18.11.2019
1
Interpretive Media
Michal Medek
michal.medek@kapraluvmlyn.cz
www.michalmedek.cz
Review – Interpretive planning
Interpretive planning
considerations/factors
A Sense of Place 5M Model
 What you want to
communicate with visitors
 Why provide
interpretation?
 Message
 Who your visitors are  Who might the
interpretation be for?
 Market
 What your place is like
and what is has to offer
 Mechanics
 What else is happening
around
 Market
 What you want to say
about your place
 What might be
interpreted?

 Message
 How, and where, you are
going to say it
 Where, when and how
should the place or object
be interpreted?

 Media
 What are the
management implications
 What subsequent
management is
necessary?
 Management
Model 5M (Brochu, 2003)
Media come last after all the other areas were considered
Choosing the media
Only when we know what we want to communicate, to whom
and why we ask how.
Market
Message
Education
‘X’ years
Families Over 50s
Sub-theme A
Storyline 1
Outreach
programme
Trail guide
Sub-theme A
Storyline 2
Visitor centre
Exhibit A
Souvenir
booklet
Sub-theme B
Storyline 1
On-site
curriculum
Sub-theme B
Storyline 2
Activity booklet Activity booklet Visitor centre
Exhibit B(
„When you work backwards,
deciding on your media first
and then checking to see
whether it can be shoehorned
into the mission of the site or
the budgeet or visitor interest...
chances are good you will end
up spending a lot of money for
something that does not work
very well. Better back up and
think through the other 4 M-s
before getting your heart set on
the latest technological gadget
that every other visitor centre is
installing“ Brochu 2003:65
Message – Markets – Media Matrix
Choosing the media - context
Cultural heritage:
– genius loci, uniqueness
– making efforts for minimal impact (visual, physical)
– emotional reaction is expected
Natural heritage:
– wonders of nature, generalization to other places
– caring/conservation reaction is expected
Museums, galleries:
– collections, objects as objects vs. objects as symbols
– understanding & appreciation is expected
Different behaviour is expected in each of the environments.
Media categories – interaction with a
visitor
• There is no better or worse medium, just more appropriate.
• John Veverka suggests for exhibitions: 20% active/active, 30%
pasive/pasive and 50% mixed interaction
18.11.2019
2
Media categories – cognitive processes
• Lorin et al (2001) – revised Bloom‘s taxonomy that was
developed for learning aims in formal education, however, its
application is much wider
Examples – cognitive processes
Příklad 1 – visitor understands relationship between deforestation and erosion
Příklad 2 – visitor can make home composter
Příklad 3 – visitor realizes that human decisions affecting nature stem from
different ethical standpoints
Příklad 4 – visitor finds out that some statements in media are not based on
scientific evidence
Příklad 5 – visitor can analyse high energy consumption at home
Interpretive panels vs. educational
trails
• we do not discern between these categories in the Czech
Republic: set of interpretive panels is called educational
(interpretive) trail
• however, in UK and US educational trails (self-guided trails)
are:
• focused on a single topic
• relatively shor (800m - 1,5 km)
• content is set of panels (10-15)
• the trail usually makes a loop
Examples of educational trails
• Petrified Trees Cove - Escalante Petrified
Forest State Park
• Lava Flow Trail – Sunset Crater Volcano
National Monument
Information panels
Advantages:
• simple production, cheap, can be easily repaired, low operational
costs
Limitations:
• not much information (max. 200 words),
• low engagement of visitors
• become part of the scenery
• too many of them in the Czech Republic
Interaction:
• passive/passive
Information panels
Rule for interaction with this medium = 3s – 30s – 3min:
• what is it about (am I interested?) => decision
• panel overview in few seconds => decision
• reading the most interesting parts (relatively fast) => decision
• reading other parts (low percentage of visitors)
• looking around – what next (something more around or let‘s
go?)
18.11.2019
3
Information panels
Sam Ham (1992) suggests 4 levels:
1. Main theme
2. Subtheme = brief message
3. Text explaining subthemes (200-300 words = 40-50 seconds
to read)
4. What next – where to find more information, what I can do
about it
Information panels
Good practice (Ham & Medek)
1. Headlines express the message (eg. „We are losing our soil“
instead „Soil erosion“)
2. Sub-headlines directly connected with the headline
3. Four or less sub-headlines (sub-themes) per panel
4. 200-300 words = 40-50 second for reading a subtheme seems too
much today (Ham suggested this 1992)
5. Avoid terms that needs specific explanation (e.g. scientific
expressions), unless this is the goal of the text
6. Avoid not-specific expressions = „unique nature“ (in what?),
„complex relationships“ (why? how?), „specific working
procedure“ (mystery?, lack of knowledge or too little space on the
panel?)
7. Avoid passive voice.
Information panels
Tipy (Ham & Medek)
8. Avoid addressing that differentiates between the author(s) and
visitors (us vs. you).
