I have chosen to analyse the existing solution at museums that is human guides employed by the museum. This is something which I have encountered a few times but it is not present at all museums.
The guide is often a person who is educated within the area he or she is talking about and is available for questions from the visitors and can feel what kind of group he or she is guiding and is therefore able to modify the information accordingly. This makes it easier for the museum to provide information suited for different groups of all ages and skill levels and to explain things to visitors who without that interaction might not have understood the exhibition.
However a guide can be seen as boring. If there is a lot if things to see and do at the museum some people, and perhaps especially our target group of children, may have a hard time concentrating on what a guide has to say. For these people a more interactive guide where you actually get to do something may be a better solution. But it is up to the guide to make the visit as interesting as possible and I would imagine that it differs from guide to guide what kind of group they prefer to guide and how skilled they are at making the visit a memorable and educational experience.
What is working well:
- a human guide can be very knowledgeable and informative
- the information can be modified
- questions can be answered
- new information can be worked into the exhibition easily
Not working well:
- if they don’t ask questions the visitors might not be involved and could find that boring in the long run. Musee visits are often long.
- unpredictable how informational a person might be. We all have bad days.
- it is not cheap to have a person employed.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar