‘My Museum’: Serving the Member Audience

March 17th, 2008 - Posted in ASTC Dimensions by Christine Ruffo

Dimensions coverMarch/April 2008
In This Issue

Is membership the key to moving “beyond the gate”? Should we be building deeper relationships with our most loyal customers? In recent years, ASTC Dimensions has examined such audience segments as early learners, female visitors, teachers, and adults aged 50+. In this issue, we focus on a group often taken for granted: the individuals and families who join our science center as members and renew their memberships year after year. Articles highlight member audience research and approaches to membership fulfillment across a spectrum of ASTC science centers. Together, contributors examine what turns a casual visitor into someone who speaks with pride of “my museum.”

CONTENTS
• Breaking the Mold: The Science of Retooling a Membership Program, by Heather Calvin and Deborah Kulich
• Passport to Science: Member Benefits That Travel, by Diane Frendak
• The Continuum of Museum Membership: What Research Tells Us, by Susie Wilkening
• Value Added: Membership Strategies That Work, by Kelly Brault, Michael Conley, Tara Keblish and Steve Jacobson
• A Member-Shaped Museum: The New Science Center of Iowa, by Sara Scallon
It Feels Like Home: The Core Value of Community, by Paul Tatter and Kristin Leigh
• Membership Resources

Subscribe/order back issues

It Feels Like Home: The Value of Community

March 17th, 2008 - Posted in ASTC Dimensions by Christine Ruffo

By Paul Tatter and Kristin Leigh
From ASTC Dimensions
March/April 2008

“This is a wonderful atmosphere. Can I live here?” (Visitor comment card)

At Explora we think of membership as a sense of belonging. “Belonging” comes from an old English word meaning a close and secure relationship. Relationships of belonging are personal. They are about you, me, and the stuff of the world that is the medium of our activity.

Being a member has deep roots in belonging, trust, comfort, genuineness, safety, acceptance, and sharing resources. Developing personally meaningful relationships takes time, as reflected in these notes from visitors: “My husband and I have come here before and couldn’t wait for our daughter to be born so that we could share with her what fun we had! She’s now two years old, and we all had a blast. We’ll be back!” “Siempre estamos encantados” (“We’re always charmed”).

Perceiving membership as relationships that develop over time is different from viewing it as a commodity. We see membership as a layering of mutual commitments with other community organizations. Our local adoption exchange uses Explora as a place where children can comfortably meet prospective parents. In this example, membership also involves commitments with informal social groups, families and individuals. Collectively, all of these relationships define the membership.

Members of Explora feel they belong to something larger, like the neighborhood, and to something smaller, like their family or friends. A staff member observed, “One family set up dim sum in our picnic area, with a tablecloth, and a centerpiece they made in our workshop exhibit.”

Explora is a member of the community and, reciprocally, the community belongs in Explora. It’s not irrelevant that every staff person becomes a member when he or she is hired, and everyone in the community can be a member (because they don’t pay if they can’t*). For all of us to be members, we really do need regular visitors to develop relationships with each other, with the staff, and with exhibit and program materials. One visit isn’t enough to develop these relationships. Membership requires durable, mutual commitments. In this broad context of community life, four widely shared commitments are participation, trust, acceptance, and respect.

Perhaps the most important commitment is to participate in the life of Explora as part of the life of each person, family and the community, and, over time, to develop new relationships with the physical world, self, and others. These relationships develop in unpredictable ways, uniquely to each person, with no expectation of ending. For our visitors, this means contributing to Explora through their presence, being willing to engage in inquiry with us, honestly revealing their thinking, and making themselves at home. To ask for this participation, we must be committed to access for all the diverse members of the community; a comfortable, safe, bilingual environment; and a friendly, diverse staff genuinely interested in learning. We design programs and exhibits for repeat visitors and their recurring participation.

A staff member describes how relationships change with regular participation: “‘Rickie’ is 11 now. He and his family have been coming to Explora regularly since I started working here. As I have gotten to know the family better, our relationship has become more informal, and I enjoy seeing them—like one might enjoy having friends come over. Rickie brought a plant he’d started from a seed to contribute to the Experiment Bar. Every time he comes, he wants to check on his plant.”

