Interpretive Booklet

References for D' Future
Nurshirley Kamilia Abdullah


Annear, R., & Grant, R. (1992).Walpole-NornalupNational Park Management Plan 1992-2002. Como: National Parks andNature Conservation Authority.

Armstrong, E.K., and Weiler, B. (2002). Getting the Message Across: An Analysis of Messages Delivered by Tour Operators in Protected Areas. Journal of Ecotourism. Vol. 1, Nos. 2 & 3, pp: 104 – 121. 2002.


Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Beckman, E. (1998). Targeted interpretation: Exploring relationships among visitors' motivations, activities, attitudes, information needs and preferences. Journal of Tourism Studies, 9(2), 14-25.

Ballantyne, R. (1998). Interpreting 'visions': Addressing environmental education goals through interpretation. In D. Uzzell and R. Ballantyne (eds) Contemporary Issues in Heritage and Environmental Interpretation. London. The Stationery Office.
Baxter, J. (2001). Personal Communication. 26 July, 2001. Department of CALM.
Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (1993). Interpretation and sustainable tourism: The potential and the pitfalls. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1 (2), 71 - 80.

Beckmann, E. (1987). Interpretation in Australia – current status and future prospects, AustralianParks and Recreation 23 (6): 6-14.

Beckmann, E. (1990). Evaluation of Interpretive Services and Facilities – KakaduNational Park. AustralianNational Parks and Wildlife Service, Canberra.

Beckmann, E.A (2003). Listening between the lines: Research-based knowledge to support the development of interpretive text in Interpreting The Land Down Under: Australian Heritage Interpretation and Tour Guiding. Fulcrum Publishing Golden, Colorodo.

Bitgood, S. (2000). The Role of Attention in Designing Effective Interpretive Labels. Journal of Interpretation Research. Vol. 5. No. 2. Pp. 31-45.

Beck, L., (2001). “ What is the Essence of Our Professional Responsibility?”
Cole, D.N., HAmmond, T.P. and McCool, S.F. (1997). Information quantity and communication effectiveness: Low Impact messages on wilderness trail-side bulletin boards. Leisure Sciences 19, 59 - 72.

Duncan, G.S. and Martin, S.R. 2002. Comparing the Effectiveness of Interpretive & Sanction Messages for Influencing Wildenerness Visitors' Intended Behavior. International Journal of Wilderness. Vol.8, No. 2, August 2002.

Fakeye, P.C., & Crompton, J.L. (1991). Image differences between prospective, first-time and repeat visitors to the Lower Rio-Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research, XXX(2) 10-16.

Fakeye, P.C., & Crompton, J.L. (1992). Importance of socialisation to repeat visitation. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(2), 364-370.

Fehrman, K.R., and Fehrmann, C. (2000). Color: The Secret Influence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fennel, D. (2001). A content analysis of ecotourism definitions. Current Issues in Tourism 4 (5), 403 - 421.

Field, G., & Gough, D. (1998). The art of interpretation. Landscope,Winter, 36-41.

* Gardner, T & McArthur, S. (1996a). Interpretation signs…How Well Do they Really Work? Anevaluation of three interpretive walks in Tasmanian State Forest. Forestry Tasmania, Hobart.

Hermann, N. (1995). The Creative Brain, Insight into creativity, communication, management, education and self-understanding, The Ned Hermann Group.

Hughes, M.J., and Morrison-Saunders. 2002. Impact of Trail-side Interpretive Signs on Visitor Knowledge. Journal of Ecotourism. Vol. 1., Nos. 2 & 3, pp: 122 – 132

Hughes, M., and Morrison-Saunders, A. 2002. Repeat and First Time Visitation in an Experience Specific Context:The Valley of the GiantsTree Top Walk. THE JOURNAL OF TOURISM STUDIES Vol. 13, No. 1, MAY ‘02

Hein, G. (1998). Learning in the Museum. London: Routledge.
Hyun-Kim, B., Pasadeos, Y. and Barban, A (2001). On the Deceptive Effectiveness of Labeled and Unlabeled Adevertorial Formats. Mass Communication & Society, 2001, 4(3), 265 -281.

