TEACHING CLIMATE CHANGE PART II: LANGUAGE & NEED

Museums on Earth | Defne Inceoglu

---

Illustration courtesy of Defne Inceoglu.

\\\

In Part I of this column, we discussed the necessary politicization of museums that plan to tackle the subject of climate change. In Part II, we will look over how language affects learning and begin to address the needs of visitors.

\\\

Over the months of October and November, I undertook a visitor research project at the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM), where I conducted 100 anonymous interviews with visitors of varying demographics within the Life in Crisis: Schad Gallery of Biodiversity. The intention of this research was to inform my thesis work, which is interested in analyzing what exactly is the relationship between the halls of biodiversity galleries, the stuffed animals which inhabit them and the visitor who walks through them. What sort of takeaway is a biodiversity gallery that is focused on overarching themes related to a global ‘life in crisis’? How does the visitor see this; what do they look at or absorb and how do they relay what they've learned? 

An area of the Biodiversity Gallery which has stark climate change messaging. Photograph courtesy of Defne Inceoglu.

A didactic in the gallery which details the human
impact on Great Lakes ecosystems. Photograph courtesy
of Defne Inceoglu.

LANGUAGE 

Immediately, the idea of the language or the semiotics of climate change related displays created contention. It occurred to me that using a term like ‘climate change’ is not interchangeable with other concepts such as ‘deforestation’, ‘ocean acidification’, ‘habitat loss’ – among other things. The assumption that climate change would act as an umbrella term for most visitors ended up being false. Further to this, it appeared as though visitors at the ROM do not completely correlate or group these sorts of globally-scaled events like mass habitat loss or extinction with the idea of climate change. Language, then, plays an important role in creating climate change awareness and education.

Of the 99 participants who answered the question “in your own words, what was the exhibition trying to show?” – only 7 people outright mentioned climate change as a major theme in the Biodiversity Gallery. This small number however does not represent a gap in understanding of the exhibition’s themes -- rather it represents a wide variety of understanding, again enforcing the idea that there is more meaning-making going on than meets the eye. 

A portion of a display case in the gallery, detailing life
in the Great Lakes. Photograph courtesy of
Defne Inceoglu. 

When asked the question, some visitors replied:

“Endangered species. [Humans are] destructive to habitat(s)”. 

[Participant 13, aged 25-34, Ontario resident]. 

“Reminds us of nature, what was here before us”. [Participant 38, aged 25-34, Toronto resident].

“We’re losing things that were alive when I was a child. Urgency is accelerating”. 

[Participant 54, aged 45+, BC resident].

“Trying to show us nature and making us realize we are out there in the world. In our hands to see if these creatures are protected or destroyed”. 

[Participant 78, aged 35-44, Mississauga resident].





These four participants, while giving answers unrelated in terminology to climate change, demonstrate that the exhibition offered to them a divergent understanding. Here then, we see where the gaps emerge. A low percentage of visitors picked up on the explicit climate change message, opting instead to mention personal anecdotes or speak directly to a non-specific or generalized 'negative' human impact. This is a good start, and shows that visitors are in fact engaged and relating the content back to themselves in a way. However, we can now consider language as a barrier to universal understanding and we must shrug off the assumption that all visitors relate-to and can speak-to climate change terminology. Instead, we have to listen to our audiences and connect to what is really being asked for. 

NEED

When asked, "Do you have anything else you would like to share with me? Be they concerns or praises?" some visitors replied:

"Nice exhibit. Not a lot of actions steps, doom and gloom; what can you do? Missed opportunity". [Participant 51, aged 25-34, US resident].

"Needs stuff more prescriptive and non-intimidating. Small steps people can take".

[Participant 66, aged 25-34, Toronto resident].

"What is climate change, what are some of the effects, actually explaining it. The science, the challenge, [is it] attainable?"

[Participant 68, aged 45+, New York resident]. 

The arctic display case in the gallery. Photograph courtesy of
Defne Inceoglu.

I want to address this area of need. We took a long look at the language discrepancies that visitors presented. Now we see a request, a demand or want. Teaching hard-to-digest topics to museum visitors can be daunting, and discovering what visitors are looking for is a way to ensure that your messages are communicated effectively. In the ROM's case, it is clear that visitors are seeking out tangible, attainable action and information. This discovery is crucial in understanding how we can begin to create a running dialogue which will both educate, un-intimidate and invigorate visitors.

///

Next time, we'll cover a few different international institutions and their efforts in creating climate awareness using a biodiversity collection.

I did not go into detail on my research methods -- if you have questions please reach out through a comment and I can get back to you with more information.

This research was conducted with deep gratitude to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for funding. The human research component of the project is approved by the University of Toronto's Research Ethics Board.