1 - Final Project Brief

7/31/2019 1 - Final Project Brief

1/61

UCL STUDENT HOME PROJECT 2012

Final Project Brief

May 2012


2/61

UCL Student Homes Project 2012 Page 2

The cover photo has not been approved

by LOGOG, and therefore should not

be reproduced for promotional

or commercial purposes.

Special thanks goes to Suguru Koshikawa,

for appearing in the cover photo and to

Lisa Preville for acting as photographer.


3/61


TABLE OF CONTENT

1. Final Project Brief 71.1.Executive Summary 71.2.Project Title 111.3.Target Audience 121.4.Communication Messages and Learning Theories 121.5.Documenting Student Homes Team 131.6.Audience Advocate Team 161.7.Audience Research Team 171.8.Public Information Team 181.9.Learning and Interpretation Team 191.10. Web Resource Team 201.11. Exhibition Team 211.12. Project Management Team 231.13. Brief Appendices 27

2. Project Outcomes 622.1.Documenting Student Homes Team 632.2.Audience Advocate Team 1102.3.Audience Research Team 1752.4.Public Information Team 1992.5.Learning and Interpretation Team 2132.6.Web Resource Team 2732.7.Exhibition Team 3122.8.Project Management Team 356

3. Team Progress Reports 3903.1.Documenting Student Homes Team 3913.2.Audience Advocate Team 4053.3.Audience Research Team 4213.4.Public Information Team 4403.5.Learning and Interpretation Team 4713.6.Web Resource Team 4943.7.Exhibition Team 5223.8.Project Management Team 5683.9.Project Briefs 630


4/61

UCL Institute of Archaeology

2012

Who Stole my Milk?1. Final Project Brief


5/61


TABLE OF CONTENT1. Who Stole my Milk Brief 7

1.1.Executive Summary 71.1.1. Communication Messages 71.1.2. New Networks and Community Participation 81.1.3. Concourse Case Exhibition 81.1.4. Learning Events 91.1.5. Web Resources 101.1.6. Public Information Resources 101.1.7. Audience Advocacy and Evaluation 111.1.8. Audience Research 11

1.2.Project Title 111.3.Target Audience 121.4.Communication Theories & Learning Theories 121.5.Documenting Student Homes Team 13

1.5.1. Content Summary 131.5.1.1. Collected Data 131.5.1.2. Tower Hamlets 141.5.1.3. Islington 141.5.1.4. Camden 151.5.1.5. Barnet 15

1.5.2. Accessioning 151.5.3. Participant Input 16

1.6.Audience Advocate Team 161.6.1. First Front-end Evaluation 161.6.2. Second Front-end Evaluation 161.6.3. Formative Evaluation of Social Media 161.6.4. Formative Evaluation of Exhibition and Web Resources 171.6.5. Summative Evaluations of Family Days and Open Evening 17

1.7.Audience Research Team 171.7.1. Press Release 171.7.2. Postcard 171.7.3. Radio 171.7.4. Social Media 181.7.5. E-Newsletter 181.7.6. Magazine Article 181.7.7. Project Video Documentary 18

1.8.Public Information Team 181.8.1. Postcard 181.8.2. Case Study 191.8.3. Private View Event 191.8.4. Project Video Documentary 19

1.9.Learning and Interpretation Team 19


6/61


1.9.1. Family Days 191.9.2. Open Evening - Global Homes 20

1.10. Web Resource Team 201.10.1.Web Elements 20

1.10.1.1. Facebook & Twitter 201.10.1.2. Blog 201.10.1.3. Digital Story 211.10.1.4. Interactive Floor plan 211.10.1.5. Project Video Documentary 21

1.11. Exhibition Team 211.11.1.Exhibition Concept and Design 211.11.2.Storyline 221.11.3.Location 22

1.12. Project Management Team 231.12.1.Policy and Content 23

1.12.1.1. UCL Ethics Policy 231.12.1.2. Fieldwork Safety 231.12.1.3. UCL Data Protection Policy 24

1.12.2.Rules and Regulations 241.12.2.1. Data Protection Act of 1998 241.12.2.2. Health and Safety 24

1.12.3.Resources Needed 251.12.4.Final Budget 251.12.5.Management System and Communication Plan 251.12.6.Gantt Chart 261.12.7.Learning and Communication Theory Selection & Implementation 26

1.13. Brief Appendices 271.13.1. Project Title 271.13.2. Communication Messages 281.13.3. Learning Theories 291.13.4. Project Components 311.13.5. Communication Messages Table 421.13.6. Resources Needed 491.13.7. Project Budget 521.13.8. Management System & Communication Plan 601.13.9. Gantt Chart 61


7/61


FINAL PROJECT BRIEF

1.1. Executive SummaryIn the lead up to London 2012, the Geffrye Museum (GM) is collaborating with the MA

students from the Museum and Site Interpretation (MSI) course at UCL Institute of

Archaeology on a project as part of the Stories of the World: London programme (STOW)

within the Cultural Olympiad. The work focuses specifically on student homes in London.

Who Stole my Milk?will delve into the unusual world of Londons modern student homes,

bringing to light the unique atmosphere of friendship, conflict, and compromise that

develops amongst roommates in shared spaces, and the impact of cultural exchange on a

students personal identity. The project will also highlight how students rise to the

challenge of creating a home within an impermanent space and time.

Who Stole my Milk?will explore these themes through constructivist and socio-culturallearning theories and a cultural approach to communication. UCLs MSI students have

developed communication messages to aid and guide the team during the development of

the project.

1.1.1. Communication MessagesPrimary Message: Shared space in Londons student homes in 2012 is a unique arena in

which students from all over the world compromise, often form friendships, and

potentially come into conflict.

Secondary Message: Both practical objects and those of sentimental value found in

student homes are the material elements which connect students to past homes.

Tertiary Message: Students experience their homes in London as temporary, but find

that these homes and the city have significant effects on their identity and practices.

Over-arching Project Value: We aim to engage both existing and new GM audiences and

to support inter-group and intra-group exchange; we seek to encourage visitors to reflect

on and discuss their current or past homes, whether these be family homes, student

homes, or homes of other types.


8/61


The Who Stole my Milk?: Exploring Student Homes in London messages were deduced from

primary data obtained using different documentation techniques of social environments

student homes. We aim to present these messages using six different mediums primarily

targeted towards a student audience.

1.1.2. New Networks & Community ParticipationThe Documenting Student Home Team (DSHT) undertook the documentation process

with the following aims:

To document student homes from an object and social history point of view in orderto collect relevant data for the Who Stole my Milk?project.

To create new community networks for the GM and improve the GMs DocumentingHomes Collection

DSHT interviewed a total of fourteen participants in four different homes. The data

collected included:

Photographs (objects, spaces, people) Audio and video interviews Private and group interviews Floor plan drawings

DSHT accessioned the collected data into the GMs archives. Furthermore, DSHT

maintained contact with the participants updating them on the projects content.

1.1.3. Concourse Case ExhibitionThe lower concourse case exhibition will explore the multiple facets of modern student

homes: from social interactions amongst roommates in shared spaces, the impacts on

identity formation, and its reflection and projection within an impermanent space. The

Exhibition Team (ET) will use data collected by DSHT and present it on twelve panels

including one introductory panel.