Garcia, Marelys L., Caldera, CesarI. (1996). "The Effect of Color and Typeface on the Readability of on-line Text," Computer and Industrial Engineering, v31, number 1-2, p519-521.

Jacobson, S.K. (1999). Communication Skills for Conservation Professionals. Island Press, Washington, D.C., Covelo, California.

Johnson, D.R. and Swearington, T.C. (1992). The effectiveness of selected trailside sign texts in dittering off-trail hiking, Paradise meadows, Mount rainer National Park. In H.H. Christensen, D.R. Johnson and M.M., Brooke (eds) Vandalism; Research, Prevention and Social Policy (pp. 103 -119). General Technical report PNW- GTr-293. Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.

Jurowski, C., Uysal, M., Williams, D.R., & Noe, F.P. (1995). An examination of preferences and evaluations of visitors based on environmental attitudes: Biscayne BayNational Park. Journalof Sustainable Tourism, 3(2), 73-86.

Kellert, S.R. (1996). The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society. Island Press, Washington, DC; S.R. 1980 American’s attitudes and knowledge of animals. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and natural Resources Conference 45: 111 – 124.

Knopf, R. (1981). “Cognitive Map Formation as a Tool for Facilitating Information Transfer in Interpretive Programming”.

Knudson, D., Cable, T. and Beck, L. (1996). Interpreting Cultural and Natural Resources. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.

Lasswell, H.D (1971). A Pre-view of Policy Sciences. Elsevier, New York.

Levie, W.H. & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 30 (4), 195-232.

Machlis, G. (1986). Interpretive Views: Opinions on Evaluating Interpretation in the National Park Service. Washington DC: National Park and Conservation Association.

Magil l, A. (1995). Multicultural wildland users: A growing communication challenge. The Environmental Professional, 17, 51-54.

Manfredo, M., & Bright, A. (1991). A model for assessing the effects of communication on recreationists. Journal of Leisure Sciences23(1), 1-20.

Marion, J.L., and Reid, S. E. (2007). Minimising Visitor Impacts to Protected Areas: The Efficacy of Low Impact Education Programmes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. Vol. 15 (1), pp: 5 – 27.

Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. Harper & Row, New York.

McArthur, S. and Hall, C.M. (1996b). Interpretation: principles and practice, Heritage Managementin Australia and New Zealand: The Human Dimension, eds C.M. Hall and S. McArthur. OxfordUniversity Press, Melbourne

McGee, N.G., Loker-Murphy, L., & Uysal, M. (1996). The Australian international pleasure travel market: Motivations from a gendered perspective. Journal of Tourism Studies, 7(1), 45-57.

Meffe, G.K (1997). Biodiversity and base values. Oryx 31(2): 78 – 80.

Meis, S., Joyal, S., & Trites, A. (1995). The U.S. repeat and VFR visitor to Canada: Come again Eh! Journal of Tourism Studies6(1), 27-37.

Moscardo, G. Woods, B. and Pearce, P. (1997). Evaluating the effectiveness of pictorial symbols inReef visitor education, CRC Reef Research Technical Report 15, CRC Reef Research Centre,Townsville.

Moscardo, G. (1998). Interpretation and sustainable tourism: functions, examples and principles. Journal of Tourism Studies,9(1), 2-13.

Moscardo, G., & Woods, B. (2001). The future of interpretive signs. In R.W. Atkins (Ed.), Facing the future using interpretation. Proceedings of 5the World Congress Heritage Interpretation I n t e r n a t i o n a l (pp. 127-133). Collingwood, Vic.: Interpretation Australia Association.

