Guest post on The Incluseum blog

I'm honored that The Incluseum, one of my favorite blogs, has published a post of mine about the role of inclusive language in making museums more welcoming to families of all kinds.

Here's a handy dandy chart I made to accompany my post:

Read the full article at The Incluseum and use the comments section to let us know how your museum is trying to be inclusive of all kinds of families.

Defining family: starting the conversation at your museum

Families are vitally important to museums. By serving families museums can expand their audience, serve their community, encourage repeat visitation, and build the next generation of museum visitors. 

But who exactly is considered a family? And how are museums actively welcoming families of all kinds?

I recently asked these questions at a brown bag discussion with my colleagues at Boston Children's Museum. The conversation went so well that I want to share a step-by-step outline for how you could lead a similar discussion at your museum. And PS. I'm not a manager or director. Anyone at any level of the museum can organize an informal discussion like this.

Some background information

The following outline is based on a session I gave with Laura Callen and Rachel Kadner at the California Association of Museums conference. The presentation was called "Welcoming 21st Century Families in Museums" with the goals of debunking the myth of the nuclear family and turning a critical eye on museum policies, programs, and language. Laura is the founder and director of the Adoption Museum Project, an organization devoted to exploring the story of adoption.  Rachel is the Parenting and Community Partnerships Manager at Habitot Children’s Museum whose programs serve families of all kinds. Both Laura and Rachel have strong backgrounds in social justice.

Starting the conversation

You've booked the conference room, sent the all-staff email, and gathered up your Sharpies and giant Post-It pad. You're ready to talk families at the museum. Here's a cheat-sheet to help you along in your conversation:

1. What does family mean to you?

Everyone has their own definition of family. By asking this question you can begin to explore your preconceived notions about what family means and you may learn things about your colleagues you never knew before. After your discussion, offer up this definition that Laura, Rachel, and I came up with:

21st Century Family n.

1.  A family as defined by the individuals involved, inclusive across race, culture, gender, age, and marital status. Family members may or may not be biologically related, share the same household, or be legally recognized.
2. As opposed to "nuclear family". 

2. Share some facts

"4 out of 5 people living in the US ... do not live behind the picket fence— [their] lives fall outside outdated notions of family, with a mom at home and a dad at work."

Strong Families

How many of your co-workers are in this majority?

3. Talk about allyship

Museums have the privilege to serve and be allies for families of all kinds. What does it mean to be an ally?

• taking responsibility for the changes we know are needed in our society 
• being intentional, overt, and consistent
• challenging prevailing patterns of oppression 
• making privileges that are usually invisible, visible 
• facilitating the empowerment of persons targeted by oppression 
• talking to others in the dominant group about their behavior 

4. What are we doing to serve families of all kinds?

Chances are, your museum is already doing things to welcome and serve diverse families, intentionally or not. Use this opportunity to focus on all the good work you're already doing. Not only is it encouraging and validating to start here, it will also illuminate areas for improvement and pre-existing partnerships that could be strengthened.

5. How could we do even more?

Now is the time for brainstorming. After you've gotten a good list going, go back through the ideas you've come up with and identify possible community advocates or partners you could leverage and find interested individuals to investigate next steps. This turns your list of ideas into a list of action items and people who will be excited to help in the effort.


And that's it! Make sure you document your conversation for the participating members as well as the folks who couldn't make it. And keep the discussion going.

Museums and children: built to fail?

Does the thought of children in a museum make your heart swell? or does it make your heart stop? If the museum isn’t set up for young visitors, you’re probably on the cardiac arrest side of the equation. And it’s understandable.

The fact of the matter is, kids use museums differently than grown-ups. They’re more active and they talk more. This is how they learn and relate to the world. If museums truly want real live ACTUAL children to visit then they need to accept that children have different needs than grownups and design for those needs. If they don’t, museums are upholding unfair expectations. Children seem disruptive in galleries because galleries are not designed for their learning style. In effect, museums have set them up for failure.

One of the most fundamental problems here is the narrow definition of an appropriate experience for children to have in a museum setting. Columnist Judith Dobrzynski is becoming well-known for expressing her biases against museum experiences that look too much like fun and her thoughts on this issue is no exception. A self-described proponent of children in museums, she notes that the children she sees in museums are often “just horsing around or talking” and holds in contrast examples from the Denver Art Museum where they are actively engaging children with backpacks and programs that relate directly to the artwork on exhibit. Young visitors learn history and make art inspired by what they see on the walls. Judith deems this experience an appropriate one because she sees a clear correlation between the programming and the collection.

But Dobrzynski's underlying assumption is that every interaction a child has in a museum must be a content-driven one. When she writes dismissively about what she sees as “just play” she’s dismissing the fact that children learn by playing. In this regard, traditional museums need to take a page from the children’s museum handbook. Children’s museums (and science museums) have mission statements about sparking interest and inspiring love of learning, not delivering facts or even explaining concepts. They value attitudes and relationships over transference of knowledge.