9/61


ET carefully dissected the material collected by DSHT extracting themes, writing

exhibition panel text, photograph captions, and design briefs, and mapped out possible

visitor journeys.

1.1.4. Learning EventsThe Learning and Interpretation Team (LIT) produced a two-day learning event themed

around the GMsAt Home with the Worldexhibition, which was held on April 3rd and 4th,

2012 at the GM.

Each day entailed four one-to-two hour sessions during which participants took part in

storytelling, cooking, arts & crafts, and tasting activities. The activities included:

Explore Origami Draw to the Music Whats your Zodiac Animal? Time for a Cuppa The World of Chopsticks

LIT organised an opening event, Global Homes, aimed at an adult audience. The activities

included:

Music: Student JukeboxExhibition Talk: At Home with the WorldExhibition Talk: Who Stole my Milk?Workshop: The World of ChopsticksActivity: Communication Breakdown!Workshop: Collage your World


10/61


1.1.5. Web ResourcesThe Web Resource Team (WRT) created two permanent web resources for the GM

website and employed social media to engage with the projects primary target audience ,

to attract this new audience to the GM, and to encourage participation.

Permanent Resources:

The interactive floor plan highlights typical and personal objects found within a student

home.

The digital story explores the theme of what makes a student house a home.

Social Media:

Facebook1 Twitter Blogger

1.1.6. Public Information ResourcesIn order to promote Who Stole my Milk?: Exploring Student Homes in London, the Public

Information Team (PIT) created postcards; one for the project, and one for the private

view event. PIT was responsible for organising the private view event. The team also

worked on:

An Arts Council England case study The private view invitations Generating the content for the UCL Communications video documentary in

conjunction with the Audience Research Team (ART)

1 The Facebook and Twitter accounts were used to promote the blog, project events, and the exhibition.


11/61


1.1.7. Audience Advocacy and EvaluationThroughout the entirety of the project, the Audience Advocate Team (AAT) undertook a

number of front-end, formative, and summative evaluations enabling team members to go

beyond their preconceptions. Using face-to-face and online questionnaires, as well as

group discussions, AAT gathered and analysed our primary target audiences impressions

and thoughts on the projects cultural setting, its topic and themes, the design of delivery

methods including the exhibition and the web resources, and the effectiveness of events.

It aimed to maximise visitor experience and involvement.

1.1.8. Audience Research

ART aimed to attract a new audience to the GM students between the ages of 16 to 25 by researching relevant marketing outputs. They designed a marketing strategy using the

following mediums:

Postcard Radio Social media Press release E-newsletter

1.2. Project TitleWho Stole my Milk?: Exploring Student Homes in London

AAT surveyed the projects primary target audience using an online questionnaire and

face-to-face interviews regarding six provisional titles. Participants were asked to rank a

maximum of three titles in order of preference and clarify their selection. Results

indicated thatWho Stole my Milk?ranked highest amongst available options2. Further

2 From a total of 116 responses to the questionnaire, 88 individuals selected Who Stole my Milk?as their

preferred 1st, 2nd, or 3rd option.


12/61


consultation with GM staff resulted in the addition of the subtitle: Exploring Student

Homes in London3.

For title preference breakdown, see appendix 1.13.1.

1.3. Target AudienceFollowing research into visitor demographics at the GM conducted by AAT and ART, the

UCL team selected the following target audiences for the project:

Primary Target Audience: Age 16-25; expected to include pre-university teenagers,undergraduate students, and postgraduate students4.

Secondary Target Audience: Age 26-60+; GM core audience5. Tertiary Target Audience: Age 15 & younger6.

1.4. Communication Messages and Learning TheoriesThe projects communication messages (see section 1.1.1) aimed to implement

constructivism, socio-cultural learning theory, and cultural communication theory7. All

three theories postulate that the learner makes new meanings based on previous

knowledge and experience, and that all knowledge is individually and socially

constructed. The theoretical basis of the project shaped the communication messages in

these ways:

3 The title specifically aims to attract the projects primary target audience as it is thought that the GMs core

audience will visit the exhibition regardless.

4 This age group represents only 7% of visitors to the museum. Thus, the project aims to attract this new

audience to the GM. When taking into consideration reasonable travelling distances, AAT and ART anticipate

this new audience will originate primarily from London and the Southeast.

5 Further research into visitor demographics at the GM indicates that 71% of visitors to the museum are agedbetween 26 and 60+. AAT and ART have selected this core GM audience as the projects Secondary Target

Audience. The teams expect that this audience will tour the exhibition as part of their overall visit to the GM

as statistics show that returning visitors make up 52% of attendance to temporary exhibitions.

6 This group makes up 22% of the GMs regular visitors. The teams hope to target this group by means of twofamily activity days. See The Geffrye: Summary of Visitor Knowledge Research Findings 2010.

7 While these theories have different points of emphasistraditional constructivism tends to focus more on

what occurs between the individual and the environment, while socio-cultural learning and culturalcommunication theories focus on the interaction between the individual and the group, all three are closely

related and support one another.


13/61


Our communication messages employ the constructivist strategy of exhibiting theknown for audience members who are or were students. They also offer familiar

points of entry for non-student audiences.

Our communication messages are designed to both tap into audience members pre-existing social knowledge and to provoke social engagement and group meaningmaking among visitors to both our physical and virtual creations.

Our communication messages, while clear and precise, are jumping off points foraudience members to consider and share their own experiences and use these to

develop their own interpretations of the material presented.

For further details on the chosen learning theories and the communication messages, see

appendices 1.13.2 1.13.5.

1.5. Documenting Student Homes Team (DSHT)DSHT documented four different households totalling fourteen participants using a

number of research methods such as film, photography, sound recordings and floor plan

drawings. The full documentation of each household took three to four hours: this

involved explaining the project to participants and informing them of the possibility that

data might be transferred into the GMs archives. Each participant signed a consent form

and a model release form giving ET and WRT clearance to use their data8. Further consent

was obtained before the collected data was accessioned into the GM archives.

1.5.1. Content Summary1.5.1.1. Collected Data

DSHT collected the following information from each household:

Photographs by Li Wang (DSHT Photographer) including:o Private space/bedroomso Personal objects

8 Each household was assigned a name according to its approximate location within London and based on thenicknames they gained during the documentation process. These nicknames were slightly altered in the

exhibition and web resources to reflect their borough and ensure the participants privacy.


14/61


o Shared spaces: kitchen, living room, shower room, and toileto Kitchen cupboards and fridgeo Participants, individually and in groupso Participants preparing food

Film of the group interviews Sound recordings of the groups and individual interviews Floor plans drawn by each household member

1.5.1.2. Tower HamletsLocated in East London, this ex-council building flat contains three bedrooms, a living

room9

, a small kitchen, and a separate toilet and bathroom. Four out of the fivepostgraduate residents agreed to participate in our project; four took part in the group

interview, while only three were interviewed individually. From varied backgrounds

English, French, American, and German each participant has resided outside their home

country and enjoys travelling, an aspect reflected within the flats content.

1.5.1.3. IslingtonThis two-floor house located near Caledonian road includes a kitchen, three bedrooms10,

and a storage area. Its four postgraduate residents originate from different regions in

China. Although two of the participants are a couple, the flatmates did not know each

other prior to living together. As a result, they live, cook, and entertain separately

respecting each others personal and private lives. However, communication does occur

when necessary. The students suggested this house was temporary and they did not

regard it as a home.

