Interpretive Media And Exhibits At Montana State Parks
Interpretive Media and Exhibitsat Montana State ParksReview an d Prio rity RecommendationsPhotos: First People’s Buffalo Jump State Park, Lone Pine State Park, Pictograph Caves State Park, Makoshika State ParkOctober 2020Prepared by Lisa Bickell and Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Designfor Montana State Parks
Field to Frame provides interpretive design, interpretiveor educational program or project management,interpretive planning, research, and support:ftfinterpretive.comAnalysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design2
Table of ContentsSummary . 5Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks & Montana State Parks Mission .5How to Read this Report.5Overview of Report and Findings .5Context and Purpose of Study.6Analysis Design Considerations .6Data Collection Framework and Methods .7Recommendations for Site Improvement . 8Development of a Prioritization Matrix . 8Recommendations . 10Broad Recommendations for All Interpretive Sites: . 10Recommendations for Further Evaluation and Research . 11Overall Visitor Center Assessment Results . 11Summary of Results. 11Highlights from Montana State Parks Staff Survey . 12Highlights from Visitor Survey. 13Highlights from Site Visit . 13Prioritization Recommendations . 14Site Visits. 15Bannack State Park. 16Chief Plenty Coups State Park . 21First People’s Buffalo Jump State Park. 25Lewis and Clark Caverns State Park . 30Lone Pine State Park . 36Makoshika State Park . 41Pictograph Caves State Park . 46Traveler’s Rest State Park . 50Appendix A: Field to Frame Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation . 55Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation Form . 55Analysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design3
Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation Scores for All Sites . 59Scoring Criteria for Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation . 63Appendix B: Staff Surveys . 68Survey Questions for Park Staff . 68Scoring Results from Staff Survey. 72Criteria for Scoring Staff Surveys . 73Appendix C: Visitor Surveys . 75Survey Questions for Visitors . 75Analysis of Visitor Survey Data . 77Analysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design4
SummaryThis report summarizes evaluation conducted in 2020 to refine existing and create new Montana StatePark interpretive exhibit evaluation tools and site analysis procedures. Tools were field tested acrosseight visitor centers to gather information on the current status of interpretation at Montana StateParks. Findings, based on site visits, evaluation of current interpretive opportunities, staff surveys andvisitor surveys are provided with varying levels of detail. Information provided supports prioritization ofstrategic investments by identifying how natural and heritage parks with visitor centers provide qualityeducational opportunities to visitors while preserving and protecting cultural, natural, and recreationalheritage of Montana.Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks & Montana State Parks MissionThe mission of Fish, Wildlife and Parks is, through its employees and citizen Commission, to provide forthe stewardship of the fish, wildlife, parks and recreational resources of Montana while contributing tothe quality of life for present and future generations. The Parks Division Mission is to preserve andprotect our state’s cultural, natural and recreational heritage for the benefit of our families,communities, and local economies.Visitor centers at key state parks serve this mission by providing visitors and residents with interpretiveinformation that connects them the natural and cultural stories of our state while enhancing theresources that Parks serves to protect. Interpretive elements share the stories of prehistoric people,cultural diversity, natural history, geologic time, unique park history, stewardship, and our connectionwith Montana’s nature and culture. Exhibits and materials connect people with the stories, engagingthem in learning about Montana while enhancing a sense of stewardship that serves our parks.How to Read this ReportIncluded in this report are field-tested evaluation tools for use in future assessment, results from eachevaluation method, recommendations for a prioritization approach to improvements, a summary ofrecommendations to consider across all state park visitor centers and individual site recommendationsfor all eight state park visitor centers. Additionally, an overview of how data was scored is provided foruse in future assessment.The appendices include the survey tools or, where surveys were posted online, the wording andstructure of survey questions. Rubrics to guide use and scoring of evaluation tools is provided.Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation results are shared in full with Staff Survey and Visitor responses shared insummary. Complete, detailed results were provided to Montana State Parks leadership staff toaccompany this report and are available upon request.Overview of Report and FindingsThis report contains findings from analysis conducted during the summer of 2020. The study did not usean experimental design—visitor surveys were by choice and visits to sites were not randomized. Findingsare based on analysis of responses from park staff who have experience with visitors in addition to abroad understanding of the topics interpreted.Analysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design5
