My understandings and research to answer WEEK NINE NOTES, all academic resources have been read through. For study purpose only of unit ALC203
What does ‘engagement’ in a museum context mean to you? Does it relate in some way to time, attention, accumulation of knowledge, reflection, interactivity, or a combination of some (or all) of these?
Engagement in museums entails person-to-person real time exchanges and also participation as a part of museum experience. It is word used often in many fields one of them being in museums. Engagement in museums gives a situation where by the museum attendants do manual counting of visitors and also manual studios for the visitors (Aronson, p.224). In other it entails collecting different data from the visitors on their actual experiences. This data helps in heritage sector and engagements as far as the behavior of visitors is concerned. It creates awareness to visitors on different museum experiences. Engagement in museums relates to both interactivity, accumulation of knowledge, attention and time. Different visitors take varying to get engaged, due to varying interactivity to try to gather knowledge in different platforms many people have accumulated different experiences on museums (Aronson, p.225).
List the obstacles that face museums in the present, as outlined by Black. What do you think are the most significant problems and (how) can digital media be harnessed in order to respond to some of these?
The most significant of all problems many museums are facing is digital storages. This has been a huge problem. Museums face a problem of storing the enormous amounts of information which is often generated internally for the purpose of future references (Black, p.6). Many systems are obsolete and lead to degradation. Another problem is how to deal with tangible assets of the museum. Storing painting is a challenge. Museums have been straining to create environments in which the traditional artefacts will thrive well in. Many curators, directors and the registrars have failed in reporting the existence of fake paintings. When the visitors discover them later this loses their public confidences. It is hard to convince the current generation to pay money to view artefacts and we know that finance drives museums (Black , p.10). Many museums cannot accommodate many visitors and this has posed a lot of challenge. The media can be widely used to store the massive data and minimize loose of information. People have been able to share information in social media and have helped in expanding museums.
Heath and von Lehm (2010, p. 277) write that ‘we have to reshape the ways in which we think of and conceptualize the visitor’. How do they suggest this might be done? What key features of their argument do you find most (or least) convincing?
The innovations in the digital media have been fully adopted in different museum setting. Different exhibition in digital forms are all over the internet. Many websites based on museums have grown since now people have been able to post photos and videos on Facebook, YouTube, twitter and other platforms which have been called the virtual heritage. The media has made it too easy in engaging of visitors since people view different forms of pictures and videos which give different experiences on the museum (Heath & von Lehm, p.277). The digital media has been associated with various forms of opportunities which have brought the urge to re-conceptualize the audience nature which include the choices and preferences. It is good to utilize people’s notions in the part of interactivity by means of ways which are very useful (Heath & von Lehm, p.277).
What is your opinion of the JHC StoryPods and their potential to engage visitors? What factors do Brown and Waterhouse-Watson argue need to be considered that may impact on their reception in the museum setting?
The JHC have made the engagement of visitors an easy task, the utilization of the JHC story pods is the alternative way to rethink as far conceptualizing the visitors is concerned. He App of story pod gives the best engagements from the Holocaust survivors. It makes it easy to explore the photographic evidences and the artefacts in the experiences of holocaust (Brown & Waterhouse-Watson, p.13). Since the story pods are mounted on computer at museum center and also the touch screen kiosks which are interactive. This is best form of non-virtual and virtual location historical artefacts and also the oral testimonies. The visitors have the capability of interacting with the information and everything they need with little attention. This has been the most effective desired way in replacing the power to meet the survivors of the holocaust. This device has greatly reduced the challenges of museums in that it considers the limitations and the potentialities that affect the digital media in trying to give the experiences (Brown & Waterhouse-Watson, p.16).
How effectively does the StoryPod app mediate the memories of survivor guides? Does the app promote a higher degree of user agency than a traditional exhibit?
The Story Pod App gives good engagement with the testimonies of the holocaust survivors and gives an easy task to discover the photographic evidences and artefacts that gather around the experiences (Brown & Waterhouse-Watson, p.28). The stories of these holocaust fighters enable people to be able to properly engage into the events and history that can be too difficult to imagine. It creates pictures in our brains that help us to see the tragedy behind the story. By opening the App anyone can be able to scroll down the photographs of the survivors and if anyone wishes to know more about a survivor he/she just tap on the picture. It gives an opportunity to access all the primary information and be able to nicely engage (Brown & Waterhouse-Watson, p.31).
Aronson, R 1988, ‘The Holocaust and human progress’, in Rosenberg, A and Myers, GE (eds.), Echoes from the Holocaust: Philosophical Reflections on a Dark Time, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, pp. 223-244.
Black, G 2012, Transforming Museums in the Twenty-First Century, Milton Park, Abington and New York, pp. 1-12 (available as an ebook via library catalogue).
Heath, C and von Lehm, D 2010, ‘Interactivity and collaboration: new forms of participation in museums, galleries and science centres’, in Parry, R (ed.), Museums in a Digital Age, Routledge, New York and London, pp. 266-78 (available as an ebook via library catalogue).
Brown, A and Waterhouse-Watson, D 2014, ‘the future of the past: digital media in Holocaust museums,’ Holocaust Studies: A Journal of Culture and History, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1-32 (journal article available via library catalogue).