By Robert Mac West 

I’m writing this as the publisher and now a co-editor of the ILR journal being operated by a different organization. Given my academic and research background as a paleontologist, I am now looking at 30 years of ILR through the eyes of a participant in several environmental changes with the major adaptation now being completed. This overview is based on my recent review of all issues of the ILR and reflections upon my and ILE’s long-term position in the museum world. 

The transfer of The Informal Learning Review from Informal Learning Experiences, my Denver-based consultancy, to the Columbus, Ohio-based ILR Collaborative ensures its continued (and expanded) publication as my career is nearing its end. After 30 years and 180 issues the ILR has quite a history and I see it as a way in which I have rather uniquely contributed to the informal education field. When the ILR started up, I was looking at it as a way that I could take advantage of my experience as a college professor, museum curator, and museum director who had just started up his consulting business. I was released from the focus on the details of my own institution and could look at aspects of the science museum world with a different and broader perspective. 

An immediate impact of the transfer has been to stimulate me to look back through those 30 years and, as a “lapsed paleontologist”, observe and assess the evolution of the ILR. And it certainly was not a smooth evolution but, fortunately, there was no dinosaur extinction event (not even Covid) to deal with. This essay, disjointed as it is, incorporates what I have seen, documented, and thought about over the last few months, post-transfer.

The ILE started out as a joint effort with Bob Russell. Quite a while ago he had moved in some other directions and sole production was by me (ILE) with considerable assistance from the series of ILE staff associates. Russell has continued to produce useful articles, many of which reflect his varied interests and associations, especially with the National Science Foundation. There is much on NSF and other government funding procedures and very interesting observations about the connection of the science museum world with the Hispanic community. 

The publication initially was The Informal Science Review. That title lasted five years. As of issue #33 (November-December 1998) it became The Informal Learning Review. This was very much reflective of Bob’s and my view of the informal learning world. There is a noticeable presence of various sciences and institutions, but the emphasis is a more intentional view of the broad museum world and the numerous ways in which it is understood, used, and presented. 

We started out and have maintained a series of operating policies and practices that have helped the ILR maintain a certain level of independence or uniqueness: 

1. The ILR does not represent any organization or business. Yes, it was published by ILE but has not been a marketing agent for that small consulting business. 

2. The approach has been to engage numerous and diverse authors, especially after the early 2000s when we broke away from reprinting downloaded materials and encouraged individuals and groups to present useful, interesting, and even differing ideas and projects. This has included inviting many international authors to be present in our presentations (see Table 1). 

3. We took advantage of my travels, much of which was a function of my consulting business. Reviews and commentaries of various institutions and programs have not been used to promote clients or resources, but rather to point out special features, topics, locations, etc. I also have taken numerous trips with the primary objection being to experience new museums and often revisit well-known and established institutions. 

4. The ILR has not been a nonprofit. I have always looked at it as a contribution to the museum world that I could afford to do given the nature of my independent consultant situation. From the beginning it has been a subscription publication of ILE with those revenues paying for much of the costs. There have been no requests for donations and no publication sponsors. However, we did acknowledge the sponsors of the Traveling Exhibitions Forum that was presented at ASTC and AAM conferences. 

5. The authors have not been paid. The only payment has been to the graphic designer and ILE staff on a specific issue basis. Other costs, printing, and postage that were not absorbed by subscription payments, were covered by ILE. 

6. There is no peer review process. Most articles are directly invited based on an obvious topic. When an uninvited article is submitted, my selection process is summed up as: “If I like it, I publish it; if I don’t, I don’t.” 

7. Finally, we have sought out a diverse array of authors. They vary by institution, organization, title, and position, and represent diverse resources, both in the United States and internationally. For the past thirty years we have been delighted to share their presentations with the larger world. 

Table 1: Locations of ILR authors with the numbers from each place indicated. A total of 109 international authors (outside the U.S.) have had the benefit of one or more articles in The Informal Learning Review. 

One aspect of the evolution of the ILR, in addition to the continual growth in the diversity of authors and contents, is its physical appearance. It has gone through five changes since #1 appeared in 1993. Figure 1a - 1f includes examples of all six designs. Issues 29 - 122 included the front-page summary content list. In issue 33 the title of the publication changed from Informal Science Review to Informal Learning Review. Issue 123 removed that front page article listing, added a large front-page picture and was printed on bluish-gray paper. Then Issue 136 added color printing on whitish paper. Two Special issues with numerous content-specific commentaries replaced #170. And as of #171 the Informal Learning Review has been published digitally only. In addition to increasing access to the publication, this finally eliminated the need for each issue to have pages in units of four. 

