How could we improve ExhibitFiles?
September 25th, 2007 by Wendy PollockExhibitFiles has grown since May to more than 380 members and 70+ case studies and reviews. We’ve seen everything from Chagall to Second Life, with some classics like the Discovery Room in between.
Now it’s time for another round of improvements to the site, and we’d like your help. To make it easier for members to share their ideas, we’ve moved the blog to a more prominent location, with a tab near the top of the main page. We’ve been keeping track of the bug reports (and killing some bugs along the way). But we’d like to know more.
Please let us know your ideas for how the site could be improved by leaving comments here.
We’ll also be at the ASTC Annual Conference, which is coming up in LA in the middle of October, and hope to talk with ExhibitFiles members there. More on that soon.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Two key pieces that I think would help build more “critical mass” are:
1) Input from more of the “Silverbacks” of the field. Perhaps even a sort of digital “oral history” section. (Or is that a new project ?!?)
2) More “classic” exhibits ala Psychology and the Discovery Room that have had a lasting impact on the field. Many exhibits of this sort, like Whodunit, are MIA.
September 28th, 2007 at 8:39 am
First, great site and implementation! (ExhibitFiles is one of the few community sites I keep in touch with…)
A couple things I’d like:
1) Ability to scroll through more than four reviews at a time while browsing. (Maybe a long scrolling list of 15 or so entries per page so it’s easier to quickly get a sense of what’s been reviewed).
2) Ability to start and access discussions by topic independently (or on a parallel track) with reviews. When I wrote the review of the World of Coca Cola, a few “big picture” issues emerged. For example, the topic of “revealing our mistakes to visitors” is one that I think we could have a fun and lively discussion around — one that could span between reviews. Maybe have discussion topics that easily link to reviews and vice versa.
Nice idea to put the blog up front on the site…
October 23rd, 2007 at 2:00 pm
A few things I have been thinking about:
1) I would like to see the reviews start to utilize the Judging Exhibitions Framework. Beverly and lots of other folks have done a great job creating a standard way to judge exhibits. If we can all start to use it as we create reviews, then we will be able to assess and judge them better, individually and next to each other. When a collegue says that something was “great”, that’s nice, but it doesn’t tell me very much. The Framework helps us to look and and include a broad range of qualities of the exhibition that we might otherwise overlook. (BTW, I have collected a group of about 8 folks who will be judging exhibitions together on a regular basis. We will be posting the results in the reviews.) Is there a way to make it really easy to input Framework judging results (form?) so that it is easier to do a review if you had used the Framework than if you hadn’t? Perhaps that’s one option.
2) Collect and connect the resources that were useful in creating an exhibit. For example, a case study could refer to a model or matrix or research that the team used to inform, guide or otherwise affect their work. Perhaps it was the PISEC study or maybe an internal process or a well-developed developmental framework. These could be referred to and provided with a link. Then perhaps I could search for all the exhibits that used the PISEC study to inform their design. This could also include key development documents, such as a copy of the Interpretive plan. Then I could search for examples of Interpretive Plans. I would really like case studies to document more of the nuts-and-bolts and guts of an exhibit - the stuff that doesn’t show up in photos - to help other developers learn from our experiences.
3) Make a distinction between “exhibits” and “exhibitions”. So far, it seems that the case studies and reviews are for entire exhibitions. Perhaps there is a category that is individual exhibits. Review how they were made, what the labels said, how the visitor interaction worked/didn’t work, their context and other specifics like that. If folks were willing to share, then the case study could include parts lists and other relevant data.