Applied Interpretation

Do interpreters live up to their own goals for a program? Do the outcomes desired by the professionals meet the recollections / impact exhibited by the participant?

One approach to learn if an interpreter’s goals are met is through interviewing them following an interpretive program to get a sense of what recollections / impact his / her participants might have months after the program. Then following the program…and in this case from 6 to 18 months after the experience…interview participants to learn if expectations were fulfilled.

Denali Interpretive Program

Below is a sample of such an interview for an interpreter who led the Denali dog sled program

Author: For this specific program that you just did, what are things that you perceive that would be things that you think would be connections that would be made six months from now?

Interpreter: Well, I’m hoping that they are going to remember that it takes a lot to manage a park and that it’s a team effort. That was the number one thing. And the symbolization of team is not just the rangers, it’s really the dogs. That’s what I’d liked them to remember is, is how the dogs work together as a team and that we couldn’t run this park without those dogs. Those are some of the core concepts that I would like to be remembered.

Below are some recollections from visitors of that same program, six months following our interview:

You realize that you know they [dogs] are basically working, it’s not just a fun game thing where we are taking somebody for a ride or when they race to Nome. It’s just a working life and you say to yourself, it is so much better for the environment rather than run snowmobiles up and down the mountains. But they have dogs and it’s really a history, it’s a connection.

My husband and I both went away feeling how important the dogs have been through the history of the park, through getting them, enabling them to take care of the park in the inclimate weather that they have.

It helps people like me who, go hey, they’re doing some good here.  They’re not wasting taxpayer money or anything like that.  That there’s a good purpose behind having the dogs,

From these comments …and others like them…the interpreter’s expectations were certainly met.

Another interpreter was interviewed at the same park regarding her impact on participants of a visitor center program. Again, below is a sample of the interview conducted by the author.

Author – What did you want them to come away with?

Interpreter – I wanted them to see that there are lessons learned in the National Parks. With animals, it’s usually games and lessons taught by, you know, the parents or whatever, things that are learned that help them survive. With people, it’s lessons that we’ve learned from history and trial and error to help the park survive. So it kind of boils down again to survival, but also to the lessons that will help with survival. It goes with animals but also with us.

Responses eighteen months following the program offered general recollections about the animals she talked about, but certainly her attempt to connect games of animals and people was not retained.

What kinds of animals there were in the National Park and she told us about what not to do in front of the animals.

Just to familiarize with the bear and the animals and the whole park area there and the whole ecosystem.

I’m pretty sure they just mainly talked about all the different animals and all about them.

Two interpreters and two programs with two different results – the variance of the two outcomes may be influenced by the longer post program participant interviews. However, I believe these two different results are reflective of many other interpreters’ met…or unmet expectations.

And, to me, the only way to learn if your expectations are met is is to reach out to those who have participated in your programs and ask a few questions about what they walked away with long after they left your park or center! How else will you know if your expectations were met?