Ilanit Zada

Science and Technology in NYC

Professor Adams

11-3-13

This weeks assigned reading was chapter seven in Surrounded by Science by Fenichel and Shweingruber. This chapter emphasized the importance of making informal science settings accessible to everyone: people with disabilities as well as people from other nationalities. The chapter then goes through several things in the museum that have been integrated to accommodate a larger audience.

I believe that this is an extremely important concept. I have a relative that was extremely sick. After undergoing several procedures to cure this illness, she was told that her body did not react well to the surgeries and she would no longer see. Being the positive person that she is, she did not let this stand in the way of living a happy life. However, when her children wanted to attend a museum, she refused to accompany them saying that she would not take be able to part in anything, and therefore it would be better if she simply stayed home. However, recently, the Metropolitan Museum of Art has made workshops for individuals who are blind or partially sighted. These workshops make art accessible to such adults using senses other than seeing, including descriptions and touch. This lady is so grateful that there is a way for her to attend the museums and watch her children grow, even with her disability. She never wanted anything to stand in the way of her happiness (especially because of her recent predicament) and now with museums and other areas taking that into account, she does not have to worry about it.

I believe that this woman is not the first and definitely will not be the last to acknowledge the efforts of the museum in making everyone feel wanted and capable of attending. The way to do is to make different workshops and exhibits designed specifically for such people and it is almost certain that those benefitting from them will appreciate it greatly.

Chapter 7 of the textbook brought up a very crucial point that needs to be addressed when studying the effectiveness of informal learning settings. Chapter 7 discusses the obstacles that culture proposes in the field of informal science. Museum exhibits sometimes tend to isolate those of different cultures and those who are first generation immigrants as they are not able to relate to exhibit nor can understand the text that is associated with the exhibit. Therefore a case study was conducted in which an exhibit was created that used symbols of Vietnamese culture and included text translated into Vietnamese in order to attract the people of that culture. Results showed that the Vietnamese visitors no longer felt isolated from the exhibit and felt more welcomed which increased their interest in learning.

In addition to making the exhibits more accessible to people from various cultural background, museum exhibits are also trying to make it more accessible to people with disabilities such as amputees and those that are vision impaired. However this case study had less of a success. Although, the amputees found it easier to move around the exhibit they thought that it needed more places to sit. Whereas the vision impaired visitors had trouble listening to the audio and was frustrated by the inability to touch the objects.

I agree that museum exhibits do need to be improved in order to connect with a variety of people. I have visited few exhibits in which I was not able to understand the concept behind the exhibit since the idea was foreign to me and I could not relate to anything in the exhibit. Furthermore, exhibits which require less interaction and activity, in which the learning is mostly visual, tend to be more daunting and less interesting to those who have no connection to information being displayed.

We have been discussing the value of informal spaces for science learning and how it allows for science to become accessible. But, in reality, there isn’t always equal opportunity for learning because not all informal institutions make a significant effort to incorporate the participation of diverse communities. Many factors – including socioeconomic, ethnic, and historical factors – influence the way people learn and interact with these learning spaces.

This is an important issue not just for science learning, but for learning in general as well. In high school, we learned about the Summer Reading Gap and how people who are economically disadvantaged are not presented with equal opportunities during the summertime. And while some of them outperform the more wealthy groups during the school year, during the summertime they do not have the same learning opportunities and fall behind. This connects with the informal learning environment, as many of these same groups do not feel included in these learning spaces. The main problem with the way people are choosing to remedy the situation is that they believe that simply providing access to non-dominant groups of learners will foster an equal learning experience. But this is not the case. Learning experiences are designed using the socioeconomic and cultural lens of dominant groups in order to appeal to these dominant groups. The example that is given is that the exhibition labels are sometimes written only in English, which puts foreign speakers at a disadvantage.  Not only do they feel disadvantaged while at the museums, many of them also feel unwelcome and choose not to come at all.

Especially when there is a growing community, it is important to cater to their needs and ways of interacting with learning. Kudos goes to the Children’s Discovery Museum who launched an initiative to try to better understand San Jose’s Vietnamese community in order to be able to better integrate them into the learning experience. By studying the communities, they don’t just make it easier for these groups to enter the museum, but find ways to appeal to the groups and enhance their learning experiences while there. Building relationships with the Vietnamese community not only helps with design and planning but also shows that the museum cares about their needs. This helps to create a welcoming atmosphere and shows that their presence at these institutions is valued.

