The Summer 2012 issue of the Journal of Museum Education contains a variety of interesting articles that assess recent practice in museum education and explore potential directions for the field. This in a context that is both worrying and exciting: an uncertain economy; a shifting cultural landscape; debates about museum authority; the explosion of digital and social media.
The entire issue is worth reading, but the article that resonated most with me was “What We Do Best,” by Ben Garcia, Head of Interpretation and Operations at the Phoebe H. Hearst Museum of Anthropology, UC Berkeley. Touching on a number of themes that I’ve also discussed in posts on being a formal education enabler and on the role of museum educators, Garcia urges educators to hold true to their mission of creating opportunities for “intrinsically-motivated, joyful, open-ended learning,” and states that “Museum educators are not doing enough to make a case for the value of museum learning in its own right with political, civic, educational, and even museum entities.”
In the next few posts I’d like to pick up this discussion by
- · looking more carefully at the causes for museum education's drift into justifying its existence in terms of its ability to support formal education systems, and
- · exploring some specific skills and disciplines through which museum educators can move away from this tried and true but ultimately self-defeating role.
Our over-identification with formal education
A closer examination of the causes for our profession’s “twinning” with the schools is, I think, important as a way of seeing our way out of this over-identification. Not that museums will ever or should ever stop working with teachers and schools, but stepping back to re-examine patterns of behavior is almost always enlightening. I see the roots of this school-centric view of our profession in a variety of areas – the commonly understood definition of the term “education;” the initial staffing of museum education departments with former teachers (like me); the interest of schools in museums as field trip destinations, and so on. Perhaps readers have other causes they can contribute.
New skills and disciplines to cultivate
Although it’s now fairly usual for museum educators (at least in U.S. museums) to be part of exhibition teams, in my view their role still needs refining (and it is only they, not project managers or curators or designers) who can redefine their roles. In order to integrate into exhibitions and other museum offerings the kind of intrinsic, joyful, and self-motivated engagement that Garcia extols, educators are going to have to create interpretive plans, become experts in current learning theory as it relates to participatory experiences, understand and use social media effectively, and gain expertise in communicating effectively the links between design and interpretation. Educators need to devote at least as much time to honing these skills as they do on activities that support the schools. And, as Garcia states, all of us need to become much more articulate in communicating what makes our museums unique and important in their own right in the spectrum of experiences we call education. More to come on all of this.
If you are receiving this post as an email and wish to comment, please go to http://museumcommons.blogspot.com/.
If you are receiving this post as an email and wish to comment, please go to http://museumcommons.blogspot.com/.
I love Garcia's description of the learning experiences that can happen in an unrestricted environment. Thank you for tackling this topic! I just finished my MAT in Museum Education at George Washington University, so I've got a newly-minted theoretical understanding to add to my lifelong beliefs about interactive learning. :-)
ReplyDeleteI think the association of museum educators with formal education has come about because the cultural idea of "learning" has mostly been conflated with "school." Learning, of course, pre-dates school because compulsory education is a thing of just the last 60ish years (I say that as an unschooler myself!). Museums appear to be leading the charge back toward self-directed and personalized learning experiences which, it is my personal hope, will be more of what "formal" education will look like in the near future.
As for the skills you mention, I would add "embracing unintended outcomes" to that list, and it's a skill that really takes some work to master. Even though I prefer to learn at my own pace and in my own way, when I'm the "teacher" I still fall into the trap of being didactic, having a specific set of conclusions I want my audience to reach, and trying to herd them toward those ideas rather than being open to hearing what my participants come up with themselves. I find that the whole learning experience is more of a fun adventure when you follow where the audience leads or, better yet, let each of them follow their own way and share with each other (no two minds are alike, after all!). A lot of times these unintended outcomes can be accommodated in an interpretive plan by simply having a number of options built in, and keeping the structure flexible so spontaneity can be encouraged.
