Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/146606
|
| Title: | 博物館的知識中介—以國立故宮博物院為例
Knowledge Brokering in Museums: A Case Study of National Palace Museum |
| Authors: | 李承燁
Lee, Cheng-Yeh |
| Contributors: | 張瑜倩
Chang, Yu-Chien
李承燁
Lee, Cheng-Yeh |
| Keywords: | 知識中介者
博物館
知識傳遞
導覽志工
博物館教育
Knowledge broker
Museum
Knowledge transfer
Volunteer docent
Museum education |
| Date: | 2022 |
| Issue Date: | 2023-08-02 14:12:31 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 隨著知識經濟時代的來臨以及博物館定義演進，博物館已經成為現今社會大眾的熱門休閒選擇以及知識學習場所。其中，因為對於典藏文物的理解以及知識累積，與一般大眾產生知識上的落差，形成知識疆界的現象，也導致其知識共享的成效受到影響，亦即觀眾不易理解複雜的文物知識。為了消弭鴻溝並達成知識學習，除了知識物件的導入之外，導覽人員因為佔據了串接雙方的特殊位置，因其角色和知識傳遞技巧而成為博物館裡重要的知識中介者。
本研究旨在探討博物館中的知識中介者如何在博物館中的導覽場域進行知識傳遞，包含其中介方法、所處中介位置並最終歸納出博物館的導覽中介模式。本研究以參觀人次穩居世界前段，並且導覽培訓制度較為成熟的國立故宮博物院作為研究個案；除了主要透過參與觀察法蒐集資料，同時也透過與三位導覽志工進行深入訪談，探求導覽志工對於博物館知識中介的技巧以及理解。
本研究發現，雖然博物館中充滿知識傳遞的物件，然文物知識的複雜性使得目前的內嵌機制不容易理解，因此導覽介入仍十分重要，且其培訓制度能確保導覽志工具有足夠的知識正確性。針對不同的觀眾類型，中介者會採取不同的傳遞手法，將概念由淺入深地介紹給觀眾。於博物館以及特展背景知識，中介者採取知識轉移手法，將簡單的概念傳達給觀眾。針對個別的文物知識，中介者則採取知識轉移以及轉譯的方式；其中知識轉譯又可以再分成名詞解釋、視覺引導、與本身背景結合和比喻，協助理解過去觀眾陌生的專有名詞。最後，本研究發現導覽志工同時考量博物館方以及觀眾的特殊位置，提出了「推廣者」的中介類型，並說明正確性、靈活性以及數位化將是博物館中介模式的重要特質。本研究結果可提供未來博物館及文化機構進行知識傳遞時的參考。
With the growth of knowledge economy and the development of the definition of museums, museums have become a popular leisure institution and an important place of learning in the society. With the continuous research outcomes and knowledge accumulation of the collections and cultural relics, there is a knowledge gap forming the knowledge boundaries, which lead to the ineffectiveness of knowledge sharing, between museums and the public. In order to bridge this knowledge gap, docents occupy a special position to connect the these two sides and become knowledge brokers through their flexibility and communication skills.
This study aims to investigate how knowledge brokers in museums conduct knowledge sharing in museum guide tours, including methods, brokering positions, and general museum guide mode. This study selects the National Palace Museum, which has one of the highest number of visitors in the world and has a more mature volunteer training system, as a case study. In addition to data collected mainly through participant observation inside the museums, this study also uses in-depth interviews to explore museum volunteers’ skills and understanding of knowledge brokerage.
This study finds out that the complexity of knowledge makes existing boundary objects difficult to understand. Thus, knowledge brokers adopt different methods to introduce the concepts. For example, for background knowledge, brokers use knowledge transfer methods to bridge the knowledge gap and for individual artifact, they tend to adopt both transfer and translate methods. Finally, this study also finds a new brokering position “promoter”, and suggests that accuracy, flexibility, and digitization will be important characteristics for future museum knowledge brokerage. |
| Reference: | Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132-169.
Alexander, E. P., Alexander, M., & Decker, J. (2017). Museums in motion: An introduction to the history and functions of museums. Rowman & Littlefield.
Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice. London:Routledge.
Babbie, E. R. (2020). The practice of social research. Cengage learning.
Baskarada, S. (2014). Qualitative case study guidelines. Qualitative case studies guidelines. The Qualitative Report, 19(40), 1-25.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism (Vol. 9). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bogdewic, S. P. (1992). Participant observation. In Doing qualitative research. (pp. 45-69). Sage.
Burcaw, G. E. (1997). Introduction to museum work. Rowman Altamira.
Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American journal of sociology, 110(2), 349-399.
Caldwell, K., & Atwal, A. (2005). Non-participant observation: Using video tapes to collect data in nursing research. Nurse Researcher, 13(2). 42-54.
Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442-455.
Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555-568.
