Final Jeniffer Sams Pilot Study MAS Resaearch

8/2/2019 Final Jeniffer Sams Pilot Study MAS Resaearch

1/24

An Empirical Examination of the Feasibility of an Online Museum Education: TheMuseum of Arts and Sciences, Macon, Georgia

Research Pilot Study: Fall 2011

Jeniffer A. Sams, Graduate Student

Art Education, University of Florida

November 26, 2011

Jeniffer A. Sams, University of Florida, Masters of Art Education Program Student


2/24

Table of Contents

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................. 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1

RESEARCH PLAN ...................................................................................................................................... 2STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .............................................................................................................................. 2RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 4HYPOTHESES ............................................................................................................................................................. 4METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 6HYPOTHESIS 1A ........................................................................................................................................................ 6HYPOTHESIS 1B ........................................................................................................................................................ 8POST HOC ANALYSES AND FINDINGS.................................................................................................................... 9

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................... 14

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................... 16APPENDIX PILOT SURVEY ................................................................................................................................ 18WORKCITED ...................................................................................................................................................... 22


3/24

1

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this pilot study is the purification process of a survey instrument for

the Museum of Arts and Sciences and gathering of information relating to research

for a Masters thesis proposal to be submitted to the University of Florida committee

and the Museum of Arts and Sciences (MAS) in Macon, Georgia. The pilot research

survey, research plan including research questions, hypotheses, methodology, and

findings from a pilot study for the purpose of survey purification are included in this

paper. Preliminary findings revealed changes needed in the survey instruments and

supports the feasibility of implementing the Denver Art Museum (DAM) Creative

Resource Website (CRW) Project at the MAS. However, this is a pilot study only and

findings should be considered with caution as a guide to the larger study only.

INTRODUCTION

The following study examines the feasibility and methodology to replicate or adapt

the Denver Art Museum (DAM) Creative Resource Website (CRW) Project for a

museum in the Southeastern United States. The study further purifies a survey

instrument that will be part of a larger study to measure the feasibility of replicating

or adapting the Denver Art Museum Creative Resource Project. This study consists

of a research plan including research questions, hypotheses, methodology, and

findings from a pilot study for the purpose of survey purification. This study is

designed in an order that leads the reader through the research process in a logical


4/24

2

and clearly understandable method beginning with the problem statement, research

plan, data analysis and finding, and ending by presenting conclusions and

limitations of the study.

RESEARCH PLAN

Statement of the Problem

For over fifty-five years the Museum of Arts and Sciences (MAS) in Macon Georgia

has offered programs for school age children, families, college students, and the

community. The museum has a unique advantage of having been started by two

educators and propelled forward through the years by people who have insured the

museum was steeped in educational programs. Whether in the classroom, in a

gallery, in the mini-zoo, the ecology program, or in the planetarium the MAS has

sound and strong understandings of education as well as a working relationship

with the school systems and community. During an internship and discussions with

the Museum Educational Director, Susan Mays, several concerns were discussed. A

common discussion topic involved the museums outdated education section online,

education budget cuts, and area school system relationships with the MAS.

The United States economic conditions have negatively impacted financial

conditions nationwide for industries such as museums and that coupled with the

budget reductions in schools has reduced and even cut field trips in the school

systems. As reported in the Museum of Arts and Sciences Marketing Plan by Georgia


5/24

3

College, public school visits (field trips) account for thirty percent of the MASs

revenue each year and that revenue is in jeopardy due to the budget cuts, the arts

being cut, and standardized testing taking priority in the school system. (Bellamy,

Birdsong, Connaly & Walters, 2011) Lauren Hunleys dissertation Teaching,

Testing, & Tyrannosaurus Rex: How the No Child Left Behind Act Has Affected

Museums and Galleries in the United States states, field trips have plummeted

since the enactment of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Museums rely on visitor

numbers for grants and revenue. Additional conditions reported in this report by

Hunley identify transportation costs; chaperon availability, paperwork, admission

costs, and time spent by the educators proving the field trip will align directly with

the states SOL (Standards of Learning) directives, which link directly to the NCLB

objectives. (Hunley, 2011)

The above-stated problem is an opportunity for this well-established museum in

growing a love for the arts and meeting the needs of educators in the 21stcentury by

adding an online program that has the feel of visiting the museum and talking to the

experts. Thus, the problem then becomes, what type of program will meet the needs

and wants of the target population. Therefore, this study will test a survey

instrument that addresses the needs and wants of educators from an online

program, specifically to determine if the DAMs Creative Resource Website program

is a good match for the MAS.


