What are your ideas for the future of education? How can historic sites and museums INSPIRE?

Questions from the Education Think Tank at The Glass House, July 18, 2012, New Canaan, CT.

1. How do people learn best?

2. What are the attributes of a successful education program?

3. How is the success of an educational program measured?

4. What are the most engaging educational programs of which you are aware? What characteristics do they possess that place them amongst the best?

5. What are the biggest challenges and opportunities in architecture, preservation, and arts education? How can they be addressed?

6. What methods or guidelines can be used within a historic site or museum to support direct educational experience and freedom while respecting the site and collection?

7. How important is context: what is the balance between educating students on the history of the site and using the site as a setting for discovery?

8. What is the best balance between off-site, online, and classroom learning, and on-site, hands-on experience?

9. What educational experience has had the biggest impact on your life?

10. What programs and experiences do you propose for The Glass House?

Monday, July 23 at 3:44pm

As I said at the think tank, I think people (adults, students, and adult students) learn best through storytelling, and many historic sites and museums have been stuck telling one type of story, or stories one way, for too long. Digital avenues like this one offer one way of connecting with larger audiences, but ultimately you have to make people feel that their education is not complete without being there,

The Glass House has already started to address this problem by tailoring tours to different audiences, some who want to know about the gardens, some about the architecture, some who want to look around themselves. But it could probably go farther in both material and method. This may be blasphemy, but David Whitney was an amazing collector: would he have been on Pinterest? Could he have a posthumous Tumblr? And how could that be used for education.

When I wrote about the Glass House in 2010, I people really connected with the discussion of how Philip Johnson lived (and how someone else might live) in the Glass House. Maybe there could be a larger discussion, either on tour, or by different voices online, about how you live in a modern house. Many people are still dubious about the prospect. That could be a way to bring in the other members of the Harvard Five, and link the Glass House, the oral histories New Canaan high school students have been recording, and contemporary architects working in Connecticut today.

Tuesday, July 24 at 9:40am

It was a treat to look and learn with so many of you, and to jump-start the conversation of what an education program for The Glass House might look like. With an overwhelming horizon, I think it was smart to focus on rational rather than methodology. It seems to me most of us agree on learning through inquiry, and this was especially well echoed in Alexandra Lange’s story of first encountering The Glass House in 8th grade. I also appreciated the spot-on comments of Theodore Prudon, DOCOMOMO who challenged the group to be risk-takers.

As the Executive Director of an equally compelling and complex historic site, I too have been searching for a rationale to create new forms of public engagement. Having recently read Russel Wright’s will in which he outlines his intent for The Hudson Valley Conservancy Center, now Manitoga, I found the DNA for what should be done here in Garrison, NY. Specifically stewardship of nature, per Russel Wright “personal enjoyment of nature is the realistic basis for a desire to protect nature” he continues by specifying thematic tours about mushrooms, the night sky, moonlight concerts, and a sketch & photo festival to name but a few.

Our breakout session discussed Johnson’s biography, aided by Susanne Pandich’s first hand experiences with Phillip Johnson, and recommended a program that was focused on architecture students from high school, community college, and undergraduate programs. This level of engagement would solve many problems, create a niche in a saturated market, and if taken to its full potential introduce an egalitarian outlook for The Glass House.

Thanks for a wonderful and inspiring day.

Wednesday, July 25 at 5:46pm

Thank you for a most inspiring, if weather-truncated day to discuss the future of education and programming at The Glass House. I am still reflecting (no pun intended) on the remarks made by Hunter Palmer, Henry Urbach, Alexandra Lange, Theodore Prudon, and Danya Sherman.

First off, I believe that the model of the Think Tank itself is tremendously stimulating and that by bringing together a number of voices and minds you immediately create a reverberation of the issues that were presented as all of us talk to our own colleagues, students and friends. Can this model be extended and repeated to include other kinds of groups (if not already taking place) for example K-12, college, and university faculty?

Secondly, I believe that the landscape, gardens, and native plant life that comprise this site are especially significant resources that could be interpreted more fully.
As a painter who works from the landscape and from botanical subjects, I would suggest looking at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York. The Cary Institute is primarily a scientific research institute but it has engaged and attracted new audiences through a recently established artist/writer-in-residence program. I am happy to help make this connection.

Monday, July 30 at 4:24pm

As is so often the case at historic properties, the most sustainable answers to current questions are inspired by the history of the site and certainly the Glass House is no exception. As the Glass House determines what its K-12, undergraduate, and graduate education programs will look like, its talented staff can draw from how the property was used by Phillip Johnson and David Whitney. Both sought to encourage young artists and designers and to provide a space in which conceptual ideas could be tested and refined.

In the small group I participated in during the Education Think Tank, we discussed how the work of Phillip Johnson and David Whitney at the Glass House could be carried forward through partnerships with university design programs, design camps for middle and high school students, portfolio classes for students and adults, and internship programs. We also discussed how the act of preserving a historic site can offer unique educational opportunities and that the Glass House can begin developing these simultaneous with preparations for upcoming conservation of the Brick House, the Painting Gallery, and other buildings on the site. This ongoing work will provide the opportunity for the Glass House to develop educational programs that could include materials studies, documentation classes, and seminars on both the techniques and general advocacy for the conservation of Modern architecture.

Both of these threads—design education and preservation education—offer new and expanded ways in which the Glass House can provide leadership in contemporary conversations while remaining true to the spirit in which Phillip Johnson and David Whitney developed, used, and preserved the Glass House property. The Glass House—along with the other 20 historic sites around the country owned by the National Trust—will serve as a living laboratory in which creativity, collaboration, and community guide and inspire new educational paradigms and programs.

