A participatory approach to the evaluation of participatory museum research projects

Abstract

In this paper we will describe, justify and critique a participatory approach that we have developed in order to evaluate the success of a participatory research project that was exploring ways of making museum learning experiences more inclusive for adults who have a diverse range of access preferences. Because we were researching in a unique space at the intersection of inclusive museum education, inclusive technologies and participatory research we have needed to develop an original evaluation approach; informed by methods and frameworks derived from other fields. We present examples of the kind of evaluation information that the framework elicited and use this as a basis to critique the strengths and weaknesses of the framework. Our experience of using creative methods for eliciting evaluation data suggest that useful information about participation can be revealed but that further improvements can be made in order to make the research experience more participatory.

Barriers and Facilitators to Cultural Participation by People with Disabilities: A Narrative Literature Review

“…A study of 28 museums across Europe suggests that accessibility for people with visual disabilities was limited even in museums that had implemented accessibility strategies (Mesquita & Carneiro 2016). Yet more attention has been paid to people with sensory disabilities than to people with ID (Seale et al 2021). Guidelines for institutions vary in approach but focus frequently only on people with physical or sensory disabilities (Jongerius et al 2020).…”

“…Access to technologies cannot be assumed for all groups, including people with disabilities on low incomes, but Constantinou, Loizides, and Ioannou (2016) suggest that barriers to a more widespread use of technology for access to cultural content and exhibitions in museums is often not the cost, but awareness and willingness (see Weisen 2012). Furthermore, technologies are more typically explored relative to sensory disabilities than other forms of disability, such as ID (Seale et al 2021), and some groups, such as people with ID, neurodivergent conditions such as dementia, and a broad range of cognitive disabilities, are underrepresented in terms of navigational information design (Renel 2019).…”

“…Renel 2019: 379;Seale et al 2021). Other examples include taped guides, touch tours, handling sessions, tactile plans, large-print and Braille information, clear labels and signs, sign-languageLeahy and Ferri Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research DOI: 10.16993/sjdr.863 interpreted tours, lip speaking and reading(Seale et al 2021).…”

Taking risks to enable participatory data analysis and dissemination: a research note

“…Within ARCHES, for instance, we undertook a pilot evaluation of people's participatory experience (Seale et al, 2020), which involved the use of visual storytelling. At the end of this process, those involved shared their understandings of their role within the wider project.…”

Emergent analysis and dissemination within participatory research

“…This was to assess the validity of the participatory process overall, as required by the funders and our ethics protocols. This was regarded as the verification of the while (Seale et al 2019). The technology companies also undertook retrospective analysis upon the data provided by the four Exploration groups as responses to requests for information, this data was itself usually a result of analysis which had arisen within the while.…”