Exhibition and collecting trends among local history museums (Blacksburg Museum musings, part 2)

Blacksburg’s own local history museum was founded twelve years ago, with its third director officially taking the helm at the end of last year. While I worked with the Blacksburg Museum and Cultural Foundation (BMCF) over the past semester, I conducted a survey of local history and house museums across the United States. The goal of this peer institution study was to assess trends surrounding these museums’ exhibits and collections; the findings allow the BMCF to chart areas for development and increased attention.

The museums selected for this study were not based on a random sample. The museums I reached out to were specifically selected because of their presence on the Historic House Museum Committee for the American Association for State and Local History (AASLH), or because of their proximity to a college town. These priorities fit the BMCF’s presence in the Alexander Black House, as well as its closeness to the Virginia Tech campus. Because the participating museums were not randomly sampled, this survey should not be considered a generalizable study amongst all American local and house museums.

20 museums were contacted for this survey, with 10 responding institutions. The participating museums are as follows:

• Ames History Museum, Ames, IA
• Emily Dickinson Museum, Amherst, MA
• Gibson House Museum, Boston, MA
• Hickory Hill/Watson-Brown Foundation, Thomson, GA
• Historic Castalian Springs, Castalian Springs, TN
• Longue Vue House and Gardens, New Orleans, LA
• Montgomery Museum of Art and History, Christiansburg, VA
• Morgantown History Museum, Morgantown, WV
• Oak Hill and The Martha Berry Museum, Rome, GA
• The House of the Seven Gables, Salem, MA

For those interested in visiting these museums, I have created a Google Maps List that compiles the addresses of all responding museums.

Who They Serve

As previously mentioned, the selected museums were chosen specifically because of shared qualities with the BMCF. One such quality is local population size. While the mean city population amongst survey respondents is 130,750, the median population (which accounts better for outliers) is 38,687 people. In comparison, Blacksburg’s population is 44,826 people. Widening the scope of local populations served to the county, the median population amongst respondents is 134,065, compared to the 99,721 population in Montgomery County, where Blacksburg resides.

Exhibitions Practices

When considering how these museums’ missions impact their exhibitions, many organizations referred to their local communities as key factors. Half of responding museums cited history as impacting exhibitions, which is unsurprising given the selection criteria for the survey. However, keywords such as “local,” “community,” and “inclusivity” were cited six times by responding museums when explaining how their missions inform their exhibitions. These museums are heavily driven by their mission, not just to exhibit history but to focus on their locality and community in a way that is accessible.

It is worth noting that only 9 of 10 museums discussed how their mission informs their exhibitions, as not all museums reported presenting new exhibitions. In fact, four of 10 respondents stated that they do not present new exhibitions, instead cycling through objects in their collection as needed. Since many of these museums exist in historic houses, their exhibits are often more fixed than traditional museums spaces, which can be more flexible for exhibiting collections. These historic house museums are therefore more limited in terms of what aligns with their mission and what their space can accommodate.

Collections Practices

As creating virtual spaces becomes more accessible and less resource-intensive, museums are increasingly finding ways to present their collections digitally. Of the ten responding organizations, 6 museums mention providing digital access to their collections. While five of those 6 museums use an online database for digital access, other strategies listed include social media posts and online articles about their collections. However, providing an online database is certainly the most popular method of providing digital collections access; of the four museums who currently only offer in-person collections access, half plan to launch an online database in the near future.

When it comes to these museums’ databases, PastPerfect is the clear winner in terms of popularity. 6 museums reported using some version of PastPerfect, whether their classic, locally installed software or their cloud-based database. What is important to note is that PastPerfect provides a licensing discount to AASLH members; while 6 of the 10 responding organizations were initially contacted because of their affiliation with AASLH’s Historic House Museum Committee, three reported using PastPerfect. On the other hand, only one organization who reported using PastPerfect is not also a member of AASLH.

As discussed in the first part of this series, collections policies are undeniably important for museums to keep and follow. 100% of responding organizations reported having a collections policy, although the frequency of policy referral and revision differs between institutions.

Regarding collections procedures, half of responding organizations have a designated committee for approving items entering or leaving the collection, although only one organization mentioned incorporating their local community into said committee. However, the presence and makeup of each committee is not necessarily indicative of how the organization's collecting practices align with its mission, especially since several organizations stated that collecting is not their top priority.

Similarly, the specific staff designated to approve accessions and deaccessions is not necessarily indicative of their collecting priorities, either, given that the staff size and responsibilities vary widely among responding museums. 6 responding organizations have less than 5 full-time, paid staff members. Outside of staff, 6 organizations reported utilizing volunteer labor, and three reported utilizing intern or student labor. Of the 7 organizations who have volunteers and/or interns, four reported that these community members help with collections documentation; otherwise, that responsibility falls to collections staff, curators, or any of the museum’s staff members.

Museum Communities

A primary impetus for conducting this survey was to learn from peer institutions across the United States. Affiliation with museum associations can also provide community and peer learning amongst museum professionals. 6 responding organizations are connected with their state association of museums, while two are connected with local arts and culture organizations. The four museums that are not connected with a state association are instead members of regional associations or programs. Nationwide, museums reported affiliation with AASLH (8 organizations), the American Alliance of Museums (four organizations), and the Association of Academic Museums and Galleries (one organization). The responding museums balance membership within a variety of museum and arts and culture communities — only one museum reported having just one membership, and none reported zero affiliations.

This survey demonstrates the power of cultivating a museum community — a group that can answer questions about exhibiting and collecting practices, in which members can stay aware of developing trends in the museum world. While this survey seeks to answer these questions, it is also a snapshot; it reflects trends and practices from a single point in time. Rather, cultivating a museum community can provide years’, even generations’, worth of insight.

Written by Bria Weisz, a graduate student in the MFA in Theatre - Arts Leadership program at Virginia Tech.