Similarly, a grandmother describes her grandson: “Diego is 8 years old. He started coming to Explora four years ago. He first spent all of his time at the ball run. Later it was one or two hours in the water area, then Shapes of Sound, then Systems in Motion. Today, Diego talks about Explora as his second home. He knows the staff and every change. Everywhere he goes is his favorite. Now he brings his friends to show them around.”

Another commitment members must make is trust. We ask visitors to trust us enough to take intellectual risks, to believe that we won’t embarrass them, and to embark on explorations for which the outcomes are unknown. At the same time, we trust visitors to use our many loose materials in creating their own learning experiences.

A staff member describes such an experience: “In November families from two Title I schools spent una noche especial at Explora. They brought all the kids, from 20s to babies. There were about 350 people. Most of Explora’s bilingual staff came. Parents spontaneously helped serve food and assisted the staff. I sat down with a teenager at the Magna-cam. We magnified money. He was so interested that I gave him a dollar to examine. In half an hour, he found me to return the dollar. Later, he saw me across the room and brought me to meet his older brother.”

A child attending the same event wrote, “Querido Explora, a mi me gusta ir a Explora mucho, mucho, y mucho. Después yo voy a ir otra vez.” (“Dear Explora, I like coming to Explora a lot, a lot, and a lot. I will come again later.”)

Members also make a commitment to accept each other. Explora often serves as a meeting place. “I began coming to Explora as a mother with two children. I have many friends with children that have come to Explora for as many years as me. Now I work here. Increasingly, conversations have led to child development, what parents have observed their children doing and learning at Explora, and conversations about their families. Parents are increasingly trusting, and I have observed parents who had been ‘hands off’ begin to interact with their children and the activities.”

Many members meet the same people here each week, and this notion of Explora as a meeting place rubs off, even on people who didn’t intend to attend the meeting. Explora’s staff and environment support an inclination to see others around you, even strangers, as belonging to your community. Homeschool parents find each other and share ideas. Adoptive parents meet regularly to create peer groups for their children and support networks for themselves.

With acceptance of other community members comes respect. “I think that being here makes me feel like I can make anything” (visitor comment card). Whether it’s the grandmother who, over the years, taught all of her grandchildren to walk in Explora’s Knee-Hi-Sci area, teens from different parts of town working together in our Youth Program, or hundreds of families from underserved neighborhoods at a family night, all of these community members respect each other’s presence and the commitment manifested through that presence.

A school principal sent this note: “WOW—that was truly a wonderful, powerful, exciting, and so engaging evening. There were so many moments I observed last night—two students talking about vibrations, delighted laughter about air pressure, a little ADHD girl focusing on water flow for 20 minutes, parents and students building marble tracks together. My heart was full with the vision of what learning and exploring the world together can be.”

Membership comes back to one of Explora’s six core values, the value of community: “…We value the diverse community in which we live, to which we strive to make a positive contribution and to create an environment where all members of this community feel a sense of comfort and belonging.” Or, as one visitor wrote on a comment card, “I love this place…it makes me feel right at home.”

Paul Tatter is associate director and Kristin Leigh is educational services director at Explora, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Footnote:
* Explora’s Family Membership is available at no cost to families whose children qualify for free or reduced-price school lunches. Applications are distributed through schools and selected social service organizations.

Small Matters: Communicating Science at the Nanoscale

February 8th, 2008 - Posted in ASTC Dimensions by Christina Jones

Dimensions coverIN THIS ISSUE
January/Febuary 2008

Much of this issue is devoted to the Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network (NISE Net), a National Science Foundation-funded initiative intended to foster an informed U.S. citizenry and a competitive workforce in the emerging field of nanotechnology. Articles from the Museum of Science, Boston (lead institution), Science Museum of Minnesota, Exploratorium, and others describe network members’ progress in creating new public programs, exhibitions, media, online resources, and professional development opportunities based on the latest in nanotechnology. Of course, NISE Net was not the first to tackle the nano challenge. Here, too, are stories of pioneering exhibitions about science at the nanoscale and a preview of projects now done in development.

CONTENTS
• A Very, Very Small Opportunity, by David Rejeski
Thoughtful Decisions: The Evolution of the NISE Net Forums, by Larry Bell and Troy Livingston
• RISE: A Community-Focused Strategy for Public Engagement, by Carol Lynn Alpert
• Scientists Speak about Nano: Nanoscience and the Public, by Bob Westervelt
• Visualizing the Invisible: At the Frontier of Art and Science, by Tom Rockwell
• Scientists Speak about Nano: Capturing the Public Imagination, by Krishna Madhavan
• Too Small to Grasp? Lessons from Formative Exhibit Evaluation, by Kirsten Ellenbogen
• Scientists Speak about Nano: Nanoscale Science and the Science Curriculum, by M. Gail Jones
• Scientists Speak about Nano: Nanotechnology as a Catalyst for Change, by Ainissa G. Ramirez
• A Nano Sampler: Exhibiting Emerging Technologies, by Natasha Waterson, Darrell Porcello and Catherine McCarthy
• Resources for Nanoscale Science and Technology Learning

Subscribe/order back issues

Thoughtful Decisions: The Evolution of the NISE Net Forums

February 8th, 2008 - Posted in ASTC Dimensions by Christine Ruffo

By Larry Bell and Troy LivingstonParticipants in a June 2007 NISE Net forum at the Museum of Science, Boston, ponder the medical applications of nanotechnology. Photo courtesy Museum of Science
From ASTC Dimensions
January/Feburary 2008

Though scientific research may at times appear removed from the daily concerns of life, the development of new technologies based on that research inevitably has societal implications. Decisions about technological development, therefore, require input beyond scientific knowledge, as the authors of Science for All Americans, a 1989 report from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), pointed out when they wrote that “engineering decisions, whether in designing an airplane bolt or an irrigation system, inevitably involve social and personal values as well as scientific judgments.”1 Technically Speaking, a 2002 report from the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), suggested a role for the public in decisions about technology: “In a democratic society, people must be involved in the technological decisions that affect them . . . .”2

Committed to public participation

What does this call for civic engagement with new technologies mean for informal science educators? At the Museum of Science, Boston, it was not until 2002 that we began to take education in technology and engineering as seriously as we do education in science. At the AAAS conference in Boston that year, several of us heard professors from North Carolina State University talk about their experiments with Citizen Consensus Conferences. These public events were modeled on forums conducted by the Danish government to get ordinary citizens’ advice on matters of technology policy.

After the AAAS conference, we asked ourselves if we could develop a similar model, a program that would address technological literacy goals cited by the NAE while incorporating the social and personal values called for by AAAS. One influence on our decision was an article by Jon Turney of University College London, in which he argued that “a host of experiments with consensus conferences, citizens’ juries, (and) deliberative polls . . . all show that people involved in such discussions quickly become adept at quizzing experts, mastering a brief, asking questions, and unmasking political assumptions masquerading as scientific conclusions.”3 Not only do participants become scientifically literate, Turney concluded, but they do so “under conditions in which they decide what they need to know.”

To several of us, this sounded like an interesting parallel to our museums’ interactive exhibits, which allow visitors to explore scientific phenomena and practice inquiry skills. In our new model, it would be interactive programs that would explore the societal implications of new technologies and offer participants the chance to practice decision-making skills. And so we set out to offer museum visitors a means to engage in dialogue and deliberation around emerging technologies.

The NISE Net platform

We soon had an exciting opportunity to experiment with programs that feature dialogue and deliberation. In January 2005, the National Science Foundation (NSF) solicited proposals for a science center collaborative that would focus on informal science education (ISE) approaches to the new field of nanotechnology. The solicitation cited the economic, environmental, social, and ethical dimensions and issues associated with nanotechnology; advanced the need for an informed citizenry; and encouraged the creation of science cafés and other forums that would address its implications and potential consequences.

Partnering with the Science Museum of Minnesota (SMM) and the Exploratorium, the Museum of Science, Boston, submitted the winning proposal and became lead institution for the new Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network.

NISE Net launched in the fall of 2005. Soon after, we put together a group of five museums to experiment collaboratively with the public forums format. Joining the three original partners in this effort were the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI), in Portland, and the Museum of Life and Science (MLS), in Durham, North Carolina.

