I suspect most of us would need to acknowledge that there is a 'real'
world out there. It is the sense we make of it that varies. This will of
course also vary according to the communities of interpretation to which
we belong - so scientists and artists will make different
interpretations. Values attributed also vary, according to differenbt
interpretive communities. Yes, we need a varied menu within galleries,
and I think the materials gallery is an excellent example. It could be
evaluated by carrying out the ideas I suggested earlier with a small
group of visitors to document the range of responses. Doug Worts paper
in NMRS 5 Arty in Museums is amazing on the range of ways to respond to
paintings.
Eilean
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 08:55:48 +0100
Subject: Re: Museum Education Service performance indicators
From: Roland Jackson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Reply-to: Roland Jackson <[log in to unmask]>
At 08:22 18/09/98 +0100, Eilean wrote:
We need to
>find a way of evaluating museum education that takes on board the
>constructivist learning theory that most of us subscribe to. To do this
>we need to develop a new language of evaluation that indicates that we
>are concerned with individual learning, which might be very different
>foreach person involved.
Now this does start to get interesting! If it turns out that we do not
have
a clearly-articulated and shared theory of learning (and an associated
shared pedagogy of museum education) we are unlikely to agree on
qualitative, evaluative measures of the effectiveness of our museums as
educational organisations.
I am certainly not a 'pure' constructivist in the sense that I take
George
Hein to mean in his writing (e.g. JEM 16 p21). As far as I am concerned
there is a real world out there from which we can obtain objective
knowledge, but perhaps that's the scientist speaking. (The best paper I
know on the strengths and weaknesses of the constructivist position as
they
affect science education is Jonathan Osborne's in Science Education 80
p53).
The more I think about these things (and read the likes of Gardner et
al)
the more I believe that we provide the best conditions for learning in
museums by providing diversity (and redundancy) of approaches, so
different
individuals with different learning styles and preferences can find
attractive, comfortable ways in. That is why we need to mix 'traditional
displays' (text and object-based), with interactives, multimedia, drama
and
other programming. How we get that to some sort of performance measure
that
would stand up, I don't know yet, but please send me ideas! This is the
approach we have pursued in our Challenge of Materials gallery (and
visitors seem to like it) and is informing (along with other
'constructivist-type' notions such as understanding people's pror
knowledge
and conceptions) the development of our Wellcome Wing.
Roland
Dr Roland Jackson
Head of Education and Programmes
Science Museum
London SW7 2DD
tel: 44 171 938 9760
fax: 44 171 938 9804
http://www.nmsi.ac.uk/education/
Eilean Hooper-Greenhill
Director
Department of Museum Studies
University of Leicester
103/105 Princess Road East
Leicester LE1 7LG UK
email: [log in to unmask]: http://www.le.ac.uk/museumstudies/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|