Politicking in museums

People really seem to get the idea that museums need to think deeply about their responsibilities for displaying scientific controversy ("how do we capture the controversy around stem cells?" "what should we be saying about evolution?"). However, lost in discussions I heard at ASTC was an urgency to reflect on their responsibilities for political advocacy in regards to pedagogy. Historically, science museums were largely responsible for one of the only successful introductions of a large-scale pedagogical change in how science is learned and taught. They successfully opened-up, socialized, and legitimized the interaction of people with phenomena, ideas, and things in ways schools have never been able to. This was a hugely important part of their mission: Provide alternatives to school science.

What worries me now is the lack of interest that this goal inspires in current museum folk. As an example I provide No Child Left Behind. This piece of legislature aimed at public schools is starting to leak into museums. There are multiple reasons for this, but primary among them is that schools are being heavily pressured to pass tests and so are pressured to provide students only with experiences that can be justified as helping them pass those tests - and if museums aren't helping to do this, then they aren't priorities. As a result, 'providing' standards-based exhibitry becomes a priority, in order to attract school visitation.

Fine, we all need revenue, but really, museums doing S T A N D A R D S?. . . does anyone else think that is totally wacky? Instead of providing a clear alternative to schools and challenging the limits placed on schools by government and society, museums are conforming to the norms of science learning and teaching legitimized in school science. How does this fundamentally change the role of science centers in society?

I think the political question museum folk need to be asking themselves is how to remain responsible to the original mission of the science museum: To provide alternatives to school science. In many senses, this is the high-stakes political question museums need to grapple with. What counts as legitimate science learning? And how can museums offer solid alternatives to the limited scope of schools? How can we re-centralize a pedagogical mission in science museums?