Who the museum evaluations are for: From museum visitors ... · PDF file Conclusion and...

Click here to load reader

  • date post

    30-May-2020
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    1
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Who the museum evaluations are for: From museum visitors ... · PDF file Conclusion and...

  • Who the museum evaluations are for : From museum visitors to local societies

    and collaborative project partners

    Toru Sasaki Hokkaido University

    1

  • 2

    The museum focuses on the Native Peoples of the North who live in both Eurasia and America.

    Hokkaido Museum of Northern Peoples Abashiri City, Hokkaido Prefecture

    Source: website of Hokkaido Museum of Northern Peoples

  • 3

    Tokyo

    Kyoto

    Hokkaido Museum of Northern Peoples Abashiri City

    Sapporo

  • 4

    Permanent Exhibition

  • Presentation Outline

    1. Background 2. Period of museum evaluation adoption 3. Period of reflection 4. Trial period ・Mie Prefectural Museum(MieMu) ・Special exhibition “Mushrooms! Mushrooms! Mushrooms!” Osaka Museum of Natural History ・Regional cooperative project “Singing Insects and the Township” Itami City in Hyogo Prefecture 5. Conclusion and prospects for the future

    5

  • 1. Background on the museum evaluation’s adoption in Japan

    6

  • 7

    Trends in National and Local government

    1999

    2001 Central Government Reform

    2002

    1996

    1997 Shizuoka Prefecture : the administrative evaluations using business inventory tables

    National government

    Local government

    the Law Concerning Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs

    the Government Policy Evaluations Act

    M ie Prefecture : the office project evaluation system

  • 8

    Tokyo

    Kyoto

    Mie Pref. Shizuoka Pref.

    Sapporo

  • 9

    1990 2000 2010 2020

    introducing

    evaluations

    of their

    operations

    spreading /

    being set in p lace

    Adoption of the evaluation of adm inistrative bodies in Japan

    | | | |

  • • The Comprehensive Evaluation Method → an evaluation of programs • The Performance Evaluation Method → an evaluation by measuring result • The Project Evaluation Method → an evaluation with a cost-benefit analysis.

    10

    Issues on evaluation methods :Tatsuya Ono (2009)

  • • Almost all of the local governments use the Performance Measurement(PM).

    • The lack of process to assess the cause and effect relationship or logic in PM.

    11

    Issues on evaluation methods :Tatsuya Ono (2009)

  • The method most widely adopted by museums is the Performance Measurement(PM).

    12

    Museums in Japan and establishers

    5690 museums

    4489 museums → 79%

  • Presentation Outline

    1. Background 2. Period of museum evaluation adoption 3. Period of reflection 4. Trial period ・Mie Prefectural Museum(MieMu) ・Special exhibition “Mushrooms! Mushrooms! Mushrooms!” Osaka Museum of Natural History ・Regional cooperative project “Singing Insects and the Township” Itami City in Hyogo Prefecture 5. Conclusion and prospects for the future

    13

  • 2. Period of museum evaluation adoption

    14

  • 15

    Office project evaluation system by Tokyo Metropolitan government

    This was the first time that a public museum was considered a management organization and was evaluated as a whole.

    Achievement rate Efficiency

    Performance of a museum Necessity Impartia l i ty

    Com prehensive eva luation result( 5 grades)

  • 16

    Tokyo

    Kyoto

    Shizuoka Prefectural Museum of Art

    Sapporo

  • 17 Source: website of Shizuoka Prefectural Museum of Art

  • 18

    Exhibition & Workshop

  • • Began to create an evaluation system in 2001.

    • A committee composed of third-party stakeholders and museum’s staff members in 2003

    • “Museum Navi”(2005) created over roughly 2 years.

    19

    Shizuoka Prefectural Museum of Art

  • 32 quantitative indicators 8 qualitative indicators

    32 quan titative ind icators

    40 ind icators

    indicators that use

    responses from visitors,

    18, 56% indicator that uses

    responses from residents, 1, 3%

    indicators from data

    derived from documents,

    13, 41%

    20

    Evaluation indicators of “Museum Navi”, Shizuoka Prefectural Museum of Art

  • 21

    One of 8 qualitative indicators

    “Did the museum change the lives of exhibition visitors or event participants.”

