Program Spotlight

JME Roundtable: The Literacies of Culture in Education: A Roundtable Discussion about the Impact of Cultural Institutions on the Development of Literacy Skills

Planning a JME discussion Group
By Gretchen Adams, Education Director, Paul Revere House

The Literacies of Culture in Education: A Roundtable Discussion about the Impact of Cultural Institutions on the Development of Literacy SkillsJME Roundtable
by Susan Marcus

Presented by the Museum Educators Roundtable [MER] and the Chicago Cultural Coalition for Literacy [CCCL]; and hosted by Spertus Museum, Chicago, Illinois, October 2004

Many organizations step back from time to time to review their activities and see if their original premises match the needs and expectations of their membership. The Chicago Cultural Coalition for Literacy [CCCL] began as an informal group of educators from Chicago area cultural organizations interested in supporting the Chicago Reading Initiative. For one of the Initiative’s goals, developing comprehensive literacy programs that recognize the particular literacy needs of Chicago Public School students, the CCCL organized many membership meetings with representatives of the Board and administration of the Chicago Public Schools, with specific cultural organizations for demonstrations of programs and materials they use in this effort, and with authors, artists, and reading specialists.

After three years of such gatherings, the CCCL was losing momentum and reassessed its direction. Realizing that professional development and discussions of principles, concepts, and design would be of great value to the CCCL constituency, the group joined with the the Museum Education Roundtable to offer its first meeting based on a recent issue of MER’s publication, the Journal of Museum Education. “Reading the World” included articles from a variety of perspectives—from the philosophical to the practical and hands-on—that delved into the subject of literacy as a skill set that goes beyond engagement with the text. Approximately 35 people attended the gathering with the intention of focusing on this edition of the JME and exploring its implications for their profession.

To kick off the discussion, the event organizers invited presenter Andrew White, ensemble member as well as director of the Lookingglass Theatre Company’s production of George Orwell’s 1984. White spoke eloquently and concretely about his commitment to play as a way of developing language skills in the context of articulated experience. Referring to David Carr’s JME article,” Reading Beyond the Museum,” and to his own experiences as an actor and theater educator, White demonstrated the value of focusing on individual experience and weaving it into a group narrative with layers of meaningful gesture, words, and song. Carr’s article focused on the making of meaning, which also informs White’s approach to theater. According to Carr, the interaction of reading redefines or transforms experience:

[In Louise Rosenblatt’s descriptions of reading transactions] Persons and text, she says, are not separate entities, or antagonists daring each other to make something meaningful; rather, in the moment of the reading event, the reader and text engage to construct each other mutually, in a ‘to-and-fro’ transaction. Reading in the museum, we similarly engage in a collaborative process with evidence and words, and (because we are not blank slates) we remember the world beyond the museum, and ourselves in that world…as Rosenblatt says of her subject, ‘An intense response to a work will have its roots in capacities and experiences already present in the personality and mind of the reader.’

Roundtable discussions followed the presentation. Divided into three facilitated groups, participants spent about 40 minutes discussing one question: in what ways can we take a definition of literacy beyond an engagement strictly with the written word? A variation on that question that spurred a lot of discussion was, “How would you define literacy as applied to the education program of your institution?” Scribes recorded the three groups’ conversations the summary of which follows.

Participants represented a wide range of cultural organizations: performance companies; art, history, and science museums, among others; and natural collections like zoos and botanical gardens/conservatories. Nearly all participants agreed that the definition of literacy goes beyond engagement with text, but that improving reading and expression skills were still the paramount objectives. Some participants defined this expanded view of literacy as “building awareness.” The discussions explored strategies that encouraged the development of such skills while encouraging interest and the “ah-ha” experience face to face with the organization’s collections or arts application.

One representative from a botanic garden noted that, before this session, she understood literacy to mean the ability to read. As the break-out group’s conversation continued, she developed a new enthusiasm for “reading” nature at work: she hoped to stimulate an interest in plant life by connecting it to visitors’ common and personal experience. Having constructed personal meaning within the setting of the garden, the visitor would hopefully continue to augment that construct with more information found in texts, such as labels, books, or less traditional sources.

How does the cultural site make collections relevant and encourage literacy? At the Garfield Park Conservatory, reading areas and storybook carts add text to the green space as well as new conceptual dimensions to the garden experience. In addition to giving people access to plants they may not know, the education program places them in context through storytelling and performance. For example, a story hour for pre-schoolers includes reading, but also vocabulary building, performance, music, and other hands-on activities.

Socialization and formal learning require a host of skills as diverse as street literacy, science literacy, cultural literacy, and consumer literacy. Developing materials for families to use at home and at the cultural site counterbalances formal learning by building on moments of personal interest to strengthen literacy skills through “reading” activities. Some discussion groups stated that museums must provide spaces in which children and adults can create and play together or independently with out fear of being uncomfortable, spaces that create those moments of interest.

