As I reflect on my experience at 6SCWC, I would like to make both an observation and an affirmation concerning our field today. I have observed that we often describe the common thread of our work as providing experiential learning environments, while viewing our endeavors to embrace cultural diversity as a subset of these efforts.

While I do not diminish the significance of this common theme, I feel that 6SCWC did a marvelous job in “inverting” the emphasis, demonstrating how we can engage diverse cultures first and foremost, with science and learning playing a vital role in strengthening these cultures. Included in this message is the value of cross-cultural understanding, the relevance of Indigenous knowledge, and the importance of ancient science to us now and in the future.

My second point is an affirmation of our field’s work to engage the public on vital (if sensitive) topics, with respect for wide-ranging worldviews. Years ago, while working in Paris, I was visited by a team of legal experts whose mission was to learn the varied public perspectives on the then-emerging field of genetics and biotechnology. With tremendous foresight, this group recognized that navigating the provocative issues raised by this new field would depend not solely upon “hard science,” but also upon diverse societal and cultural orientations.

I am delighted that, in exactly this spirit, a newly formed Community of Practice on Public Engagement in Science will explore best practices and challenges in engaging diverse communities in myriad issues at the intersection of science and society. Many thanks to the science center leaders who are forming this group, one of the growing number of professional development tools offered by ASTC. For more information, contact ASTC’s Laura Huerta Migus.

More than ever, though, our local leaders are recognizing that lasting and positive policies require not only scientific rigor and integrity, but also transparency and determined efforts to build and retain public trust—which begins with a fundamental public grasp of the science in the policies.

Science centers and museums strive to be valued learning environments and trusted platforms for engagement between citizens, scientists, and decision makers. From our perspective, we may feel a growing confidence that we are serving these needs in our local communities. Yet, this perspective may not be entirely recognized by key stakeholders and decision makers who are charged with representing the public’s best interests on these critical issues.

Within the very communities that we serve, our local leaders are tackling wide-ranging, interrelated challenges—greener cities; sustainable energy and transport systems; land and water use; health and wellness in diverse populations; innovations for progress, security, and education; and more—all embracing key aspects of science and technology.

On these topics, we have an opportunity not just to inform, but to be enormously proactive in bringing local actors together around issues of science, commerce, culture, and public policy. We should envision science centers and museums as the brokers and the builders of alliances between policymakers and the publics that they serve.

ASTC is committed to helping our members worldwide achieve their goals, by equipping individual professionals with essential skills, providing member institutions with valuable information and perspectives, and linking our members to one another.

With this mission in mind, we proudly launched the newly redesigned Dimensions magazine with our July/August 2011 issue. We hope you’ll find the new magazine to be even more relevant, readable, and attractive.

In January, we conducted a survey of Dimensions readers. You told us you wanted a greater focus on best practices and practical information. You’ll now find more of both within the magazine’s pages. You said you wanted additional guidance on addressing current issues. In the July/August edition, for example, we feature the topic of financial viability and how to navigate challenging times. You also asked for content that more fully represents science centers and museums of all sizes, staff at all levels, and local contexts around the world. To aid us in our constant effort to showcase the varied voices from our diverse membership, we’ve added several new departments:

1) Viewpoints highlights readers’ responses to questions of interest to our field. These discussions continue on our website and Facebook page.

2) What We Learned presents lessons learned from projects in exhibit development, education, finance, and/or operations.

3) Q&A features interviews with intriguing people from all levels of science center and museum staff, as well as people in related fields.

4) Inbox (letters to the editor) will appear beginning with our September/October 2011 issue. Please email us your thoughts on Dimensions articles or the new redesign (subject line: Inbox).

Keep an eye on the Dimensions webpage in the coming months as we add more content to support the magazine, including extended content for departments, online discussions, and an archive of back issues.

We are also exploring a new approach to distribution. Any paid staff member at an ASTC-member institution can now request a free subscription to either the print or electronic edition of Dimensions at myASTC. Please spread the word to your colleagues. (Nonmembers are welcome to subscribe to Dimensions; click here for more information.)