  • 22

    Tokyo

    Kyoto

    Sapporo

    Shizuoka Prefectural Museum of Ar

  • Presentation Outline

    1. Background 2. Period of museum evaluation adoption 3. Period of reflection 4. Trial period ・Mie Prefectural Museum(MieMu) ・Special exhibition “Mushrooms! Mushrooms! Mushrooms!” Osaka Museum of Natural History ・Regional cooperative project “Singing Insects and the Township” Itami City in Hyogo Prefecture 5. Conclusion and prospects for the future

    23

  • 3. Period of reflection on the evaluation of museums

    24

  • 25

    The state of museum evaluation adoptions

    Source: Created by the presenter using data from the Japanese Association of Museums(2009:4-5)

    N=1,044

  • The requests from museums that have not adopted evaluations yet.

    • “the introduction of specific examples of evaluations”

    • “the provision of training, manuals, or guidelines to help with adopting evaluations.

    →Lack of the know-how on adopting evaluations. →Lack of appropriate place to learn about it.

    26

  • The opinions and requests from museums that appear to have already adopted evaluations. • “Most of the indicators are evaluations of measures to achieve

    numerical goals but it is difficult to evaluate unseen effects.” • “If we can find a way to measure the economic effect of

    museum activities or their cost-effectiveness, we can make evaluation activities even better.”

    • “We should shift to a system that evaluates the contents of activities.”

    • “The evaluation cannot be said to be analyzed or used enough, and we want the technical aspect to be covered better.”

    →Skeptical opinions about the Performance Measurement (PM) →Opinions about improving the way the data was analyzed.

    27

  • 28

    “The Progress of Activities Related to Evaluation and Current Issues.” : Takai (2012)

    ?

  • Reason that evaluations did not spread among museums. Takai(2012) 1) There are few museums that formulate midterm or

    long-term project plans.

    2) There are no tools available to plan midterm or long- term project plans and it is difficult to arrive at concrete indicators or goals from project plans.

    → Lack of midterm or long-term project plans that are connected to a museum’s mission and its self- evaluation. 29

  • Presentation Outline

    1. Background 2. Period of museum evaluation adoption 3. Period of reflection 4. Trial period ・Mie Prefectural Museum(MieMu) ・Special exhibition “Mushrooms! Mushrooms! Mushrooms!” Osaka Museum of Natural History ・Regional cooperative project “Singing Insects and the Township” Itami City in Hyogo Prefecture 5. Conclusion and prospects for the future

    30

  • 4. Trial period for creating new evaluations and evaluation methods

    31

  • Presentation Outline

    1. Background 2. Period of museum evaluation adoption 3. Period of reflection 4. Trial period ・Mie Prefectural Museum(MieMu) ・Special exhibition “Mushrooms! Mushrooms! Mushrooms!” Osaka Museum of Natural History ・Regional cooperative project “Singing Insects and the Township” Itami City in Hyogo Prefecture 5. Conclusion and prospects for the future

    32

  • 33

    (1)Designing an evaluation system that is linked to the deliberation of the project p Mie Prefectural Museum (MieMu) Opened in April 2014

  • 34

    Mie Osaka

    Itami Kyoto

    100km

  • 35

  • Basic Exhibition

  • MieMu’s symbol Children’s Hands-on exhibition room

    Mie’s real-life encyclopedia Learning Space

  • 38

    History of the Prefectural Museum in Mie 1953 Prefectural museum of M ie opend( ~ 2007)

    1986 Concept for a new museum began being deliberated

    2008 Basic Plan for a New Prefectural M useum, M useum M ission

    April 2011 Reconsideration of all sorts of projects

    June 2011 "3 directions” and “7 items"

    2012 W orking group to devise an evaluation system

    April 2014 New M useum( M ieM u) opend

  • MieMu’s mission in 2008

    1. Preser