Wayne LaBar writes that the National Association for Museum Exhibition (NAME) – one of the American Association of Museums (AAM) Standing Professional Committees – is looking for session proposals for the 2010 meeting, to be held in Los Angeles, May 23-27.

Sessions relating to the meeting theme – Museums Without Borders – are given greater consideration by the AAM Program Committee. Such topics might include: learning how best to engage publics in new ways; how museums have succeeded (or not) in responding to different communities including minorities, immigrants, and children; how museums have succeeded (or not) in creating networks with other museums in the United States and abroad; and what we’ve learned about what works with nontraditional audiences.

If you have an idea for a session – about technology, design, content development, prototyping, or some other aspect of exhibitions – that relates to these themes, go to the AAM website to submit a session and ask for NAME endorsement.

From what I’ve heard, it sounds as if there are quite a few of us who’ve started writing case studies, but haven’t quite finished – or haven’t gotten around to hitting “publish.” I started a post some time ago about an exhibition called Rotten Truth that I worked on with Kathy McLean, Beth Redmond-Jones, and colleagues from the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service, about 15 years ago. (The exhibition was never actually built – which is part of the story.) One thing that’s held me up is that this all happened so long ago that records aren’t that easy to pull together, few were in digital format back then, and documents will need scanning. It was such a collaborative project, shouldn’t we all  consult on the case study? And then there were some sensitive issues – what Gretchen referred to recently as “exhibition frictions.” Should those be mentioned? What are the “frictions” or tensions that would be meaningful to recount? I gather others are stymied by those “intellectual property” issues Paul was commenting on earlier this week. In the interest of sharing experiences that may save some reinventing-of-the-wheel – one of the reasons we created this site – I think I ought to take on those challenges and finish this case study. I hope others will overcome hesitations and do the same. The stories, however imperfect they may seem to us, are part of our collective memory, the foundation of the “wisdom of practice” that informs our field.

Last week in Milan, at the annual meeting of ecsite, the European Science Centre Network, in a session about art in science centers organized by Claire Pillsbury, an old topic came up: What ethical guidelines should we follow, as a field, in copying others’ work? Remo Besio of Techorama in Switzerland spoke passionately about instances he had observed in recent years of organizations profiting from sale of copies of work that had been developed by other organizations and individuals, without permission or compensation. There was at least one example right there in the exhibit hall.

The original spirit in the science center field was generous. The Exploratorium freely shared plans for their exhibits, for the cost of a Cookbook, and in that way inspired hundreds of others around the world to start their own science centers. The Cheapbook series begun by Paul Orselli and colleagues like Dan Goldwater (who contributed plans for a Harmonic Cantilever) and Steve Pizzey (who contributed Windy City, shown here) continued the tradition of generosity – a tradition with echoes in the contemporary open source movement.

There are very few museums that can afford to secure legal protection for their exhibit designs, or to defend those rights. But it was clear from the discussion in Milan that most people hope that we can embrace ethical guidelines that will help protect the spirit of common purpose and mutual aid that are such an important part of the history and culture of this field.

This topic was discusssed at length some years ago by a group that met at ASTC conferences and summarized their position in what was then the ASTC Newsletter.  The guidelines they suggested are still online, here. Are there any updates or suggestions?

Gretchen Jennings, editor of the NAME journal, is looking for leads for an upcoming issue. You can get in touch with her or post here. Here’s Gretchen’s note:

Hello all. For the Spring 2010 issue of “Exhibitionist,” the exhibitions journal that I edit (www.name-aam.org), we want to look at issues that come up over and over again in developing and designing exhibitions – like should we do an intro film? are dioramas out forever or in again? lighting for accessibility or low lighting to preserve objects? Should this be a staffed exhibition? etc? I’m soliciting examples of exhibition frictions that you experience continually – and especially those that have been addressed creatively. Any ideas? I’d love to hear them. I would like to hear from you by end of June 2009.

Thanks, Gretchen

We celebrated the solstice by reaching a milestone: There are now 1,000+ members of ExhibitFiles. Welcome to all of our newest members!

Since the site opened at the end of April last year, word has spread, and the community’s grown – and with it, the collection of shared memories and experiences posted here.

