With the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, legislative action was taken to increase civil rights and disability access. ADA compliance set a standard for many institutions to create not just an equalized opportunity, but innovative alternative options for visitors that require special assistance. My initial introduction to accessibility in a public institution was through an internship at a museum in Los Angeles, California. While my daily tasks primarily focused upon educational outreach, I was able to gain insight into the complications that disability access generates in the museum sector.
One of the many challenges museums encounter in the process to become ADA compliant is the financial strain they face while completing the required modifications. Smaller institutions require funding based on community and private donations to not only maintain their exhibits, but also to expand and meet ADA standards. In order to combat these economic restraints, many institutions turn to technological assistance in creating accessible and financially realistic options. During my internship, I witnessed these economic concerns, along with the technological advancements for those specifically with hearing disabilities.
The main exhibit of the museum is a primarily light and sound guided tour, inhibiting many visitors from gaining the full experience that was intended for the exhibit. I was able to observe the conceptualizing of options for the hearing impaired specifically for that exhibit. The design team had to resolve several issues regarding the environment of the exhibit, the funding, as well as the visitor capabilities of utilizing unfamiliar technological assistance while in a museum. Lighting within the exhibit space is limited, thus ruling out pamphlets to follow along with the visuals. While well-funded institutions can acquire a personal interpreter with advanced notice of a hearing impaired visitor, this museum could not afford this type of individualized assistance. However, notice was taken about the effectiveness of an American Sign Language interpreter in a museum. Inquiry went into technological options to recreate this type of experience in a smaller institution, and ideas were generated that revolved around the utilization of an iPad app. This app would allow the museum to amortize the cost across every hearing impaired visitor, and while it was not completed during my time there, I feel it can be a very cost effective, and user-friendly solution.
In order to interpret the inhibiting experience of an exhibit, research must be conducted to determine the flaws of accessibility. This requires an educational understanding of involvement within the disability community, in order to garner a greater understanding of the accessibility challenges inherit in museums. Surveying this specific population should aid in the process of exhibit redesign, with the hopes of interpreting the exhibit in a multitude of fashions that are attainable to a wide range of audiences. That requires an active role of the museum within this community. Utilizing social media to gain survey information about these issues of accessibility could be a financially responsible option for several small institutions. Social media provides a small institution with the ability to easily poll a vast number of responses, both locally and nationally, regarding their concerns for disability access. By understanding the needs of their visitors, museums can be significantly more effective in their efforts to continually remain relevant and accessible.
The problems that I feel many institutions face when confronting ADA compliance, besides financial restraints, are the logistical alterations to the exhibit and building design. Older historical sights and buildings are confronted with physical issues of accessibility. Buildings constructed in the early 20th century and before are often incompatible with ADA standards, resulting in a more demanding overhaul of their interior blueprint. While historic sites face additional physical restrictions, a question is raised about the compromise between ADA compliance and maintaining historical preservation of the site. Does striving for equitable experience for visitors come at a cost to preservation of historic sites? How do we as public historians create a balance of these two vital factors?
Conclusion: While the ADA created a set of standards and preliminary guidelines, it is the individual institution’s responsibility to interpret and create an interactive and educational experience for all visitors. While many institutions face differing challenges of financial and logistical restraints, there are a variety of opportunities available to expand the confines of public history with the assistance of technologically interactive and accessible alternatives.
Small Group Topic:
Regarding the small group topic options, I feel that the “other” category, specifically technology and community would be the most interesting category based off of my previous experience. I am very excited about the potential that exists within the museum community with the exponential growth and implementation of technology.
~ Kristen Rund, Arizona State University
Back to this Working Group’s homepage.
Hello Kristen! Thank you for highlighting the challenge of making public history accessible given a museum’s financial strains. I love the idea of using social media to reach the community because many sites are already trying to do this in order to engage with potential visitors. Creating polls via social media to connect with the community on their concerns related to access is a cost effective way to learn more about those who the museum might serve. Did the museum you mentioned conduct a poll? What were the outcomes? It would be great to get tips from a site that may have done this kind of outreach! Thank you for focusing on the active role of the museum in addressing the “flaws of accessibility.”
In working at an institution which suffers from a lack of funding I see many similarities in what you have mentioned above. We have expanded into social media and are looking at 3D technology to reach a wider audience. Our place is going to have issues with funding in order to become a place any community member can visit. I would be interested to see what the community response was via social media in terms of online and in person engagement.
I was wondering if you could clarify the sentence, “However, notice was taken about the effectiveness of a American Sign Language interpreter in a museum.” Could you also elaborate more on how ideas were solicited for technological solutions?
I’m also curious to see how your app is implemented. In my experience, I’ve found that apps or sign language guides are a poor substitute for audio tours mainly because such videos require you to look exclusively at the screen rather than your environments for long period of times. While listening to a narrator for five minutes while exploring the room doesn’t seem too long, looking a video screen for the same five minutes is quite lengthy and detracts from the art or exhibition.
In regards to your first question, the museum I had briefly worked at was in the initial stages of creating this technical application, and from what I observed, was grappling with the financing of the various options. An on-site ASL interpreter was not an economically feasible solution, and thus the team turned to technology in an attempt to solve the problem.
I also appreciate your comment about your personal experience with sign language guides. While it might sound like a simplistic answer, I honestly believe technological assistance with alternative accessibility options varies due to a variety of circumstances. Even within the museum I worked at, utilizing this sign language app would be significantly more useful in one exhibit over another because of the layout, purpose, and interactive qualities. That is part of the problem with creating technological alternatives; they have to be specifically created and modified for each individual exhibit. The light and hearing guided exhibit relied on some video, but primarily auditory-guided information. It could be feasible to provide a space in-between translating the material, in order to give the visitor a moment to visually examine the space before continuing on with the guide.
Drew brings up a great point: walking around a room and listening to a guide (either in person or a recorded device) is very different from an app. Watching a guide, following their movements to note specific details, and casually walking around while listening to them is different from taking your eyes away from the exhibits to watch a screen. If part of a larger group, it’s very easy to be left out of the broader experience because attention is diverted to the iPad.
I also think that you make excellent points about financial issues facing institutions and the compromises between accessibility and historical preservation. And I have some of the same curiosities as Nicole: how was the poll conducted, and what were the results? Do you have thoughts on scaling it up? Some larger institutions have people (or teams) to handle social media, and this may be a great way to address concerns at a number of institutions.