Testing a Museum Program: “What’s in the Evidence?”

Because we don’t yet have a building, the Education Programs staff doesn’t get to work with the public very often. So I’m excited whenever I can get one of our programs in front of a group of living, breathing kids.

“What’s in the Evidence?” is an activity developed by our staff, including two of our past interns, to teach middle school students (ages 10-14) about forensic science and its connections to law enforcement. After testing with Memorial Fund staff and one group of students, the activity was just about ready for prime time.

An important component of any program developed by the National Law Enforcement Museum is evaluation, or looking at our programs to objectively examine whether they’re meeting the goals we created them to meet. Read Dean’s blog post to learn more about this process.

Recently, we’ve had three opportunities to test out “What’s in the Evidence” with some more students, each time working with a great group of kids who tried out the activity and helped us pilot the evaluation survey that will go with it. Every time we’ve all had a great time!

The middle schoolers solve a “vandalism” that occurred at the Visitors Center through forensic evidence collected at the scene of the “crime.” They analyze handwriting samples, run chromatography tests on ink from different pens, and examine shoe impressions (footprints) and fingerprints. Some groups have been more successful than others at fingering the culprit, but they’ve all learned about what forensic evidence can—and oftentimes cannot—tell us about crimes.

Sound like fun? This summer we’re offering the special opportunity to participate in this session free of charge. That’s right—you provide the kids, the room, and some adults to take part, and we provide the materials and an educational two-hour experience. If you’re in the D.C. area and know of a Girl or Boy Scout troop, science class, camp group, etc., who might like for us to come in and teach this activity, let me know [link to rfulcher@nleomf.org]. I’m also curious to know, if you could do this activity, what would you like to learn about in the area of forensic science?

Putting the Value in eVALUation: Part I--What is Evaluation?

When you hear the word “evaluation,” what do you think of? If you are like most, beads of sweat appear on your forehead as you begin to recall the cranky driving instructor who put the kibosh on your earnest attempt to become a licensed driver with his red pen. Most of us are familiar with (and dread) this type of evaluation, which is defined as “the process of determining significance or worth, usually by careful appraisal and study.”

In the context of museums, however, evaluation takes on more of an emphasis of “analysis and comparison of actual progress versus prior plans, oriented toward improving plans for future implementation.” In this sense, museum evaluation is about enrichment—it is about setting, improving upon, and reaching measurable outcomes.

As Evaluation Specialist at the National Law Enforcement Museum (NLEM), my role in this vein is to help examine the outcomes of our educational programs against each program’s goals and objectives and to make certain these line up with the Museum’s overall mission. While at times challenging, evaluation is the means by which we incorporate accountability and long-term effectiveness into the Museum’s work.

Although the NLEM is slated to open in 2013, the Museum Programs Department is planning to begin a number of its public programs just after groundbreaking takes place on October 14, 2010. With the support of the non-profit Institute for Learning Innovation, we are currently in the process of testing our programs.

Over the next year and a half, the purpose of our testing is two-fold. First of all, over the next several months, our iterative testing (also known as front-end or formative evaluation) will provide feedback about early versions of our programs to inform decisions about how we can best modify and improve them. Secondly, we will use summative testing to evaluate the effectiveness of the final programs based on previously identified outcomes.

In part two of this post, I will outline in greater detail different types of evaluation, discuss our identified outcomes and how we arrived at them, and use our recent testing to help put it all into perspective.