9 This room was converted into a fourth bedroom. The tenants, however, still use the space as a living room.

10 The first bedroom is located on the ground floor, while the other two are found in the basement.


15/61


1.5.1.4. CamdenThis house located near Euston station includes a small kitchen and three bedrooms.

Three out of the six occupants agreed to participate in our project: a Vietnamese couple

and a Maltese woman11. The Maltese woman occupies a large bedroom filled with objects

belonging to her partner and furniture owned by the landlord. The Vietnamese couple

share a very small room; having resided in the country for only a short period of time,

they do not own many objects. The three participants believed they had created a home

together.1.5.1.5. Barnet

This house located in North London is larger than most student homes. It includes adining room12, a living room13, a large kitchen, a laundry room, two bathrooms, and four

bedrooms. Three out of the four residents took part in our project; all PhD students, one

flatmate is English and the remaining are Italian. Having resided in the flat for three to

four years, the Italian participants own many objects. The English participant, however,

only relocated in September and has not yet decorated his bedroom. There was a

significant difference in the flats cleanliness and tidiness compared to the other student

homes. DSHT associates this with the students being older14.

1.5.2. AccessioningDSHT accessioned the material into the GMs Documenting Homes Collection.

11 The Maltese woman shares her room with her partner who, like the other non-participants, is not a student.

12 The dining room has been converted into a guest room sofa bed.

13 The living room is the main shared space television.

14 The participants are all PhD students, and are older than the projects primary target audience.


16/61


1.5.3. Participant InputDSHT remained in contact with the participants informing them on how they would be

featured in the project; ET and WRT were keen not to portray the participants in an

unfavourable light.

1.6. Audience Advocate Team (AAT)AAT conducted front-end evaluations and formative evaluations. They also conducted

summative evaluations of the Family Days and the Global Homes events.

1.6.1. First Front-end EvaluationUCL team members carried out 83 surveys at the GM and at UCL on December 13 th 14th,

2011. They aimed to test public awareness and interest in the Cultural Olympiad, SOTW,

and student homes.

1.6.2. Second Front-end EvaluationUsing results from the first front-end evaluation, AAT developed a second front-end

evaluation15. The survey tested the primary target audiences reactions to the projects

potential titles, the types of objects to be used, any potential links between personal

objects and cultural identity, different mediums through which the project could be

presented, and the popularity of certain social media sites.

1.6.3. Formative Evaluation of Social MediaAAT began its formative evaluation of the blog on March 5th using an online survey posted

on the websites main page. The blog survey and the collection of data continued until

March 29th. The survey aimed to assess the audiences reaction to the blogs design,

writing style, and content. AAT also monitored online traffic and the effectiveness of the

postcards QR code. AAT also evaluated the outreach of the Facebook and Twitter posts.

15 Some of the surveys were carried out in person. The majority were circulated by UCL team members using

an online SurveyMonkey link.


17/61


1.6.4. Formative Evaluation of Exhibition and Web ResourcesOn March 12th, AAT carried out a fourth evaluation with the Geffrye Youth Panel testing

their opinion of proposed design, content, and images for the exhibition panels, WRTs

floor plan, and digital story. AAT continued its evaluation using an online survey betweenMarch 17th and March 23rd.

1.6.5. Summative Evaluations of Family Days and the Global Homes EventAAT carried out a summative evaluation of the Family Days at the GM on April 3rd and 4th.

AAT also carried out a summative evaluation at the Global Homes event on May 16th.

1.7. Audience Research Team (ART)ART designed a marketing strategy to reach out to the primary target audience. The

elements of the strategy were:

1.7.1. Press ReleaseThe press release was sent to student magazines, student papers, and alumni magazines.

An email to the editor followed complete with relevant images and text about the project,

as well as the project postcard.

1.7.2. PostcardThe postcard was sent to high schools, colleges, relevant organisations and shops along

with the press release it was also available at the GM. Any recipient intending to place

the postcard on an announcement board received a minimum of two cards, thus allowing

for the display of both sides.

1.7.3. RadioA shorten text version of the press release was sent to ten radio stations and three UCL

team members were nominated to be spokespeople should any station request

interviews. The interviews would have focused on the projects title, its links to student

life, and would have referred the audience to the projects blog for further details.


18/61


1.7.4. Social MediaART assisted WRT in circulating news and content regarding the project using Facebook

and Twitter. The posts encouraged the primary target audience to interact: their casual

and humorous tone aimed to provoke interest among students and trigger discussions.

1.7.5. E-NewsletterPre-existing members of the GMs mailing list received an e-newsletter summarising the

project and detailing key information. The newsletter enabled the project to target the GMs

core audience. The email also included the press release and postcard.

1.7.6. Magazine ArticleART wrote an article showcasing the projects outputs for publication in a popular

magazine.

1.7.7. Project Video DocumentaryUCL Communications approached the UCL team wanting to produce a video documentary

about the project in order to highlight student achievements within the university. The

documentary, filmed jointly by ART and PIT, coordinated by the ART point team member

and assembled and edited by WRT and PMT, showcased all project outputs from the

collection of data to its public display using interviews of UCL team members, and GM

staff members.

1.8. Public Information Team (PIT)PIT aimed to promote and inform the public about the project using a series of marketing

outputs. In addition to the project outputs, PIT assisted the Geffrye Youth Panel in manning

the information stalls during half term and April Family Days.

1.8.1. PostcardIn collaboration with a graphic designer, PIT designed a postcard to promote the project

which featured a picture of the Regency Room at the GM next to a picture of a messy


19/61


student room. The back of the postcard included brief details about the project, including

the dates of the exhibition and a QR code to link to the blog.

1.8.2. Case StudyPIT drafted a case study describing the project for submission to the Arts Council England.

The case study was completed in late April.

1.8.3. Private View EventPIT organised a private view event that showcased all project outcomes to a select

audience. The event occurred at the GM on May 24th after the exhibition opened and the

web resources launched. PIT designed the invitation with the help of a graphic designer; it

was approved by LOGOG.

1.8.4. Project Video DocumentaryPIT assisted in writing questions, contacting participants, and recording interviews at the

GM chronicling student and staff participation in the Who Stole my Milk?: Exploring Student

Homes in London project.

1.9. Learning and Interpretation Team (LIT)LIT organised two Family Days and a Global Homes event aimed at an adult audience.

1.9.1. Family DaysThe Family Days served as a platform to promote the values, themes, and objects

associated with the GMsAt Home with the Worldexhibition. Through these activities, LIT

aimed to improve family ties, shape knowledge using hands-on and multi-sensory games,

and highlight the culturally eclectic nature of homes in England. The Family Days, aimed

at family groups with participants of all ages, consisted of eight one-to-two hour sessions

(four sessions per day). Attendees participated in such activities as storytelling, cooking,

arts & crafts, and tasting sessions. The Family Days took place on April 3rd and April 4th,

2012.


