Links to the following publications by your blogger Paul C. Thistle have now been added to the Critical Museology by Thistle Online page found in the header above as well as the References section below.
One example is “The Socratic/Directed Questioning Method of Museum Interpretation” (Thistle 1981: 24-28) article that presents the do’s & don’ts of the questioning approach to museum interpretation. It is introduced as follows:
According to much of the museological wisdom, past and present, the ideal educational role of the museum is one which is provocative rather than expository; discovery-oriented rather than didactic. Indicative of how much easier such an ideal is mouthed than carried out, however, is the distinct impression that the majority of museum interpretation efforts . . . rely on one-way expository communication from docent to visi1or, with the museum object in the background.
[The intent here is to] stimulate some further interest in the use of the question as an important interpretive alternative, or at least, help to confirm the gut feeling of many of us that it is a method that is not only important, but which is also one that works!
The use of a questioning approach to interpretation serves “development of visual awareness, critical thought processes, & problem-solving skills” in a method “which truly involves the visitor in significant mental activity based on examination of the museum object” [on display].
The key is that the mental activity engendered by the question can more easily be moved into the higher levels of the cognitive, hopefully to result in more . . . [advanced levels of] learning.
Among the various values of questioning by docents during interpretive tours is the direction of the visitor gaze to the study of “visual and mental hooks” revealed in the objects on exhibit.
The question forces the learner to confront dissonance and to become active in reducing this internal discomfort by using the museum object as a resource.
Essentially, in consideration of the materials on display, interpretive objectives, & visitor characteristics from elementary classes through seniors groups, questions are designed so they can be answered by a close examination of the objects on display.
Among the counsels made in this article is that “the dreaded silence after posing a question is not to be feared, since this represents exactly the time that thinking & significant learning occur.”
A bibliography for this article is found on page 18 of Thistle (1981).
The other subjects of your blogger’s published articles in this post are cited & linked in the References section below. They include a commentary on the significance of & need for attention to the intellectual control over the archival records of the museum itself, a commentary about the value of museum in-person conferences, a critical analysis of reliance by government on gaming & lottery sources to fund museums, & the values of formal museum planning studies.
A full listing of your blogger’s publications in the fields of museum studies & Native studies can be found in his curriculum vitae .
References (annotated):
Thistle, Paul C. 1988. “Editorial: Records of the AMM [Association of Manitoba Museums].” Dawson and Hind Quarterly 15 (1): 3 at https://miscellaneousmuseology.files.wordpress.com/2023/12/aam-records-1.pdf .
The above extensively documented article strongly recommends that—as heritage preservation & education advocates—museums & professional museum organisations need to avoid neglecting the preservation, arrangement, & description of their own organizational records.
Thistle, Paul C. 1987. “Great Expectations: CMA’s 40th Anniversary Conference, Winnipeg.” Dawson and Hind Quarterly 13 (4): 8-10 https://miscellaneousmuseology.files.wordpress.com/2023/12/cma-1987-review.pdf .
The above provides a summary of the author’s learning experience at the Canadian Museum Association’s 1987 national conference & encourages small museum participation going forward.
Thistle, Paul C. 1987. “Museums and Lottery Funding.” Dawson and Hind Quarterly 13 (3): 15-17 at https://miscellaneousmuseology.files.wordpress.com/2023/12/lottery-funding.pdf .
Here is critical analysis of the funding of museums by the Manitoba government exclusively by means of gambling & lottery funds rather than through tax-derived revenues.
Thistle, Paul C. 1986. “The Sam Waller Little Northern Museum: Museum Planning Studies, Who needs it? and why?” Dawson and Hind Quarterly 13 (2): 16-17 at https://miscellaneousmuseology.files.wordpress.com/2023/12/museum-planning-study.pdf .
Above is a brief outline of the crucial value of a formal planning study undertaken to prepare for a capital project to create a new facility for the Sam Waller Little Northern Museum in a heritage building.
Thistle, Paul C. 1981. “The Socratic/Directed Questioning Method of Museum Interpretation.” Saskatchewan Museums Quarterly 7 (2): 14-18 [also published in Dawson and Hind Quarterly 10 (1): 24-28] at https://miscellaneousmuseology.files.wordpress.com/2021/06/thistle-socratic-questioning-sk-mu-q.pdf .
Presented here is a method of interpretation by introducing “dissonance” by means of asking questions to stimulate an intrinsic motivation for the visitor to look closely, think, & thus discover new information while viewing exhibits.
Critical Museology Miscellanea 