MEOWING WOLF: THE QUERICAL EXPERIENTIAL MUSEUM AND SOCIAL STUDIES EDUCATION
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
MEOWING WOLF: THE QUERICAL EXPERIENTIAL MUSEUM
AND SOCIAL STUDIES EDUCATION
Amanda Lacey, University of Louisville
Abstract
The museum field trip is an often-used educational tool in social studies classrooms around the United States.
These museums usually take the form of large, austere-looking buildings with carefully structured exhibits,
real historical artifacts, and a strict no-touching policy. This article identifies, defines, and promotes the field
trip possibilities of an entirely new type of museum: the querical experiential museum (QEM). QEMs are
inquiry-based, interactive, and visitor-focused places that promote student learning through constructivist
design, interactive experiences, social connections, and the development of inquiry skills. Meow Wolf: House
of Eternal Return in Santa Fe, New Mexico and Otherworld in Columbus, Ohio are referenced as examples of
how social studies educational goals can be met in this new type of museum setting.
Introduction
The museum field trip is an often-used educational tool in social studies classrooms around the United States.
Students on such field trips can usually expect to visit a large, austere-looking building and spend the day reading
placards, viewing (but not touching) actual historical relics, and listening to a guide or docent explain the history and
importance of various artifacts. While such field trips have documented educational value (Marcus et al., 2017), the
recent rise of a new type of institution has presented new possibilities for the social studies field trip: the querical
experiential museum (QEM). QEMs are inquiry-based, interactive, and visitor-focused places that promote student
learning through constructivist design, interactive experiences, social connections, and the development of inquiry
skills. The sections that follow further define and describe the QEM experience, as well as highlight the research-based
benefits to their use in social studies education. The installations at Meow Wolf: House of Eternal Return in Santa Fe,
New Mexico and Otherworld in Columbus, Ohio will be referenced to further demonstrate how social studies
educational goals can be met in this new type of museum setting.
The QEM Experience
Imagine: after a walk down a narrow, blacklight hallway, you open a door to your left. As you step inside the
massive room beyond, you’re greeted with the sight of a multistory Victorian home on an average neighborhood
street, complete with picket fences, trees, and streetlights. A doormat on the home’s threshold welcomes you with
the phrase “Beyond Here There Be Dragons.” Inside, you can see what appears to be the fixtures of an average,
middle-class American home: a living room, a kitchen, and bedrooms. You start to explore. Unlike other exhibits
you’ve been to before, you’re allowed – nay, encouraged – to touch everything, to let your inner snooping urges
thrive. You read the papers on a desk. Open the books on the shelf. Check a bedroom closet to see what may have
been left behind. With every turn, you ask yourself What happened to the family that lived here? Where did they go?
Finally, you open the fridge, and inside you’re shocked to see not racks of food, but a brightly lit portal to the
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4mysterious other side of the house. An entirely new world -- full of light, sounds, endless rooms, and maybe even
monsters -- is waiting for you on the other side.
Such is the beginning of the typical visitor experience at Meow Wolf: House of Eternal Return, a prime tourist
destination in Santa Fe, New Mexico that bills itself as a “combination of jungle gym, haunted house, children’s
museum, and immersive art exhibit” (Meow Wolf, 2021, para. 1). The first institution to popularize this new genre of
interactive installation, Meow Wolf’s 20,000 square feet is filled with countless rooms, structures, and secrets, all of
which, at minimum, invite the visitor to touch, play, read, watch, listen, explore, inquire, and discover. The driving force
behind the immersive experience is the mystery of the (fictional) Selig family who “disappeared one night after
conducting a forbidden experiment inside their Victorian Mansion”, the same mansion-turned interdimensional portal
that serves as the starting point for the experience (Meow Wolf, 2015). Every room contains clues to the Selig’s
disappearance, including such artifacts as scrapbooks, newspapers, and otherworldly images. It is only through
traveling through each exhibit, exploring each nook and cranny, and examining each artifact that the mystery can be
uncovered.
After its initial founding as an art collective in 2008, Meow Wolf has gone through a variety of iterations,
finally opening the permanent, immersive, massive, interactive installation that is The House of Eternal Return in
2016. As of 2022, two other Meow Wolf locations have opened in Las Vegas, Nevada and Denver, Colorado — as
have similar (but unrelated) analogs such as Otherworld in Columbus, Ohio, and Factory Obscura in Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma. These institutions are more than an immersive art environment in which a visitor can spend hours pressing
buttons or finding secret compartments; rather, they are querical experiential museums (QEMs), an underutilized
education destination that belongs in the same category as the traditional history, art, or science museum.
From a social studies standpoint, while querical experiential museums may not teach what actually happened, they
provide an avenue for students to learn how to determine what actually happened — to develop their inquiry and
critical thinking skill set. If history is an “inquiry-based discipline that is founded on a process of asking questions,
seeking answers, analyzing new ideas and information, and making new inquiries” (Anway & Mayer, 2010, p. 201),
then the querical experiential museum is the starting point for learning this process. As such, QEMs should be seen
as a promising potential field trip destination and learning experience that invite students to expand their historical
and critical thinking skills through the unique environment they offer. The following sections explore the role of
museums in social studies education, further define the querical experiential museum, and demonstrate how QEMs
meet the needs of a social studies educator.