The ability to “read the world” allows an individual to be an active participant in that world, to think critically, and to appreciate multiple perspectives. Visitors to cultural sites can reinterpret and make meaning of their text-based experiences as they revisit them through performance, visual arts, and music. Imagine a visitor to the Botanic Garden who encounters a variety of monocotyledons in their natural setting at the conservatory—palms mixed with lilies and orchids. She reads the labels, has a much stronger sense of the environment in which the plants grow and prosper, and then moves on. The question is to move from the visitor’s acquaintance with the objects to the point at which she looks for resources to learn more about the animals that share this environment, and the ways people settled there and used the plants as well as sustained their plant resources. Perhaps she will find the means to satisfy her curiosity through text, activities, or other first-person experiences, including visual art or performance. The meaning making will grow as the visitor’s interest grows. The cultural site provides her the opportunity to build her language skills by expressing her understanding and using its resources.

So much for inspiring life-long learning! As cultural sites, how do we actually encourage young readers? Participants suggested a number of approaches ranging from the recording of oral histories, story boarding, listening to stories then revisiting them by reading them together, or creating a performance environment to encourage students to share their understanding of texts. Props and costumes help remove students from the everyday and create an alternative reality. Such a setting allows students the freedom to share without feeling self-conscious. All suggestions pointed to one basic principle of personal engagement—“this has something to do with me!” Books in the galleries, activities that personalize the experience, and resources for more learning off-site contribute to excitement about reading.

One conversation during the break-out sessions revealed the tensions that can exist in the exhibition development process regarding literacy. A concern about power and authority encouraged one participant to caution that museum administrations need to become more self-critical and sensitive to the evolution and installation of an exhibition. The implication was that they do not understand how building in opportunities for conversation is critical to visitors’ “reading” an exhibition. For example, they need to know that in an exhibition designed for conversation, parents often explain exhibits to their children, thus revealing their own understanding and the interpretation that they want their children to hear while children can respond with their own interpretations of the phenomena. New perspectives can develop from such dialogues.

Andrew White’s presentation deeply engaged many of the participants. Several references to David Carr’s JME article and White’s own compelling ideas greatly influenced the groups’ discussions. Acknowledging the value of the other essays such as Valerie Bang-Jensen’s “Book Arts and Literacy” and Mark Larson’s “The Continuing Conversation,” discussion groups nevertheless continued to focus their conversations on White’s and Carr’s points about the effectiveness of performance and the presence of books in their public spaces. In general, the session underscored the value of encouraging roundtable discussions and including a strong professional development component in the CCCL program. Informally, participants have expressed satisfaction with the session and look forward to the next CCCL meeting on January 19, 2005.

Planning a JME discussion Group
By Gretchen Adams, Education Director, Paul Revere House

When your next issue of the Journal of Museum Education (JME) arrives, don’t just read it and shelve it -- plan a get together to discuss the articles with your colleagues! After I received the JME entitled “Reading the World,” I was inspired to do just this. Here are some tips for putting together your own JME discussion group:

Invitations

Invite twice as many people as you’d actually like to have attend. People are busy, and there is no one date and time that will work for everyone. In the email that I sent, I offered to order copies of the Journal for colleagues are not yet members of MER.

On the invitation I listed beginning and ending times, 5:30 to 7:30, so that anyone who felt the least bit of trepidation about coming, would know that the gathering wouldn’t go on all night. The first hour was reserved for general conversation and eating, the second for discussion.

Format

I decided to host a dinner at my house for the first of what I hope will be many Journal discussions, luring in my museum friends with food! Although I made the meal for this gathering, the next ones will be potlucks. I preferred having the discussion group in the evening so we could relax and not feel that we had to rush to get back to work, but a brown bag discussion group might work better for you.

I asked each person to bring one question inspired by the Journal articles that she would like to discuss. This worked well. Our group was small, so we had plenty of time to address each person’s issue.

If the group had been larger, I might have asked each person to write down her question on a card, then ordered them so that we could address similar topics in succession.

Discussion Leader

It’s helpful to designate a discussion leader whose job it is to gently guide the group back to the topics at hand, ensure that no one person dominates the conversation, and that the discussion ends on time.

Putting Ideas into Practice

At the Paul Revere House, where I am the education director, we have already implemented some of the ideas we discussed at the dinner! We now have annotated bibliographies available on each floor of the site for interpreters to distribute to interested visitors. One visitor who took one, went right over to the museum shop and purchased $40 worth of books from the list! Other visitors have taken the bibliography to search for recommended books at libraries. We have added copies of our favorite children’s book on Revere to the hands-on materials on each floor. Interpreters are sharing the book with children who are especially interested in Revere (and also using it to capture the imaginations of children who seem bored!).

Future Gatherings

All of the people who attended the discussion group worked at historic sites. We agreed that hearing the perspectives of educators who work at science, art and children’s museums, as well as school teachers, would enrich the conversation. Next time we will invited a more diverse group.

If you host a JME discussion, please jot down a few reflections about the event for the next issue of Network! We’d love to hear about what worked well and what you might do differently in the future.