The chapter emphasized the importance of formulating a deeper understanding of the needs of various non-dominant groups. The two solutions that are proposed are to focus on making the designing process of informal environments be a collaborative effort with communities, and to make sure that the design reflects diversity by integrating the interests of these communities.

When I traveled to Spain this summer I visited the Naval Museum in Madrid and experienced firsthand how detrimental it is to not understand the labels in the exhibition. The museum labels are in Spanish as they do not expect many tourists to visit, and while the museum was beautiful, unique, and interesting, it was very difficult to understand the importance of the artifacts in the exhibitions. Even though I have been learning Spanish, it was extremely difficult to be able to translate what was written since I did not learn maritime Spanish vocabulary in school. This highlights the importance of breaking through the language barrier in these informal institutions and I really do believe that more should be done to overcome this, and other, obstacles to learning.

It was very interesting to see that this chapter was addressing the fact that people from low-income areas, often people of color, have limited access to science education. Thus, it is important to find ways to include them in the science discussion through informal settings. I was a bit surprised by the book’s preference for using the terminology of “dominant” and “nondominant groups” instead of saying “white” and “non-white” (except for in a couple of places). It seems a bit counterproductive to a discussion about race if you’re not going to name the races in question, but that’s neither here nor there. The Native Waters project seems like a very good way to introduce Native peoples to an informal science setting, by relating it directly to aspects of their culture. I was really happy to read the quote on page 120: “However, simply exposing individuals to the same learning environments may not result in equity, because the environments themselves are designed using the lens of the dominant culture.” This is so true! It’s impossible to simply transplant teaching practices for one group of people to another group of people, because cultural, ethnic, class, gender, and racial lines are drawn so deeply and are so divisive that people’s ways of thinking and learning are divided by these same lines as well. To integrate education by bringing educational practices from one place to another in the same exact form is an exercise in futility. I also liked how the text acknowledged that the term “outreach” can contribute to the feeling of excludedness felt by poor people/of color when it comes to education. The practice of feeling othered by institutions has been practiced historically throughout the history of the nation. Neither science nor education are exceptions.

The story of the Vietnamese outreach program at the museum was interesting to read about because it showed that while cultural difference is a difficult hurdle to jump in and of itself, an even more difficult one is economy, because, as an institution that needs money to exist, there’s a lot less you can do to make the event more affordable, especially since you have no control over another person’s finances. Nonetheless, the cultural additions, like bamboo, the round boat, and the rice sieve were a nice touch. In contrast, I wouldn’t say that the Making Models program for disabled people was necessarily a form of cultural expansion. That’s because I don’t believe it’s appropriate to call being disabled a culture per se. It’s definitely an identifier that results in the exclusion and underrepresentation of certain people, but it’s not what one would commonly call a culture. That being said, it’s good that a program exists with intentions to include disabled people. The fact that they chose staff who themselves were disabled is perfect for trying to find common ground between the educators and the educatees. This way there’s no sense of “talking down” or alienation between the two parties. 

Jennifer Mikhli

Professor Adams

10/31/13

Chapter seven in Surrounded by Science brought an important point to the foreground, as it linked up the issue of cultural diversity with informal learning environments. It illustrated the importance of recognizing various cultures in the facilitation of learning amongst those who do not belong to dominant groups. This is a vital notion to consider as we traverse the field of informal science learning. Until now, we have examined the importance of informal science learning and its ability to expose the adolescence to new scientific concepts. However, while this may be so, and while informal science learning opportunities have the potential to equalize scientific education amongst various economic groups in our society, there is a fundamental ingredient that is lacking. A quote that sums up this lacking component goes as follows: “simply exposing individuals to the same learning environments may not result in equity, because the environments themselves are designed using the lens of the dominant culture” (120).  While all ethnic groups have access to institutions of informal science learning, there will be a disconnect in this experience due to the lack of these exhibits catering to the needs of these various cultures. For instance, such factors include the lack of diverse staff and content that is not available multi-linguistically. Thus, while there may be a myriad of exciting new facts to be learned on behalf of everyone, only select groups are able to consume the information. Translating exhibit labels and program content to various languages has the ultimate capability of fostering conversation amongst several generations, thus enhancing learning. This ties back to our previous discussion pertaining to the importance of social interaction and conversation in informal learning environments. If the information is presented in one’s native language, then perhaps the parents accompanying this adolescent can ease the learning experience for the child. This would also encourage parents from non-dominant groups who have not in the past, to now venture out into these institutions of learning.