ReplyDeleteThe irony of museums' over-identification with formal education now is how learning is wildly proliferating beyond the classroom. With Khan Academy, SmartHistory, TedEd and other digital platforms and tools, informal, self-directed education is enjoying a renaissance that museums should be leading - and yet we're not, for two main reasons: 1) museum educators lack the technical skills and are not implementing aggressive professional development for the field on this front, and 2) we are not stepping forward in our institutions to make the case for how we can stretch education beyond our walls with digital strategies.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Erin, I think you're right about this. Am hoping some of the discussions on Twitter about museum professionals and what social media skills they need will encourage educators to become more accomplished in the digital arena.
DeleteNow is the time. Free choice learning via online resources is happening all over, and there's a great deal of talk about how the formal education paradigm may be breaking down because of all of this self-directed learning (see The Wall Street Journal's recent article on badges earned by self-directed learnign online replacing diplomas as requirements for employment: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577170912221516638.html)
DeleteMuseums should be at the forefront of this wave, and museum educators should be leading the charge - instead we are running to catch up. Luckily, learning new things is our forte. It's a very exciting time for education outside of the classroom, but we've got a lot of work to do! www.edgital.org
What is the twitter hashtag for these discussion please?
DeleteActually we don't have one. Maybe for next post. Thanx for your interest.
DeleteHi Gretchen,
ReplyDeleteReally interesting to read your post and the discussion around it. I'm not a trained teacher, but I am academically trained in pedagogy, adult education, museums and cultural theory, and I've worked in cultural institutions since 2002 (in web teams) and since 2010 in an education team (as digital learning designer).
I'm curious about your phrasing of the drift toward supporting formal education because in my experience and understanding of the sector, that's what museum educators have always done, and that that's actually how museums came to have education departments (ie, to deal with all the school-kids!). It has always frustrated me because my interests are informal learning and adult learning.
From where I sit, it seems like the shift (at least rhetorically and in terms of org restructures) is in the other direction. Education is being recognised as central to museum practice, and education departments are being merged with public programs (though not dare-I-say-yet with curatorial). It certainly seems smart for us to recognise our wholeness and aim for integrated approaches, rather than sticking with those that perpetuate dividedness.
Speaking of which... for us at the National Museum of Australia, it's an exciting time because we're about to release a new digital social learning program in the museum – a game of connectedness, where teams of players craft interesting resemblances between objects on display. It's rolling out as a school program initially – because that's what we know :) – but evidence suggests it will also be popular among other visiting groups, including adults.
I'll try to obtain a copy of the Garcia article and keep up with your conversations :)
Cath
I find it curious that there is a tendency in museum education discourse for museum professionals to want to disassociate themselves with 'education', 'formal education', 'schools' in favour of 'informal learning in museums'. The word 'education' has become a pejorative term since the idea of 'learning' became fashionable in museum education discourse in the 1990s. I don't see how you can simply focus on learning and not include 'teaching' (either by human or electronic delivery) and the information that is to be learnt and understood by the visitor. This three-way dynamic is essence of pedagogy and I think pedagogy is the key to understanding the nature of teaching and learning in schools and museums; this is where museums should be going in the future. It is certainly what is happening in school education here in Australia and I know there is a lot of cutting-edge pedagogy taking place in schools in the US and Canada, especially in history education. As a result of this discourse, a false dichotomy has been created between educators who work in museums and educators who work in schools. And there is a pervasively (incorrect) assumption that museums are at the forefront of ‘learning’ and schools are not keeping up with the digital learning revolution and new pedagogies. My doctoral research on the pedagogy and praxis of 25 museum educators in Australian museums showed quite the opposite is the case. There is very little difference between the teaching methods used by educators in 'formal' history programs in these museums and what classroom history teachers are doing in schools. Teachers (in Australia at least) bring their kids to these museums so they can extend the teaching and learning they are doing in the classroom and so the kids can participate in active learning programs delivered by experienced, expert educators who know the material in the museum and know how to deliver history information in entertaining and engaging ways. The 9 museums I studied (and many others) offer teachers two different types of programs: self-directed learning programs (usually free or low cost) or educator-guided 'formal' programs that usually charge a fee and teachers are happy to pay for. This phenomenon/model seems to be quite different to common practice in North America. The National Museum of Australia, where Catherine Styles is located, offers both types of programs and was one of the museums I studied for my doctoral research. Their formal education programs are very popular and the museum has a healthy number of educators who are employed to deliver these 'formal' programs to student visitors. By continuing to have this singular focus on ‘learning’ rather than pedagogy, which acknowledges the vital role of the educator in the learning process, museum educators are at risk or editing themselves out of the learning process, and ultimately, becoming redundant in the museum workplace.