6/24

4

Research Questions

Research Q1: What factors are important when examining the feasibility ofreplicating or adopting the DAM Project?

Research Q2: Is the Denver Art Museum Creative Resource Website (CRW) Projectfeasible to replicated or adapted to meet the needs of the MAS andsurrounding area surrounding educational system?

Hypotheses

HO1a: The CRW project should not be replicated and adapted to meet the needs ofthe MAS.

HA1a: The CRW project should be replicated and adapted to meet the needs of theMAS.

HO1b: The CRW project should not be replicated and adapted to meet the needs ofthe Macon Georgia area educational system.

HA1b: The CRW projects should be replicated and adapted to meet the needs of theMacon Georgia area educational system.

To test these hypotheses requires identifying the sample population and testing the

survey instrument on a small sample to assure that the survey is asking the right

questions. Then, by analyzing the data from the pilot test, a purified survey can be

implemented by examining the true population through a probability sampling

methodology.

Methodology

The pilot survey instrument was presented to potential respondents with the

understanding that data would be statistically analyzed to purify a survey

instrument and to gain insights into what educators are looking for in an online

program such as the Creative Resource Website at the DAM. As for the client, the


7/24

5

Museum of Arts and Sciences, Macon, Georgia, the museum education curator was

informed that the pilot survey would be analyzed and purified.

The target population for this study comes from a convenience sample of educators

and education students. The potential respondents were solicited to take the study

through the direct link posted from http://www.surveymethods.com/ to the

University of Florida Sakai message board, blog, and email for the course Methods of

Research in Art Education ARE6746 on November 11, 2011, Section 3000

containing fourteen students and two professors (all are in the University of

Floridas Art Education Masters Program); the closed UFARTEd group for Masters

students and two professors on Facebook which has thirty-five members (fourteen

student members and one Professor member overlap the ARE6746 course) on

November 11, 2011; and the Art Education website created by a University of

Florida Art Education Chair was posted on my page on November 14, 2011 and

viewed by eight members of the 10,162 members (fourteen of which are overlap to

the Facebook closed group) prior to closing the survey on November 16, 2011 of

which one survey was acquired from this post (A non-University of Florida student)

(http://arted20.ning.com/profile/JenifferSams).

A descriptive research survey (see Appendix) combining quantitative and

qualitative questions were administered via convenience sample (a type of non-

probability sampling) due to time and financial constraints; therefore, no sampling

list is available. By removing the outlier of the Art Education Website 1/10,162
http://arted20.ning.com/http://arted20.ning.com/http://arted20.ning.com/http://arted20.ning.com/


8/24

6

response and the overlap of the Facebook group the population with the ARE6746

population the census size was thirty-seven (37) with a response of fifteen (15)

resulting in a response rate of 40.54%.

The pilot survey was invaluable in finding the queries to ask toward obtaining more

concise focal points of what the educators want and the museum can provide within

reason prior to engaging in a major survey initiative across a large population.

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Based on the purpose of this study, the data was examined from the pilot survey to

determine the validity of the instrument and to purify it. The hypotheses as set

forth in the research question #2, Is the Denver Art Museum Creative Resource

Website (CRW) Project feasible to replicated or adapted to meet the needs of the

MAS and surrounding area surrounding educational system? was analyzed and a

report of the findings is offered below:

Hypothesis 1a

HO1a: The CRW project should not be replicated and adapted to meet the needs ofthe MAS.

This hypothesis was tested through interviews with the MAS Curator of Education,

Susan Mays to identify the needs of the MAS as to a web-based museum education

program.


9/24

7

Based on a series of interviews with the Education Curator of the Museum of Arts

and Science (MAS) in Macon Georgia, it was determine that the MAS should be

successful in replicating and adapting the CRW project as funding will be provided

through volunteer, human resources, and grants, which are available to design and

maintain the program. The current online information for the education department

at the MAS is general information, contains a dated program, and dead-end links.