There was a failed effort to engage the broad population into the production of the ILR. At the very beginning, we appointed an advisory board comprised of Sue Brogdon, Education Department, Chicago Botanic Garden; Valerie Chase, Staff Biologist, National Aquarium at Baltimore; Hilda Crespo, Director of Education, The ASPIRA Association; Andrew Fraknoi, Astronomical Society of the Pacific; Alan Friedman, Director, New York Hall of Science; Nancy Hotchkiss, Director of Education, American Wilderness Society; Conrad Katzenmeyer, Division of Research, Evaluation and Dissemination, National Science Foundation; Bruce Lewenstein, Associate Professor, Cornell University; Steve Rabin, President, Educational Film Center,; and Treopia Washington, White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Bob and I planned for this group to contribute (in undefined ways) to the quality of the publication. This board, from which we never sought advice, was terminated in 2004 (#66). This was an obvious mistake on our part which fortunately doesn’t seem to have any recognizable negative impact. 

An aspect of the magazine's early evolution was the substantial use of the downloaded materials, certainly an indication that 25-30 years ago the internet was indeed a primary information source. Early on, most author-attributed materials were written by Bob Russell and me. By the late 1990s we had moved to materials by diverse authors within the broad field and the downloaded online materials were significantly reduced. Bob and I continued to be authors with an increasing number of knowledgeable and well-situated people generating the primary and diverse articles. Now we are delighted with the diversity and quality of the authors and topics in the ILR.

AUTHORS AND TOPICS 

The sourcing of ILR authors has been a strong point for many years. Participation in conferences has always been a way to identify interesting projects, ideas and, of course, people. I am a regular participant in AAM and ASTC meetings in the U.S. as well as ECSITE in Europe and ASPAC in the Asia-Pacific. Others that are less frequent include (but are not limited to) VSA, MPMA, ICOM, TEA, IAAPA, AAAS and several others where I have been an invited speaker (ISSM South Korea International Association of Science Museums and Southern African Association of Science Technology Centers SAASTEC are examples). 

And what we have often found is that the opportunity to present their materials via the ILR has encouraged people to expand upon the content of the formal presentations and initial concepts. And they also have been able to bring in additional authors in order to explore a broader or more specifically focused concept.

An approach to the broad topics of “what’s new?” includes my reviews of new museums. I pay attention to announcements in various sources of museums that are now or recently open and amenable for me to visit as a “public visitor” and then discuss the place with several staff before writing a review or assessment. This has allowed the ILR to have articles about a remarkable array of places, some of which were a sole visit by me, and others were encountered in communities where I was working on an aspect of a project. The following is a list of some of those places, not organized in any particular way but all done 10-20 years ago. Others were critiqued before these, and I continue to do this for the benefit of the broad field. A current example is West, 2022. Museum Review: MOSAC Museum of Science and Curiosity, ILR 173, pp 19-23. 

·         Clinton and Lincoln Presidential Libraries and Museums, Little Rock, AR and Springfield, IL 

·         Kirtland Science Museum, Washington, DC 

·         California Academy of Sciences, temporary facility, San Francisco, CA 

·         Georgia Aquarium, Atlanta, GA 

·         Science Center of Iowa, Des Moines, IA 

·         Creation Museum, Boone County, KY 

·         International Spy Museum, Washington, DC 

·         Harley Davidson Museum, Milwaukee, WI 

·         Acropolis Museum, Athens, Greece 

·         Please Touch Museum, Philadelphia, PA 

·         Guangdong Science Center, Guangdong, China 

·         Copernicus Science Center, Warsaw, Poland 

·         North American Museum of Ancient Life, Thanksgiving Point, UT 

·         Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO 

It is indeed interesting to look at the numerous topics and issues that have been dealt with by ILR authors over the years. Some can be traced through time while others appear once or twice and then either are absorbed into the bigger world or remain as something of importance to that author or organization. Here is a loose summary of ideas and authors and articles that appeared in the ILR over the past thirty years. It definitely is not comprehensive but rather is an array of materials I recently encountered as I made my way through the many issues. Most can be accessed online in the appropriate issue number.

The topics and articles mentioned here represent the viewpoint of one person who happens to have been engaged in publishing all of them. However, it is very likely that ILR readers will have different views, both about the selected topics and then the particular articles that are listed. Readers are encouraged to share their thoughts and specific selections which may be very different from mine.

CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS 

We have encountered a variety of controversial topics, often focused on exhibits and programs intended for the public. They included social issues as well as current scientific work. I’m placing one example here, as it draws so well from multiple sources. 

ILR 127, pp. 8-19 featured articles based on a discussion at the 2014 ECSITE conference titled Science Museums and Sensitive/Controversial Topics and Situations led by Mac West. 

