Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Interpretation Model for Dioramas

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Natural History Dioramas – Traditional Exhibits for Current Educational Themes

  • 271 Accesses

Abstract

Museum objects do not exist outside interpretations of their meaning and significance (Hooper-Greenhill, Museums and the interpretation of visual culture. Routledge, London, 2000). A natural history diorama, as a museum object, is classically an artefact, which contains animals and plants in an ecological setting. Visitors are able to view and look with meaning at the organisms in the ecological, geological and meteorological context in which they live. The way in which perception engages with artefacts of our culture may significantly vary from the way in which it deals with the natural world. What are the elements that are involved in interpreting a museum exhibit such as a natural history diorama? I propose an interpretation model that links the various elements involved in interpreting the diorama. This new model is based on Activity System by Engeström et al. (Perspectives of activity theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999), which I consider to be the most adaptable in this case. This model may be applied to interpret museum artefacts such as natural history dioramas. A particular example from one child is used to illustrate how the new model maybe effectively applied to data. In this respect, a natural history diorama may be considered a unique model in science in that it depicts what is already recognized as plants and animal rather than rendering visible what cannot be seen such as the atomic structure or molecules.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye. Berkeley: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ash, D. (2004). How families use questions at dioramas: Ideas for exhibit design. Curator, 47(1), 84–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoszeck, A. B., Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Rocha da Silva, B. (2009). Investigating Brazilian children’s concept of insect. Paper presented at the 8th conference of the European Science Education Research Association, Istanbul, 31 August – 4 September 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, B. C., & Boulter, C. J. (2000). Investigating the role of representations and expressed models in building mental models. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 119–135). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M. V. (1992). Children’s drawings. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2005). From living to virtual: Learning from museum object. Curator, 48(3), 317–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R. L. (1999). Perspectives of activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. New York: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1980). Artful scribbles: The significance of children’s drawings. New York: Basic Books Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatt, S., Tunnicliffe, S. D., Borg, K., & Lautier, K. (2007). Young Maltese children’s ideas about plants. Journal of Biological Education, 41(3), 117–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2008). Visualization: An emergent field of practice and enquiry in science education. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (Vol. 3, pp. 3–24). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Golomb, C. (2004). The child’s creation of a pictorial world (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, I. E. (2004). Theories of visual perception (3rd ed.). New York: Psychology Press-Taylor & Francis Group.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hein, G. E. (1999). The constructivist museum. In E. Hooper-Greenhill (Ed.), The educational role of the museum (pp. 73–79). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hein, H. S. (2000). The museum in transition: A philosophical perspective. Washington: Smithsonian Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1994). Museums and their visitors. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2000). Museums and the interpretation of visual culture. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopperstad, M. H. (2010). Studying meaning in children’s drawings. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10(4), 430–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huxham, M., Welsh, A., Berry, A., & Templeton, S. (2006). Factors influencing primary school children’s knowledge of wildlife. Journal of Biological Education, 41(1), 9–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Insley, J. (2007). Setting the scene. Museums Journal, 2(107), 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolley, R. P. (2010). Children and pictures: Drawing and understanding. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, R. (1970). Analyzing children’s art. Palo Alto: National Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G. (1997). Before writing. Rethinking the paths to literacy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenfeld, V. (1963). Your child and his art. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, J. (2003). Drawing and painting: Children and visual representations (2nd ed.). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mifsud, E. (2015). The visualization of natural history museum habitat dioramas by Maltese school children. Unpublished PhD thesis, University College London Institute of Education, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moussouri, T. (1997). The use of children’s drawings as an evaluation tool in the museum. Museological Review, 4, 40–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2011). What plants and animals do early childhood and primary students’ name? Where do they see them? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(5), 630–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paddon, H. (2009). The important role of natural history dioramas in biological learning: Curatorial responses to natural history dioramas. In S. D. Tunnicliffe & A. Scheersoi (Eds.), The important role of natural history dioramas in biological learning. ICOM Natural History Committee Newsletter, 29, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peart, B., & Kool, R. (1988). Analysis of a natural history exhibit: Are dioramas the answer? The International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, 7, 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pipueras, J., Hamsa, M. K., & Edvall, S. (2008). The practical epistemologies in the museum: A study of students’ learning in encounters with dioramas. Journal of Museum Education, 33(2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, D. N., & Kurby, C. A. (2008). The ‘Ins’ and ‘Outs’ of learning: Internal representations and external visualizations. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (Vol. 3, pp. 29–52). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, M. J., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (1999). Conceptual development. Journal of Biological Education, 34(1), 13–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, M. J., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2007). Opportunities for learning in biology. Paper presented at the NARST annual international conference, New Orleans, 15–17 April 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheersoi, A. (2009). The important role of natural history dioramas in biological learning: Biological interest development at natural history dioramas. In S.D. Tunnicliffe & A. Scheersoi (Eds.), The important role of natural history dioramas in biological learning. ICOM Natural History Committee Newsletter 29, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smidt, S. (2011). Introducing Bruner: A guide for practitioners and students in early years education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, T. (2009). An afternoon among dioramas at Yale Peabody Museum. In S. D. Tunnicliffe & A. Scheersoi (Eds), The important role of natural history dioramas in biological learning. ICOM Natural History Committee Newsletter, 29, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Striker, S. (2001). Young at art. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomkins, S., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2006). Bring back the nature table! Environmental Education, 82, 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trowbridge, J., & Mintzes, J. J. (1985). Student’s alternative conceptions of animals and animal classification. School Science and Mathematics, 85, 304–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trowbridge, J., & Mintzes, J. J. (1988). Alternative conceptions in animal classification: A cross-age study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(7), 547–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2002). The educational value of natural history collections in learning about biodiversity. The Biology Curator, 22, 27–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2005). What do dioramas tell visitors? A study of the history of wildlife diorama at the museum of Scotland. Current Trends in Audience Research and Evaluation, 18, 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2013). Editorial: Animals and plants in natural history dioramas in museums: Specimens or objects. Journal of Biological Education, 47(4), 189–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunnicliffe, S. D., Gatt, S., Agius, C., & Pizzuto, S. A. (2008). Animals in the lives of young Maltese children. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(3), 215–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Malta, Msida, Malta

    Edward Mifsud

Authors
  1. Edward Mifsud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward Mifsud .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany

    Annette Scheersoi

  2. University College London (UCL), Institute of Education, London, UK

    Sue Dale Tunnicliffe

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mifsud, E. (2019). An Interpretation Model for Dioramas. In: Scheersoi, A., Tunnicliffe, S. (eds) Natural History Dioramas – Traditional Exhibits for Current Educational Themes. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00175-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00175-9_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-00174-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-00175-9

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation