Learning Connections: From Practice to Praxis

The articles in this issue of the Journal of Museum Education are unified by the theme of linking research with practice – a phenomenon many in our field would term “praxis.” As we prepared the issue for publication, our editorial team found ourselves in an honest conversation: Did we really understand what “praxis” means? Many people use the word comfortably and regularly, while others confessed we found it a little fuzzy. Yet we find ourselves living it more often than we may realize.

After a deep dive into the history and etymology of the concept, it turns out that it’s no wonder the idea can feel a little slippery. From its origins in the philosophy of ancient Greece, “praxis” has been interpreted in multiple ways and has specific usages in a wide array of fields: medicine, social work, philosophy, justice, psychology, ethics, and, of course, education. From Aristotle to Hegel, Hannah Arendt to Jean-Paul Sartre, “praxis” has taken on many shades of meaning.¹

In the world of education, the term connotes a specific lineage – one tightly intertwined with the foundations of learning theory that underlie museum education. Aristotle’s view was that praxis was any activity, undertaken for its own sake, with an ethical or moral dimension. Its partners in his construction of human activity in the world were theoria (thinking, contemplation, seeking to understand) and poeisis (making or producing material things). It was through Karl Marx’s work that “praxis” took on the theme of purposeful action toward transformation: in his succinct words, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” It was also Marx who thought of praxis as a way of synthesizing theory and action, linking a framework of thought to the practice of doing. Adding this layer of interpretation highlights opportunities to turn any regular or routine act of doing – any practice – into one that is both informed by theory and potentially transformational. Social worker Graeme Stuart phrases it this way: “In praxis, theory (in simple terms, the way we understand things) is embedded in reflection and action, and action is embedded in reflection and theory. It can thus be seen as cycles of action, reflection and theory building.”²

Since the mid-nineteenth century, key educational theorists have embraced this notion of praxis as a means of connecting the theory of learning and the practice of education in an ongoing, iterative relationship. Prominent among them is Paolo Freire, who in his liberation-focused pedagogical framework described it as “the action and reflection of [people] upon their world in order to transform it.”³ Freire’s thought informed David Kolb, whose influential theory of the experiential learning cycle centered on the “transformative dialectic between reflection and action.” For Kolb, neither pure action nor pure thought is sufficient to produce learning, but together, they “give us a ‘stereo’ perspective that motivates learning,” enabling “an endlessly recurring process of exchange between the learner’s internal world and the external environment. Learning is like breathing; a lifelong process of taking in and putting out.”⁴

That constant exchange could be one way to describe the JME’s role in supporting dialogue around teaching and learning in museums. As we publish this issue in the spring of 2023, we reflect on praxis as part of the genesis of the Journal of Museum Education. Although the first issue of the JME under that title was published in 1976, the earliest available issue of its predecessor, Roundtable Reports, was created in the spring of 1973. This fifty-year mark provides an opportunity to celebrate the roots of the JME. We are looking forward to a series of reflections on our anniversary over the next year. We kick off our celebrations with this issue, “Learning Connections,” which features examples of theory and practice in museum education influencing one another, much in the way the earliest Roundtable Reports did.

With that 1973 issue, a six-page publication offered to Museum Education Roundtable Members for a whopping $5 membership fee, the board reported opportunities to gather (including a calendar of events and advertisement for a field trip) as well as reflections on current questions in the field. It is clear that one of their guiding values was collaboration across museum departments and institutions. For example, the first article, “Exhibitions: A Question of Cooperation” reflected on a workshop held at the National Portrait Gallery on April 11, 1973. Then-Director of the National Portrait Gallery Marvin Sadik welcomed the Museum Education Roundtable participants by acknowledging that an ideal exhibition is “the result of active cooperation among curators, designers and educators.” The issue also included an article on the Central Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory’s research on aesthetic education, highlighting early emphasis on the value of research. The issue concludes with an article analyzing a panel discussion about the role of education in planning exhibitions. The author reflects on an event which began with an educator-led tour of “The Far North: 2000 Years of American Eskimo and Indian Art”⁵ at the National Gallery of Art, followed by a panel that included exhibition staff from the Smithsonian, the Anacostia Neighborhood Museum (now Anacostia Community Museum), and the National Gallery of Art. Reading between the lines, it seems the educators in the room raised familiar concerns about how decisions on displaying objects made by people native to the circumpolar region had not involved educators or the community in exhibition planning (though it is worth noting that the participants were pleased with the work the Anacostia was doing). The article concludes with the reflection that “it is obvious that this topic is of major concern to most museum educators”⁶ as well as a reading list to encourage further research on the topic.

These three articles demonstrate the early commitments of the JME’s predecessor: to hold space for thinking about research and practice, and to advocate for making connections. Fifty years later, the articles featured here continue to show the value of articulating educators’ position as a nexus where praxis happens. In so many ways, an education position or department is a museum’s place to forge linkages, connecting audiences to content, communities to institutions, and functional areas to one another. Educators are a two-way channel, introducing insight from practice into research work, and putting research into action on museum grounds.

In this issue, you are invited to explore examples of praxis, spanning all four continental North American time zones as well as Europe and Asia. Much like the earliest issue of Roundtable Reports, various disciplinary perspectives have been brought to the table, including academic researchers who study visitor behavior and learning, theorists, and educator-practitioners. Each article finds its particular way of creating connections. The three articles “Interactive experiential model: Insights from shadowing students’ exhibitory footprints,” “Empowering Families Through Research-Based Museum Exhibits on Child Development: Impacts on Parents and Implications for Researcher-Museum Partnerships,” and “Understanding Facilitation Techniques for Hands-on Chemistry Activities” all propose the use of their research and evaluation on exhibition design and facilitation to shape awareness and practice. There are also robust examples of scholar-practitioners directly shaping museum interventions through the “Our Footprints” case study in “Using an Interactive Mnemonic Device to Navigate Memories in Museum Theatre” and partnerships with senior and community centers in “Long Term Positive Effects of Flexible Partnerships.” In “Museum Visitor Comfort When Sharing Personal Informatoin for Evatluation” and “Traidtional or Contemporary Art? A study of educational approaches to children in two Chiense art museums,” museums in the US and China provide applications of theory to better understand the ways they serve evolving, dynamic communities. Finally, the interview “The Moment Is Now: Caring for Marty’s Sexual Assault Evidence Kit” provides a compelling look into a moment of praxis, as museum staff bring deep consideration to their collecting and interpretive decisions about a powerful object.

From its first year to its fiftieth, the Museum Education Roundtable has been in the business of connections. What began as a way to overcome the silos of separate institutions and advance a professionalized approach to museum learning was, from its inception, also a place to foster exchange and learning among practitioners. Though we may not always have had (or fully understood), the words that best describe it, praxis is at the heart of museum educator’s work.

Notes

1 Cowley, “What is Praxis?”.

2 Stuart, “What is Praxis?”.

3 Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 79.

4 Kolb and Kolb, “Eight Important Things to Know,” 8–9.

5 National Gallery of Art, The Far North.

6 Alexander, “EXHIBITIONS,” 1, 4.