Dominique Botbol, Controversial, Taboo or Sensitive Subjects at La Cite des Sciences, Paris, Cite ds Sciences, Paris, France 

Asher Hoeg, Science Centers as Arenas for Discussions of Controversial Subjects, Experimentarium, Copenhagen, Denmark 

Mikko Myllykoski, Controversial and Taboo Topics at Heureka: Klimax, BodyWorlds and Heureka Goes Crazy, Heureka, Helsinki, Finland 

HUMAN BODY EXHIBITS 

Human body exhibits went worldwide several decades ago and fostered a great deal of attention. 

West, Robert, 2001. The Human Body on Display. ILR 54, pp.1, 4-7.

Burtnyk, Kimberly M., Tara Rose, Magda Stawikowska,

Sheena Patel, Nasley Proa, Zaret Proa, Stephanie Cheng, Connie Wu, Juliana The. 2005. Body Worlds’ Family Visitors: A Demographic Study of the North American Debut of Body Worlds. ILR 73, pp. 8-12

West, Robert, 2008. Bodies Exhibitions – Successes and Controversies. ILR 88, pp. 1-7

Newman, Marc, 2016. The Human Body Experience: When the Scientists Met the Vampire. ILR 142, pp. 23-26.

EVOLUTION AND CREATION 

This is a topic that has broad cultural implications, especially in conservative parts of the United States. Given my background I have a deep engagement with this so am very sensitive to it. 

West, Robert, 1999. What’s Going On with Evolution? ILR 38, pp. 1, 4-8. 

West, Robert. 2004. The Lay of the Land – The Current Context for Communicating Evolution in Natural History Museums. ILR 69, pp. 1, 6-9. 

Hoffstadt, Rita Mukherjee, 2005. The Evolution Debate: Potential Roles for Science Centers, Childrens Museums and Natural History Museums. ILR 74, pp. 23-26. 

Falxa-Raymond, Nancy, 2006. Why is There No Evolution in Nature Films? ILR 78, pp.11-13  

Schroer, Katherine E. and Matthew R. Borths. 2010. Creating Science: How the Creation Museum can Build a Better Natural History Museum. ILR 100, pp. 14-21 

IMPACT OF ECONOMIC RECESSIONS, COVID, ETC 

This is a discussion which continues today, given the fluctuations in so many elements of the economic and political world. 

Ramsay, Kirk, 2011. Impacts of the Economic Recession on Science Centers, ILR 106, pp. 1, 6-9 (Former Director of Glasgow Science Centre, Scotland) 

Johnson, Rolf, 2020. Navigating Change as the 21st Century Unfolds. ILR 160, pp. 22-27 

Ritchie, Tim, 2020. What Now? ILR 163, pp. 3-4 

Reed, Sarah, 2021. A New Role for Science Centers and Museums During the Pandemic. ILR 165, pp. 24-27.

PARTNERSHIPS 

It is increasingly necessary for museums to be integrated into their broader community and formal relationships are a popular strategy. 

Kiehl, Kimberlee, 2010. Building Partnerships: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. ILR 100, pp. 1-5 

Reynolds, Andrea, 2015. Healing through Hands-on Science: Exploring Museum and Hospital Collaborations. ILR 131, pp. 3-7. 

DiBartolomeo, Donna, Paul Freiling, Karen Hager and Beth Gibson. 2016. Exhibits and Programs Informed by Research: Building Capacity Through Museum-University Partnerships. ILR 141, pp. 16-21 

Chesebrough, David E. 2016. COSI’s Center of Science Model Takes on Huge Proportions. ILR 140, pp. 3-6 

LaConte, Keliann and Paul Dusenbery, 2016. STEM Learning in Public Libraries: New Perspectives on Collaboration. ILR 140, pp. 21-27 

Walhimer, Mark, 2022. The Future of Museums: Cooperation. ILR 174, pp. 18-25

INDIGENOUS CULTURES AND COLLECTION SOURCES/ RETURNS 

Appropriate acknowledgement of and respect for Native Americans is a critical, current need. And given the nature of the collections is housed in many museums, their acknowledgement, repatriation, and interpretation is a current issue.

Stein, Jill and Shelly Valdez, 2012. Visitors' Perspective on Integrating Indigenous Knowledge in Science Museums. ILR 114, pp. 1-5

Kerton, Emily, 2018. Bringing Science North. ILR 149, pp. 3-7 

Amati, Anne. 2018. A Roadmap to Repatriation: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAG- PRA). ILR 152, pp. 3-9. 

Hawkins, Mary Ellen, 2022. Truth-telling at the National Museum of the American Indian: 2004 to Now. ILR 171, pp. 15-22 

EVOLUTION OF SCIENCE MUSEUMS 

It is very hard for any of us to look both directions – how did the science museums get to where they are today and what sort of a future can we project or predict? 