This particular link between culture and informal learning institutions got me thinking about my friends’ interactions with museums throughout their youth. While my parents had chauffeured me around form one museum to the next throughout my adolescence, my friends had not experienced the same. I believe this can be traced to the fact that my friends’ parents were thwarted from accessing these institutions because of the language barriers that were at play. While their children were proficient in the English language, they were not and thus going to such institutions must have been thought of as an intimidating and daunting experience. Thus, these rich learning experiences were denied to my friends, solely because of a lack of cultural tailoring on behalf of these places of learning.

I was pleased to note the progress currently began made to adjust this problem and bring equity back to these valuable resources.  While these adjustments are extensive and will be fiscally demanding, the payoff will be tremendous. There is a resounding hypothesis that informal science learning can finally be the equalizer in science learning amongst disparate economic circles; however, this cannot be realized if the aforementioned component continues to go missing. Essentially, much attention must be made towards making these informal learning environments culturally friendly and without cultural barriers.

Chapter Three of the NPS report covers the changing demography of the Jamaica Bay Watershed. In essence, there has been an enormous and unprecedented flux of immigration to the Jamaica Bay area that has shifted the ethnic proportions of each neighborhood quite significantly. Surprisingly, the population around the Jamaica Bay area has increased at almost twice the rate of increase in the rest of New York City. Taking a closer look at the individual neighborhoods comprising the Watershed, it was found that in fact the Brownsville and Sheepshead Bay areas saw a decline in population over the entire time span being studied – from 1970 to 2008. The 30% decline in population in Brownsville and 5% decline in the population of Sheepshead Bay was met with increases in the populations of all the other areas, with the most rapidly growing community being Kew Gardens, with a 33% increase over 38 years.

This population growth is attributed to the arrival of immigrants and migrants from within NYC. A broad look at the ethnic makeup of the Jamaica Bay Watershed reveals a sharp decrease in the proportion of white, non-hispanics and a moderate increase in the black, latino, and asian groups. A closer look at the individual neighborhoods reveals some that are predominantly white (Borough Park, Sheepshead Bay/Gravesend) and some that are predominantly black (Brownsville, East New York, Canarsie, East Flatbush, S. Crown Heights, Rosedale, Jamaica), and some that are mixed (Flatbush, Kew Gardens, Howard Beach/S. Ozone Park, Rockaway). Across the board, the percent of population that is native born dropped between 1970 and 2008. This is correlated with intention of immigrants to become American citizens and assimilation into American culture.

Data from the US Census reveals a 3-fold increase in the educational attainment of residents in the Jamaica Bay Watershed. On the other hand, the proportion of people living below the poverty line has doubled and was almost 20% in 2008.

The chapter concludes by noting the communities that have made the most use of Gateway resources thus far: people of Guyanese-Hindu background, the Indian sub-continent, and people of African and Caribbean origins.

As a resident of Sheepshead Bay, I haven’t identified myself as belonging to the Jamaica Bay Watershed. Nobody that I know has identified with this rather large group of communities which are very different going from one neighborhood to the next. It’s interesting to see that some people do have an intimate relationship with the surrounding geography and ecology, and that they make use of these resources for personal or religious reasons. Perhaps I too will grow to appreciate what the Jamaica Bay and the Wildlife Refuge have to contribute to the diversity of New York City.

The chapters from Jamaica Bay Ethnographic Overview and Assessment by William Kornblum and Kristen Van Hooreweghe talked about the Jamaica Bay area and its social and religious importance.

The interesting part of the reading was the large role the Bay had in the religion of many of its residents. The Hindu residents use the river for cleansing themselves and for reaching a level of spiritual purity. This is essentially similar to the Ganges River that is located in India. In the Ganges river, thousands of Hindu indians bathe in the river and clean themselves as part of a ritual. I assume from the reading that  a similar process occurs in the Jamaica Bay. I liked that the Bay played the role of as a whole new world to the Hindu’s. It was as if they were replicating their homeland and doing the same ritual thousands of miles away.

