Curiosity & Continuing Learning Comments: Since the Australian Museum has a very rich and detailed website, it could be positive to advertise its existence, encouraging people to access it in order to explore further beyond. CORE MUSEUM ACTIVITIES 1. When you walk into the museum you get an understanding of what it’s all about and

where to find things low average high 1 2 3 X 4 5 2. Adequate signage to toilets, cloaking, baby change rooms, other facilities low average high 1 2 3 4 X 5 3. Accessible for wheelchairs/strollers low average high 1 2 3 4 X 5 4. Meet and greet staff efficient, friendly and helpful low average high 1 2 3 4 5 X Core Museum Activities Comments: I think that way-finding in the museum is sometimes confusing, due to the physical characteristics of the building. However, maps and staff are very helpful.


USE THIS PAGE FOR ADDITIONAL GENERAL COMMENTS Overall, I think that the exhibition succeeds in illustrating the variety of peculiar animals that live in different natural settings in Australia nowadays. The direct encounter with stuffed and alive animals may be particularly exciting for children and visitors from abroad who are not familiar with the Australian fauna, whilst texts can enhance the knowledge about the topic for natives and adult visitors in general. Generally speaking, the exhibition is not addressed to specialists and the language used is easily accessible for teenagers, adults and older children. The content provided by the exhibition is coherent and it likely satisfies visitors' expectations; however, given that the title of the exhibition is Surviving Australia, more information about surviving strategies adopted by animals could be provided: in fact, it is not always clear why the animals presented in the exhibition have survived until now, how they adapted, and why they needed to adapt. Moreover, just few animals that have not survived are presented. In addition, more tips concerning how people can cope with Australian dangerous animals could be offered, too. The information provided are easy to process, but the action of reading the texts is sometimes difficult, and could be facilitated by using more paragraphs, bolded words, images rather than long descriptions; moreover, physical features such as lightening of the panels and the use of the color white for writing the texts could be reduced in order to limit fatigue. Then, expressions such as "of course" should be avoided in order not to take from granted visitors' previous knowledge (see Appendix, fig. E). Interactives, stuffed and alive animals, panels, videos and hands-on corners enable visitors to experience the exhibition in a variety of formats, suiting for different ways of learning; however, interactives and hands-on corners are sometimes not very well visible and they risk to go unnoticed by visitors: as a consequence, it would be beneficial to design solutions that improve their capacity to attract visitors' attention. For instance, the use of smaller cases for the interactives and the use of labels/drawings that help visitors to understand whether they can touch objects or not could be suggested (see Appendix, fig, B). Moreover, since time management is an important issue for visitors, the provision of a label that gives information about the length of the video located in the Digital Stories area would be of great value (see Appendix, fig. C). Finally, the display level of some of the showcases located in the Blue Edge area could be modified and adapted to children's needs and physical characteristics.

Surviving Australia Evaluation Report - FINAL · Australian Museum: Evaluation Report – Surviving...

Documents

Transcript of Surviving Australia Evaluation Report - FINAL · Australian Museum: Evaluation Report – Surviving...