Nelson, R.P. (1987). Publication Design. Fourth Edition. WM.C. Brown Publishers Dubuque, IOWA

O'Loughlin, T. (1996). Walk softly: The ef fectiveness of the Tasmanian minimal impact bushwalking campaign. In C. Michael Hall & Simon McArthur (Eds), Heritage Management in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 82-91). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Oppermann, M. (1998). Destination threshold potential and the law of repeat visitation. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 131-137.

Orams, M.B. (1995). Using interpretation to manage nature-based tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 4(2), 81-94.
Packer, J and Ballantyne, R. (2002). Motivational factors and the visitors experience: A Comparison of three sites. Curator, 45 (3), 183-198.

Pearce, P.L. (1991). Analysing tourist attractions. Journal of Tourism Studies, 2(1), 40-55.

Roggenbuck, J.W., and Berrier, D.L. (1982). A comparisons of the effectiveness of two communication strategies in dispersing wilderness campers. Journal of Leisure Research, 14 (1), pp: 77 – 89.

Roggenbuck, J. (1992). Use of persuasion to reduce resource impacts and visitor conflicts. In M. Manfredo (Ed.), Influencing human behaviour: Theory and applications in recreation, tourism, and natural resources management (pp. 199-208). Champaign, Ill.: Sagamore Publishing Company.

Ryan, C. and Dewar, K. (1995). Evaluating the communication process between interpreter and visitor. Tourism Management 16, 295 – 303.

Silverman, L.H. (1997). “Personalizing the Past: A review of the Literature with Implications for Historical Interpretation.”

Stubbs, C.J. (1991). Low –impact recreational practices: Assessing and improving wilderness user knowledge, behavioral intentions and behavior, unpublished MsC Thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Forestry, Blacksburg, Virginia.

Sylwester, R., and Joo-Yun Cho. (1992/1993). “What Brain Research Says About Paying Attention"

Thorn, T.F. (1995). Teaching low-impact camping practices to wilderness backpackers: An Evaluation of thrailhead signing and personal contact. Unpublished MSc Thesis, Utah State University, Logan, Utah.

Tubb, K.N. (2003). An Evaluation of Effectiveness of Interpretation within Dartmoor National Park in Reaching Goals of Sustainable Tourism Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. Vol.11, No.6. 476-498.

Veverka, J.A. (1994). Interpretive Master Planning. Falcon Press, Helena, MT.

Vogt, C., & Stewart, S. (1998). Affective and cognitive effects of information use over the course of a vacation. Journal ofLeisure Research, 30(4), 498-520.

Weiler, B. and Davis, D. (1993). An exploratory investigation into the roles of the nature-based tour leader. Tourism Management 14 (2), 91-8.

Widner, C. J. and Roggenbuck (1999). Reducing theft of petrified wood at Petrified Forest National Park. Journal of Interpretation Research 5 (1), 1-18.

Winfield. (1996). Saving the giants. Landscope, Spring, 10-16.

Woods, B. and Moscardo, G. (1996). Adding value to tourist operations through interpretation: Is interpretation good for tourism, or tourism good for interpretation? Interpretation in Action, Fifth Annual Interpretation Australia Association Conference, Bendigo

Young, M. (1999). Cognitive maps of nature-based tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 817-839.