Designing for children (and other kinesthetic learners) in museums is often mistaken for dumbing-down the museum. This speaks more to our society’s hierarchy of learning styles than anything else, but that’s another blog post. It’s this misapprehension that stokes the fears of folks like Ian Hewett who writes that such a philosophy dictates that “high culture must be brought down to the kids’ level”. He believes that art is far too complex for a child to appreciate. Incited by the bad behavior of the notorious grownups at the Tate Museum who let their kids climb all over a Donald Judd sculpture, he suggests that the pendulum is swinging in such a child-centric direction that eventually all hell will break loose and ultimately concludes that we simply cannot accommodate children in museums at all and they should be banned from museums altogether.

Of course there are plenty of museum professionals who disagree with Hewett. Educator Sarah Erdman encourages parents to visit museums with their babies. Not only does a museum visit serve the interests of a parent who wants a break from the isolated world of Cheerios and laundry (so much laundry), it can also delight infants with some of their favorite things: bright colors, photos of human faces, and the voice of their parent as they excitedly narrate their experience.

I wish Ian had been with me at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston last weekend (really, not really) to see an infant in his mother’s arms go gaga for their Quilts and Color exhibit. The baby may not have comprehended the history of the quilts or the color theory that his parents were interested in, but he was enjoying art with his family in a developmentally appropriate way. I felt bad that his mom felt like she had to shush his squeals of delight in the quiet gallery.

“We should be thrilled when even young children respond so enthusiastically ... Isn’t this exactly what we want?” 
Dea Birkett, Director of Kids in Museums, The Telegraph

Setting realistic expectations for children in museums comes down to what we in the children’s museum field call “ages and stages”. A three-year-old has very different needs and capabilities than a seven-year-old or a thirteen-year-old so exhibit developers match their expectations for children to their development and design experiences that meet their widely varying needs simultaneously. And children's museums always try to make sure the experience is just as engaging for grownups because let’s face it, the kids didn’t drive themselves to the museum. Creating multi-layered experiences is challenging, but it’s not impossible.

Sesame Street is a classic example of a successful multi-layered experience. Do the kids know who Placido Domingo is? Nope. Do they still get a kick out of Placido Flamingo? Absolutely.

As educator Cate Bayles succinctly states, “children breathe life into museums”. And deep down, most of us really do want children in our museums- even if it’s just to entice their parents. But making room for children in museums has its implications. What does it mean to truly invite children to the museum?

Take it from children's museums- these toys are for everyone

Around this time of year the discussion about girl toys vs. boy toys gets particularly lively. Most of us who are concerned about the strict gendering of toys are in agreement: the way toys are designed and marketed is sexist and harmful to children. But all too often these discussions take a turn away from discussing the limitations this puts on children and starts maligning toys meant for girls and upholding boy toys as somehow better.

I’d like to argue for a more inclusive way of talking about toys. Instead of using the word “girly” as a synonym for “dopey” or “frivolous” or referring to “playing with dolls” in a dismissive way, let’s recognize the value of “girl” and “boy” toys. To say that playing with dolls is not as important as playing with blocks, we are creating a hierarchy of play and sending children the message that some interests are better than others.

And it has implications on the professions that grow out of these interests- it’s no secret that the salaries in the male-dominated engineering (building stuff) field are much higher than the salaries in the female-dominated teaching (communicating and taking care of people) field.

Here are three toys that are generally thought of as being for girls and why they are not to be dismissed. In fact these toys are so important that children’s museums include them in their exhibits, and though I’m completely biased, I happen to think that’s a great metric for evaluating a play experience.

1. Baby Dolls

A boy and girl with baby dolls at the Iowa Children's Museum 

Photo by Jody Landers.

These are some of the best dolls you can get. Unlike fashion dolls, they are realistic and often anatomically correct and their skin comes in a variety of colors. In their day-to-day lives, children are completely dependent on grownups and it can be extremely rewarding to flip things and become someone who takes care of someone else for a change. And children know just what to do. They rock the baby in their arms, sing to it, feed it, and change its diapers. When children imagine the feelings and needs of others, they are building empathy skills and those will serve them well regardless of whether they want to become parents themselves one day.

2. Dollhouses 

Historic dollhouse on display at Boston Children's Museum.

Dollhouses make a child’s familiar world small and easy to manipulate. The scale gives children control over things they have no control over in real life and allows them to act out scenarios between characters. Storytelling and dialogue are ways that children learn valuable communication and interpersonal skills. When two or more children play together with a dollhouse, the negotiation skills they develop are valuable too.

3. Play Kitchens

The Rainbow Market at Children's Discovery Museum of 

San Jose features a play kitchen with child-sized appliances.

In a world where counters are hard to reach, a scaled-down anything is exciting and kitchens are no exception. Real kitchens are not particularly child-friendly places to play, but they are a central part of daily life in a society that eats three times a day. When there is nothing to mash or stir, children often need to be shooed out of kitchens for their own safety. Play kitchens give children a safe opportunity to emulate grownups independently and begin to develop healthy personal relationships with food, eating, and cooking.