MLS is located in North Carolina’s Research Triangle Park region, a hotspot for empty nesters and retirees looking for meaningful learning opportunities. Staff at the museum were already looking for new ways to attract adult audiences to the science center. At their suggestion, the group decided to develop a series of nanoscale science and technology forums that would target adults and encourage them to become more involved with science topics.

NISE Net Forum programs focus on a hot current science topic and typically begin with a question or problem that participants will grapple with during the event. Because a central goal from the start was that participants would engage in dialogue not only on the science itself, but also on its societal and ethical implications, organizers regularly invite social scientists, ethicists, and regulation experts from local universities, as well as nanoscale science and engineering researchers, to join the discussion. After hearing from both kinds of experts, audience members engage panelists and one another in small-group discussions on questions like “Who should decide how much risk is acceptable?” and “What role should the public play in shaping discourse on regulation?” Afterwards, each group reports out on the decisions that were reached.

Programs like these are easy to conduct and relatively inexpensive, and they connect scientists with the public and participants with one another in enjoyable, meaningful ways. Over the past two years, we have formally evaluated 20 forum events developed by our five museums. The majority of participants in all locations reported that they enjoyed the experience, felt more informed as a result, and felt comfortable expressing their opinions. Forum attendees also routinely report that they value the small-group discussions as much as the expert presentations. These are gratifying results for a program designed to reach adults and get them more involved in issues of science policy.

Larry Bell is senior vice president for exhibits and programs at the Museum of Science, Boston, and principal investigator for the NSF-funded Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network. Troy Livingston is vice president for innovation and learning at the Museum of Life and Science, Durham, North Carolina.

Notes
1. AAAS, Science for All Americans, 1989, p. 40.
2. National Academy Press, Technically Speaking, 2002, p. 36.
3. The Guardian, “How Greenfield Got It Wrong,” April 17, 2003,
www.guardian.co.uk/life/opinion/ story/0,12981,937901,00.html

From the January/February 2008 issue of ASTC Dimensions.

About the image: Participants in a June 2007 NISE Net forum at the Museum of Science, Boston, ponder the medical applications of nanotechnology. Photo courtesy Museum of Science

Immersed in Science: Learning in Today’s Digital Environments

November 16th, 2007 - Posted in ASTC Dimensions by Wendy Pollock

Dimensions coverIN THIS ISSUE
November/December 2007

In July/August 2006, ASTC Dimensions examined new social technologies—blogs, podcasts, wikis, RSS feeds, and other “Web 2.0″ communication tools that allow Internet users to personalize their online experiences. That was then; this is now. Moving past MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube, the buzz today is about immersive digital experiences, mixed realities, avatars, and the 3-D Web. Researchers document the benefits of video gaming and design “serious” games to support educational or therapeutic ends. In the multi-user online world Second Life, your custom-designed alter ego can visit a museum, take a class, view a webcast, or interview for a job. Seniors can’t get enough of digital brain games, second graders play Zoo Tycoon, and Nintendo’s whole-body Wii gaming console flies off the shelves. How does all of this relate to learning in science centers? In this issue, we’ll explore the new digital immersive technologies and learn how museums are using them to create experiences for the tech-savvy audiences of the 21st century.

CONTENTS
• Immersive Digital Interactives: An Emerging Medium for Exhibitions, by Eric Siegel
• Digital Games as Learning Platforms, by Heather Choy
• Magical Science: Evaluating the Impact of Immersive Exhibits, by Daniel Tan and Sharlene Anthony
From 2-D to 3-D Web: The Science Center in ‘Second Life,’ by Paul Doherty and Robert J. Rothfarb
• Embedding Virtual Reality in Exhibitions: A Perspective from Paris, by Marc Girard
• Digital Planetariums for Astronomy Education, by Ka Chun Yu and Kamran Sahami
• Virtual Reality and Immersive Environment Resources
• Changes in Attitudes: Designing for Visitor Expectations, by Nina Simon
• Otronicon: Celebrating Digital Media, by Jeff Stanford

Subscribe/order back issues

© Association of Science - Technology Centers Incorporated