NSF’s ISE program has funded a number of projects – CAISE, InformalScience.org, and ExhibitFiles among them – that together are building what some have called an “improvement infrastructure” for the informal science education field. The 240+ case studies and reviews, and the growing number of Bits, contributed by ExhibitFiles members are an important part of the collective memory that’s supporting good work i our field.

Along with Bits there are other enhancements to the site that will make it easier to use. Icons in the Comments feed on the main page help you quickly find the newest Bits, with their associated media files.

Let us know what you think. Many thanks to Ideum and to the National Science Foundation for the funding that enabled us to add this feature and keep this site commercial free.

Tom Nielsen of Tucson and Jason Jay Stevens of San Antonio received this year’s “golden” awards in recognition of their recent contributions.

Tom wrote in July about his recollections of soap bubble exhibits at the Exploratorium. “‘Exploratorium’, I think, nails it—exploration for the joy of it, up to your elbows in soapy water, shoulder to shoulder with other visitors. If there are discoveries, if there is learning, if test scores improve, fine. But without exploration there’s nothing.” Tom also wrote earlier about the Experimentarium’s Giant Ears and Seeing the Light.

In his reviews, Jason has shared his observations about exhibitions from upstate New York to Los Angeles, including the Goodbye Parade that closes every day at Rochester’s Strong National Museum of Play, the “old-fashioned charm” of the Velaslavasay Panorama and St. Louis’s City Museum, “profoundly profuse with risk.”

Many thanks to Tom, Jason, and all of the members of ExhibitFiles who are contributing to our collective memories.

We’ll be recognizing some of the outstanding contributors to the site over the last year. KC Cole, author of the recent biography of Exploratorium founder Frank Oppenheimer, also will be there to give a signed copy of her book to an ExhibitFiles member who’s helped keep Frank’s memory alive in a post on the site.

Between now and then, we hope you’ll consider contributing a case study or review – it can be of a whole exhibition, or just one exhibit that was an inspiration to you, or that taught you something you want to share with others.

Hope to see you in Fort Worth!

We invite the ExhibitFiles community to help celebrate – and to take time to revisit and reflect on Frank Oppenheimer’s exhibit philosophy and practice.

Over the next three months, contribute a case study or review of an exhibit that was developed by Frank himself, or in his spirit. Then on October 30, at the ExhibitFiles Happy Hour at the ASTC Annual Conference in Fort Worth, we’ll recognize the most highly rated contributor with a copy of K.C.’s book. She’ll be there to sign the book and talk about her memories of Frank.

If you want to learn more about Frank Oppenheimer’s ideas about exhibits, there’s also a wonderful collection of his writings on the Exploratorium website – a great source of inspiration, even after all these years.

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.

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?