CEBR. (2020). Contribution of the arts and culture industry to the UK economy. https://www.artscouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/download-file/CEBR%20Main%20Report%20Contribution%20of%20the%20arts%20and%20culture%20industry%20to%20the%20UK%20economy_0.pdf
Cross, R. L., Cross, R. L., & Parker, A. (2004). The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets done in organizations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Dierking, L. D. (2005). Lessons without limit: how free-choice learning is transforming science and technology education. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, 12, 145-160.
Endacott, C. G., & Leonardi, P. M. (2022). Keep them apart or join them together? How identification processes shape orientations to network brokerage. Communication Research, 49(1), 61–92
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (1992). The museum experience. Whalesback Books.
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2002). Lessons without limit: How free-choice learning is transforming education. Rowman Altamira.
Friedman, R. A., & Podolny, J. (1992). Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: Labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1), 28-47.
Galloway, S., & Dunlop, S. (2007). A critique of definitions of the cultural and creative industries in public policy. International journal of cultural policy, 13(1), 17-31.
Gibson, C., & Kong, L. (2005). Cultural economy: a critical review. Progress in Human Geography, 29(5), 541-561.
Glass, S. R., Djamaris, A., Priyanto, A. B., & Jie, F. (2012). Workplace utilization of participative observation and in-depth interviewing. Review of Integrating Businees & Economics Research, 1(1), 70-78.
Gould, R. V., & Fernandez, R. M. (1989). Structures of mediation: A formal approach to brokerage in transaction networks. Sociological Methodology, 19, 89-126.
Haas, A. (2015). Crowding at the frontier: boundary spanners, gatekeepers and knowledge brokers. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(5), 1029-1047.
Hargadon, A. B. (2002). Brokering knowledge: Linking learning and innovation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 41-85.
Hasu, M., & Engeström, Y. (2000). Measurement in action: an activity-theoretical perspective on producer–user interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53(1), 61-89.
ICOM. (2022). Museum Definition. https://icom.museum/en/resources/standards-guidelines/museum-definition/
Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacy, 5(4), 87-88.
Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies (Vol. 15). Sage.
Kavanagh, G., Locke, S., Ormord, R., Brown, M., Taylor, R., Smith, C., Lassey, P., & Miller, S. (1994). Curatorial Identity. London: Routledge.
KOCCA. (2020). KOCCA Year Report. https://www.kocca.kr/img/foreign/file/DirectoryBook.pdf
LeCompte, M. D., & Goetz, J. P. (1984). Ethnographic data collection in evaluation research. In D.M. Fetterman (Ed.), Ethnography in Educational Evaluation (pp. 37-59). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Leigh Star, S. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(5), 601-617.
Levina, N., & Vaast, E. (2005). The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: Implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 335-363.
Lingo, E. L., & O`Mahony, S. (2010). Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 47-81.
Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing Social Settings–A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis, Wadsworth. Belmont, CA.
Marsden, P. (1982). Brokerage behavior in restricted exchange networks. Social Structure and Network Analysis, 7(4), 341-410.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Sage publications.
Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 100-130.
Obstfeld, D., Borgatti, S. P., & Davis, J. (2014). Brokerage as a process: Decoupling third party action from social network structure. In Brass D. J., Labianca G, Mehra A., Hargin D. S., Borgatti S. P. (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on organizational social networks (pp. 135-159). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Pawlowski, S. D., & Robey, D. (2004). Bridging user organizations: Knowledge brokering and the work of information technology professionals. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 645-672.
Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 199-220.
Pratt, A. C. (2011). An economic geography of the cultural industries. In A. Leyshon, L. McDowell, & R. Lee (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Economic Geography (pp. 322-337). Sage.
Quintane, E., & Carnabuci, G. (2016). How do brokers broker? Tertius gaudens, tertius iungens, and the temporality of structural holes. Organization Science, 27(6), 1343-1360.
Ramirez, M., & Dickenson, P. (2010). Gatekeepers, knowledge brokers and inter-firm knowledge transfer in Beijing`s Zhongguancun Science Park. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14(1), 93-122.
Salvetat, D., & Géraudel, M. (2012). The tertius roles in a coopetitive context: The case of the European aeronautical and aerospace engineering sector. European Management Journal, 30(6), 603-614.
Stamper, C. L., & Johlke, M. C. (2003). The impact of perceived organizational support on the relationship between boundary spanner role stress and work outcomes. Journal of Management, 29(4), 569-588.
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology,translations` and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley`s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-420.
Suchman, L. (1993). Working relations of technology production and use. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2(1), 21-39.
Throsby, D. (2008). The concentric circles model of the cultural industries. Cultural Trends, 17(3), 147-164.
Webb, A. (1991). Coordination: A problem in public sector management. Policy & Politics, 19(4), 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557391782454188
Williams, P. (2011). The life and times of the boundary spanner. Journal of Integrated Care, 19(3), 26-33.
Yin, R. K. (1981). The case study as a serious research strategy. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 3(1), 97-114.