I have asked many of my Hindu friends if they have actually gone to the Jamaica Bay area. What I learned was that many of them go there because they aren’t able to go to the Ganges river annually. In a way, the Bay serves as a substitute. I was also surprised to find out that some of my friends who were practicing Mallu Christians also went to the river. When asked as to why they went, they said that the Bay played a large role not just in the Hindu religion, but a large role in South Asian culture. The Bay was not exclusive to Hindu’s, but was a retreat for everyone as a whole. They also stated that the Ganges river also welcomed thousands of tourists and non-Hindu’s.

Well, I live in the Jamaica Bay watershed area (Howard Beach), and I visit the area frequently, so a lot of the things that were in the reading were things that I already knew to some extent. I’ve seen the Diwali and Puja rituals take place, and I’ve actually collected the things that have washed up ashore (although, in retrospect, that’s probably not the most respectful thing I could have done). I’ve been to the Gateway Wildlife Preserve (some of the main path might still be destroyed as a result of Sandy), and I go kayaking at Sebago Kayak Club frequently, which launches out of Paedergat Basin. However, I didn’t know about the Santeria religion. I don’t really see many Afro-West Indians in the areas where I live except, I suppose, for myself. However, the actual Jamaica Bay Watershed extends farther than I originally thought. My original conception was that it included Howard Beach, Canarsie, Far Rockaway, and Broad Channel, but it’s more than that. It extends to Brooklyn neighborhoods that are more inland, like East New York, Brownsville, and Spring Creek. Obviously, West Indians live in all of these neighborhoods, so if I can broaden my perspective as to what counts as the Jamaica Bay Watershed, it’s not a stretch to acknowledge that I’m not alone in my West Indian-ness.

As mentioned earlier, Jamaica Bay’s used in a number of religious practices. Hindu and Voodoo rituals are a much-discussed example. This is evidentiary of the great Indo-Caribbean presence in the Richmond Hill and Jamaica areas, as well as the Afro-Caribbean presence in southeast Brooklyn. If one wants to look at culture as something broader than religious practice, maybe as an umbrella term for lifestyle, then maybe one could say that wildlife preservation, fishing, kayaking, boating, or other activities are part of culture, and the Bay is frequently used as a resource for these activities. The religious practices may be seen as detrimental to the environment, as their offerings tend to wash up ashore and are left their dirtying the beach (the beach under North Channel Bridge is especially dirty), but the other activities are intentionally designed such that they don’t compromise the natural environment or pollute, as far as I know. The speedboating scene may not be as good with that, but I don’t know for sure.

Well, I’m assuming indigenous knowledge is things that people already know about science or about their environment or something like that, based on where they were raised or what they know culturally. If that’s the case, then people could possibly know about Jamaica Bay if they’re indigenous to it, although this isn’t always the case. As we saw in the video, the woman claimed that she wished the national parks were more publicized so that people both in the area and out of it could know more about it and explore what it has to offer. This was a statement I agreed with and personally related to, because my father and I didn’t know much of anything about Jamaica Bay until his exercise needs gave us cause to start exploring it.  But people’s experiences and histories aren’t the same. For people who have a strong connection to their native culture or religion, they’ll know the rituals they perform and where it’s appropriate to do so. For example, the reading shows us that Pujas, which would normally be performed in rivers such as the Ganges, can be performed in Jamaica Bay to the same effect. This shows not only an innate knowledge of self, but an ability to adapt to one’s geographical situation.

While I come from two distinct cultures (Roman Catholic Sicilian and Christian Jamaican), I was not raised with either culture. My mother didn’t raise me with Italian language, and while she sometimes made traditional Italian dishes, we were very separated from our Italian family for personal reasons, and so my connection to that part of my culture was severed since before I was even born. On my Jamaican side, I live in a predominantly white neighborhood, and my father identifies as atheist and has limited-at-best communication with his (actually rather large) family. He came to America at a very young age, and the white supremacist imposition of “Americanization” on immigrant groups definitely affected his upbringing, so it affected mine as well. So on a cultural level, in that respect, we don’t connect to the Bay or to the environment. But, as a family and as citizens, we connect in numerous ways. My father and I go out kayaking or go to Floyd Bennett Field frequently. My family often goes to the Gateway Wildlife Preserve. We drive along the Belt Parkway to get to Gateway Mall. I often go exploring the beach beneath North Channel Bridge with my girlfriend. So I guess in that respect, I connect to the environment and with the Bay, but it doesn’t seem like a very deep connection, and it doesn’t feel very cultural.