When a Place Overshadows Interpretation…Part 2…A Rant from an Old Researcher
Why can’t we just share in the experience???
Seriously…
In the years that I have conducted research at parks around the country I have instances where even if the site isn’t a Yellowstone or Glacier Bay (see previous blog) people would just as soon walk the trails, look at the sights, or just want to BE in the place. Certainly, much of the long term retention we have found from visitors is general at best when it comes to formal programs. And if it is vivid it almost always seems to be correlated to direct connections to the individual person.
In several of my previous blogs (for example A One on One “Magical” Moment; To Rove or Not To Rove?; ‘One Way’ versus ‘Two Way’ Interpretation) I have noted the obvious importance of the interpreter, the success of connections to the visitor, and the vignettes of instances where roving found more public interface than our traditional methods.
So here is my challenge….get you and or your staff from behind the podium, drop the scheduled Saturday morning hikes or evening presentations and walk WITH the people!
In fact, I want to call on interpreters to have a National Roving Week where all interpretive staff just goes out amongst the people…no matter whether it be a park, nature center, museum, or historic site.
So what do you think??? I’ll post it as soon as you write it (or at least as soon as I get to a computer)!
I’m all for national roving week, let’s amke it a month or a year!
I’m not sure I get the first paragraph. If you are saying that folks would rather BE in a place than participate in a program, maybe that’s fine. Maybe they already ARE connected to the resource in a way meaningful to them and don’t need us. Jesus said something about it not being the healthy who need the doctor. Hard on the ego, but not everyone needs us…
In my experience, I enjoy interacting with a ranger as I go about my visit. I like to chat and ask questions and share my observations and then hear what the ranger has to say. I don’t particularly enjoy formal presentations.
My favorite interpretation memories are two hikes I went on with a ranger at Glacier. We hiked. She’d mention things from time to time but she was very informal. The fun part was actually getting to the hike with the ranger and just talk.
Hi Doug
I work for Parks Canada, which is the equivalent to NPS in Canada. I was thinking of organizing a mini-forum on roving. We would use Windows Live Meeting so you could give a 1-hour session from the comfort of your office (or home).
How much would you charge?
Here is my complete contact info if you would like to discuss this further:
Diane Schreiner
Analyste de produits d’interprétation | Interpretive Products Analyst
Direction, Expérience du visiteur | Visitor Experience Branch
Parcs Canada | Parks Canada
25 Eddy, 6e étage/floor, #135A (25-6-Y), Gatineau, Québec, K1A 0M5
Téléphone/Telephone: 819-934-9891 | Télécopieur/Fax: 819-953-5523
diane.schreiner@pc.gc.ca
http://www.pc.gc.ca/
I am a convert to roving interpretation. To be honest, I used to really dislike doing it. I preferred the structure and mostly captive audience of formal presentations. However, when looking back on my favorite interpretive moments, I realize that my most memorable interactions were unscripted and spontaneous. Informal conversations that occur in the course of enjoying a place or resource are more meaningful than anything we could ever plan.
I agree with you fully Doug! The larger the park, the more important roving becomes. I’ve met visitors out at overlooks in Badlands who had no idea what geological forces were behind the rock formation, despite it being their umpteenth visit! Parks where it’s possible to drive through and not stop at the visitor center need roving desperately!
The only problem I find is the lack of awareness, not on the part of the visitor, but the park ranger, as to why roving is important. At the few parks I’ve worked, roving will be scheduled, but how to enforce it? It’s easier to sit at the computer and make up some rove numbers later.
There is a real need for education on WHY roving is important. And this is what hurts the most: there is a horrid lack of enthusiasm within the ranger ranks! How people get into the ranger life just to ‘pay the bills’ is beyond me, but they are there and I think they may be of more threat to our park resources than poachers, illegal collectors, and those kids and few adults who take a ‘little token’, or a petrified tree stump, out of National Parks combined. I’ll admit I’m not perfect and I miss some interpretive moments, but lots of rangers take ‘information desk’ time literally! Just dispensing information and nothing more! With that caliber of performance, how successful will their roving be?
My thinking is roving is the lifeline of national parks, especially large ones, but I’m not seeing it happen as much as it should and it has me worried.
Sorry that was so long…it’s been on my nerves for four years now!