Formative Evaluation, Round 2: Places of Invention Exhibition

The Lemelson Center for the Study of Invention and Innovation at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History (NMAH) contracted Randi Korn & Associates, Inc. (RK&A) to conduct a formative evaluation for Places of Invention, an exhibition funded by the National Science Foundation. The exhibition aims to stimulate visitors’ thought about how people, resources, and spaces work together to support invention in historic and modern communities. Through formative evaluation, RK&A explores visitors’ use of exhibition prototypes (including barriers to use) and the meanings visitors take away from their experiences using the prototypes. How did we approach this study? For this second and final round of formative evaluation, the Lemelson Center and the exhibition design firm Roto mocked up three prototype interactives for the exhibition. At the Pacemaker interactive in the 1950s Medical Alley, Minnesota case study, visitors read cardiac patient files and adjusted the settings of an early pacemaker in response. At the Scratching interactive for the 1970s Bronx, New York case study, visitors tried out their hip-hop DJ skills by mimicking and experimenting with scratching on a record. At the Build Your Own Place of Invention interactive in the exhibition’s Hub, visitors created places of invention using labeled wooden blocks (representing spaces) and figures (representing inventive people) and making stop-motion videos. Forty-eight walk-in visitor groups, including both adults and children 6 years and older, were observed using the prototype area and interviewed about their experience. What did we learn? Visitors used the prototypes to varying degrees with different levels of success. Visitors’ responses to the Medical Alley interactive were mostly positive, with the majority understanding the essential concept of how a pacemaker works and how its settings are adapted to individuals. Yet visitors did not recognize that the set up of the interactive (with one side of the table representing an operating room and the other an operating room) reflected the collaboration between engineer and surgeon that was crucial to the invention of the pacemaker. The Bronx interactive had high appeal to some, but visitors spent the least amount of time there compared to the other exhibits, with some confused by how to scratch a record and others reluctant to try scratching. The Build Your Own Place of Invention had high dwell times and visitors said they enjoyed the activity. However, visitors had difficulty understanding the purpose of the interactive. Some felt pressure to come up with an invention. Others thought the exhibit was about the invention of stop-motion technology versus an interactive through which to consider the conditions necessary for places of invention. What are the implications of the findings? Findings suggest that the prototypes will physically function well with mostly minor modifications from Roto, mostly related to providing clear visual cues at the interactives. For instance, for the Medical Alley interactive, the designers should consider how to demarcate the Medtronic garage and operating room by physically separating the areas and including design cues and props indicative of each space. For the Bronx interactive, refined video instructions showing someone scratching should help assuage confusion and reluctance to scratch. Lastly, at the Build Your Own Place of Invention, designers should provide an array of curated examples of places of invention to cue visitors about the intent of the activity.

If you would like to edit a resource, please email us to submit your request.