9. Use open-ended questions to engage.
10. Real data engage often engage more than derived information
(because of authenticity).
11. Whatever can be expressed by a graphic, must be expressed by a
graphic.
12. Expect non-linear behaviour of visitors => do not bind information
within a panel or between panels.
13. Include directing a visitor further. (What next? What me?).
14. No grammar mistakes within the text!
15. When intepreting we do not write a book (encyclopedia at worst),
both the author and contracting authority must be aware of that.
Interpretation panels
Examples from the Českosaské švýcarsko NP
• Jetřichovická interpretive trail
• Gabriela‘s interpretive trail
Information panels
Need not always look like panels.
18.11.2019
4
Leaflets & brochures
Advantages
• Portable
• Can include detailed content
• Languages
• Source of income
• Souvenir of a visit
Limitations
• Can discourage audience participation
• Require the audience to be literate
• Must be kept up-to-date
• Require staffing presence to support retail sales
Interaction
• mostly passive/passive
Leaflets and brochures
Both content and form depend on the context
(educational trail guide, promotion of a place,
tourist information).
Good practice – more or less the same as
interpretation panels (binding of graphics and
text, hierarchy, headlines = messages).
Audioguides
Can be used for personal touch or listening to otherwise disturbing
sounds.
Audioguides
Advantages
• Portable and unobtrusive
• Can provide layers of information
• Can deliver interpretation in different languages
• Support management objectives
Limitations
• Require staffing support
• Can be expensive to set-up
• Present a security risk
• Do not encourage visitor communication
Interaction
• active/pasive
Dioramas and scenic display Dioramas and scenic display
Advantages
• Provide a sense of history and place, events, and personalities;
• Can engage visitors’ imaginations and create spectacle
• They can be highly cost effective
Limitations
• Offer little or no physical visitor involvement or participation in the
media
• Can appear slightly old fashioned;
• Can be costly to generate and model
• Require constant maintenance
Interaction
• pasive/pasive
18.11.2019
5
Props Props
Advantages:
• (highly) interactive
• sensory experience
• relatively cheap
Disadvantages:
• Usually need further interpretation
• extra costs for their protection from vandalism
• need maintenance
Pasive/active medium
Props Models
Models
Advantages:
• Create a three dimensional sense of place, object, process
etc.
• Able to communicate highly complex information very
effectively
• More immediate and engaging than flat graphics
Limitations:
• Limited opportunities for visitor participation
• Cost to generate and model
• Can require constant maintenance
pasive/pasive medium
Audio-visual & multimedia
18.11.2019
6
Audio-visual & multimedia
Advantages:
• visualisation, provision of access
• possibility to use authentic material
• create mood
• can reach many visitors at one time
Limitations:
• can be disturbing disturbing
• difficult to update
• easy to break down
• recipient does not control the flow of information
Interaction:
• passive/active
Interactives
Interactives
Advantages
• Can be tailored to multiples learning styles;
• Provide information at varying levels;
• Promote visitor participation; and
• Can transcend language and culture barriers
Limitations
• Computer interactives are expensive
• Require a lot of maintenance
• They need to be intuitive to be effective
• Can be target to vandalism or theft
Interactions
• Active/Active
Interactives
Interactives Interactives
18.11.2019
7
Interactives Interactives
Children Children
Live interpretation
Advantages
• Immediate
• Subtle
• Change of pace
• Soft management
• Intimate
• Flexible
• Provocative
• Memorable
• Modelled behaviour
Live interpretation
Advantages
• Immediate
• Subtle
• Change of pace
• Soft management
• Intimate
• Flexible
• Provocative
• Memorable
• Modelled behaviour
18.11.2019
8
Live interpretation
Limitations
• Variable
• Inconsistent
• Intrusive
• Inefficient
• Expensive
• Group size
Literatura
• Brochu, L. (2003) Interpretative Planning: The 5-M Model for Successful Planning Projects. Fort Collins:
National Association for Interpretation
• Ham, S. (1992) Environmental Interpretation. Golden CO: North American Press
• Ham, S. (2013) Interpretation – Making a Difference on Purpose. Golden CO: Fulcrum Publishing
• Lorin W. Anderson, David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airasian, Kathleen A. Cruikshank, Richard E. Mayer,
Paul P. Pintrich, James Raths, Merlin Wittrock (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching a Assesing
of EducationalObjectives. New York: Longman.
• Ptáček, L., Růžička, T., Medek, M., Hušková, B., Banaš, M. (2012) Jak předkládat svět. Brno:
Partnerství o.p.s.
• Ptáček, L. et al (2004): Interpretace místního dědictví. Brno: Veronica pro Nadaci Partnerství
• Růžička, T. (2009) Už žádný leták, prosím!. Brno: Nadace Partnerství.
• Tematické číslo Veronica XXV. Ročník (2011), č. 4
• Veverka, J. (1998) Interpretive Master Planning. Tustin: Acorn Naturalists