DeleteHi, Louise, thanks for your thoughtful comments. I hope I can address many of them in future posts where there is more space for discussion. I recommend that you look at this careful study of learning in informal environments sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences in the US at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12190
DeleteThe report is by Bell et al and entitled Learning Science in Informal Environments. This report shifts the focus from the learning process itself, which is neither formal nor informal, but a cognitive process that happens all the time - it shifts the focus to the nature of the environments in which learning takes place, and classifies museums, botanical gardens, etc as informal spaces that are intentionally designed for learning. It is in this area - designing spaces intentionally, by knowing how people learn - where I think museum educators need to put their efforts. Not INSTEAD of in schools, but in addition to schools. They need to help their own institutions - museums- to make their spaces more engaging for learning. In doing this I think they will make themselves more valuable rather than redundant in their institutions.
Thanks your reply Gretchen. Yes, I am familiar with this document and I am sure it's most useful and relevant to informal learning in science museums.
DeleteGreat discussion. I think one of the reasons museum educators are associated with school programs is that they are easy to quantify. When a museum education department can document numbers of school kids attending field trips at the museum, it's a simple but powerful number to show impact. In other words, it's an easy way to make your case for the value of museum learning. Garcia calls for us to tackle other, less easy ways of documenting our impact.
ReplyDeleteHi, Catherine and Kris, thanks for your thoughts. I agree that being about to report and quantify school programs and attendance makes it easy to equate museum education with school services. It's also true museum ed departments have pretty much always dealt with school groups. But it's the limiting of museum education's role to this single area that I feel is a departure from the real role of education in museums. Am hoping to address this more fulling in next posting.
ReplyDeleteHow about thoughts on a museum that is currently working to separate the museum experience from museum education? I am currently struggling to see how this will be successful. Museum experience and museum education will be in two different departments reporting to different VP's.
ReplyDeleteHi, I'm assuming that the museum education part deals with schools and the experience part with exhibitions? If educators work in both areas it wouldn't be so bad, since the educators in the experience section could be contributing their knowledge of how people learn, how people of different ages experience the world differently, etc. I think the main thing would be preserving a role for educators in the "experience" division
DeleteAs a teacher in a sci/tech school (http://www.tjhsst.edu) for the las ten years we found that working directly with the museum rather than through the education division allowed a more investigative approach. We were experimenting with the idea of combining chemistry, social studies, and English was a perfect match for Conservators, who needed all three disciplines to succeed. Our partnership over five years with the conservators allowed us to create authentic curriculum and create student internships. Grades were never involved.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you mean by working with the museum rather than through the education dividion - the education dept of the museum? Anyhow am glad you feel the partnership was helpful.
DeleteHello,
DeleteWe went directly to the people doing the conservation work. We did not contact the Education Division for a tour or workshop but created our own with the conservators.
Thanks for asking,
Milde
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGreat post and discussion - helped to inspire a blog post, Museums and Open Education that we (Beth Harris and Steven Zucker of Khan Academy/Smarthistory) just published today: http://mfeldstein.com/museums-and-open-education/
ReplyDeleteThanks, Beth, I checked out your post. Thanks to your and Steven for joining the conversation. I heard Salman Khan speak about his new book recently, and was thinking of how relevant the Khan Academy approach is to museums. Then saw Nina's blog on the topic. It's a whole new area to be explored.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete