Advertisement

Visitors’ Learning Experiences in Dutch Museums

  • Folkert Haanstra
Part of the Landscapes: The Arts, Aesthetics, and Education book series (LAAE, volume 2)

Abstract

Through audience surveys much is known about visitors’ characteristics, but still little is known about how visitors perceive and experience the museum and how this influences their learning. This chapter presents the results of two empirical studies on personal learning experiences of museum visitors. Quantitative and qualitative instruments are used to get more systematic information about the learning experiences. Data were collected in Dutch museums with mixed collections of art objects, historical objects and ethnographic objects. Three dimensions of museum guidance are distinguished: a cognitive dimension (clarification of subject matter), a meta-cognitive dimension (information on the goals and the set-up of the exhibition, the routing etc.) and an affective, emotional dimension.

Keywords

Affective Aspect Psychical Distance Semantic Differential Museum Visit Museum Staff 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boekaerts, M. & Simons, P. R. Leren en instructie. 2nd ed. Assen: Van Gorcum, (1995).Google Scholar
  2. Bullough, E. ‘Psychical distance’as a factor in art and an aesthetic principle. In: G. Dickie & R.J. Sclafani (Eds.) Aesthetics: a critical anthology. New York: St. Martin’s Press (1977).Google Scholar
  3. Falk, J. H. & Dierking, L.D. The museum experience. Washington: Whalesback Books, (1992).Google Scholar
  4. Groot, A.D. de Begrip van evalueren. ’s-Gravenhage, VUGA, 1986.Google Scholar
  5. Haan, J. de Het gedeelde erfgoed Het culturele draagvlak 3 Rijswijk: Sociaal en Cultuur Planbureau, 1997.Google Scholar
  6. Haanstra, F Beieving en waardering van museumbezoek. Amsterdam: SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut (1992).Google Scholar
  7. Haanstra, F., Van der Heijden, P & Sas, J. Evaluation Studies in Dutch Art Museums In: Evaluating and Assessing the Visual Arts in education. International perspectives. New York: Teachers College Press (p. 207–221) (1996).Google Scholar
  8. Hein, G. E. Learning in the Museum. New York, London: Routledge, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. Kamp, M. van der Wat neemt de leerling mee van kunstzinnige vorming? SVO reeks 29. Den Haag: SVO, 1980.Google Scholar
  10. Kant, I. Over schoonheid Meppel/Amsterdam: Boom, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. Kesteren, B.J. van Gebruiksmogelijkheden van het learner report. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 14, nr. 1, p13–29, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. Klein, H.J. en B. Wüsthoff-Schäfer. Inszenierung in Museen und ihre Wirkung auf Besucher. Materialien aus dem Institut für Museumskunde Heft 32, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1967.Google Scholar
  14. Osgood, Ch.E., G.J. Suci en P.H. Tannenbaum. The measurement of meaning (8th printing). Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  15. Sociaal en Cultured Planbureau Sociaal en Cultured Rapport 2000. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultured Planbureau, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. Simons, R.-J., Linden, J. van der & Duffy, T. New learning. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. Vermunt, J.D.H.M. (1989) The interplay between internal and external regulation of learning, and the design of process-oriented instruction. Paper presented at the third Conference of the European Association of Research on Learning and Instruction. Madrid.Google Scholar
  18. Vermunt, J.D.H.M. (1992) Leerstijlen en sturen van leerprocessen in het hoger onderwijs: naar procesgerichte instructie in zelfstandig denken. Amsterdam/Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Folkert Haanstra
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Utrecht UniversityThe Netherlands
  2. 2.SCO-Kohnstamm Institute for Educational Research of the University of AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations