Before getting into the “outreach” for “non-dominant” peoples and their cultures, I would like to note that I am impressed that the textbook acknowledges people with different types of disabilities.  It is important to remember that not everyone is able-bodied, and so planning an informal learning environment that is inclusive to people with disabilities is important, and, as the book says, “Exhibit and program designs that serve visitors who face physical, sensory, or cognition challenges tend to benefit all visitors” (pp. 128); for example, it mentioned larger font sizes for those with poor vision are helpful to visitors regardless of their vision, as it is less likely to tire their eyes (pp. 128).  While it is important to accommodate learners with disabilities regardless of benefits for the able-bodied, the effects on everybody are often raised when money is involved, and getting funding could be more likely if those effects are mentioned.

Now unto the merging of “non-dominant” cultures and science:

First, I share the negative feelings of the Vietnamese visitors of the Children’s Discovery Museum (CDM) about the use of Chinese cloth hats to replace straw Vietnamese hats.  If CDM is trying to make an exhibit using Vietnamese cultural items, it should not incorporate other Asian elements into the exhibit as being Vietnamese, or without a proper explanation of the differences in origin.  “Vietnamese” is not synonymous with “Chinese,” or “Asian,” or any of the other East Asian cultures.  If the distinctions are not made, then the dominant group (CDM staff) is assuming that Asian cultures are alike, and it is easy to exchange between them.  While there is no problem including more than one (Asian) culture, the Vietnamese visitors are right: there needs to be a respectful distinction between cultures that may become confused by groups not familiar with them; otherwise, the institution ends up diminishing Vietnamese culture to a stereotypical Asian culture.

It is respect and open-mindedness that are most important in the pursuit to approach non-dominant cultures with Western science.  There are tensions and histories between dominant (formerly imperialist) Western white culture and the non-dominant cultures.  As I mentioned above, the grouping of geographical areas is not fair to different ethnic groups; while Latino cultures may share common characteristics, they are also unique.  To think otherwise would be similar to saying a Frenchman must wear lederhosen just because he’s Western European, except neither group has historically been oppressed.  The textbook groups people on several occasions, and whether it is for simplicity’s sake or ignorance, I cannot tell; for example, “…museum staff recognized how little they knew about both the Latino and Asian communities…” (pp 129).

Despite this, I seem to like the outreach to Native American communities.  For one, the book recognizes the fact their are different tribes/groups within the overall community; “…to be most effective, learning environments must be connected and relevant to each particular Native American tribe” (pp. 32).

Also, in the activity itself, it seems that the particular tribe’s traditions are incorporated with science; the program has the two complement each other, and while being science-based, incorporates the traditional spiritual elements.  For instance,

…the group huddled in a circle, recited a prayer in their language, and held hands while making an offering of tobacco… the youth are learning that this is the respectful way to proceed before picking plants.  By practicing this tradition, students learn that they have a reciprocal relationship with Mother Earth and that they should take only what they need (pp. 133).

By using the tribe’s traditions with science, the learners’ culture is respected, and not treated inferior to Western science, which is important if Western scientists and educators would like to spread their knowledge without being imperialist.