>It is amazing how uncritical visitors are about their experience.  "We like
>it."  "We enjoyed it" predominate visitor comments, both on exit surveys and
>focus groups.

I too have found this to be true.  This might be due to the fact that people
who aren't predisposed to at least liking (if not loving and learning from)
the facility and its offerings just wouldn't come.  We get very few visitors
from "the field," who would be more disposed to be critical.

> most are 'content'
>with what they experience from the site; therefore deeper questioning is
>needed or more people need to be queried in order to get those who can
>provide more quality feedback. Is this a valid observation?

I think that most people don't look for architecture-related stuff--they
just take it for granted.  I, of course, look for these things all the time
when I visit museums and other learning centers, and if asked I do give the
feedback.  Deeper questioning is not the issue--maybe it's a matter of
inviting the people who would give the kind of feedback you want (a
"super-focus" group?)

Asking a random (even a scientifically-selected random group) sample has its
uses for some purposes--but if you are looking for learned feedback, ask a
learned group.

Julia Moore
Indianapolis Art Center