The specific issues of photographing the collection were discussed by the Curator of

Education and should be addressed as part of the larger whole of an online project.

The null hypothesis 1a is rejected. However, the opinion of one member of the

museum is not sufficient, thus in the larger study, it is recommended that the Board

of Directors be interviewed and a set of questions be prepared for the Board

Members.

Further, through the research instrument, respondents were asked if they take

students on field trips and where do they take them on those field trips.

Respondents were encouraged by the survey instrument instructions to mark all

that apply. The largest field trip destination identified was artmuseum/galleries

(n, 13) and second largest was a planetarium (n, 4). Both of which make up the MAS.

This finding should be addressed further in the purified survey by asking whether

having an online experience would increase the number of opportunities for the

educators students to explore in more depth these two field trip offering. Thus, the

hypothesis is not accepted or rejected by this finding.


10/24

8

Hypothesis 1b

HO1b: The CRW project should not be replicated and adapted to meet the needs ofthe Macon Georgia area educational system.

Testing of hypothesis 1b allows the researcher to determine if the questions are

relevant. Further, the pilot study provides the research with insights into the

hypotheses that will be put forth in the larger study.

The survey was designed to determine the need for a web-based educational

program in the middle Georgia area similar to the CRW project in Denver. This

hypothesis was examined by surveying educators as to how many field trips are

taken per year, where, and the constraints on educators to take field trips if any.

As per the survey results, when ask if educators in the sample take their student on

field trips, the following was found through a frequency analysis: 1) 12 out of 15

respondents reported taking students on field trips. 2) As to how many field trips

are taken in a typical school year, a frequency analysis revealed that the majority,

66.66% (10 out of 15) take their students on one to two field trips per year. Only

one respondent takes their students three to five times a year. 3) More interesting

are the comments as to why fields are limited or not taken (see Appendix A for

survey instrument). These comments support the alternative hypothesis that the

CRW project should be replicated and adapted to meet the needs of the of the Macon

Georgia area educational system.


11/24

9

As to the comments, for example: one respondent said, too many regulations and

students do not have the funds to pay for the trip themselves, another stated, a

lack of available dates, and yet another stated that there is a lack of funds to go and

lack of available museums nearby. And, yet another said, no money. To further

examine this relationship, a qualitative question on the survey inquired as to the

challenges facing the educator when contemplating a field trip. The responses

included: Transportation (i.e., planning, costs, responsibility, logistics),

administrative duties (i.e., paperwork, liability issues, administrative permission,

core testing restrictions), perception of importance to administrators (e.g., not top

priority for them), and limited or non-existent funding. These findings support the

alternative hypothesis and reject the null.

Because previous research and the economic trends of the United States over the

past eight to ten years is not favorable for funding of activities outside of the school

itself, a question about funding is your school provided funding from the educators

state for field trips resulted in all no. responses. The respondents were also asked

what their field annual budget was for 2011-2012 (twelve said zero).

Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Keeping in mind, this is only pilot study, and;

thus, data are taken from a similar population and not the true population for the

larger study.

Post Hoc Analyses and Findings


12/24

10

Beyond the hypotheses, it is important to know what the respondents expect in an

online museum resource. Therefore, the following questions were included in the

survey and analyzed:

The survey inquired as to which types of museum resources had been utilized by

the educators in the past. Respondents were encouraged to check all applicable

boxes and it was determined that all respondents had utilized a museum

resource(s) as all boxes on the survey were checked except for none by all

respondents. A frequency analysis revealed that multi-media resources were the

highest utilized resource (73.33%); physical visits to the museum by 66.66%

(Planning a Visit link prior to a visit being utilized by six of the ten who utilized the

brick and mortar museum); lesson plans, resources for the classroom, and

professional development all utilized by 60%, with only 6.66% using the teacher

exchanges and docents. This information is important in that it is clear that the use

of lesson plans, multi-media resources, classroom resources, and professional

development online are important aspects of the online experience. These services

are all types of services similar to those offered by the DAMs Creative Resource

Project; thus, if the larger study also returns these visits, it would be feasible for the

MAS to implement.

What is not clear from this pilot study and must be addressed in the purified survey

are specifics of each area regarding subjects to be offered, the usability of the

resource (e.g., schools have or do not have Internet available) and the availability of


13/24

11

the resources (e.g., MAS photography equipment, equipment for making

Webcasts/Podcasts, staffing, etc.).