A total of 24 park staff responded to the survey including all Park Mangers for the respectivestudy sites, Park Rangers, Assistant Managers, Camp Hosts, Volunteers, and AmeriCorpsmembers. Each park was asked to have at least three respondents per park30 visitors responded to the surveyField to Frame conducted site visits for all eight parks during the summer 2020 travel seasonSurvey questions were unique between survey tools, but each group responded to questions thataddressed similar elements of the park interpretive experience. Survey materials have been revisedbased on this field testing and are available for routine use by Montana State Parks staff and volunteers.Survey tools and questions are included in the appendices.In addition, this report provides information to support prioritization of strategic investments, long-termimprovements that visitor centers can address to better serve their visitors and communities andrecommendations for future research.Context and Purpose of StudyMontana State Parks works to preserve and protect Montana’s cultural, natural and recreationalheritage for the benefit of our families, communities and local economies. Across the state, 55 parks,covering 46,538 acres offer a variety of recreational and educational opportunities that are unique toMontana—sharing stories with more than 2 million visitors every year.The Montana State Parks and Recreation Classification and Investment Policy established a set of goals,priorities and recommendations. Among them is the essential need to prioritize resources across thesystem. The Strategic Plan highlights the need to help all Montanans and visitors understand andappreciate Montana State Parks, recreation programs and the outdoor heritage of this state.This evaluation provides information to support prioritization of strategic investments by identifyinghow state park visitor centers provide quality educational opportunities to visitors while preserving andprotecting cultural, natural and recreational heritage of Montana.Quality interpretation can meet stewardship goals by: Engaging visitors in learning about natural, cultural and recreational heritage of MontanaInspiring visitors to want to learn more about the sites they visitedInspiring visitors to extend their experience by visiting other relevant sitesConnecting visitors with the natural, cultural, and recreational heritage of MontanaInspiring return visits to parks and long-term practice of values and skills learned during parkvisitsAnalysis Design ConsiderationsThe research design was influenced by several constraints. Due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions andto keep the project budget manageable, data collection methods were based on self-administeredsurveys.Self-administered surveys have limited success, relying on a sense of obligation or reward to completethe survey. Parks staff were expected to participate and therefore showed a high response rate. VisitorsAnalysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design6
however could self-select participation and it is possible that visitors who completed the survey arelikely more engaged in the exhibits, topic, or the specific state park as compared to others. In addition,each park had the visitor survey kiosk located in a different place, though most chose to keep it near theexit. Because visitor flow was identified as a concern and challenge among most state park staff, it islikely that the kiosks, although small, were not always well-placed. For these reasons, visitor response toexhibits and intentions as they relate to experiences in visitor centers and parks would be betteraddressed through direct interviews in the future.Data Collection Framework and MethodsAppendix A, B and C includes the survey tools and scoring rubrics developed for use in this project aswell as more detailed data collected.Site analysis questions were modified from an existing Montana State Parks Interpretive ExhibitEvaluation. Some elements were removed to focus on exhibits within visitor centers and additionalitems were added based on best practices in interpretive planning and design. The evaluation includessix categories for review: approachability of exhibits, visual appeal, understandability, development ofthematic structure, relevancy of content, and maintenance. Five additional questions identify corerequirements that all sites should meet: the topic is interesting, significant and site-specific; the graphicsinvite viewers to interact with the exhibit; the exhibit’s content is accurate; the arrangement of text andgraphics provide a clear interpretive point; and the text is legible. A scoring rubric in Appendix A wasused support the scoring of each site based on these criteria. Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation results forall parks is also included in Appendix A.Visitor questions were created in partnership with Montana State Parks staff and were deliveredthrough Survey Monkey. The visitor survey questions can be found in Appendix C. The aim of the visitorsurvey was to identify how much people interacted with the exhibit elements and how the interpretiveexhibits at the park influenced behavior such as visiting more parks or purchasing items in the gift shopto continue their learning. Initial plans to interview visitors and complete more thorough site visits withassistance from an intern were changed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In lieu of a directsurvey, visitors had the opportunity to provide feedback online.Due to low response rate of visitors, it is not recommended that we place high value on their feedbackand Field to Frame has not added their results to the process of prioritization. It is recommended thatvisitors be surveyed directly in a subsequent travel season at which point visitor feedback data can beadded to the prioritization matrix.Staff surveys were created in partnership with Montana State Parks and were delivered by Field toFrame using Google Forms. Staff survey questions and criteria for scoring can be found in Appendix B. Atotal of 24 park staff responded to the survey including all Park Managers for the respective study sites,Park Rangers, Assistant Managers, Camp Hosts, Volunteers, and AmeriCorps VISTA members. Parks wereasked to have three staff respond to survey questions and the number of responses per park rangedfrom one up to five. A total of 26 questions addressed the thematic content of the parks, interpretivestrategies used to share stories, identification of missing or inaccurate information, and identification ofaccessibility concerns.Analysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design7
