Learn the Facts and Hear the Other Side

As Museum educators, we are in a unique position to engage audiences in meaningful discussions about controversial topics. Whether you are a history museum interpreting issues of race, an art museum creating conversations about censorship in modern art, or a science museum or zoo discussing evolution, the collections of a museum can create an interesting context for relevant conversations. However, the last thing a museum wants to do is alienate their audience by having those conversations, and subsequently create a contentious dialogue.

It is only natural that a zoo, aquarium, natural history museum, or science museum, whose mission is largely based on protecting the environment of this planet in order to preserve biodiversity, will at some point have to advocate for topics that could be considered controversial by an audience. It is our hope that we will better equip museum educators to handle these controversial topics successfully to create meaningful conversations.

The first step in successfully interpreting environmentally controversial topics is to gather all of the facts and then create a conversation about ALL sides of an issue. Without being held accountable for verifiable facts, a museum will quickly lose their credibility with an audience. It is important for the museum to use accurate language and use sources considered to be an authority in the field.

In The Relevant Museum: A Reflection on Sustainability, Emlyn Koster states that “given that museums exist to be places for reflection and inspiration, the field is not justified in using this descriptor unless it is comfortable with and capable of tackling contemporary and consequential subject matter. Relevancy entails a comfort with controversy that, in turn, involves fostering an atmosphere where difficult questions can be broached and a variety of opinions expressed. Preferably, relevant museum experiences go beyond fostering an intellectual appreciation of their subject matter to stimulating new behaviors in their visitors.” This underlines the need for museums to create a dialogue about controversial topics where the audience can hear all sides of an issue. At the ECHO Lake Aquarium and Science Center, Phlean R. Fretz describes a way in which they are doing just that.  The Science Café offers community members the chance to engage with an expert coached by ECHO to “offer 20 minutes of background followed by audience discussion around candle-lit tables. The evening concludes with a lively discussion that positions the audience in the information driver seat.” At the Science Café “we advocate not for a particular point of view, but for being an active and engaged citizen of the community.”

The divisive nature of controversial topics begs for careful consideration by museums when interpreting these topics. In our succeeding posts, we will explore additional ways for a museum to successfully navigate environment controversy.

Source-  Fretz, Phlean. “Environmental Advocacy in Free Choice Institutions.” NEMA News Winter 2011: 6-7, 16.