I have always found it interesting how all pre-Western cultures developed explanations for natural phenomenon and thus practice different forms of rituals to accommodate their beliefs. The thing in common between science and these cultures are their abilities to observe. Both groups seem to observe natural events and give explanations for what they see. However, as mentioned in Chapter 7, this predisposition of having traditional belief conflicts with these traditional groups’ abilities to adapt and understand a scientific explanation behind a natural event. This, I believe, is the reason the author wants to blend scientific exhibits with some cultural background. It will connect those with predisposed beliefs with the modern explanations.

I think the solution presented to include diverse groups – by adding multiple languages in labels, audio recordings – is rather obvious and extremely valuable. The Vietnamese Audience Development program sheds much light on how an exhibit should be catered to diverse ethnic groups. Many aspects were seen to be appreciated while some negative aspects of the museum can be learned. A mistake most noted was the fact that the museum was difficult to access in many ways including financial and locational obstacles. But as the chapter concludes, simply translating words into a different language does not necessarily equate to proper understanding by those reading the labels. The concepts taught have to be approached differently in a way that the readers can relate to. Additional tour guides from the specific nationality being catered to can assist this. These tour guides would narrow the gap between a difficult translation and understanding new scientific concepts presented in a museum.

Honestly, even with all of the graphs and charts proposed, I could not find a way to internalize the numbers of different populations that inhabit the area. It seems meaningless to me possibly because of the extreme amount of numbers presented. The only statistic that seemed important and relevant is the fact that there are currently more immigrants in the area, which implies that the area is culturally diverse. After reading about the anecdotal accounts of Jews visiting the Canarsie Pier to perform a specific religious ceremony called Tashlikh, I was able to relate since our elementary school used to take us to the bay by Toys R Us to do the same. I would explain what that ceremony is, but Jennifer already elaborated. I was not aware of the once vibrant Jewish community that inhabited the area. It was interesting to note how many different religions had ceremonies involving bodies of water and therefore practice these customs at the Jamaica Bay. Since water is vital for life, it makes sense that many religions regard it at the highest esteem. However, some ceremonies may bring pollution into the bay, such as the “puja” in which the Hindu community send offerings into the bay expecting them to sail out to sea but they come right back to the bay’s shores. In the other examples given, most do not harm the bay. The group that had been cutting down willow branches that originally thought of the area as public property regarding its resources had stopped since of the introduction of the idea that they might be stealing. Regarding the ceremony of Tashlikh, some include throwing bread into a body of water, while others simply recite a few passages near it. Although it might look ugly, the bread would either be eaten by birds and fish or degrade in the salty waters. If in fact, it is harmful to the animals eating the bread, maybe since it is only a symbolic ritual (either throwing “sins” away- being done on the holiday of repentance, or to fulfill a biblical verse that mentions a king that was anointed near a body of water; in this case, God being the king – one of the themes of the holiday) and is not a very old tradition, it can be altered to leave out the bread-throwing part (nothing to do with the second interpretation of the custom). Other problems may be posed against those that light bonfires since it attracts crowds that leave messes that can stay for a longer time if not cleaned up properly.

In order to answer the question of indigenous knowledge, its definition must be explored. However, based on Wikipedia’s definition, I will posit that through indigenous knowledge, people feel they have a right to utilize natural resources as long as these natural resources do not belong to any particular being. If there is a fence around it or it seems like it was planted with intent of personal use (i.e. a large orchard organized in rows), it would be off limits, while if not, the resource can be taken. However, most religions would give importance to nature and not destroying it. Looking at both angles, indigenous knowledge would suggest that using a resource in a way that can guarantee the replenishment of that resource would be permissible.

Science and art have an interesting relationship. The first thing that comes to mind is that science can be depicted in an artistic way, which can spark interest and attract attention. Cells are mostly colorless when looked under microscopes (except for naturally green chloroplasts). However, most slides are dyed before they are viewed. This enhances the viewers ability to distinguish different parts of the cell but at the same time, it makes it attractive to the eye to the point that one might want to take a picture of it and display it by a museum exhibit. Although the fluorescent colors one might see on an electron microscope image are artificial, they still represent science. Ashley Taylor in her article “The Art of The Brain: “Brainbow” and the Difficulty of Distinguishing Science and Art” brings up the question of whether or not an eye-pleasing representation of scientific data can be called art.

Another connection that is apparent between science and art can be seen when analyzing characters in history such as Leonardo de Vinci. Artists such as de Vinci used their knowledge in science to create works of art. It is no coincidence that the development of sculptural depictions of the body advanced as knowledge of medicine and the human body increased. Another common aspect of art and science is that there are steps in analyzing each. When one sees an artwork or a certain natural phenomenon, he or she has an option to inquire further. A distinction must be made between what is seen and what its implications are. One can ask why the artist used that specific technique or why did that specific phenomenon occur. However, arriving at a solution is entirely different between the two fields. Despite both having the ability to sustain multiple interpretations, art is subjective since there isn’t necessarily a correct answer even if the artist states his or her intentions. Other viewers are free to interpret the art as they feel. Science on the other hand even though multiple answers are presented, the correct answer is defined. It can be a combination of the answers given so in a way both answers can be partially right but at the end of the day there is a correct answer. Taylor concludes at the end of her paper that art and science are similar in multiple aspects.

For me, art has a significant role in science since seeing visually pleasing images enhances my interest in different types of science and in some cases might also help me understand the contents of images in a scientific diagram.

David Gruenewald in his article, “The Best Both Worlds,” is determined to combine the concepts of critical pedagogy and place-based education into what he calls “a critical pedagogy of place.” After reading and re-reading the first paragraph, I still did not grasp a clear understanding of what critical pedagogy actually is. I then only associated the term with the “emphasis of social and urban contexts“ and with challenging premade assumptions. However, giving the context of this term’s development (Page 4) helped improve my understanding of the word. The author writes with the assumption of the reader’s knowledge of these concepts. That said, the other assigned article, “Learning in Your Own Backyard,” seems to be giving an example of “critical pedagogy of place.” The Lower East Side Tenement Museum combined place-based learning with an urban setting. Those visiting the museum share the experience of walking into old tenements and are given the opportunity to understand what the immigrants of the Lower East Side went through when they first arrived in New York. It gives perspective on how certain communities developed and in turn, might affect how communities can be developed further.

I agree with Gruenewald’s argument that in order to understand a situation, its spatial context must be studied along with the situation itself. Reading the world has to be placed alongside reading the word and vice versa. It is interesting to see how connections can be made between cultures and ecosystems and how the term “ecology” can be related to an urban environment, referring to overpopulation and pollution.