Article About Yours Truly
I’m taking a science communication class and one of our assignments is to write an article about the work of our team-member. So, this is what mine wrote about me. Just thought I’d share it since I don’t discuss what I do often enough on the blag. Also, it’s pretty weird for me to read this, seeing how what I said was understood and translated for another person. It has definitely helped me better appreciate the frustration most scientists must feel when an article about their work comes out. It’s not so much that big ideas are misunderstood, just the slight nuances which are somehow off and irking… Or maybe that’s just the feeling of seeing myself referenced by my last name!
Anyways, enjoy!
~~~
D.H.
Com597G Classmate interview
January 17, 2012
How long did you spend looking at each exhibit the last time you went to a science museum? Did you push the button to watch the volcano explode? Was there a momentary pause at the history of music exhibit as you watched a video of how to do a studio remix? Or perhaps you ventured a passing glance at the rhythmically roaring heads of the mechanical dinosaurs in the Mesozoic Era display? “Most people look at a science exhibit for less than one minute, even interactive ones,” reports Ari Einbinder, a first-year graduate student in the University of Washington’s Museology program. In an age of technology where one only needs to look to You Tube to get a science fix, Einbinder has a goal to make science museums more engaging and interesting to visitors. Thus, a more engaging visit to the museum becomes a more enjoyable and lasting experience contributing to each individual’s overall learning process.
Einbinder, after working in several science museums across Europe and the United States, recently began his graduate program with the hopes of advancing a career in science museums. A program in Museology, or the study of museums, at the University of Washington trains museum professionals by developing interdisciplinary skills and tools to significantly contribute to museums and other cultural institutions (http://depts.washington.edu/uwmuse/). Einbinder explains on his website (www.realclevername.com) that his experiences in European Science Centers solidified his interests in making science exhibits more engaging to the public. The UW Museology program aligns particularly well with his goals with its emphasis on science museums and links to centers like the Burke Museum of Natural History (http://www.burkemuseum.org/) whereas other academic programs are more traditionally focused on art and history museums. He even dreams of opening his own science museum someday. Although he originally had career aspirations to become a scientist, he instead realized the value of and his personal interest in communicating science to the public.
Museum exhibits on controversial topics are a primary interest to Einbinder, who argues that society has become too politically correct in our characterization of subjects such as evolution, climate change, or sustainability. He sees science museums as a way to show the public the reality of the science behind the controversy of these important topics, topics that are often ignored or avoided in schools or museums because of their controversial nature. What is the true basis for evolutionary theory? What are the scientific experiments and results that theory is based on? He thinks there are real facts of climate change that need to be portrayed to the public to percolate discussion and action. Regardless of a person’s opinion on a topic, Einbinder wants museum visitors to gain accurate knowledge of the science underpinning the controversy. He also notes that there are just “a lot of cool things” about science that the public misses without focused exhibits in museums.
To further engage the public, Einbinder needs to embrace two primary objectives of museum exhibits. Although not necessarily complimentary, museum exhibits are designed to engage their visitors as well as to move people along from exhibit to exhibit. Einbinder believes that both objectives can be achieved, even when visitors linger for extended periods at a single exhibit. “Interactive exhibits make people to stay longer and are more likely to get them thinking,” says Einbinder, which means that the concepts of the exhibit are more likely to be internalized by the visitor. He uses the example of Seattle’s Pacific Science Center (http://www.pacificsciencecenter.org/Exhibits/) where a Design Zone exhibit with a catapult-like demonstration challenges visitors to practice a hit-the-target game, forcing them to DO something more than just SEE something. The act of doing will strengthen that visitor’s learning process. Seattle’s Woodland Park Zoo also provides a world-renowned penguin exhibit that allows visitors to not only view Humboldt penguins under- and above-the-water, but also see aspects of the cultural and natural terrain of coastal Patagonia, the field camp of a penguin biologist, chat with the zookeeper, and to feed penguins (http://www.zoo.org/page.aspx?pid=1722). Einbinder argues that more variation in the interactive capacity of exhibits will only strengthen the experience for visitors. If each exhibit is equally fascinating and able to hold a visitor’s attention, the additional time spent at each exhibit will then equalize so the flow of visitors through the museum is not negatively impacted. Einbinder suggests visitors could even be offered something to take with them that will help reinforce the message of an exhibit and promote further reflection into the subject matter. For example, instead of just watching a video or pushing a button at that History of Music exhibit, Einbinder would hand you a CD to cart home with options to do your own track remix and continue a guided exploration into musical mysteries.