20/61


1.9.2. Opening Evening Global HomesGlobal Homes was aimed atthe projects primary target audience in order to encourage

them to engage with the project. Activities included workshops, music, and informal

discussions where visitors were invited to speak with the curators and socialise withother participants. The event enabled visitors to soak up the atmosphere of the Cultural

Olympiad and student homes. It took place on May 16th, 2012.

1.10. Web Resource Team (WRT)WRT utilized two strands of online communication: a digital story and an interactive floor

plan uploaded on the GMs website; social media applications, such as Twitter, Facebook,

and a blog, enabling WRT to communicate to a wider audience.

1.10.1.Web Elements1.10.1.1. Twitter & Facebook

WRT used linked Geffryes Young Peoples Twitter and Facebook accounts to create an

online diary and update the readership on the projects progress. The social media

applications also served as promotional tools to communicate news and upcoming events,

to promote the GMs website and the projects blog, and raise awareness amongst the

primary target audience.

1.10.1.2. BlogThe blog, launched on March 5th, was an arena where student audiences and potential

museum visitors could interact and share personal stories, videos, and photographs of

their experiences living in a student home. Topics included but were not restricted to:

food, stories of conflict, objects of identity and connections to past home. WRT posted bi-

weekly. Audiences were asked to respond either through leaving comments on the blog or

[email protected]. The blog was graphically updated after AATs

survey.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


21/61


1.10.1.3. Digital StoryThe digital story consisted of a short film (3-4 min) incorporating photographs and audio

provided by DSHT. The topic explored the idea of what makes a student house a home.

Themes included life in London, potential conflict and situations of compromise amongstroommates, homemaking through decorations, objects of sentimental value, cooking, and

ultimately the friendships that blossom within shared spaces.

1.10.1.4. Interactive Floor planThe interactive floor plan a 3-D drawing representing a typical student home delineated

common objects found within a student home and activities occurring in private and public

spaces. Upon object selection, a separate window offered the audience photographs and

texthighlighting one students personal relationship with the specific object. WRT

cooperated with Big Picture Inc., an external contractor, for the design.

1.10.1.5. Project Video DocumentaryWRT edited video footage obtained at the GM creating a story outline and a rough cut

documentary.

1.11

Exhibition Team (ET)ET intended to design a twelve panel exhibit aimed at the projects primary target

audience which disseminated the aforementioned communication messages.

1.10.2.Exhibition Concept and DesignET produced a constructivist exhibition with multiple entry points enabling visitors to

freely approach each panel section from the temporary exhibition space, the art rooms, or

the staircase. ET took advantage of the spatial layout see project outcomes appendix

2.7.7 to divide the communication messages. Each message was explored using stories

collected by DSHT of individual or student groups.


22/61


ET formed conceptual links between each panel section in order to demonstrate how

elements of a student home work together to make them unique yet similar to other

homes. This resulted in the repetition of key information and ideas at strategic points. The

overall design of the panels also showed similarity across the exhibition in order to

provide a visually cohesive exhibition. Finally, ET utilised object images and audience

questions to create links with concurrentSOTW-themed exhibitions found throughout the

GM.

1.10.3.StorylineThe storyboard (see project outcomes appendix 2.7.8) outlines the exhibition ideas. The

panels are numbered for clarity of explanation, and do not indicate a narrative approach

dictating how the visitor must approach the exhibition.

The communication messages are summarised in the introductory panel. The first

communication message begins in panel three, while communication message two begins

in panel six, and communication message three starts with panel nine.

Each panel has been assigned a specific theme supporting the constructivist design of the

exhibition. The modalities selected within the concourse exhibition are text and images;

audio and video will be available on the web resource, thus complementing the exhibition.

ET will use the pre-selected colour scheme of the SOTWbrand: the GM has already chosen

pink in their exhibition. ET will also incorporate the ribbon theme implemented by the

GM.

1.10.4.Location16

16 The panels available include one metal wall panel at the bottom of the access stairs and eleven slim glass

cases mounted into the walls with room for panels and small objects. In addition, the glass panels above the

cases and metal panels below are available for the exhibition.

The surrounding brick walls are part of the Grade I listed building and therefore nothing can be attached to

them. The floor space needs to be left clear for functions.


23/61


The exhibition space is an open plan and led to the GMs temporary exhibitAt Home with

the World. Potential challenges included the risk for through traffic and high noise levels

as these may have reduced visitor dwell time. ET selected panel one as the introduction

because, aside from the lift, the main way to access the exhibition space is via the stairs.

Therefore, although visitors may not have started the exhibition here, it was likely to be in

their initial line of sight.

1.11. Project Management Team (PMT)PMT was responsible for maintaining a project schedule which ensured that teams met

deadlines and generated deliverables. Calendars for each team were created and updated

to clarify team deadlines (see project outcomes appendices 2.8.3 2.8.8). PMT maintained

a project budget and resource chart, ensured good communication between the GM, the

project teams, and UCL staff, and certified that the design, content and overarching vision

of the project were consistent across all aspects of the project.

1.11.1.Policy and Content1.11.1.1. UCL Ethics Policy

The project was exempt from undergoing review by the UCL Ethics Committee as student

researchers did not collectSensitive Personal Data as defined by the UCL Ethics Policy.

As is generally recommended by the Committee to all UCL research projects involving

ethnographic research, all team members abided by the Ethical Guidelines for Good

Research Practice as put forth by the Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and

the Commonwealth (http://www.theasa.org/ethics/guidelines.shtml). This included

negotiating informed consent with participants, allowing participants to retroactively

retract information within a given time period, and attempting to anticipate and mitigate

any potential negative effects of participation in the project.

1.11.1.2. Fieldwork SafetyThe Project Manager and DSHT Leader completed a fieldwork risk assessment outlining

risks to the personal safety of student researchers in the field. To counter these risks,
http://www.theasa.org/ethics/guidelines.shtmlhttp://www.theasa.org/ethics/guidelines.shtml


24/61


DSHT adopted a call-in system to the Project Manager when the team arrived and

departed from a student home, exclusively utilized public transportation, and concluded

all research before 10pm.

1.11.1.3. UCL Data Protection PolicyBoth UCL and the GM comply with the Data Protection Act of 1998. In accordance with

UCLs Data Protection Policy, the Student Home Project was approved and admitted to the

UCL Data Protection Registration, reference No Z6364106/2012/01/46, section 19.

The project avoided the processing ofSensitive Personal Datadue to ethical

implications and primarily processed standard personaldata. Processing included

activities such as storing, consulting, disclosing and destroying data.

1.11.2.Rules and Regulations1.11.2.1. Data Protection Act of 1998

Both UCL and the GM comply with the Data Protection Act of 1998. Our compliance with

the act was ensured by our compliance with the UCLs Data Protection Policy section 8.3

and with guidance provided by the GM.

1.11.2.2. Health and SafetyBoth UCL and the GM must comply with the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and

its accompanying secondary legislation. Under the act, leisure and education

organizations must ensure the health and safety of both employees and participants, who,

in the case of the Student Homes Project, include UCL students and visitors to the GM. The

standard procedure for compliance requires that management conduct a risk assessment

and make plans to mitigate identified risks. Students completed a risk assessment for

fieldwork. All other aspects of health and safety were covered by the GMs Health and

Safety Policy 2010, which is specifically interpreted and implemented at departmental

levels within the GM. For the Family Days, LIT adapted the risk assessment used by the

Education and Learning Department. For the exhibition, Global Homes event, and the


25/61


private view, the Project Manager had a discussion with the Head of Front of House and

Security at the GM, Adrian Wells, about potential risks for the concourse and caf areas.

These risks were deemed to be minimal, and no mitigation strategies other than those

routinely followed by the GM were deemed to be necessary. PMT also consulted the UCL

Guidance for Exhibitions. PMT conveyed to all team members that no activity is so

important or urgent that it will be carried out other than with full regard to all issues of

health and safety (British Museum Health and Safety Policy 2008).

1.11.3.Resources NeededSee appendix 1.13.6

1.11.4.Final Budget

See appendix 1.13.7

1.11.5.Management System and Communication PlanThe management system and communication plan followed the hierarchy described in

appendix 1.13.8.

Each member of PMT oversaw and facilitated communication with the following teams:

Project Manager: DSHT, ET, & LIT Project Coordinator: AAT, ART, & PIT Content Editor: ET17 & WRT

Emails were the GM staffs preferred method of communication. Each team selected a

representative responsible for contacting their GM counterpart. Team members also

communicated via email with both MSI course coordinators. For communication within

the project team, team members used Basecamp, a communication and project

management platform (www.basecamphq.com). Other forms of communication between

project members, which were primarily facilitated through Basecamp included:

17 Content only
http://www.basecamphq.com/http://www.basecamphq.com/


26/61


Intra-team meetings and messages18 Inter-team meetings and messages Full UCL team meetings and messages Panel meetings Meeting of teams with GM counterparts Sharing of relevant files Brainstorms with Whiteboard MSI classes Friday updates issued by the Project Coordinator over e-mail which included

information regarding key meetings and upcoming events.

1.11.6.Gantt ChartSee appendix 1.13.9.

1.11.7.Learning and Communication Theory Selection and ImplementationPMT facilitated the identification and application of the appropriate theoretical framework

(constructivism, socio-cultural learning theory and cultural communication theory)

throughout the development of the project. Through the use of presentations, group

discussions, and worksheets completed by each team, team members reviewed their

knowledge from the previous term and made connections between their practice in the

specific components that they were responsible for and the supporting theories. As

knowledge of and familiarity with the supporting theories grew throughout the term, team

members were eventually asked to use their experience to reflect on how they might apply

these theories in the future as a working professional, and the potential strengths and

weaknesses of the theories.

18 Messages referred to any information or query exchanged between team members relating to dates,

milestones and deliverables. Basecamp messages were the main form of communication for the project.


27/61


1.12. Brief AppendicesAPPENDIX 1.13.1 PROJECT TITLE

First choice

17%

24%

29%

13%

13%4% A. Fusion & Confusion

B. Student Living: Just

Passing through

C. Who Stole My Milk?

D. Your Mother Doesnt

Live Here

E. Funny, Messy, Whiskey

F. Uni! No Parents

This pie chart demonstrates the overall percentage of interviewees title preferences.

Firstchoice

Secondchoice

Thirdchoice

ResponseCount

20 23 16 59

29 24 17 70

34 30 24 88

16 23 19 58

15 17 17 49

5 12 20 37

B. Student Living: Just Passing through

C. Who Stole My Milk?

D. Your Mother Doesnt Live Here

Answer Options

E. Funny, Messy, Whiskey

Looking at the six titles below, in the context of student living and student homes which three titles interest you the most?

F. Uni! No Parents

A. Fusion & Confusion

This table outlines the number of individuals who selected specific titles as their first,

second, and third choices.


28/61


APPENDIX 1.13.2 COMMUNICATION MESSAGES

Our primary communication message reflects broadly shared experiences in student

homes. The idea, however, that interpersonal compromise and conflict is characteristic of

communal living will be something familiar to anyone who has lived as part of a group. The

pre-existing knowledge that this message will tap into will be of a social nature. In

addition, we expect that the stories and themes we will use to illustrate this message will

engage the audiences sense of humour and encourage them to share their own stories with

each other. Both of these effects are likely to lead to social interaction and group meaning-

making.

The first of our secondary communication messages also reflects a common student

experience of bringing or acquiring objects that connect one to past homes. As the message

also taps into a more general experience of valued objects, it will provide non-student

audiences another point of familiar entry to the project. As sentimental and practical

objects can reflect both social and cultural background on both a micro and macro scale,

this message also places personal identity within the wider contexts of family, community,

society, culture and country and, thus, encourages audience members to use their

experience of belonging to and making meaning within various groups to relate to and

make sense of the experiences portrayed in the project. Finally, the emphasis placed by

this message on valued objects provides the target audience, a statistically

underrepresented audience at the GM, with a point of familiar entry from which to connect

with other, less familiar objects within the GM and with the museum as a whole.

Our final communication message reflects the common student living experience of

transience and liminality. While a significant characteristic of the student experience and a

point of familiarity for our student audience, we predict that this message will be the most

difficult to convey to audience members who have never been students, precisely because

it lacks obvious general points of familiar entry. However, we hope to provide this

message, access to which will be scaffolded by the more accessible messages, as a

springboard for novel reflection for both student and non-student audiences alike.


29/61


APPENDIX 1.13.3 LEARNING THEORIES

Constructivism requires that, in any educational situation, a learner be able to relate to

something familiar, something that is already known or has already been experienced

(Hein 1998, 156). As the GM focuses on the home, visitors engage with the museum from a

very personal store of pre-existing knowledge and experiences. On the one hand, for non-

student audiences, our project is replicating the constructivist strategy found throughout

the GM of granting conceptual access to all visitors by displaying familiar objects that

provide a gateway to more foreign and remote objects and situations. (Hein 1998, 161-

162). For a significant portion of our target audience, however, we are employing the

constructivist strategy of exhibiting the known (Hein 1998, 162-164); by documenting

and representing student homes in our exhibition, web resource, and events, we hope to

reflect elements of the student experience to which a significant portion of our target

audience can directly relate. All of our communication messages have been informed by

our teams personal experiences in student homes and by front-end evaluations conductedwith members of the target audience. While these communication messages reflect the

student experience, they have also been designed to offer familiar points of entry for non-

student audiences.

Home is a social place, and, thus, knowledge of home, what home is and what makes a

home is highly socially-constructed. The differences in details but broad commonalities

found in the idea of home held by individuals of a single group are an apt illustration of

the socio-cultural claim that what we know is produced through our interpretation of

our individual experiences but also through the testing and refining of our interpretation

within significant communities (Hooper-Greenhill 1999, 70). Student and non-studentvisitors alike will approach the project with ideas of home that have been informed by

those significant communities or communities of practice in which they have lived,

whether these communities are composed of family members or roommates. In addition,

GM visitors, like most museum visitors, tend to visit the museum in groups, and thus, make

meanings from the material on display and events as part of social groups. We expect the

GM core audience to visit our exhibition and events in groups, and we hope to encourage

our primary target audience to engage with the exhibition, events, and web materials as a

part of an enjoyable and social experience. Audience members will make meanings

individually and jointly. Our communication messages are designed to both tap into

audience members pre-existing social knowledge and to provoke social engagement and

group meaning making among visitors to both our physical and virtual creations.

