kur8r

So this is just an experiment – I’m uploading my raw notes from the session I’m sitting in right now.

MW 2008 Working with Teens 4/12/2008

ArtPad- A Collection. A Connection. – Glenbow Museum

Teens are: Interested in themselves

Interested in their relationships with peers

Interested in adapting and improving their skills

Used a teen focus group – showed them six works of art with no context, then showed six works with a bit more context. Found that giving them skeletal information was not enough – but provoked questions that could then be used in the interactive. Ultimately found that providing context for the work was needed.

Students really want to know scale in the virtual context, want to see pictures of the artists

All of the works of art have the same categories: Looking at this work, Insight from the artist, how was this made?, finding meaning, talk back, more stuff, artist’s biography, credits

Students want different kinds of media – audio, video, etc. But when the students were asked about downloading podcasts – they thought that was a bad idea – would be boring. but they would watch the video online. RSS feeds not of interest.

Project also includes interviews with teens, and also enlisted design students to assist in the project

TalkBack section is moderated

Privacy concerns with login – use non-identifiable user names, no email info displayed – and still they ran up against certain area school board regulations that kept students from being able to register at school – but they could do it at home.

Young Peoples’ Laboratories for Art

www.smk.dk/ulk Anne Nielsen

Hired 90 teens – had 400 days

all they knew that there needed to be an on-site and online presence

Now – almost 500 profiles online with no advertising – and have created and engaged this target community

Concept –

Every profile is a laboratory

‘New knowledge’ – a collaboration between staff, artpilots, audience and artists

The ‘new knowledge is presented in entries on the website – related to the contributing profiles

Why try? There are so many communities already out there. Because sometimes teens think they are the only ones who like something in the world – they are alone in their classes – here they find others, find new inspiration

Advantages –

It’s non-commercial – no ads, no fear that the site will be bought out or content regrouped

It’s in Danish

It’s democratic – If I give a lot to this community it will grow – I can improve it

It’s a small and safe community – and exists on-site as well

It’s serious- it’s not just flashy show off stuff.

There’s room for different kinds of users and user behaviour

The context of the museum – gives some authority and identity

Challenges

Education – teachers are not as enthusiastic about the community as the students are. Teachers are not using it. Don’t care that there is a teen site.

Continuum from museum to community – where is the balance? For staff – where is the ROI?

Community members grow “too old” – original community was for ages 12 – 25. What do you do when they age out? Where do they go?

Resources – time and funding

The internet ecosystem – do you link out to the rest of it? Some teens want it to stay a closed system because there their nerd side can be displayed – not so much on MySpace or Facebook

From Boring and non-offensive to

Walker Art Center – visual arts

http://teens.walkerart.org

This is for teens in their after school time – important to make that distinction

Citywide scavenger hunt – decode clues and find bands in secret venues

Original website was designed really for museum staff and educators – not for teens – not for the target audience

Where are teens? On MySpace, Facebook, other social networks. And what are they doing?

Messaging privately and publicly

posting links

shows/events

trading videos

showing their work

customizing – form of self expression

Walker has a total of 7 institutional blogs – launched in 2005 – has become more popular than even the front page of the site sometimes.

Site needs institutional info, projects archive, application, sponsorship logos, maybe teens can be enticed into doing reviews and criticism

Two distinct tiers of information – teen driven content, playful, fun, fresh set of views AND institution driven content

Site should also be an open vessel – ready for expansion and ability to add other content that has not even been thought of yet.

SO – the site is split in half – literally. The boring, institutional stuff on the left – and the teen site on the right side.

Are using del.icio.us – one shared account at the moment – RSS feed into site

upcoming.org

Using outside services really works – use RSS feeds

Users can customize the look of the page – just like MySpace, etc.

Make teens a part of the process – not just the product.

Risk – no moderation – but, there are guidelines which they have to agree to – and most feel empowered by it.

Think about the site as an educational program – don’t focus on marketing. The marketing will flow from the site – but it isn’t the site. Authenticity is better marketing than any ad you can do.

Easiest if you create partnerships at the beginning – with schools, school systems, etc.

Look at the sites that teens go to – have them show you what they like and draw from those suggestions. They don’t have to be heavily involved in the design process – but should be consulted along the way.

Walker Art Center – while the WACTAC group is teenaged – the onsite programs are not limited to an age group – while the program might have been created by teens for teens, there’s no exclusion of others – remember, that teenager might like to keep coming to those events when he’s 23…..