The survey then addressed which areas the educators would like to see on a

museum website as it pertained to education. Using a frequency analysis, access to

images of artwork online and for printing, Webcasts/PodCasts, lesson plans and

professional development were the factors with the highest percentages (86.66%,

73.33%, and 66.66%) respectively. The choice of art vocabulary was perceived as

important by 60%, yet in the DAM study, testing during their beta phase they

reported the following relative to the vocabulary (glossary) section, One of the

changes made to the site after the evaluation was scratching a glossary of art terms,

a project that we had unfortunately already devoted considerable time to. Not a

single person mentioned wanting to have a glossary, and we were working out butts

off creating a glossary because so many other museums had one, and we thought we

needed one too (Patty Williams) (Denver Art Museum, 2010). This disparity

between the survey and the DAM Project results is interesting. This factor (i.e.,

vocabulary a.k.a., glossary) will remain in the survey instrument to be tested on a

larger population.

Teacher exchange blogs, museum visits customized for the educators classes, and

specific planning a visit information were all considered important by 46.66%. Of

particular interest as well were the comments written in the other choice.

Respondents made suggestions such as, Artists as docent guided tours for students,


14/24

12

more professional development (but ceased due to suspension of PLU

requirements), and Student interactivity options (protected).

The educators were asked specifically the open-ended question, How could the

Museum of Arts and Sciences (MAS) be the most helpful in your class and in

achieving the Georgia Performance Standards?. During the pilot phase of the

research this question was asked of respondents who are in the educational field,

but may or may not be in Georgia. The purpose was merely to allow the researcher

to determine if the question is relevant to the study. The following responses were

submitted:

The following responses directly link lesson plans with Georgia

Performance Standards and field trips: Respondent 1: Tie current

exhibits to specific standards and lesson plans. Respondent 2:

Showing example of teacher project that connect their instruction,

student project to the Georgia Performance Standards and the

museum. Respondent 3: Providing lesson plans to parallel the

fieldtrip. Therefore, questions will be added to the purified survey

instrument to directly address this perceived need.

These responses directly address the state of the current website as to

the MASs in-house programs. Three respondents went to the MAS

website and did not find that field trip programs for different ages and

a mini-studio workshop were available; however, these are available


15/24

13

through the museum but finding them on the website is nearly

impossible (https://www.masmacon.com/macon-museum-educators.da):

Respondent 1: Offer a variety of field trip programs catered to

different ages. Respondent 2: Get a clearer website. Respondent 3:

Mini-studio workshops for students.

Two other respondents addressed other issues. The first issue

address printouts, which should be resolved with digitally available

media to classrooms instead hardcopies of art. The second is an

outreach program, such as the one already in place for the MAS

Planetarium.

Another open-ended question allowed for other comments and/or suggestions to

assist in the development of an online curriculum and resource website by the

Museum of Arts and Sciences was provided and the following information was

obtained:

Website design:

Virtual tours Interactive for students and link to museum visit How about pod cast tours of the collection. Introduce a studio project directed to the students online and then when

they finish have them send photographs of their project. You could start anonline gallery/blog so students could leave feedback. Your projects couldchange every month.

Financial/Practical Concerns:
https://www.masmacon.com/macon-museum-educators.dahttps://www.masmacon.com/macon-museum-educators.dahttps://www.masmacon.com/macon-museum-educators.dahttps://www.masmacon.com/macon-museum-educators.da


16/24

14

I think it needs to be relevant and practical to todays classroom situations(money). Most online resources (lesson plans) I find cost so much (supplies)I have to modify or discard them.

This series of qualitative questions added depth of understanding and address

content validity (i.e., face validity) of the survey instrument. From these findings,

additional question must be added to the final survey instrument to assure

appropriate subject matter coverage.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The conclusions drawn from this pilot study, recent research by the Denver Museum

of Art Creative Resource Project, and 2011 research by Hunley, indicate a strong

need for museums to move toward online museum educational programming,

which serves the needs of the education community and local communities.

The Museum of Arts and Education (MAS) has for fifty-five years provided

educational opportunities teeming with possibilities that may fall by the wayside of

no doing of their own, but due to educational budget cuts, the recession, school

transportation issues, a new generation that lack the introduction to museums, and

educators unable to integrate museum education into the standardization required

by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act and similar policies.