Tuesday, July 31 at 3:31am

As we discussed in our Think Tank break-out session with various educators from local schools, libraries and museums, the way for the Glass House to reach a broader and younger audience involves a combination of on-site and off-site programs. Learning through inquiry and visual thinking strategies was deemed the most effective method to educate children about art and architecture.

The Glass House site, as a place of creative inspiration and a progression of discoveries, captures the imagination and inquisitive nature of children. Fun educational tools and materials would further encourage the children to be active participants and explore the site on their own terms. The labyrinthine site lends itself perfectly to scavenger hunts, mapping projects, storytelling games, and art, science and math challenges that appeal to their sense of adventure while enhancing their problem-solving skills. Philip Johnson would certainly have enjoyed the children’s enthusiastic reactions to his playful and theatrical approach with its elements of surprise. The expressions on their faces when they arrive at conclusions through a process of collective examination are priceless. What fun they have describing Da Monsta or figuring out the location of the bathroom in the Glass House!

Aware of the space limitations of the Glass House, our group of educators recognized the potential of off-site programs coordinated with local libraries, schools, and art institutions. These programs enable the introduction of this historic site in the classroom with the help of materials, such as my children’s architecture activity book From the Saltbox to the Glass House and hands-on building projects. I have found that my workshops motivate children and their parents to have a direct encounter with the site and to continue their exploration in a more visceral manner.

In the architecture workshops I have taught at the New Canaan elementary schools and the library, some of the most frequently posed questions by the children are: How does one become an architect? What tools are necessary? How can one learn more? How was Philip Johnson able to create such a place? Can we do the same? Children are inspired and empowered when they realize that such creativity is possible.

Finally, a pride of place and of our history is one of the key reasons we educate the public about architecture and preservation. Our children are our future and these historic sites will be in their hands one day. Therefore it is our responsibility to foster an appreciation of the need for preservation and ensure that visitors to historic sites, such as the Glass House, take lasting impressions away from their experience that they will continue to process.

Tuesday, July 31 at 9:33am

The visioning and brainstorming exercise on the future of programming at Glass House (GH) evoked a flood of possibilities. So many ideas, so little time and money. In our conversation group we recognized that the program obligations for an institution like The Metropolitan Museum and Glass House are very different. Is serving a niche audience elitist and can tightly targeted outreach programs provide a balance?

Who is this niche audience? It would seem that the geographic community of New Canaan and nearby CT as well as the intellectual community of architects, modern artists and design aficionados are the primary components. Without a doubt this audience is mostly white, affluent, and well educated. The GH is a cerebral site and how accessable is it for a broader audience and to what lengths would you have to go to make it accessable? As Peggy Fogelman from the Met said, the GH audience is an NPR audience.

In our session we all agreed that partnerships are key and experimentation is good. Several design programs and schools were discussed until the skys became dark, the electricity went off and we were all sent home.

Tuesday, July 31 at 11:34am

This is both an exciting and challenging moment for museum education, as is often the case in times of change. Advances in technology now make in-depth scholarship and high resolution images of our collections available instantly and for free from anywhere in the world. Resources like the Google Art Project, the exponential expansion of tablet and smart phone use by all age groups, and now the affordability of replication through lower cost 3-D printers all provide unprecedented offsite access to museum collections. But actual museum visits can and should provide meaning beyond information. Museums can offer unique locative experiences that foster a different kind of engagement, connecting people with the original works of art as well as the distinct sensory environment of the site, and creating social learning through participation. In her Foreword to the October 2011 study on arts participation commissioned by the James Irvine Foundation, Josephine Ramirez, Arts Program Director, notes a “seismic shift” toward participatory arts culture: “People are thinking about the experience of culture differently than in the past, placing value on a more immersive and interactive experience than is possible through mere observation…. Americans are activating their own creativity in new and unusual ways …”

Art museums around the country are experimenting with new modes of participation—whether through their own education programs or through collaborations with artists’ collectives that use social practice as a medium. By opening up possibilities in direct relation to the physical objects and spaces of the museum, these efforts help distinguish onsite experience from both information-based online engagement and the social exchanges that fuel digital communities. At the Met, for example, we’ve initiated drop-in, free with admission, multigenerational programs that tap into visitors’ curiosity and creativity at all levels. People vote with their feet. Last year, about 2,400 people took part in our biweekly sketching-in-the galleries program and almost 10,000 participated in How Did They Do That?, a monthly hands-on program exploring artistic materials and techniques.

As an educator working in an encyclopedic museum, I’m always seeking new ways to connect the art of the past with contemporary life, to relate the history of cultural production to creative expression today, so that our collections remain meaningful and relevant to visitors. Context matters. The locative experience is unique in part because it derives from each institution’s mission, purpose, and community. Philip Johnson created a wonderfully stimulating environment for participation and exchange. What should be the nature of site-based creative experience at the Glass House? What form of participation resonates most with its character and intention?

As an unabashed architecture groupie, I’ve always admired the charrette as a model for creative collaboration. The strengths of the charrette stem from its potential to integrate the talents and interests of a diverse group of people to yield multiple solutions—in other words, exactly what museums aspire to do. What if it became the model guiding the conception and format of education programs at the Glass House? Envision high school students working together to solve architecture and design challenges that resonate with their own lives. Portfolio classes for students based on this model could foster important and transferable experience in teamwork and co-creation while developing specific design skills. Architects participating in major competitions for public projects could be invited to workshop and present their proposals in the inspiring setting of the Glass House. Choreographers, composers, and artists of various genres might similarly use the site as a lab for creative development and works in progress. Students could explore the interconnections of body and built environment. By focusing on active, collaborative modes of learning, the Glass House could continue its role as catalyst, linking its special past to a creative future.

Friday, August 3 at 12:47pm