There are other ways to share, from the more traditional channels like journal articles to personal blogs. But by contributing to ExhibitFiles, we’re building a collective resource that’s easily accessible, everywhere in the world. We’re glad to see that museum studies students have begun to use the site to post reviews and hope to see more; you’re acting as eyes and ears for the rest of us. And for those who haven’t yet shared your stories, we’ll all look forward to reading about them in the new year. For now, thanks to all for your contributions, and best wishes for 2009.

Wendy

In October, we recognized the contributions of two ExhibitFiles power-users during a gathering at the ASTC Annual Conference in Philadelphia. Paul Orselli, a self-described instigator and principal of Paul Orselli Workshop (POW!), was among the group of exhibit developers who guided early planning of this site, and one of the first to contribute a review (check out Toasters, posted in April 2007 – and his 8 other case studies and reviews).

Gretchen Jennings was also among the early advisors, and her case studies of Psychology and Invention at Play provided models for others to follow. As editor of Exhibitionist, journal of the AAM’s committee on exhibitions, NAME, she – along with Beth Redmond-Jones, Penny Jennings, Eric Siegel, and others – has looked for ways to make this site useful to NAME members. And she’s spread word about the site through presentations to groups outside of the United States.

To them, and to all of our other 960+ members, thank you for so generously contributing to our common fund of knowledge and experience.

ExhibitFiles member Beth-Redmond Jones is looking for good examples of insect zoos (and also life science/ecology halls). Does anyone have a review to contribute?

(The photo, right, was taken by Christine Ruffo of ASTC during the ASTC Annual Conference in Philadelphia two weeks ago. It’s in the Academy of Natural Sciences Butterflies! exhibition.)

Over the last 18 months, we’ve received a lot of suggestions for new features for the ExhibitFiles site. One recurring request is to allow members to post not just full Case Studies or Reviews of exhibits and exhibitions, but short message or media elements. In other words, members could share one image (or video) or just an idea or a question. We’ve been thinking about how best to incorporate this potential new feature.

We want to make it easy to add media so we are envisioning a system that would allow for direct uploads to the ExhibitFiles server or links to images on Flickr, videos on YouTube, along with other services.

Here’s a few mock-ups of how it might work. The first one shows the “Add” page, where members are asked what they would like to contribute to the ExhibitFiles site.

The next screen shows how the ‘Bits main page might look. (Obviously, the gray thumbnails would be populated with images.)

Finally, here’s a mock-up of an individual ‘Bits page. We’re hoping to add the ability to make comments that have associated media files. Notice there is an integrated media-player. This improvement would also be added to Case Studies and Reviews.

This is all preliminary and we’re still working through the details. I didn’t post the proposed form for adding ‘Bits, as this has many layers due to the multiple choices.  (There are lot’s of options for that screen, since we are allowing members to include images and video that already exists on external social media platforms).

We’re open to any comments or questions you might have about ‘Bits. We’ll let you know how this all progresses.

An Inquiry Group working under the auspices of the Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE) is looking to catalog efforts that make informal science education experiences more inclusive of people with disabilities. Founded in 2007 with support from the National Science Foundation (NSF), CAISE is a center that works across the entire spectrum of informal science education to strengthen the community’s ability to gather evidence, communicate value, and improve practice.

The Inquiry Group wants to understand:
1. In what ways has the informal science education community worked in the past to include people with disabilities in informal science learning?
2. What does this prior work tell us about actions that should be taken in the future?

If you or your institution has been working to increase access to science education for people with disabilities through informal learning, you can help by completing this survey: http://tinyurl.com/Access-Survey

The survey isn’t limited to exhibitions. But if your work involves exhibitions, we also hope you will post a case study here on ExhibitFiles. (You could refer to it in the CAISE survey, so you don’t have to enter information twice.)

This will help CAISE, and everyone in the informal science education field, to become aware of the good work you have been doing—and, of equal importance, the challenges you encountered.

Thank you for helping.

If you’re a member of ExhibitFiles, and you haven’t yet “favorited” a case study or review, this would be a good time to start. Just a year and a half after the site initially opened, 69 members have taken time to post 137 case studies and reviews, helping to build a common resource for all of us who work with exhibitions.

But many other members are helping, too, by adding tags and comments, and by marking “favorites.” Over time, “favorites” help site users to browse by “popularity.”

We’ll be recognizing some contributions (and contributors) during the ExhibitFiles brunch at the ASTC conference coming up in Philadelphia. Hope to see some of you there.

Wendy