17/24

15

Based on this pilot study and Hunleys study (2011) of art educators and museum

education curators for all grade levels, note reasons for not going to the museum

such as:

1. Funding2. Permission to go due to curriculum surrounding Standardized Testing

(NCLB) requirements3. Transportation and/or transportation costs

Yet, these situations could be adjusted and partially remedied or completely solved

with a program adapted from the DAM Creativity Resource project.

A purified descriptive survey containing both qualitative and quantitative questions

will be developed and strategically delivered to an identified sampling frame based

on the characteristics of respondents in previous research by the DAM and Hunley

as well as updated Research Questions purified from this survey will be addressed.

Therefore, educators in the Macon Georgia and surrounding areas will be identified

and sampled.

From the preliminary finding of the pilot study, the adaptation of the DAM Project is

feasible for the MAS. Based on the DAM Project and this pilot study, it is expected

that creating an interactive website for the MAS and area educators and art

advocates will facilitate learning of the arts both in and out of the school systems,

encourage a new generation of museum goers and art advocates, and enrich the

curriculum and lives of students. In this time of recession and budget cuts in

particular, online curriculum, downloadable multimedia, and virtual tours are


18/24

16

timely. The development of this project is additionally expected to provide a

stronger relationship between MAS and the community, the area

colleges/universities via internships by creating more opportunities for career

experience, and opening a new avenue for the museum they would otherwise not

have the resources to create.

From the data we find that an integrated curriculum is possible and many

researchers have shown it provides stronger learning and retention. Many

educators need an easily navigated website with relevant lesson plans, which also

clearly address their Georgia Performance Standards. The MAS offers

multidisciplinary programs ranging from in-house art lessons, Ziggy the dinosaur, a

mini-zoo, a planetarium, environmental education, and fine arts all housed together

in Macon, yet fewer and fewer educators are able to take advantage of this vast

resource. The value of the Museum of Arts and Sciences, a Smithsonian Affiliate, is

phenomenal in regard to education inside the museum and their time to share that

knowledge with schools, art educators, interns, and other museums online has

come. Art education has the power to cross borders and boundaries like few other

educational subjects and bring new meaning to learning. Utilizing a museums

resources creates a symbiotic relationship between art education and educators in

all subject areas.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY


19/24

17

The MAS (Museum of Arts and Sciences) Replicate and Adapt DAM (Denver Art

Museum) Survey was sent to art educators, museum educators, and art/museum

education students. Due to time and financial constraints this study was not given

an adequate amount of time or advertisement to reach as many people as would be

appropriate to achieve an optimum audience for analysis. Unlike other studies this

was a study, which was intended to be an instrument so that the data could be

statistically analyzed and a survey for the research project and subsequent Masters

Thesis for the client, the Museum of Arts and Sciences, Macon, Georgia, would be

purified. The process of the pilot survey is the first stage in many toward

determining the feasibility of a larger project of an integrated online educational

curriculum at the subject museum. Therefore, this will not be a limitation of the final

study.


20/24

18

Appendix Pilot Survey

Research Consent

I agree to take part in the MAS Replicate and Adapt DAM Survey, which is research

toward creating an online database of information for the MAS for educationalpurposes for use by the community, teachers, students, and parents. This researchis also part of a research process toward a Masters of Art Education degree at theUniversity of Florida.

1. I have had the project explained to me, and I have read the informationstatement about the project, which I may keep for my records (Thisinformation was included in the Introductory email you received).

I understand that this project will be carried out in accordance with theUniversity of Floridas Code of Research Ethics.

I have read and understand the information sheet (this information was

provided in the introductory email you received).

Yes/No

2. I have been given the opportunity to ask questions about the project, andthey are answered to my satisfaction.

Yes/No

3. I understand that I can withdraw from the study at any time.Yes/No

4. Please indicate the level of confidentiality you with to obtain. Select all,which apply to you.

a. I give permission to utilize my real name and my school affiliation inconnection with any words I have said or written or with anyinformation I have provided.

b. I request that my real name be used in connection with anyinformation I have provided or comments I have made.

c. I request that my comments are presented anonymously, butpermission to contact my school affiliation with my comments (butnot with the title of my position).


