My favorite exhibit for both signage and engagement was in the Water Lab. Britt mentioned a sign from it in her post.
![]() |
| Child playing with model Falls. Can you spot the model engineered structures? |
Visitors could build dams, spin turbines, and run logs down the river on several models of St. Anthony Falls, just like occurred on the Falls throughout their history. The moving water and many tools to interact with it invited visitors to touch. It was fairly intuitive to use. Even just placing your hands in the water gave you a better understanding of how the water moves on the river.
![]() |
| Overhead signage. One explains and the other instructs. |
Signage was just enough to encourage deeper understanding without overwhelming the visitor with information or structure. The amount of words was concise. Size of the words was easy to read and approachable.
![]() |
| Do these signs at playing level seem to extend learning from the overhead signs? |
I especially appreciated the creative placement of the signage, both high and low. The signs that hang from the ceiling guide initial engagement, while the ones on the exhibit encourage prolonged engagement. My one complaint is that the ceiling signs might be easy to miss.
Another exhibit/signage that I liked demonstrated how a water-powered turbine turned a grain elevator in a pulley system. The visitor gets to turn the turbine, simulating the action of the power. Then you can see all the other parts move.
![]() |
| The exhibit had many moving parts to catch the eye. Can you spot all the signage? |
The coolest part of the exhibit for me was the placement of the signage. It was placed at all different angles on different parts of the machine, so that you could read it while observing the part in action. The signs followed the path that your eyes naturally took in exploring the machine. As in the Water Lab exhibits the writing was concise and approachable. This exhibit also had a more lengthy explanation off to the side for those interested in learning more.
![]() |
| The exhibit invites you to look up. |
While the combination of signage and moving parts did keep me engaged, this exhibit did not encourage active prolonged engagement. There wasn't actually much to do and there was only one way to interact with the exhibit. Still, this was a step up from the normal history museum exhibit encased in glass.
| Information direct from the source. |
Other strategies I saw that I might consider using for my exhibit were the use of direct quotes from a primary source (ie. William Kamkwamba from The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind) and questions. Just like in a nonfiction book, these leads engage the reader and make them want to read more.
| A question and fun fact wrapped into one! |





I agree with your thought that the criteria for a good sign might differ between a science exhibit and a history exhibit. As I read through a lot of the exhibits with "APE goggles" on, I thought about how I wouldn't want to cut out any of the information presented. I mean, do all topics lend itself to an APE style exhibit? For me personally, I would like a museum that has a mix of all different kinds of exhibits. Would you agree?
ReplyDeleteI picked up on Justine's comment, too, about whether the standards/criteria for signage depend on the type of museum. We should have asked Bette or Jill for their opinions.
ReplyDeleteThe Mill City museum is next on my list of new places to visit. There's a lot to learn here about exhibit design and signage, even if the context isn't technically a science museum. I mean, really, anything could be science, right? A Chemistry class could learn a lot of content at Mill City, in my opinion.