Acevedo, Salvador and Monique Madara, 2017. The Latino Experience in Museums: An Exploratory Audience Re- search Study. ILR 143, pp. 13-17 

West, Robert M., 2017. A Whale of a Change in London. ILR 146, pp. 14-16 

Vergeront, Jeanne W., 2017. Looking at Some Museum Trends. ILR 143, pp. 18-22, 

Matterson, Clare, 2018. Redefining the Natural History Museum for the 21st Century. ILR 153, pp. 14-16. UK 

Goncalves, Juan, 2018. A Museum Proposal for the 21st Century Society: The Liquid Museum. ILR 153, pp. 23-27 Portugal 

Trautman, Charlie, Diego Bevilaqua, Ganigar Chen, Kenneth Monjero, and Carol Valenta, 2018. Reaching New Audiences at Science Centers and Museums. ILR 149, pp. 13-19 US, Brazil, Thailand and Kenya 

West, Robert M. 2019. Continuing Evolution of University Natural History Museums. ILR 158, pp. 19-23. 

LaMere, Bradley K. and Elaine Thatcher, 2023. Museum Accessibility for the Blind and Low-Vision. ILR 177, pp. 4-7 

THE INDUSTRY SPEAKS 

In 2020 we produced two "Special Issues". These were comprised of short essays by an array of museum professionals looking at their world in the midst of closure of the Covid-19 crisis. The intention of the first was that this "will help us come together as a field, keep learning from one another, and build collaborations, especially across field specializations and professional networks." The second, written in May 2020, "reflects the many pressures and challenges felt by the museum world during the unpredicted Covid-19 pandemic." Taken together, they included 69 essays by museum professionals from the US and seven other countries. This was followed a year later by ILR 169 titled "The Museum World Confronts the Current Environment" which was comprised of additional essays by 34 repeat authors from the US and five countries.

As I conclude this series of reflections on the evolution and significance of the ILR, I am sorrowfully mentioning the recent passing of three very significant multiple authors and supporters: Alan Friedman, Ted Ansbacher, and John Jacobsen.

Alan Friedman: In#17 his article The Evolutions of Science and Technology Centers featured his evolutionary diagram which has been used multiple times in discussion of the emergence of those institutions. Alan was a frequent ILR author until his unfortunate passing in 2014.  

Ted Ansbacher: He was an early promoter and explainer of the concept of interactivity in several articles around the turn of the century when the vocabulary for interactivity was in its developmental stage. His extended presence in the ILR began with Exhibits and Learning at the Science Center: Another View–The Informal Science Review, no. 18, May-June 1996, pp. 6-7. Ted passed away in January 2022.

John Jacobsen: John was a prolific author of materials essential to the development and operation of museums and science centers. In addition to his articles in the ILR he was a great fan of the museum operating world. He wrote several books that are desktop resources for many museum professionals. He died in January 2023. 

DOCUMENTATION OF AUTHORS 

This does not include Mac West or Bob Russell. Each has had many articles, especially in earlier issues. It also 

excludes what we can call “neutral download” – those materials downloaded from the internet and published in the ILR, almost always with no author credits or even acknowledgement of the online source. Again, this was common in earlier issues and is not part of the current practice. 

Issues 1 – 180 have a total of 971 authors. This includes single authors as well as primary and secondary when articles had multiple producers. Here is a quick list of individuals who are authors of more than three articles. They may have been the primary author or in a secondary listing, including Ted Ansbacher, James Bradburne, Carol Bossert, Mike Bruton, David Chesebrough, Linda Conlon, Clark Dodsworth, Lynn Dierking, John Falk, Paul Dusenbery, Alan Friedman, Barbara Flagg, Rita Mukherjee Hoffstadt, W. Scott Heath, Anne Holland, John Jacobsen, Emlyn Koster, Dan Martin, Paul Orselli, Bonnie Sachatello-Sawyer, Marsha Semmel, Charlie Trautman, Sue Dale Tunnicliffe, David Ucko, Jeanne Vergeront, Karen Wise, and Steven Yalowitz. In an unanticipated way this demonstrates the broad impact and utility of the ILR as well as the changing world in which it was projecting its own future. 

IT’S NEW FUTURE 

With this issue of The Informal Learning Review the publication has formally moved to its new and progressive location. Now a publication of Ohio-based ILR Collaborative, it has multi-editor team who will bring new and additional resources to this publication. The economics of complimentary subscriptions will expand the readership and influence so the future if the ILR is very positive. As the editor and producer, I am pleased to see and support this very positive evolutionary event.

Publisher information: The Informal Learning Review. The Informal Learning Review is a copyrighted publication of the Informal Learning Review Collaborative, an independent board of co-editors. Website: informallearningreview.org Email:info@informallearningreview.org.

Mailing Address: c/o COSI, 333 West Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. While COSI serves as the fiscal agent and publisher, it is essential to note that the content of the Informal Learning Review remains independent, reflecting the diverse voices and perspectives of its contributors and readership alike. ISSN 2642-7419