We hope you enjoy the new and improved Dimensions. We look forward to hearing from you.

Fortunately, our field is remarkably generous with sharing its successes. In fact, some institutions are already exchanging information on their best practices through the Teacher Educator Network, the Youth Program Network, and other groups.

So how can we ensure that these practices achieve the widest possible distribution among our many members? We at ASTC plan to organize association-wide “communities of knowledge and practice” with precisely this objective in mind. With the support of the ASTC leadership and field development committee, we will begin work on convening these communities in mid–2011.

We envision these communities to take several forms. Through facilitated online programs, open exchanges using social media tools, key articles in ASTC publications, planned sessions and tracks at conference, and more, we are planning a more purposeful effort to share the experiences of our field. I anticipate that these communities might embrace at least three levels of information exchange for members.

First, we would like to expand the communities that already exist around topics like youth development programs, teacher training, and facilitated community dialogues. Second, we will certainly form communities of practice around essential science center operations, including exhibit design, education, floor management, and volunteerism. Third, I look forward to the establishment of communities designed to explore collectively those topics and practices that still lie over the horizon. It will be important to engage our diverse membership broadly in these strategic discussions.

One of the most challenging, yet interesting, elements of what we do as an association is to try to bring the very best of our field to the very largest component of our membership. I believe that we can best achieve this goal by working diligently to identify and share all of the wisdom and experience that have already made our member institutions so valuable within their communities. My thanks to all of you for your great work and for your contributions to ASTC’s professional development agenda.

The protagonists in this debate charge that science educators today spend far too much time on “what we know” and perhaps too little time on “how we have come to know.” They caution against the implication that scientific principles require no context—that they somehow exist in the absolute.

There is no debate that science is rooted fundamentally in objectivity, logic, and coherence. Still, I share the view that there is a case to be made for exploring the winding path by which individuals (and societies) ultimately acquire their understandings of science.

History shows us that science has, in fact, evolved in ways that often appear to defy logic, lack coherence, and are in a perpetual state of redefinition. Arguably, it is when we have challenged assumptions, when we have experimented and failed, and when we have applied our own unique perspectives that we have seen the greatest breakthroughs in scientific understanding and its application.

We are both the beneficiaries of all of the science learning that has preceded us and the forerunners of the many advancements in science understanding that are to follow. Science centers and museums offer a special opportunity to examine this continuum of scientific knowledge. More and more, our science centers are presenting wonderful displays of science as it was perceived, as it is currently understood, and how it may yet be envisioned in the future. This applies not just to the ever-emerging new applications of science, but also to the continuous refinement of the very scientific principles that we hold today.

Science centers should, of course, always strive to provide science that is accurate, thorough, and current. At the same time, I applaud the many ASTC-member institutions that present science with varying degrees of historical context, in programs and in exhibitions like Darwin, Islamic Science Rediscovered, and Invention at Play, among many others.

Through these presentations, we convey an important message that perspectives and context can indeed inform our scientific understanding and that the progressive accumulation of scientific knowledge is a winding road. The dynamic nature of science learning does not threaten the solid foundation of science, but rather deepens our appreciation of science as a human endeavor.

As you know, ASTC had serious concerns about two particular amendments to the CR (otherwise known as the Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 or H.R. 1). The first, Amendment No. 35, was proposed by Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ-5th) and would “reduce funding for the Institute of Museum and Library Services by $265.8 million, eliminating funding for the agency.” The second, Amendment No. 471, was proposed by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA-6th) and would “prohibit funding in the bill from being used to fund non-federal museums.”

ASTC made a strong push to reach out to House leadership and key House Members to urge them to vote against these two amendments—and any others—that would damage the ability of science centers and museums to serve their communities, and I know a number of you responded to our call to action as well. I want to take this opportunity to thank all who assisted us in this effort, and I am pleased to be able to report that ultimately both amendments were withdrawn. As a result, neither amendment was included in the final House version of the bill, which was passed at 4:35 a.m. on February 19 by a 235–189 margin.

That bill, which contains $61 billion less than the FY 2010 federal funding levels and $100 billion less than the FY 2011 budget proposed by the President, now heads to the Senate, where it will be taken up next week. Clearly, there are very significant differences between the House bill and one that the Democratic-majority Senate would favor. Therefore, it is very possible that a compromise won’t be reached during the handful of work days that remain until the March 4 expiration of the current CR. Should that happen, possible scenarios include the passage of another temporary CR that could last a week or two (thereby buying more time to work out a compromise) or even a government shutdown.

ASTC will remain fully engaged on the CR and FY 2011 appropriations, and we will keep you informed of further developments and ways to stay involved. Thank you once again for your help with our advocacy efforts.

Amendment #471, filed by Rep. Robert Goodlatte (R-VA), would prohibit the use of funds provided by the bill to fund non-federal museums. This could formally be offered at any time, and is likely to be considered under terms of unanimous consent if not challenged.

Amendment #35, filed by Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), would de-fund the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the remainder of FY11. This amendment no longer appears on the unanimous consent agenda, but it bears close attention nonetheless.

I want assure you personally that ASTC is intervening directly in person and in correspondence with legislators with points in support of our members and urging that these amendments be opened for floor debate.  In addition, I have attached an ASTC Press Release on the matter and several sample letters that were sent to House leadership. These are only a few of the many letters that we are sending today to key legislators, particularly those who shoulder the responsibilities for education and science and in whose districts our members are located.  Again, I would urge that you take just a few moments to call to seek the additional support of your Representatives for your institutions.  You can reach your Representative’s office by calling 202-224-3121.

Timing is important in this effort.  The House bill is now under review and could pass quickly.  In anticipation of an unfortunate passage of one or both of these amendments, we are also preparing a strategy of engagement with Senate leadership as they take up the bill next.  Please note that the House has already voted amendments that seriously diminish funds to other relevant agencies (including the National Endowment for the Arts), in amounts greater than those proposed in the President’s budget. 

The President’s budget includes strong support for science and for education, and these are areas in which our members provide high value. We will continue to work to ensure that ASTC members are recognized and supported for the full range of assets that they provide to communities that they serve.

Many thanks,

Bud Rock

In these and many other ways, science centers are overcoming barriers to extend their reach to audiences who don’t regularly visit. The challenges in reaching these audiences range from lack of interest or motivation to broader social, cultural, and economic dynamics. In each case, centers are challenged to meet audiences where they are—physically, culturally, and philosophically—and by extension, know themselves better as community institutions.

As we embark on the second decade of the ASTC Equity and Diversity Initiative, watch for new tools and programs that will move us toward our vision of ASTC members as models of inclusive institutions. Philosopher and educator John Dewey said, “Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination.” With a renewed commitment to engaging diverse audiences in the wonder of science, we can play a pivotal role in nurturing this audacity of imagination in all people.

In the modern world, people’s lives are constantly touched by science and all that it yields. And yet, the sheer complexity of new knowledge today approaches levels that few can fully comprehend and, sadly, that far too many have come to doubt, reject, or even fear. Recent surveys indicate that, throughout the world, understanding of science concepts and the scientific process is generally low. Lack of familiarity with emerging technologies or research advances results in broad misconceptions. And yet, these same surveys indicate that citizens around the world value all that science has offered humanity and all that it promises. Moreover, people continue to express enormous confidence and trust in science leaders and the scientific community.

Unfortunately, studies indicate that less than 50 percent of scientists engage in any purposeful efforts to communicate their scientific activities to the public. Science centers can offer unique venues to reverse this trend, providing important platforms for inspired exchange between the general public and scientists. If there is a universal language of science, then science centers are in the business of teaching that language. Surveys indicate that about three in five U.S. adults visited an informal science institution in the year preceding the survey (somewhat fewer in Europe and Asia). Many of these institutions are regularly bringing the public face to face with scientists, whether through a hands-on activity based on a scientist’s work, a tour of a working laboratory housed in a museum facility, a science program held in the city streets, a lecture or demonstration on a museum floor, or a Science Café event in a local coffeehouse.

