This document discusses conditions for museum educators to successfully innovate with technology. It identifies three key domains that determine success or failure: the innovator, the innovation/project, and the context of the museum. For each domain, it lists factors that indicate preparedness and likelihood of success. It provides a scoring system to assess an educator's strengths and weaknesses across the three domains to help determine if a given technology project is likely to succeed given their situation.
1. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Museum Educators
Innovating with Technology
Scott Sayre and Kris Wetterlund
AAM Learning in Museums
Seminar
Friday, June 20, 2008
2. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
What are the conditions for museum
educators successfully innovating with
technology in museums?
3. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Conditions for Classroom
Technology Innovations
Yong Zhao, Michigan State University, Kevin Pugh, University of
Toledo, Stephen Sheldon, Johns Hopkins University, Joe L. Byers,
Michigan State University
Teachers College Record, Volume 104,
Number 3, April 2002, pp. 482-515
ARTstor Study
4. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Museum Educators Innovating
with Technology
The Innovator (Educator)
The Innovation (Project)
The Context (Museum)
5. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
ARTstor Projects
Docent Project
History Museum
Video Conferencing
Teacher Partnership
7. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovator (Educator)
Knowledge of the technology and its
enabling conditions
A Request for Proposals (RFP) that contained
wildly varied levels of detail made it impossible
to bid on.
8. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovator (Educator)
Pedagogy-technology compatibility
In an ARTstor test, a history museum educator
stressed her emphasis in bringing in resources
from all disciplines to aid teaching history at her
museum.
9. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovator (Educator)
Knowledge of the organizational and
social culture of the museum
Technology staff proposing a project that put technology in the hands of art
museum docents. The educator expressed interest but knew the docents
would resist.
10. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovation (Project)
Alignment with the museum culture
Museum authority versus Web 2.0
The art mob and MOMA
The Library of Congress and Flickr
11. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovation (Project)
Required resources are available: human,
economic and technology
Cell phone audio tours
YouTube, Facebook, Flickr, etc.
12. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovation (Project)
Distance from the innovators current
practices
MDL teacher training. Teachers who succeeded
were those who used Pachyderm to create
resources for something they were already
teaching.
13. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Context (Museum)
Technological infrastructure (facility,
network, equipment, etc.)
Museum educators would like to use YouTube
videos in docent training but the IT staff of the
museum has YouTube blocked because the
network can’t support video streaming.
14. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Context (Museum)
Human infrastructure
The first version of ArtsConnectEd placed more
demands on the new media staff than
resources were available. Solution: Recreate
ArtsConnectEd so that museum educators are
responsible for content.
15. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Context (Museum)
Organizational culture (support staff,
policies and procedures, etc.)
Cell phones and laptops are banned in some
museum buildings.
16. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
The Innovator
Knowledge of the technology
Pedagogy/technology compatibility
Knowledge of museum culture
The Innovation
Distance from culture
Distance from resources
Distance from innovator’s practice
The Context
Technology infrastructure
Human infrastructure
Organizational culture
Successful Tech Projects
17. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Museum Educator Technology
Preparedness Quiz
18. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section A: The Innovator
Question 1
I can use the technology myself and am familiar
with all of the enabling technologies needed to
support it.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
19. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section A: The Innovator
Question 2
The way this technology aids learning closely
parallels my own teaching philosophy.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
20. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section A: The Innovator
Question 3
I understand and can navigate easily the
social/political dynamics of my institution.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
21. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section B: The Project
Question 4
This project is a variation of something I’ve
done or do already.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
22. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section B: The Project
Question 5
I understand and can navigate easily the
social/political dynamics of my institution.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
23. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section B: The Project
Question 6
I can implement this project without cooperation
from anyone else.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
24. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section C: The Context
Question 7
Communication between technology staff,
museum leadership and me is common.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
25. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section C: The Context
Question 8
Technology components required to implement
this project work well and are easily available to
me whenever I need them.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
26. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Preparedness Quiz
Section C: The Context
Question 9
I work in an organization that welcomes and
encourages innovation with supportive policies
for technology purchases and related
professional development.
No Some Yes
1 2 3 4 5
27. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
It’s Time to Calculate Your
Scores…
28. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Scoring: The Innovator
The innovator is the most important domain used to determine
innovation success or failure. If innovator scores total nine or
above, the project may well succeed even if scores in the other two
domains are not as high.
Score 9-12: Innovator’s strengths will likely steer project to success
Score 5-8: Innovator should proceed with caution. If other domains
have scores of 9 or higher, success is still possible.
Score 0-4: Innovator may benefit from reflecting on the nature of
his/her pedagogy and developing a deeper understanding of the
proposed technology. An awareness of the social dynamics of the
institution will aid the innovator in choosing the right innovation and the
right time to introduce it.
29. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Scoring: The Innovator
The innovator is the most important domain used to determine
innovation success or failure. If innovator scores total nine or
above, the project may well succeed even if scores in the other two
domains are not as high.
Score 9-12: Innovator’s strengths will likely steer project to success
Score 5-8: Innovator should proceed with caution. If other domains
have scores of 9 or higher, success is still possible.
Score 0-4: Innovator may benefit from reflecting on the nature of
his/her pedagogy and developing a deeper understanding of the
proposed technology. An awareness of the social dynamics of the
institution will aid the innovator in choosing the right innovation and the
right time to introduce it.
30. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Scoring: The Innovator
The innovator is the most important domain used to determine
innovation success or failure. If innovator scores total nine or
above, the project may well succeed even if scores in the other two
domains are not as high.
Score 9-12: Innovator’s strengths will likely steer project to success
Score 5-8: Innovator should proceed with caution. If other domains
have scores of 9 or higher, success is still possible.
Score 0-4: Innovator may benefit from reflecting on the nature of
his/her pedagogy and developing a deeper understanding of the
proposed technology. An awareness of the social dynamics of the
institution will aid the innovator in choosing the right innovation and the
right time to introduce it.
31. Scott Sayre & Kris Wetterlund
Sandbox Studios/Museum411Learning in Museums 2008, June 20, 2008
Scoring: The Project
Innovations most likely to succeed are those that have some
connection to current practice or do not require significant leaps in
technology acquisition for the host institution. The degree of
dependence on other people also impacts a project’s success or
failure. Research indicates that projects rooted in “evolution rather
than revolution” have a greater chance for success.
Score 9-12: This innovation is likely to be a timely step in the
museum’s technology development.
Score 5-8: This innovation may present significant hurdles during the
implementation process. Innovator should question if strengths in
other domains (Innovator and Context) are enough to overcome these
hurdles at the present time.
Score 0-4: The innovation is likely to present too many barriers to
meet with success at this time. Examining other areas of current
practice to identify projects that require smaller technological and
pedagogical challenges may be recommended.
Notas do Editor
Scott and I work with so many museums, and notice patterns about what succeed and what fails when museum implement technology projects. We have our own theories as to how to predict success…
Original research, its approach to teachers innovation with what ever kinds of tech. The ARTStor study and its correlation.
VTS
“Socially savvy educators are much more aware of the potential for problems and can frequently negotiate compromises among the various stakeholders that smooth the way for successful technology experiences.”
MDL
A healthy human infrastructure would include flexible and responsive technical staff, knowledgeable colleagues who can help with the innovation, and supportive administrators.
Only one person is advocate and when that person leaves the project is trashed?