aceUVi

Recommendations

Info

Foreman-Wernet and Dervin Lois Foreman-Wernet and Brenda Dervin have long been using qualitative methods to study how people experience various form culture events (2013, 71). Using the Sense-Making Methodology that Dervin has developed over 40 years of research in the field of Communication Studies, the authors seek to ‘break through surface-level responses’ and ‘delve more deeply into the interpretive process’ of arts audiences (2013, 79). In this, their project resembles the work of Radbourne et al. L Foreman-Wernet and B Dervin, 2013, ‘In the Context of Their Lives: How Audience Members Make Sense of Performing Arts Experiences’, in The Audience Experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts, edited by J Radbourne, H Glow and K Johanson, Bristol, UK and Chicago, USA: Intellect, 67-82. According to Foreman-Wernet and Dervin, the responses that audience members usually give are limited to ‘pictures of stereotypic and habitual behaviour’ that fail to reveal ‘the narratives, hopes and dreams, challenges and struggles that make up the core of human experiencing and are so central to human appreciation of art’ (2013, 71). Dervin’s Sense-Making Methodology (SMM) assumes that it is inherent in the human condition that we are forced to move through a world that is chaotic and open to multiple, changing and conflicting interpretations. Within this world ‘humans are always mandated to “make sense”—that is take the next step cognitively, emotionally, physically, spiritually—in the absence of complete instruction’ (2013, 70). ‘Sense-making’ in Dervin’s usage is thus not limited to cognitive interpretation; it includes a the full range of responses that make up human experience, which connects Foreman-Wernet and Dervin’s work with the notions of intrinsic impact and cultural value. Whether it is used in the context of arts experiences or in other communicative encounters, SMM always draws upon the same set of open-ended questions to coax out candid responses from research participants in self-interviews, such as: • What conclusions, thoughts, insights did you come to • What confusions, questions did you experience • What emotions, feelings did you have • How did this relate to your past experience (2013, 71) In order to evaluate the qualitative responses that are elicited through this method, the researchers have identified ‘a number of themes of patterned responses to individual encounters with the arts,’ based on their analysis of interviews collected over the course of 20 years of research (2013, 71). In the 2013 study, these themes—elsewhere referred to as ‘categor[ies] of impact’ (2011, 29)— Measuring Individual Impact: Post-Event Surveying 78 UNDERSTANDING the value and impacts of cultural experiences
are applied in the evaluation of ten student responses to an online presentation of a piano concerto. The eight categories are: • Truth/Beauty (previously called “Spirituality/Transcendence,” 2011, 29) • Captivation • Self-expression • Self-awareness • Cognitive/intellectual growth • Community/connection • Well-being • Social judgment (2013, 72-75) The researchers note ‘that the beneficial outcomes of arts experiences that have been identified by our informants are also precisely the ones that are discussed in the aesthetics literature and are well understood by lovers of the arts’ (2013, 71-72); however, they do not speculate on the directionality of the causality. Do these themes inherently structure the way that humans react to artistic experiences, so that Foreman-Wernet and Dervin’s findings empirically corroborate the theories of aestheticians Or have cultural norms and aesthetic theories shaped the way we think about the arts, so that informants merely reiterate familiar tropes The authors do not comment on these questions. One benefit of the open-ended interview questions used in SMM is that it allows respondents to express negative aspects of their experiences. Most formal surveys are biased in that they ask respondents whether they perceived a positive impact or no impact at all. Surveys generally do not ask audience members to rate the degree to which they felt offended, whether the experience incited rage in them, or whether they feel more inclined to engage in illegal activities in the future. In Foreman-Wernet and Dervin’s interviews, however, ‘informants also identified arts experiences that had negative or mixed outcomes’ (2013, 72). Another advantage of Dervin’s SMM is that it has been used to interview people about all sorts of different experiences. Foreman-Wernet and Dervin note that this methodology has been utilised to gather information on ‘users of information systems, audiences of all forms of media, citizen understandings of public policy and patients interacting with health-care systems’ (2013, 70). Rather than simply asserting that cultural experiences create a unique set of values and impacts, this allows for comparison with other types of experiences. Measuring Individual Impact: Post-Event Surveying 79 UNDERSTANDING the value and impacts of cultural experiences