The idea of home is so individually and collectively subjective that it would be neither

possible nor desirable to create a project on this theme that communicated a right

answer or a singular interpretation. Constructivism, socio-cultural learning theory, and


30/61


cultural communication theory, with their common tenet that knowledge is constructed,

provide us with a basis for creating project that includes multiple layers of interpretative

possibilities. By inserting the student home into the GMs discourse of home, we are

broadening the notion of home by giving representation to new voices. By including

students of various nationalities, we are also extending this dialogue beyond cultural

boundaries. Our communication messages, while clear and precise, are jumping off points

for audience members to consider and share their own experiences and use these to

develop their own interpretations of the material presented.

(Hein 1998, 26) Our project makes use of both the

learning theory and epistemological framework provided by constructivism.

(Hooper-Greenhill 1999, 17). Our project recognizes

that meaning making occurs at the interrelated levels of the individual, communities, and

society and culture.


31/61


APPENDIX 1.13.4 PROJECT COMPONENTS

In order to support the chosen learning and communication theories, each project component considers: 1) the previous

knowledge and experiences of audience members, 2) the accessibility of the project and engagement of audience members, 3)

the social context from which and within which the audience members will engage with the project, and 4) how to allow and

support audience members in making their own interpretations.

Project Component Previous Knowledge

and Experience:

Increased Access and

Engagement:

Social Context and

Engagement:

Open-Ended Meaning

Making

How do the project

components encourage

audience members to

draw connections

between the project and

their previous

knowledge and

experience?

How do the project

components make the

project more

accessible to the

traditionally

underrepresented

target audience, as

well as audience

members of different

cultural backgrounds,

learning styles and

physical and mental

levels and abilities?

How do the project

components

encourage audience

members to engage

socially with the

project as part of a

community of

practice?

How do the project

components allow

audience members to

actively make their

own meanings as

opposed to passively

receiving correct

meanings?

Communication

Messages (Entire

Project Team)

See Appendix A.

Title (Entire Project When the title was tested This title resonates The title attempts to The title does not name


32/61


Team) with the target audience,

respondents stated that it

reminded them of their

personal experiences

with student living.

with the traditionally

underrepresented

primary target

audience. The subtitle

Exploring Student

Homes In London

clarifies the subject

matter for student andnon-student audiences.

engage the audiences

sense of humour and

fun. These qualities

portray engaging with

the project as an

enjoyable social

activity.

a specific culprit.

Rather it asks who the

milk thief was,

allowing audience

members to create

their own

interpretation.

Primary Source

Research

(Documenting

Student Homes

Team)

By recruiting student

participants and

documenting their homes

and experiences, DSHT

has provided content that

allowed the rest of the

project to connect with

the primary target

audience by reflecting

components of the

primary target audiences

experience.

By collecting

photographs, videos,

and sound recordings,

DSHT provided the rest

of the project with

content that could be

used to engage a

variety of learning

styles and

developmental levels.

By recruiting

participants from

different cultural

backgrounds, the

material collected by

The material collected

by DSHT was social in

nature and provoked

students to reflect on

their own social

experience, while

potentially bringing

student and non-

student audiences

together to create a

broader community

for the discussion of

the meaning of

home.

As the material

collected by DSHT

represented a diversity

of specific experiences,

it allowed the rest of

the project to convey

that there are multiple

ways in which students

live and experience

home. This, in turn,

invited the audience to

create their own

interpretation of the

project components

and their personal

experiences.


33/61


DSHT allowed the

project to engage with

a culturally diverse

audience.

Front-end and

formative

Evaluations

(Audience

Advocates)

Front-end and formative

evaluations assessed

precisely what audience

members were familiar

with and what they

expected to see in a

project on student

homes. The rest of the

project team utilized this

information to shape

their project components.

The front-end and

formative evaluations

focused heavily on

soliciting opinions and

feedback from the

traditionally

underrepresented

primary target

audience. This helped

the project team to

create a project that

meets the needs and

expectations of the

primary target

audience.

By asking for feedback

about social media use,

preferred

communication media

and exhibition

Front-end and


examined museum

visiting and social

media habits so that

project team

members had a better

understanding of the

groups from which

and within which our

audience was likely to

engage with our

project.

The front-end and


allowed multiple

audiences to have a

voice about what

content the project

covered and how it

was presented.

Decision-making

power was shared with

the audience. The

evaluations also

captured multiple and

disparate audience

viewpoints. The rest of

the project attempted

to respond to the

variety of viewpoints

expressed.


34/61


components, the front-

end and formative

evaluations also

ensured that the target

audience was able to

engage with the project

in the ways which they

preferred.

The front-end

evaluations also

solicited feedback from

core GM audiences so

the project team was

able to ensure that the

project appealed to

them as well.

Marketing Plan

(Audience

Researchers)

The marketing plan was

based on research into

which media outlets were

used by and are familiar

to the primary target

audience.

The marketing plan

reached out to the

traditionally

underrepresented

primary target

audience by publicizing

the project in media

outlets such as student

By publicizing the

project through

various media outlets,

including social

media, the marketing

plan aimed to foster

discussions among

students about the

By engaging with the

primary target

audience in ways

which are acceptable

and appealing to them,

the elements of the

marketing plan

portrayed the project


35/61


publications, student

radio shows and social

networking utilities

popular with this

audience.

project and its

themes.

as something which

was open to their

contribution and

interpretation, rather

than something which

was being interpreted

for them.

Family Days:

(Learning and

Interpretation

Team)

The workshops at the

Family Days drew and

expanded upon on

participants past

experiences with crafts,

cooking, music, different

cultures and the GM.

The workshops were

designed to appeal to

every age group by

providing activities that

could be both easy and

non-verbal and

adapted for more

advanced

developmental levels.

The workshops were

multi-sensory and

active and designed to

appeal to a variety of

different learning

styles.

Participants attended

the workshops in

family groups. The

activities were

designed to

encourage

cooperation,

collaboration and

knowledge-sharing

among family

members.

The workshops

encouraged young

people and their carers

to imagine, create, and

experiment. While the

workshops provided

information and

inspiration, they

allowed the young

people to reinterpret

the music, objects, arts

and traditions of

different cultures in

their own ways.

Open Evening for

Adults: and

The entertainment and

workshops at the Global


workshops offered

All of the

entertainment and


the workshops offered


36/61


Interpretation

Team)

Homes event were

designed to evoke

personal memories and

reflection. By focusing on

past memories and

communication skills,

Global Homes allowed

attendees to connecttheir experiences at the

event with past

experiences.

were multi-sensory.

They were aimed at

appealing to the

underrepresented

target audience in

order to encourage

them to visit the GM.

workshops were

crafted so that they

were enjoyable and

social experiences.

Attendees were

encouraged to come

in social groups.

The workshops

encouraged social

interaction between

participants.

aimed to show that

there are many

different ways in which

people experience

home, London, and

being a student. The

workshops

emphasized thedifferent ways in which

people communicate.

Postcard (Public

Information Team)

The postcard, which

features an image of a

student room,

encouraged members of

the primary target

audience to draw

connections between

their own livingexperiences and the

project.

The postcard, by

featuring an image of a

student room and an

image of a period room

at the GM, was

designed to appeal to

both the

underrepresentedprimary target

audience and the core

GM audience. Both

audiences were

provided with a point

of conceptual entry.

