Morris and Peter make an interesting point.  Immersive exhibits can and 
should be thought of as interactive in that they stimulate visitors 
curiosity about the content and allow for exploration and discovery in 
ways other than the traditional look and read method.  The World War I 
trench at the First Division Museum at Cantigny being a great example.  
All the sights and sounds (wish there was smells too) of the trenches 
with not a label in sight.

Their comments also force me to reveal my own bias in interactive 
exhibits.  As my example of the Oregon Trail wagon shows, I prefer low 
tech, multiple input/multiple output devices. That's what I like so they 
must be the best, right?  I did not mean to imply that feeling different 
animal pelts has no interpretive value or is somehow an inferior 
interactive.  In fact my wife, who touches and smells everything, gets 
more out of that kind of simple interactive than some of the more 
complex things we've tried.  And computers make fantastically engaging  
interactives.  Come to our exhibit opening this fall to see our new 
touchscreen and large plasma monitor interactive that allows you to have 
a conversation with a virtual 1840s teenager.  Best practice, in my 
opinion, requires a suite of devices, great and small, each pitched to 
one or more of the various learning modalities and intelligences.

So lets reframe the parameters of the discussion.  What immersive 
exhibits do you all think work best and why, AND what interactive 
exhibit elements, simple or complex, computerized or not, have you seen  
lately that you think worked really well (and why)?  Examples should 
still be accessible to visitors without the presence of an interpreter. 
And I would still like to limit the discussion to history (and 
anthropology) museums because I believe that those of us who work in 
these types of museums might not be thinking creatively enough when we 
develop new exhibits.

Finally, David Lewis replied off list with a link to a website put up by 
Eugene Dillenberg (who I know is lurking out there somewhere) of a great 
variety of exhibits he feels have some merit.  And a few that don't.  
It's an interesting and thought provoking site and I pass the link along 
again now: http://www.msu.edu/%7Edillenbu/exhibits/exshell.html .

Dan

Morris Witten wrote:
> Hi Dan-
>
> I agree with Peter about letting people "get into" an exhibit.  Years ago at
> the Kit Carson Home and Museum we had a mountain man camp set up. There was
> a hide tent with a buffalo hide bed, possibles bag, cookware, and other camp
> items. We also had a hide and scraper, stumps and tree branches, and even a
> little dripping spring.
>
> The "camp" was used by children and adults.  We did find that it got more
> use when we had a mountain man or woman there to answer questions and offer
> information about the exhibit.
>
> Morris
>
> Morris Witten
> Curator of Education
> Public Relations Manager
> Millicent Rogers Museum
> PO Box A
> 1504 Millicent Rogers Road
> Taos, NM 87571
> 505-758-2462 ext 216
>   

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).