Additional content addressed through the staff survey included observations and feedback from visitorsduring this and previous travel seasons. These questions were included to provide some insight into thevisitor experience in the absence of a direct visitor survey. Questions related to gift shop sales wereoriginally included to explore the possibility of comparing sales with quality of interpretive experiencebut was not pursued.Recommendations for Site ImprovementThis report includes a series of broad recommendations to be considered across all parks. These wereidentified based on how frequently the topic, concern, or suggestion was referenced in staff surveys andthe Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation. Each site includes a unique list of recommended improvements thatwere uniquely identified by staff surveys and/or the Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation.Development of a Prioritization MatrixTo provide a system for prioritization of strategic funds, a matrix was developed using responses fromstaff surveys, results from the Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation, and observations made through site visits.To meet the mission to preserve and protect our state’s cultural, natural and recreational heritage forthe benefit of families, communities, and local economies, state parks have to be accessible to bothMontanan’s and visitors from out of state, maintain accurate and complete information about each siteand provide an interpretive experience that guides visitors through exploration of the unique site and itsresources in a way that leads to protection and preservation. Visitors must be willing and able to engagein interpretive experiences. Willingness to engage increases when interpretation is relevant, current,and intentionally planned or organized. Ability to engage depends on physical abilities as well as abilityto read, understand, and connect with the information provided.Three categories for prioritization to address the visitor experience emerged from the research includingAccessibility, Inaccuracies/Omissions, and Interpretive Experience. Within each of these categories,criteria for how to rank visitor centers is included in Table 1. Accessibility and Inaccuracies/Omissionsranking was based primarily on staff survey responses with confirmation through site visits to furtherassess ranking. The Interpretive Experience ranking was determined using the score from theInterpretive Exhibit Evaluation.One factor not included in this matrix is damage to signs. It is recommended that maintenance ofsignage be addressed regularly as there is not an appropriate range of acceptability for broken ordamaged signs.Analysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design8
TABLE 1 P RIORITIZATION MATRIX C tive ExperienceAccess to visitor center ischallenging as identified bystaff and site visitInaccuracies identified by staff areculturally sensitive, broad orotherwise affect the professionalreputation of Montana State ParksScore of 65% or lower onInterpretive Exhibit EvaluationMedium PriorityConsiderationAccess to core exhibitelements or several exhibits ischallenging as identified bystaff and site visitsInaccuracies identified by staff arelimited in number and do not meetabove criteriaScore of 66% to 85% onInterpretive Exhibit EvaluationLow PriorityConsiderationAccess to a limited selection ofexhibits or panels or potentialfor expanded access asidentified by staff and sitevisitsInaccuracies as identified by staffare focused on omissions in thethematic hierarchy and storiesScore of 86% to 100% onInterpretive Exhibit EvaluationHigh PriorityConsiderationPHOTO 1: ITEMS ON DISPLAY AT T RAVELER'S REST STATE PARKAnalysis of Interpretive Exhibits at Montana State Parks Visitor CentersPrepared by Field to Frame Interpretive Planning and Design9
RecommendationsBroad Recommendations for All Interpretive Sites:All Montana State Parks visitor centers maintain a high standard for visitor e
Scoring Criteria for Interpretive Exhibit Evaluation To maintain consistency between Interpretive Exhibit Evaluations completed at each park, scoring criteria was developed to accompany the rubric. The following tables detail the criteria used. The first five questions were highlighted as essential elements that all interpretive exhibits address.
guide the development of quality interpretive media such as signs, exhibits, trails, digital media, and publications. Students will discover design theory, explore and evaluate media samples, develop interpretive writing skills, and create new interpretive media. Students will also master t
Interpretive skills are important in everyday life. The key for teachers' using an interpretive exercise is Flexibility (16). A teacher has many objectives in a unit. Interpretive exercises are best used for higher level thinking. What learning outcomes can the interpretive exercise measure: Application of principles and methods
iii 1 Mass Media Literacy 1 2 Media Technology 16 3 Media Economics 39 4 Cybermedia 59 5 Legacy Media 75 6 News 98 7 Entertainment 119 8 Public Relations 136 9 Advertising 152 10 Mass Audiences 172 11 Mass Media Effects 190 12 Governance and Mass Media 209 13 Global Mass Media 227 14 Mass Media Law 245 15 Mass Media Ethi
Digital Media Middle East & Middle Eastern Digital Media Awards 29-30 Nov 2022 Riyadh Digital Media Africa & African Digital Media Awards 12-13 July 2022 Virtual Digital Media LATAM & LATAM Digital Media Awards 16-18 Nov 2022 Mexico City Digital Media India & Indian Digital Media Awards 08-10 Mar 2022 Virtual Digital Media Asia &
interpretive biases has yielded mixed results, likely due to flawed experimental paradigms and statistical techniques that do not adequately control for anxiety. Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) is an innovative research paradigm that involves inducing interpretive biases in an experimentally controlled manner.
OPTION INSERT 9650-0218-01 Non-Interpretive 12-lead - 2 WARNINGS Before use, carefully read the M Series Operator's Guide and these operating instructions. The M Series with non-interpretive 12-lead ECG is designed to acquire ECG data from resting, supine patients. Use of the device to acquire ECG signals from moving or shaking patients may produce erroneous 12-lead data.
ISASP Spring 2019 Interpretive Manual for Educators 1 How to Use the Interpretive Guide This guide is intended to help you understand results from the Iowa Statewide Assessment of Student Progress (ISASP). The published reports available for th
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., Akert, R. M., & Sommers, S. R. (2016). Social psychology (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Course Learning Outcomes: The primary objective of the course is to provide you with a .