By juxtaposing a

messy student room

with an image of a

period room, the

postcard attempted to

engage the audiences

sense of humour and

fun. These qualitiesportrayed engaging

with the project as an

enjoyable social

activity.

While the postcard

suggested certain

themes and hints and

common

preconceptions, it

posed these as being

in question, thus

encouraging thereader/viewer to

decide for themselves

whether or not they

agree.


37/61


Private View (Public

Information Team)

-Event

-Invitation

The private view served

as an informal forum

which encouraged social

engagement and the

sharing of experience,

knowledge, and

preconceptions.

The private view

served as a fun

occasion for members

of the primary target

audience to come to the

GM and to engage with

the project. The guest

list of the private viewmixed museum

professionals with

students, which

demonstrated to the

primary target

audience that the GM is

a welcoming place that

values them.

The private view

encouraged members

of existing

communities of

practice to come to

the exhibition

together, but it also

resulted in peoplewho did not attend

the event together

engaging in dialogue.

By inviting a diverse

group of attendees, the

private view

encouraged a variety of

interpretations of the

project, rather than

just the interpretation

of a single audiencegroup.

Web Resource: (Web

Resource Team)

The themes and content

of both the floor plan and

the digital story were

shaped by the front-end

and formative

evaluations, which

informed the project

team about the

audiences pre-existing

knowledge and

The floor plan and the

digital story allowed

anyone with an

internet connection to

engage with the

project, thus expanding

access beyond those

who could physically

come to the GM.

The floor plan

featured people and

objects. When

audience members

engaged with the floor

plan they were

engaging with the

participants whose

experiences were

documented. It was

the human face that

The floor plan offered

information about the

personal and historical

significance of each

documented object.,

but as the floor plan

did not come together

in a single narrative,

audience members had

to craft their own

understanding of the


38/61


experience.

The floor plan allowed

people to draw

connections between the

typical objects

represented and theirown objects of

sentimental or functional

value.

The digital story

addressed the challenges

that students face in

feeling at home in a new

place; student members

of the primary target

audience were able torelate their own

experiences to the story.

The floor plan and

digital story catered to

different learning styles

as the former was

interactive, while the

latter used visual and

audio media.

allowed audience

members to connect

with the objects and

the ideas presented.

One of the main

themes addressed inthe digital story was

that of the importance

of friendship in order

to feel comfortable in

a new place.

floor plan as a whole.

The digital story began

by posing questions to

the viewer. The story

that unfolded was one

possible answer to thequestion, but not the

only answer.

Social Media (Web

Resource Team)

Facebook & Twitter are

used by many of the

target audiences. Using

them to promote the

Facebook & Twitter

were particularly

effective ways to reach

the underrepresented

While going on online

is generally a solitary

activity, Facebook &

Twitter and the blog

The blog was a

platform by which

audience members

shared and reflected


39/61


project tied into a

platform which audience

members already utilized

and understood.

The themes and content

presented by the blogwere shaped by the front-

end and formative

evaluations. The blog

allowed audience

members to share their

prior knowledge,

experience and ideas.

primary target

audience, as this group

utilizes online social

media so heavily.

The blog provided

access to people whowere online savvy and

like to engage in

dialogue, but might

otherwise shy away

from museum-based

projects.

were used to foster

the creation of virtual

group engagement

and communities.

By using the Geffryes

Young PeoplesFacebook & Twitter,

WRT tapped into a

pre-existing

community of practice

and expanded this

community by

encouraging audience

members engaging

with the project to

follow the Young

Peoples accounts.

The blog created its

own community of

practice by

encouraging students

and former students

from around the

upon their experiences.

There was no right or

wrong answer.


40/61


world to contribute

material on different

topics and discuss it

with each other.

Exhibition

(Exhibition Team)

The content and design of

the exhibition were

shaped by the front-end

and formative

evaluations, which

informed project team

members about the

audiences pre-existing

knowledge and

experience.

The content from DSHT

allowed ET to create an

exhibition that reflected

elements of the student

experience familiar to our

primary target audience.

The content and design

of the exhibition

reached out to the

underrepresented

target audience and

demonstrated that

their experience was

valued by acting as a

physical representation

of this experience

within the GM.

The content reached

out to a culturally

diverse audience by

featuring students from

a variety of cultural

backgrounds. By

linking the exhibition

directly to the web

resources, which had

The content and

design of the

exhibition framed it

as a dialogue between

visitors, curators, and

participants.

The content of the

exhibition tapped into

the previous

communal living

experiences of

audience members.

By posing questions

as part of the text

panels, the exhibition

encouraged visitors to

discuss their own

opinions and

experiences with each

other.

The content of each

panel was introduced

by a question which

asked visitors to reflect

on what they would do

or think about a certain

topic. Participant

experiences were then

offered as a possible

answer, but not as

correct answers.

The design of the

panels highlighted the

introductory questions.


41/61


interactive content, the

exhibition appealed to

different learning

styles.

The design of the

exhibition was testedby with the Geffrye

Youth Panel, who

served as a focus group

of our primary target

audience.

The design of the

panels highlighted the

introductory

questions posed to

the audience, as well

as the student quotes.


42/61


APPENDIX 1.13.5 COMMUNICATION MESSAGES TABLE

Inspiring Learning for Allis a framework put forth by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council that assists organizations in

planning and assessing impacts in terms of broad learning and social goals or Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) and Generic

Social Outcomes (GSOs). The chart below shows the relationship between the projects communication messages, first tier and

second tier GLOs (1.2) and GSOs (1.3), and example audience statements that would indicate that the project had met its

intended learning and social outcomes. The chart also illustrates which project component will fulfil which GLOs and GSOs.

More information can be found on the Inspiring Learning for Allframework athttp://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/.

1.1.Communication Messages and GLOs and GSOs TableCommunication

Messages

Generic Learning Outcomes

(GLOs) and Generic Social

Outcomes (GSOs)

Example Audience

Statements

Project Components

ALL GSO: Strengthening Public Life

Improving the responsiveness

of services to needs of the local

community, including other

stakeholders

As a student or former

student, I identified with someof the experiences of the

students represented.

As I might go to university, I

could see myself havingsimilar experiences in the

future.

I felt that the project catered

to my interests as young

person.

Digital Story, Interactive Floor

plan, Exhibition, Marketing

Materials, Global Homes,

Primary Source Research,

Case Study
http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/


43/61


GLO: Attitudes and Values

Opinions about ourselves

GSO: Stronger and Safer

Communities

Helping young people to enjoy

life and make a positivecontribution

Because my interests and

experiences were worthy ofinspiring a museum project, I

feel like a valued member of

the community.



Materials, Social Media, Open

Evening


Attitudes towards an

organization

The Geffrye Museum cares

about young people and

provides interesting and

enjoyable experiences for

them.



Materials, Social Media, Open

Evening, Primary Source

Research, Case Study

GLO: Activity, Behaviour,

Progression

What people do

What people intend to do

I will visit the Geffrye

Museum in person or online

again or for the first time.



Materials, Family Days, Open

Evening, Case Study

GLO: Enjoyment, Inspiration,

Creativity

Having fun

I enjoyed the time I spent

engaged with the Project.

I found parts of the Project

humorous.