Resources:

• Let Toys Be Toys campaign
• Make your own play kitchen
• Rebecca Hains's gender-inclusive gift buying guide

Leaning in, full throttle

I would have had a perfect score on my motorcycle driving test if it hadn't been for the part where you're asked to perform a "sudden stop". I was so focused on the goal of performing this stop that I let back on the throttle well before my mark. I braked too soon and lost points.

"Don't put on the brakes. Accelerate." Sheryl Sandberg

I'm reading Sheryl Sandberg's book Lean In and I just finished Chapter 7, “Don't Leave Before You Leave.” It's all about women putting the brakes on their careers long before children are even a glimmer in their eyes, deciding not to take promotions and pursue demanding positions in anticipation of maybe someday becoming a parent.

From the driving test anecdote above, you've probably gathered that I think ahead- sometimes to a fault. And Sheryl Sandberg clearly states in Chapter 7, "When it comes to integrating career and family, planning too far in advance can close doors rather than open them." This concept makes sense to me. But I know I'm a planner and for now, I'm choosing to work with this tendency instead of against it:

I am pursuing my career with wild abandon because I know I would like to someday be a parent.

Now, I'm reluctant to talk about this because I’m sure it’s frustrating for parents to hear a non-parent talking about parenting. Also it's personal. I'm fighting this trepidation because I haven't heard anyone of my generation discussing this subject and this is a conversation that I want to have with my fellow museum professionals.

For me, being a parent will likely involve dialing back my career for a few years. I'll want to have reached a certain level in my career before I focus on children so I can more easily pick up where I left off. It's also important for me to co-parent in an equitable way so I want to be able to financially support my partner as well as my kids if need be. It may seem a little extreme, but I'm saving up now. I don't want anything or anyone to limit my or my family's options. That said, I acknowledge my privilege as a middle-class individual for whom having a career or a family are both choices.

Oh but you're still young, you might say, What if you change your mind? And you're right, that might happen- I change my mind about stuff all the time. But if when I'm older and have decided not to have children, I'll be reveling in my career and have a whole lot of money saved up. Maybe I'll buy a second home in Paris. Or maybe just some nice things at Whole Foods.

As someone who is excited about the prospect of parenting one day, I'm putting my tendency to plan ahead to work for me. I know I’ll be tapping on the brakes at some point but instead of focusing on that now, I’ll do my best to lay the groundwork for a future in which I can choose how I want to have a career and a family, however that ends up playing out in my life, regardless of my gender.

American Family, Revisited

Happy Pride, museum-geeks! It's been an historic week with Supreme Court decisions to overturn DOMA and dismiss Prop 8 here in California, all in the last few days of Pride Month. We have plenty of reasons to be merry and gay. But for all the progress we've made lately, it's clear we still have a long way to go. Just a couple weeks ago a lesbian family was denied a family membership at their local children's museum. Luckily, children's museums are in the unique position to directly affect change and we do it every day by empowering children in the development of their imaginations. A strong imagination is a powerful tool in learning empathy and empathy is what drives movements of social justice.

Back in April I spoke about this at Pecha Kucha Night at the Association of Children's Museums conference in Pittsburgh. I got such positive feedback that evening that I decided to turn my presentation into a video.

Here it is:

Women in museums: over-represented and underpaid

...our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts.

President Barack Obama

As soon as the 2012 AAM National Comparative Museum Salary Study came out, I was on their website downloading my free copy. It's the first publication of its kind for the museum field and I'm thrilled to have access to a resource like this. You can download it for free too if you're an AAM member.  The biggest downfall of the study, which is admitted outright in Chapter 1, is its omission of the Mid-Atlantic and the West Coast. Without their representation this study leaves out New York, Los Angeles, and Washington DC, three of the top five "Most [Economically] Important Cities" ranked by Business Insider. As disappointing as that is, I'm confident the next Salary Study AAM publishes will include all 50 states. My real disappointment (note: not surprise) came later when I started to read the data.

Two thirds of the survey respondents were women and they outnumbered men in all but 8 of the 48 positions highlighted in the survey. And yet, a quick scan down each page reveals that, "Although women usually fill the majority of jobs in each position, it is clear from these tables that they typically receive less pay than their male peers." (26) Even though 60% of CFOs in museums are women and even though 57% of executive directors are women, men are making higher salaries. Not only are women not compensated equally, it's often women who are involved in making those decisions.

There are a lot of reasons why women make less than men. Not one of them is a good excuse. Change won't happen overnight, but there are a few things we can start doing right away. I recommend reading, Women Don't Ask by Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever. Regardless of how victim-blamey the title sounds, it's a useful book for anyone who avoids negotiation or could use some advice on self-advocacy.

Here's my call to arms, fellow Emerging Museum Professionals: let's take on those director-level positions, mentor the women in our lives in self-advocacy, then ensure that the women we hire receive the same salaries as men in the same positions. While we're at it we need to hire people of color (according to AAM's "data snapshot", the museum workforce is 79.4% white) and recognize the artistic and scientific achievement of women and people of color in our museums, but that's another blog post (or rather a whole lot of other blog posts).

It's unacceptable for any field, let alone a female-dominated one, to pay women less than men and it is completely within our power as museum professionals to change this. In fact, we're the only ones who can.