Webpage Supplement to
Chapter 14: Museum Theatre
Catherine Hughes
Revised: July 11, 2007
Note as a major resource the International Museum Theatre Alliance's website: http://www.imtal.org/
Evaluation
Here are
some further notes considering the process of evaluation in museum
theatre: The
evolution of theatre's standing in museums is reflected in the
various, albeit sporadic, evaluation reports conducted over the last
twenty years. Initially reports focused simply on whether visitors
liked the dramatic experience. Early resistance to theatrical
techniques by staff often proved the impetus for such studies. In the
results of Munley's evaluation (1982) of the play, Buyin' Freedom,
responses to it were universally positive, including those of
previously critical staff.
At The Science
Museum in London, staff were concerned that visitors
might be embarrassed at being approached by an actor in role as they
walked through an exhibition, which spawned the study title,
"Enlightening or Embarrassing: An evaluation of drama in the Science
Museum" (Bicknell and Mazda, 1993). This comprehensive evaluation
of the Science Museum's entire drama program found nearly categorical
support from visitors (95%) for the idea of theatre in a museum.
There were a number of ways in which visitors expressed this support.
From the executive summary, 85% of the sample agreed that the
characters in the Museum's drama program made people want to get
involved with exhibits; 90% felt that the actors made the exhibit more
memorable.
In a more recent
study, Jackson (2000) sought to be more critical and
incisive of claims made of interactive theatre's power by looking at
theatre in two heritage sites.
"If truly educational approaches to History are to
do with generating a spirit of curiosity, inquiry and engagement, a
recognition of the differences and similarities between present and
past, and with showing that history is as much about lived experience
as it is about dates, buildings and artefacts, then what function might
theatrical techniques have in achieving such educational ends?" (p.
204).
What he found
was that theatre can be both illuminating and a hindrance
to educating about history. Done well, it can open up the past in all
its complexities and generate true engagement. However, ill-conceived
programs can also pander to simplistic ideas of history. The same, of
course, could be said of any theatre or teaching tool. It must be
conceived, created, and produced with immense care and skill.
Many of us may
have had the uncomfortable occasion of encountering an
over-eager costumed actor who does not know how much information is too
much information to share; or had the pleasant surprise of happening
upon an ongoing conversation with an impressive and competent
interpreter who keys in on people’s levels of interest. Finding
the balance between content, style and interaction is central. The
aesthetic standards for good theatre are high and demand talent and
veracity. Add to that the necessity for consummate interaction based on
specific content and you have the challenge of museum theatre in a
nutshell
In the present
day, it has become all but mandatory to produce
evaluation results in order to hold a place on the moving menu of
museum offerings. Museum theatre must prove its worth in some manner.
How to do this and why are the big questions. I include why because no
one should carry out evaluation studies simply to satisfy those asking
for them. At least, it is not just for them. Rather, evaluation studies
can be carried out in order to find out what is happening with visitors
when presented with a play, or a character, or an interpretation. There
is wonder in trying to discern the currents rippling below the surface
as children sit rapt before a musical about sea turtles, as adults
debate the merits of cloning, as teenagers experience a first-person
account of slavery. In realizing and articulating that wonder, we
fertilize the field of museum theatre. That said, the limitations of
time and money constrain many museum theatre practitioners to carry out
little, if any, evaluation. However, there are ways to conduct serious
studies within those limitations.
For example, a
variety of findings have resulted from ten years of
evaluation of the theatre program at the Museum of Science, Boston,
which began using theatre in its exhibitions in 1985. In a
meta-evaluation that looked at these studies collectively, which
included three external evaluations and seven internal evaluations,
Baum and Hughes (2002) found collective evidence of both cognitive and
affective outcomes:
* content gain;
* visitors'
perception that plays were educational and of consequent
value;
* visitors'
articulation of abstract and complex ideas from plays (p.
357).
Over the course
of the ten years, the aggregate theatre experience for
visitors was overwhelmingly positive. These evaluations, in addition to
comment cards submitted voluntarily by visitors, have been key factors
in the theatre program's success.
At the Museum of
Science, Boston people wrote supportive comments on
cards they left at the end of their visit. One visitor commented, “The
performance was informative, stimulating and educational. It sure does
challenge and foster discussion.” Another said, “This one [show] moved
me in so short a time.” Collectively, these responses suggest that
theater can be a powerful learning tool in the museum setting. In these
and other studies (Hein, Lagarde and Price 1986; Rubenstein and
Needham, 1992), theatre's place in museums was confirmed by visitors as
appropriate and enjoyable. Additionally, these responses suggest that
theater can be a powerful learning tool in the museum
setting.
References to the above:
Baum, L.
& Hughes, C. (2001). Ten Years of Evaluating Science
Theater at the Museum of Science, Boston. Curator 44 (4): 355-366. This
meta-evaluation synthesizes many different play evaluations into a
whole. The Museum of Science, Boston has been a pioneering institution
in museum theatre.
Munley, Mary
Ellen, 1982. Evaluation Report of Buyin’ Freedom. In C.
Hughes (ed.). Perspectives on Museum Theatre. Washington, D.C.:
American Association of Museums, pp. 69-94. This is the first
evaluation of museum theatre, which looked at how visitors reacted to a
difficult, emotional play on slavery set in the National Museum of
American History.
Rubenstein, R.
& Needham, H. (1992). Evaluation of the Live
Interpretation Program at the Canadian Museum of Civilization. In C.
Hughes (ed.). Perspectives on Museum Theatre (pp. 95-142). Washington,
DC: American Association of Museums. This comprehensive evaluation of
an entire theatre program provides support the notion of a drama
program in a museum.
Naomi Stein
<nstein@berkeley.edu> is a museum professional who
wrote on July 4, 2006:.
We do a type of science theatre. One
example is an improvisational theatre show about the function and
anatomy of the human brain, that I've been touring to schools,
community events and even a home for emotional disturbed youth (one of
the most enriching) over the last 15 years. Also a piece I wrote
for the California Department of Health Services which was generated
using a variety of improvisational techniques (Spolin, Boal, Johnstone,
Zaporah). You can learn more about the former at
http://www.lawrencehallofscience.org/SDT/SDT.html and the latter
at http://www.tarnival.org then click on Street Theatre. If you
view the trailer the first man you see (dressed as a bird) is a
neuroscientist who regularly uses improv. in his teaching (he's a
professor at San Francisco City College).
Theatre in Museums Workshop. The Children’s Museum
of Indianapolis, Indiana, now hosts the annual
“Theatre in Museums” workshop, founded at the Science Museum of
Minnesota, where it ran for eighteen years. The 21st Annual workshop
will be from September 24 - 29, 2007!
The workshop serves as an
introduction to the field of museum theatre, and as a refresher course
on new developments. It addresses the history museum theatre, its
present status, various program options, program administration and
budgeting, collaborations with other theatre artists and playwrights,
and designing stage sets, costumes, and props. Questions: 317 334-3701.
The Children’s Museum
of Indianapolis employs ten full-time actor-interpreters. For further
information, contact Tessa Bridal : TessaB@childrensmuseum.org