Page 1 and 2:
UNDERSTANDING the VALUE and IMPACTS
Page 3 and 4:
However, we cannot ignore this ‘i
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 FOREWORD 4 ACKN
Page 7 and 8:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Over the past dec
Page 9 and 10:
dividing the overall value into con
Page 11 and 12:
the necessity of limiting the scope
Page 13 and 14:
espondents are conscious; 2) there
Page 15 and 16:
Table 2 Stages of Individual Impact
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 6 Impact pattern of a cultur
Page 19 and 20:
Valuing arts and culture from the m
Page 21 and 22:
cultural researchers are hamstrung
Page 23 and 24:
organisation’s creative capacity
Page 25 and 26:
The literature clearly identifies t
Page 27 and 28: 1 INTRODUCTION This literature revi
Page 29 and 30: Outline of the report This literatu
Page 31 and 32: Economic value There are several di
Page 33 and 34: happy, healthy, educated people pro
Page 35 and 36: 2 FRAMING THE CONVERSATION LANGUAGE
Page 37 and 38: six in particular. Indeed, the fact
Page 39 and 40: Arjo Klamer Within the field of Cul
Page 41 and 42: culture. By increasing people’s k
Page 43 and 44: that Holden mentions under the head
Page 45 and 46: public value’ (4). The authors de
Page 47 and 48: Figure 3 Tentative visual synthesis
Page 49 and 50: establish an interpretive frame and
Page 51 and 52: terpretive, curatorial, observation
Page 53 and 54: Knell and Taylor Due to the widespr
Page 55 and 56: of impacts with instrumental values
Page 57 and 58: the capacities to realise cultural
Page 59 and 60: 3 MEASURING INDIVIDUAL IMPACT As wa
Page 61 and 62: While one might argue that the requ
Page 63 and 64: Table 1 Comparison of components of
Page 65 and 66: In Brown and Novak-Leonard (2007),
Page 67 and 68: Novak-Leonard’s terms) stands out
Page 69 and 70: Like Brown and Novak-Leonard and NE
Page 71 and 72: Table A-2: A grouping of indicators
Page 73 and 74: The same two studies also provide a
Page 75 and 76: Summary The fact that different res
Page 77: with audience members, and they all
Page 81 and 82: White and Hede Tabitha White and An
Page 83 and 84: (2008) and Foreman-Wernet and Dervi
Page 85 and 86: Everett and Barrett Michelle Everet
Page 87 and 88: ‘sensation’, while Walmsley use
Page 89 and 90: Discussion of research methodologie
Page 91 and 92: analyse existing interviews from so
Page 93 and 94: Individual impacts are not fixed or
Page 95 and 96: 4 VALUING ARTS AND CULTURE FROM THE
Page 97 and 98: In reviewing types of goals, motiva
Page 99 and 100: Intrinsic • Self-oriented, active
Page 101 and 102: of audience members’ overall eval
Page 103 and 104: this factor leads the researchers t
Page 105 and 106: 5 CREATIVE CAPACITY OF AN ORGANISAT
Page 107 and 108: Sabine Boerner Sabine Boerner (2004
Page 109 and 110: Daniel Urrutiaguer Daniel Urrutiagu
Page 111 and 112: Hannah, Langsted and Larsen 1 Boern
Page 113 and 114: In entrusting the evaluation to exp
Page 115 and 116: of the major performing arts organi
Page 117 and 118: Clarity of intent and commitment to
Page 119 and 120: tional structure in determining art
Page 121 and 122: Supportive Networks (conditional el
Page 123 and 124: CODA: COMBINING MEASURES OF EXPERIE
Page 125 and 126: dimensions in the shaded boxes have
Page 127 and 128: The 2012 DCA report assures readers
Page 129 and 130:
Bailey, Jackie 2009a. Defining arti
Page 131 and 132:
Margaret Bolton and Clare Cooper. 2
Page 133 and 134:
Chappell, Michael, and John Knell.
Page 135 and 136:
Falk, John H and Lynn D Dierking. 2
Page 137 and 138:
Johanson, Kaya. 2013. ‘Listening
Page 139 and 140:
Marsh, Kevin, and Evelina Bertranou
Page 141 and 142:
New Economics Foundation. 2008. Cap
Page 143 and 144:
Reason, Matthew. 2004. ‘Theatre a
Page 145 and 146:
Throsby, David. 2010. The Economics
Page 147 and 148:
Williams, Tandi. 2011. Community Re
Page 149 and 150:
Hegarty, C Boyd. 2009. ‘The value
Page 151 and 152:
APPENDIX TABLES Table A-1 A groupin
Page 153 and 154:
Table A-3 A grouping of indicators
Page 155 and 156:
Table A-5 A grouping of indicators
show all

aceUVi

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?