* Specific examples of documented evaluation of outdoor interpretation
Labels: 0 comments | edit post
15 Guiding Principles
Nurshirley Kamilia Abdullah
Fifteen Guiding Principles for Interpreting Nature and Culture:
  1. To spark an interest, interpreters must relate the subject to the lives of the people in their audience.
  2. The purpose of interpretation goes beyond providing information to reveal deeper meaning and truth.
  3. The interpretive presentation - as a work of art - should be designed as a story that informs, entertains, and enlightens.
  4. The purpose of the interpretive story is to inspire and to provoke people to broaden their horizons.
  5. Interpretation should present a complete theme or thesis and address the whole person.
  6. Interpretation for children, teenagers, and seniors - when these comprise uniform groups - should follow fundamentally different approaches.
  7. Every place has a history. Interpreters can bring the past alive to make the present more enjoyable and the future more meaningful.
  8. Technology can reveal the world in exciting new ways. Hpwever, incorporating this technology into the interpretive program must be done with foresight and thoughful care.
  9. Interpreters must concern themselves with the quantity and quality (selection and accuracy) of information presented. Focused, well - researched interpretation will be more powerful than a longer discourse.
  10. Before applying the arts in interpretation, the interpreter must be familiar with basic communication techniques. Quality interpretation depends on the interpreter's knowledge and skills, which must be continually developed over time.
  11. Interpretive writing should address what readers would like to know, with the authority of wisdom and its accompanying humility and care.
  12. The overall interpretive program must be capable of attracting support - financial, volunteer, political, administrative - whatever support is needed for the program to flourish.
  13. Interpretation should instill in people the ability, and the desire, to sense the beauty in their surroundings - to provide spiritual uplift and to encourage resource preservation.
  14. Interpreters can promote optimal experiences through intentional and thoughtful program and facililty design.
  15. Passion is the essential ingredient for powerful and effective interpretation - passion for the resource and for those people who come to be inspired by it.

References:

Beck, L ., and Cable, T. Interpretation for the 21st Century: Fifteen Guiding Principles for Interpreting Nature and Culture. Second Edition.

Labels: 0 comments | edit post
EVEN or ODD? SMALL or BIG?
Nurshirley Kamilia Abdullah

OMG! Aku dah pening kepala nak develop questionnaire ni..ingat kan senang, rupanya susah sungguh. Dah la guna Likert Scale ni aku tak reti pulak nak pilih mana satu. EVEN or ODD numbers? Dah banyak dah aku baca sampai nak pecah kepala pun ada..hehehe..eh takde lah..gugur rambut je..

Dari pembacaan aku, kalau kita guna EVEN number, contohnya 6-point, so tak ada org jawab 'nuetral" je memanjang...betul tak? Tapi adalah ahli bijak pandai cakap, satu kelemahan kalau guna EVEN number ni, kita menggalakkan orang tak menjawab soalan yang kita tanya sebab tak puas hati 'neutral' tu tak ada, alahai...manusia biasalah..suka BIAS. Kalau boleh, dia nak jawab semua 'neutral' je sebab tak nak mengecilkan hati kita.Secara kesimpulannya, aku pilihlah ODD number. Tapi antara 5-point atau 7-point? ni satu hal lagi. Menurut lecturer aku dulu, 7-point more varied. Aku kalau boleh nak elak jawapan 'neutral' ataupun 'undecided'. Contohnya seperti di bawah ni:

Which is BETTER?

SMALL NUMBER

LEVEL OF AGREEMENT

ODD NUMBER

EVEN NUMBER

5-POINT LIKERT SCALE

4-POINT LIKERT SCALE

1 – Strongly Disagree

2 – Disagree

3 – Undecided

4 – Agree

5 – Strongly Agree

1 – Strongly Disagree

2 – Disagree

3 – Agree

4 – Strongly Agree

BIG NUMBER

LEVEL OF SATISFACTION

7-POINT LIKERT SCALE

6-POINT LIKERT SCALE

1 – Very Dissatisfied

2 – Moderately Dissatisfied

3 – Slightly Dissatisfied

4 – Neutral

5 – Slightly Satisfied

6 – Moderately Satisfied

7 – Very Satisfied

1 – Very Dissatisfied

2 – Moderately Dissatisfied

3 – Slightly Dissatisfied

4 – Slightly Satisfied

5 – Moderately Satisfied

6 – Very Satisfied

Apa-apalah.

Anyway to myself: chaiyok chaiyok..don't stop! I'm a Princess of Courage, Princes of Hope..Whateverlah...

Labels: , 0 comments | edit post
Blog Widget by LinkWithin