文化部（2021）。臺灣文化創意產業發展年報。新北市：文化部。
行政院（2002）。挑戰 2008: 國家發展重點計畫。2002年核定。
吳茂昆（2002）。因應知識經濟世代之科技發展政策。國家政策季刊，1（1），167-182。
吳國淳（2007）。博物館學習之詮釋及溝通內涵探究 [Interpretation and Communication in Museum Learning]。博物館學季刊，21（4），81-89。 https://doi.org/10.6686/MuseQ.200701_21(4).0004
吳麗珍、黃惠滿、李浩銑（2014）。方便取樣和立意取樣之比較。護理雜誌，61（3），105-111。
林靜伶（2011）。什麼是研究？研究是一種對話：重返社會人文研究的意義。 傳播研究與實踐，1（1），99-104。
邱誌勇（2011）。文化創意產業的發展與政策概觀。載於李天鐸（主編），文化創意產業讀本：創意管理與文化經濟，31-54。台北：遠流。
胡幼慧（1996）。質性研究：理論，方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
徐嘉黛（2019）。科技導意：形塑使用者意會賦能博物館商店服務創新［未出版博士論文］。國立政治大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/x8gsbg
翁翠蓮（2014）。論設計博物館之文化價值模型建構研究［未出版博士論文］。 國立臺灣師範大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/d938x9
耿鳳英（2011）。誰的故事?――論博物館展示詮釋。博物館學季刊，25（3），99-111。
高吟瑜（2021）。網路時代營養領域知識中介者之研究──以杯蓋營養師為例［未出版碩士論文］。國立政治大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/dy6p25
高炯琪（2004）。博物館導覽解說效果研究─以台北縣立鶯歌陶瓷博物館為例［未出版碩士論文］。國立臺灣師範大學。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/eb4kb6
國立故宮博物院（2021）。國立故宮博物院參觀人數統計。 https://www.npm.gov.tw/Articles.aspx?sno=04012663&l=1
張鎧如（2021）。地方公所推動社區自主防災之角色與限制：知識中介理論觀點。公共行政學報，60，1-45。
陳怡心（2017）。從行動者網絡理論觀點探究水資源課程的生成與轉譯歷程［未出版碩士論文］。國立臺灣師範大學]。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/6v8vtr
陳國寧（2020）。由當代博物館的社會作用再思考博物館的定義 [Rethinking the Museum Definition from the Social Role of the 21th Century]。臺灣博物季刊，39（4），6-13。
陳媛（2008）。故宮‧導覽‧志工－從志工經驗反思故宮導覽願景［未出版博士論文］。國立臺灣師範大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/53u32m
曾仰賢（2019）。從詮釋觀念觀點探究博物館中的學習物件。臺中教育大學學報：人文藝術類，33（2），65-84。
黃秋霞（2016）。淺談量化與質性研究的反思。臺灣教育評論月刊，5（9）， 149-154。
黃美賢（2015）。博物館發展文化創意產業之關鍵成功因素。藝術教育研究，29，77-110。
廖天聰（2001）。美術館導覽員角色功能與其專業素養能力之研究［未出版碩士論文］。東海大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/s399e6
廖珮妏（2015）。從量化與質化研究信效度探討社會科學領域的研究品質。中華科技大學學報，62，69-88。
趙來春（2001）。故宮博物院導覽義工的特色與培訓。博物館學季刊，15（1），41-47。
劉江彬（2002）。企業成敗決勝關鍵：商業經營以展效益－知識經濟時代下企業的智慧財產權管理。會計研究月刊，204，67-73。 https://doi.org/10.6650/arm.2002.204.67
劉美玲（2005）。博物館志工角色認同之研究：以國立故宮博物院、國立歷史博物館、高雄市立美術館及鶯歌陶瓷博物館為例［未出版碩士論文］。臺北市立教育大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5cb84a
劉婉珍（1992）。美術館導覽人員之角色與訓練。博物館學季刊，6（4），43-46。 https://doi.org/10.6686/MuseQ.199210_6(4).0008
劉婉珍（2001）。以展覽為核心的博物館課程。博物館學季刊，15（4），3-18。 https://doi.org/10.6686/MuseQ.200110_15(4).0002
劉嘉文（2020）。以隨創建構資源的知識中介者－法律白話文運動個案研究［未出版碩士論文］。國立政治大學。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/3gp82q
蔡佳晏（2019）。博物館法對國內博物館文化治理影響之研究［未出版碩士論文］。國立臺灣師範大學。
蔡敦浩、李慶芳（2006）。疆界管理：探索情境知識的本質與知識轉移。科技管理學刊，11（3），89-117。 https://doi.org/10.6378/jtm.200609.0089
賴志峰（2012）。不用數字的學校領導研究：以個案研究為主。學校行政，78，1-24。 https://doi.org/10.6423/hhhc.201203.0002
羅綸新（2015）。淺談博物館教育。臺灣教育評論月刊，4（4），74-76。
嚴祥鸞（1996）。參與觀察法。載於胡幼慧（主編），質性研究：理論，方法及本土女性研究實例，195-222。臺北市：巨流。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
109364208 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109364208 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 420801.pdf | | 2843Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
