In chapter seven of “Surrounded by Science”, the topic is equity in learning about science. For members of non-dominant cultures, places of learning, like museums and libraries, may not cater to them, and smaller demographics in general. Many people may not feel comfortable in these places, and therefore not take advantage of them. There are some very simple solutions, like adding signs in multiple languages, and creating exhibits that are hands on and interactive.

I definitely understand the need to ensure that different groups of society can enjoy a public learning center such as a museum. A museum is supposed to welcome in an audience that is excited to learn and provide the means for proper learning. But I wonder how adequate a picture this chapter is giving us.

I don’t mean to be a skeptic, but as a museum-goer in New York City, you can hear about a million and one languages being spoken in any museum in the city on any given day. Museums in NYC are tourist spots, and the lack of proper signage or specific exhibits created for one culture does not seem to inhibit people from all over the world enjoying their visits. I think this chapter was focusing on the minutiae, and not looking at the big picture. People from all over the world enjoy museums, even if the museum is not tailor made to their learning preferences. I think museums can be, and should be, places of learning regardless of the dominant culture. It is interesting to read about and to consider, but in practicality, I don’t think it is an issue.

I knew nothing about Jamaica Bay before reading this weeks assignment. I did not no where it was located, why it was important, and what the practical ramifications of the Bay were on my life. But those questions were addressed in Chapter 5, when discussing the Jewish rituals that are practiced along the waters edge. As an Orthodox Jew, reading about the special services that dictate my life in a academic piece can be a little awkward. But it also shows how things that I do in my personal life affects others around me in ways that are hard to predict. It also is a great opportunity to show and explain my way of life to those who are not familiar with the Orthodox lifestyle and customs. My favorite example is that of the willows. Joseph Mitchell thought that Orthodox Jews, in preparation for the holiday of Hoshanah Rabah, would come and collect willows from the Bay. He was correct about the necessity of the willows. They are in integral part of the holiday. But as Rabbi Tomsky explains, Orthodox Jews cant collect the willows from the Bay because that would be stealing, and an item that came from bad means cant be used in the service of G-d. I loved that this article was able to show a really meaningful part of my life, but in a way that helped understand science, and the way science interacts with communities and religions.

The article “Art as a Way of Knowing” is about a conference that took place to discuss the topic of inquiry through art. The conference was about how art can be used to teach many topics, and to create interest in many subjects. The way art does this is by forcing the student to interact with the world. Art is visual, auditory and emotional, all things that require being involved with the environment and space. Art is also very personal, and personal learning and the best and most effective type.

The second article we read, “The Art of the Brain”, asks the important question, “is there art in the science?” The article discusses the possible differences between the two fields of science and art. Hypothesis one was about the motive behind the image. Artists create images so that they can create art, scientists create images to convey scientific knowledge. But in reality, they both create images that give over a lesson to the viewer. Hypothesis two is that science is regulated and methodical, and art is not. But this also is untrue, because artists use methods to create things. They may not be as regulated as those of scientists, but there are methods nonetheless. The third hypothesis is that art promotes complexity and depth, while science just gives answer and simplifies things. But this hypothesis is the easiest to discount. Science discovers new complexities, and with each discovery comes new things to discover and research.

The fourth hypothesis is the most interesting, and made me think the most about the relationship between science and art. The thought is that science has objective rights and wrongs, while art is subjective, and opinion based. There was no real conclusion to this hypothesis, but I liked thinking about it the most. Firstly, things are definitely proven wrong in science, just not necessarily within a time span that we expect. Though there is a right or wrong in science that is easier to classify in science, with time and new discovery, those rights and wrong change. People like to think art has no rights or wrong, but there are art critics, and art schools with grades, and boards for museums that determine what can be shown and what is considered art. It may not be as easy to categorize, but there are definite standards for art. Looking at these four hypotheses, the difference between art and science, and what we can learn from them, becomes more shadowed and nuanced.

“In another study, Margaret Haefner and Ellen Wartella, both researchers in communications studies, found that older siblings could help their younger brothers and sisters understand plot elements in educational programming. Through explanations and laughter, ‘older children did influence the younger children’s general evaluations of the program characters.’ Even though these studies were not on science programming, their results suggest that active engagement during viewing could have a positive impact for science learning as well.” – page 65

I am the youngest of three siblings, with a significant age gap between all of us. There is 11 years between me and my older brother, and six years between my sister and me. I have always felt that my position in my family has had a lot to do with my interests and academic development. The fact is, that by the time I was learning to speak, I was surrounded by my older siblings and their friends, and wanted to be like them and understand them and their vocabulary. I watched their tv shows, and played their games, and read their books. At the dinner table, I wanted to know what they learned in school, and understand it. My brother read the first Harry Potter book to me in first grade. I still remember my sister’s fifth grade science project on the difference between baking soda and baking powder. By being a part of my siblings lives and conversations, I wanted and needed to keep up.

Chapter four addresses the importance of conversation on informal science. Researchers record conversations taking place to see what people are learning and interested in. I think that’s really brilliant, and can show exactly what people are curious about. The dialogue between child and adult is interesting, but I think the conversations between and older and younger child can really tell you what that younger child is thinking. I look back at my childhood and realize so much of what I did and learned and enjoyed learning about came from the things that I spoke about with my older siblings.