21/24

19

d. I request that all my information remain anonymous.e. If other, please specify (comment box provided)

5. Electronic Signature Please be aware that by typing your name into the boxbelow you are consenting to participate in this survey and your answers will

be utilized as part of this research.

(Signature box provided)

Demographics

6. Please note that any information, which identifies you personally, will beutilized for follow-up purposes ONLY. All answers will remain anonymousunless you specifically state otherwise in the previous section of this survey.

a. Name (comment box provided)b. Preferred Email (comment box provided)c. What subject(s) do you teach? (Comment box provided)

7. What grade level(s) do you currently teach? (Click all that apply.)Check box options for each grade from Kindergarten through 12th grade

8. How many students are in your class on average?Check box options of 1-7, 8-15, 16-22, 23-29, or If other, please specify

comment box

9. What is the name of your school and in what city and state is your schoollocated?

a. Name of your School (comment box provided)b. City, State (comment box provided)

10. How many years have you been an educator?Check box options of 0-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 21-25, 26-30, If other, pleasespecify comment box

Field Trip Information

11. Do you take your students on field trips? Why or Why not?Yes/No and a comment box


22/24

20

12.How many field trips do you typically plan during a typical school year? (Xonly one)

Check box options of None, 1-2, 3-5, More than 5, If other, please specify

(comment box provided)

13.If you do take your student on field drips, where do you take your studentsfor their trips? (Check box options)

a. Art Museums/Galleriesb. Symphony/Music Concertc. Planetariumd. Aquariume. Government Officesf. Parks/National Parksg. Amusement Parkh. College/University/Education Associationi. None of the Abovej. If other, please specify (comment box provided)

14.What challenges, if any do you encounter when attempting to take a fieldtrip?

Comment box provided

15.Is your school provided funding from the State of Georgia for field trips?

Yes/No

16.Approximately how much is your class budget for field trips for 2011-2012?(Click only one)

a. Nothingb. $1-100c. $101-250d. $250-500e. $501-1000f. $1001-1500g. $1500-3000h. More than $3000

What Features Are Important To You for Online Resources

17.What type of museum resources have you utilized?


23/24

21

a. Lesson Plansb. Resources for the Classroomc. Multi-media (Images, printouts, films, etc.)d. Professional Developmente. Teachers Exchangesf. Visiting the Museumsg. Planning a Visit Link prior to a Museum Visith. Nonei. If other, Please specify (comment box provided)

18.Which features would you like to see on a museum education web site? (As itpertains to education)

a. Lesson Plansb. Access to Images of Artwork online and for printingc. Art Vocabularyd. Teacher Exchange Bloge. Webcasts/PodCastsf. Lessons linked to Performance Standardsg. Planning a Visit Informationh. Scheduling In the Museum Visits Customized for Your Classesi. If other, please specify (comment box provided)

19.How could the Museum of Arts and Sciences (MAS) be the most helpful inyour class and in achieving the Georgia Performance Standards?

(Comment box provided)

20.What other comments and/or suggestions would you like to share to assist inthe development of an online curriculum and resource website by theMuseum of Arts and Sciences?

(Comment box provided)

THANK YOU for your time and participation in this important study.


24/24

WORK CITED

Bellamy, W., Birdsong, M., Connaly, Q., & Walters, J. (2011, Spring). Museum of arts

and sciences marketing plan. Paper presented at The Museum of Arts and

Sciences, Macon, Georgia.

Denver Art Museum. (2010). Denver creativity resource report for teachers, the

story of putting together an online teacher resource. Denver, CO: Denver Art

Museum. Retrieved from

http://www.denverartmuseum.org/files/File/creativity_resource_report.pdf

Hunley, L. E. (2011). Teaching, testing, and tyrannosaurus rex: how the no child left

behind act has affected museum and galleries in the United States. (Masters of

Arts thesis), Available from NAEA. Retrieved from

http://www.arteducators.org/community/museum-education

Weil, S. E. (2002). Making museums matter. Washington D. C.: Smithsonian

Institution.
http://www.denverartmuseum.org/files/File/creativity_resource_report.pdfhttp://www.denverartmuseum.org/files/File/creativity_resource_report.pdf

Final Jeniffer Sams Pilot Study MAS Resaearch

Documents