Web Resource, Exhibition,

Marketing Materials, Social

Media, Open Evening, Primary

Source Research

GLO: Enjoyment, Inspiration, I saw the student experience Digital Story, Interactive Floor


44/61


Creativity

Having innovative thoughts

in a new light. plan, Exhibition, Open


Research


Communities

Improving group and inter-

group dialogue andunderstanding


Opinions or attitudes towards

other people

Increased capacity for

tolerance

Not all students houses are

the same and not all students

are the same. My experience

as a student or ideas about

students may not be

representative ofall students.


plan, Marketing Materials,

Open Evening, Primary Source

Research

Shared space in Londons

student homes in 2012 is a

unique arena of conflict,

compromise and

international fusion.


Communities

Supporting cultural diversityand identity


group dialogue andunderstanding


People from different cultural

backgrounds can live together

peacefully and have a positive

impact on each others lives.

Digital Story, Exhibition, Open

Evening, Family Days, Primary

Source Research


45/61


Opinions or attitudes towards

other people

Increased capacity for

tolerance


Communities


group dialogue and

understanding

Compromise is important in

any situation where different

people need to get along withone another.

Exhibition, Family Days, Open


Research

GLO: Activity, Behaviour,

Progression

What people intend to do

I will try to resolve conflicts

with people in my life through

compromise.

Exhibition, Open Evening,

Primary Source Research

Both practical objects and

those of sentimental value

found in student homes are

the material elements

which connect students topast homes.


Empathy

I can relate to others having

favourite objects as I also have

objects that are important to

me.

I empathise with the

difficulty of living far away

from friends and family.


plan, Exhibition, Social Media,

Family Days, Open Evening,


GLO: Knowledge and

Understanding

Making links and relationships

I saw a connection between

the objects that were

important to students and the


plan , Exhibition, Marketing

Materials, Open Evening,


46/61


1.2. First and Second Tier Generic Learning OutcomesKnowledge and Understanding

Knowing what or about something Learning facts or information Making sense of something Deepening understanding How museums, libraries and archives operate Making links and relationships between thingsSkills

Knowing how to do something Being able to do new things

between things other objects at the Geffrye

Museum.


The student home is a

unique and temporary

space occupied when

students are in between

more permanent homes

and phases of life.


Empathy

Sometimes it must be difficult

for students to make a home

in a temporary space.


plan, Exhibition, Primary

Source Research

GLO: Enjoyment, Creativity,

Inspiration

Innovative thoughts

It had not occurred to me

before that student livingsituations were uniquely

temporary.


plan , Exhibition, PrimarySource Research


47/61


Intellectual skills Information management skills Social skills Communication skills Physical skillsAttitudes and Values

Feelings Perceptions Opinions about ourselves (eg self esteem) Opinions or attitudes towards other people Increased capacity for tolerance Empathy Increased motivation Attitudes towards an organisation (eg a museum, archive or library) Positive and negative attitudes in relation to an experienceEnjoyment, Inspiration, Creativity

Having fun, Being surprised Innovative thoughts, Creativity Exploration, experimentation and making Being inspiredActivity, Behaviour, Progression


48/61


What people do What people intend to do What people have done Reported or observed actions

A change in the way that people manage their lives

1.3. First and Second Tier General Social OutcomesStronger and Safer Communities

Improve group and inter-group dialogue and understanding Support cultural diversity and identity Encourage familial ties Tackle the fear of crime and antisocial behaviour Contributing to crime prevention and reductionHealth and Well-Being

Encourage healthy lifestyles and contribute to mental and physical well-being Supporting care and recovery Supporting older people to live independent lives Helping children and young people to enjoy life and make a positive contributionStrengthening Public Life

Encouraging and supporting awareness and participation in local decision making Building the capacity of community and voluntary groups Providing safe, inclusive and trusted public spaces Enabling community empowerment through the awareness of rights, benefits and external services Improving the responsiveness of services to the needs of local community, including other stakeholders


49/61


APPENDIX 1.13.6 RESOURCES NEEDED

Team Group Human ResourcesInter-group Human

ResourcesExternal Human Resources Internal Materials External Materials

PM Team & Project

EWT, EP, JP

GM: AL,RC,VW

UCL: IC, SD All groups n/a GOS: UCL/GM

Basecamp: Project

Management System

DSTHHB, RF, CCW, LW

GM: AR, LK PMT (:EWT), ET, AAT

Student Participants in Data

Collection. GOS: UCL/GM

Student houses and

objects in data

collection.

Exhibitions Team

JB, SB

GM: AG PMT (:JP), DSTH, AAT

GM: Case designer,

installation professionals GOS: UCL/GM

Exhibition archives?,

Printers

Audience Advocates

JT, BW

GM: JF All groups, PMT (:EP)

Geffrye visitors, London

students (:UCL), the public GOS: UCL/GM

Web Surveys

(SurveyMonkey)

Audience Researchers

KD, TLL

GM: NL PMT (:EP), AAT, PIT GM: NL, press and PR officer GOS: UCL/GM

Publications, Web

resources, GM

audience evaluation,

benchmarking materi

on other museum

audiences.


50/61


Web Resources CW, UB

GM: MW PMT(:JP),DSTH, AAT, PIT

GM: The Big Picture

Interactive (Bpi.) GOS: UCL/GM

Web resources,

Facebook, Twitter,

Flickr, GM website,

design assets.

Learning and Interpretation

MYC, NYK

GM: AL, LB, PK PMT (:EWT), AAT, PIT

For Both Events: Freelanceartist, Learning activity

assistants, Storyteller,

Musicians GOS: UCL/GM

GM: Objects from

Geffrye learning

collection.

Arts & crafts and

cooking materials.

Public Information

KT, JC

GM: VW PMT (:EP), AAT Postcard Participants GOS: UCL/GM Photoshop software?

Legend:

UCL Students

Elizabeth Wells-Thulin: EWT; Elisabetta Pietrostefani: EP; Julie Patenaude: JP; Hannah Brown: HB; Riccardo Fazzalari: RF; Chao-Chieh Wu: CCW; Li Wang: LW;

Jennifer Brown: JB; SemihaBicer: SH; Jeni Turner: JT; Binlu Wang: BW; Katy Daniels: KD; Tz-ling (Leslie) Lai: TLL; Charmaine Wong: CW; Urska Bohinec: UB; Min

Young Cho: MYC; Namyoung Kwon: NYK; Kathryn Townsend: KT; Javier Caro: JC


51/61


Geffrye Museum (GM)

Alsion Lightbown: AL; Rachel Crofts: RC; Vanessa Weibel: VW; Laura Bedford: LB; Phoebe Kallin: PK ; Nancy Loader: NL; Jo Fells: JF; Mandy Williams: MW;

Ananda Rutherford: AR; Louisa Knight: LK; Alex Goddard: AG

GOS: UCL/GM General Office Supplies, including paper, photocopying, laminating, as well as Microsoft Office.


52/61


APPENDIX 1.13.7 PROJECT BUDGET


53/61



54/61



55/61



56/61



57/61



58/61



59/61



60/61


APPENDIX 1.13.8 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND COMMUNICATION PLAN


61/61

APPENDIX 1.13.9 GANTT CHART

Documents

1 - Final Project Brief