[log in to unmask] writes:

> I agree with Michel, but I would add that a truly great hands-on exhibit
is
> minds-on and communicates on its own. By participating, visitors get it.
> Text isn't necessary. That's my ideal. I'm still trying to get there.
>
> Of course, if you want to get something across that you can't communicate
> with an interactive, I guess you have to write about it. But then the
> question is, why don't you write a book instead? I don't go to museums
just
> to read and look at photos.
>
> BTW, I'm a writer by training, and I'm writing a lot of labels for our new
> permanent exhibition. I feel like I've got no choice, because some
factions
> within the museum always complain if something isn't "covered." But I know
> it isn't really covered for most of our visitors, because any one label
will
> only be read by a small percentage of people.
>
__________________________________________________________

I agree, it's wonderful when an exhibit stands alone and provides an
experience that allows the visitor to discover something.  But if our goal
is to help the visitor construct understanding, why not use whatever
methods help us achieve this goal?

Thoughtfully written text is often a useful part of the whole: it raises
questions, or relates this experience to something the visitor may have
experienced elsewhere, or perhaps helps a parent understand how children of
different developmental stages may use the materials in the exhibit.

Remember, we are comfortable in museums -- many members of our audience are
intimidated by them, or (if they are parents) feel responsible for helping
their children learn in them.  Text that's well done (see the Playspace
exhibit at the Children's Museum of Indianapolis, for example) helps set a
tone for enjoyable learning.  If used properly, text can be a tool for
those who need it or want it, without being a distraction or interfering
with the interactive experience.