“Science,” wrote the late astronomer Carl Sagan, “is not a body of knowledge, but a way of thinking.” This is true not just for those who have chosen careers in science, but even more so for generations of individuals who are applying the fruits of science in so many aspects of their lives. As we in the science center community strive to transform “I don’t get it” into understanding, we need the scientists themselves to help us open more minds to all that science can offer and to instill greater confidence in the scientific process itself.

The summit atmosphere was highly charged. Governments and individuals were represented in every conceivable form. And the rooms were filled with answers waiting to be provided. Lacking all too often, however, were the right questions that might steer the process toward decisions to serve the greatest global good. Confounded by the sheer complexity of the process, our team undertook an initiative virtually unique to the UN system at the time. In the midst of high-level negotiations, we convened a series of tutorials and workshops on the underlying scientific principles of the issues before us.

Every day, people all over the planet face challenges rooted in scientific principles. Decisions critical to the health and well-being of entire populations depend upon an understanding and appreciation of scientific complexity on a global scale.

Perhaps more than ever before, we are recognizing the interconnectedness of global and local issues. The consequences of today’s challenges reach well beyond afflicted regions, and regardless of the challenge, there is nearly always a local example or action that can inspire the greater good.

We should never underestimate the role of science centers and museums as informational platforms within their local communities. Science centers can inspire timely, responsible action by citizens in the face of challenges (or prospective opportunities). More and more ASTC-member institutions are offering activities to inform and educate visitors, from explanations of global processes to local community dialogues or citizen science projects. Education and information exchange have the potential to combat paralysis or complacency in the face of a seemingly overwhelming number of issues impacting quality of life.

Over the past two decades, the UN has drawn attention to some of the most critical issues facing the world, many of which require science understanding and local action. UNCED in 1992 was a milestone in our appreciation of all aspects of environmentally sustainable development. In 2000, the 189 UN member states adopted the Millennium Declaration, calling for global commitment to measurable targets (Millennium Development Goals, or MDGs) for combating extreme poverty and hunger, and promoting gender equality, education, health, and environmental sustainability. (Click here for the list of MDG indicators.)

Achieving progress on these objectives is a daunting task. The UN has agreed to convene a “Rio+20” Earth Summit in 2012 to address sustainable development, the green economy, energy, climate, biodiversity, and food and water resources. The UN will also convene an MDG Summit in September 2010 in New York City “to galvanize commitment, rally support, and spur collective action in order to reach the Millennium Development Goals by 2015.”

At the time of UNCED, it was well understood and articulated that education is essential to knowledge and action in these critical arenas. Yet informal science education and science centers were not highlighted in any significant way. Our field has made great progress in addressing these issues since that time, adding tremendous value to public understanding and action on these topics. Our coordinated efforts are reflected in ASTC’s International Action on Global Warming (IGLO) initiative; the Action on Climate Change through Engagement, Networks, and Tools (ACCENT) project; the European Network of Science Centres and Museums (Ecsite) Nature Group addressing biodiversity; and many other initiatives. We should aim to ensure that the science center field receives appropriate recognition at Rio+20 for the valuable role our institutions play in educating and fostering action to support the UNCED agenda.

The Millennium Declaration and the MDGs also correspond closely with the priorities of science centers and museums worldwide. Support for the MDGs is a principle set forth in the Toronto Declaration endorsed by participants in the Fifth Science Centre World Congress in June 2008. For this reason, science centers and museums will take the opportunity of this upcoming MDG Summit to highlight our institutions’ role in advancing education and public engagement concerning the MDGs.

ASTC has drafted a Declaration (PDF, 432 KB) to the MDG Summit, embraced by science centers and museums worldwide, urging strong endorsement and support at national, regional, and global levels to enable science centers and museums to inform, educate, and engage the public even more deeply in these critical issues. In addition, on September 21, 2010, ASTC, with support from the other science center networks, will hold a side event in New York City at the occasion of the MDG Summit. This event demonstrates our commitment to support achievement of the MDGs through informal science education and public engagement with science. This is the first time ASTC will bring together UN agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and science centers to discuss cooperation on global issues. To download a PDF about this event, click here.