Teaching History with Museums
The idea of using museums to teach history is far from a novel concept. In fact, Hein (2005) argues that
education is the heart of the museum and is the essence of their existence. Further, Marcus et al. (2017), authors of
the seminal work Teaching History with Museums¸ assert that museums should be a key part of K-12 history education,
stating that they 1) provide unique learning experiences that enhance historical knowledge and skills; 2) are sites of
history learning throughout students’ adult lives; 3) are often uncontested and authoritative arbiters of historical
knowledge; and 4) serve a function as public historical sites that both influence, and are influenced by, society. Indeed,
a field trip to a museum is far from a “day off” for students and staff; rather, they provide the opportunity for students
to develop historical empathy, promote critical and reflective thinking, and connect the past and present.
Marcus et al. (2017) further identify eight different types of museums: 1) artifact and display-based museums,
2) local history museums, 3) historic forts, 4), historic house museums, 5) living history museums, 6) memorials and
monuments, 7) art museums, and 8) virtual museums, mobile technologies, and augmented reality. While they may
vary in particulars, each type of museum generally tasks itself with commemorating historically or culturally significant
moments, objects, places, and/or ideas, prioritizing the teaching of documented facts and timelines. However, Marcus
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4et al.’s list is missing a final, newly minted type of institution, one that is unique in prioritizing imagination, interactivity,
and inquiry over specific historical learning: the querical experiential museum.
What is a Querical Experiential Museum?
What is a querical experiential museum (QEM)? The final word, museum, is the first major component in the
definition. The International Council of Museums (ICOM) defines a museum as a “non-profit, permanent institution in
the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates,
and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education,
study, and enjoyment” (2007, para. 2). Meow Wolf, and similar institutions, easily meet most of this definition: they
are educative, publicly accessible, permanent, serve their communities through tangible art experiences created by
local artists, and promote the study and enjoyment of art. While QEMs are not necessarily non-profit, their creation
is often a collaboration between a large group of small-time or lesser-known artists, meaning such museums promote
up-and-coming talent as well as provide a potential outlet for aspiring artists (students included) to find their voice.
In fact, many QEMs such as Meow Wolf itself are registered as a Public Benefit Corporation, or B-Corp, which means
it is a for-profit entity that is legally required to work towards community goals such as reduced inequality, lower
poverty, and a healthier environment (B Lab, n.d.). Therefore, while not a traditional museum form per se, QEMs still
meet the definition of a museum and can (and should) be considered as such.
When combined with querical, or the quality of asking questions, especially with a desire for authoritative
information (Merriam-Webster, n.d.), and experiential, relating to, derived from, or providing experience (Marriam-
Webster, n.d.) the definition of the QEM is clear: a querical experiential museum is a museum in which visitors are
invited to touch, explore, investigate, and experience each exhibit in the hopes of answering the central mystery or
mysteries inherent in the overall installation. A museum is a QEM if it meets the following criteria:
1. Inquiry-based. Speaking to the “querical” aspect of the querical experimental museum, a QEM is built around
a central narrative or mystery that can be solved in the process of exploring each exhibit. In this sense, walking
into a QEM is like walking into a strange, self-contained world. It is the visitor’s job to discover why this world
exists as it does. Here, a QEM will have intricately created documents, videos, or other artifacts found
throughout the museum that provide clues to the overall narrative. This criterion is meant to specifically
exclude exhibition types such as the increasingly popular “selfie museum” which, while interactive and visitor-
focused in nature (see criterion below) are nonetheless purely designed to take pictures for friends, family,
and/or social media (Pardes, 2017). It is also meant to differentiate QEMs from another recent creation, the
immersive art experience, which are often temporary, small, and focused on specific artist over a collaborative
whole (Witherspoon, 2021). While a QEM may inspire a visitor to take several photographs, the installation is
broad, permanent, and designed around experience and inquiry over simply engaging with aesthetics.
2. Interactive. A QEM is designed with the intention that nearly every object or fixture will be touched, played
with, or otherwise explored – especially since solving the central mystery is a key component of the
experience. This interactivity goes beyond the buttons to push or placards to flip that might be found in other
museums; rather, a QEM will contain such elements as secret compartments to locate, drawers and shelves
to be snooped through, textured statues to be stroked, and blacklight mirror hallways to navigate. At a QEM,
the exhibits are to be used rather than merely viewed.
3. Visitor-focused, not information-focused. QEMs are most usually the product of a collection of artists,
seen in how the design and visual imagery can vary drastically from exhibit room to exhibit room. As has
already been noted, they are created for the purposes of visitor interaction over the conveyance of factual
information. Interestingly, researchers of traditional museums approve and advocate this approach to exhibit
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4design, indicating that such an approach enhances student learning outcomes (Anway & Mayer, 2010; Filene,
2010; Rand, 2010; Russick, 2010). QEMs do not contain historical artifacts that are interpreted with an
informational placard or video; a visitor does not need to have some background knowledge on World War
II or the works of Monet in order to appreciate their surroundings. Instead, QEMs create an environment in
which every visitor can feel at ease to explore artifacts first-hand and come up with their own interpretations.
At Meow Wolf, visitors can walk from a tiny room of pastel stuffed animals to a cavern containing a massive
treehouse. At Otherworld, a visitor can tap gemstone projections to make them explode before entering what
appears to be a child’s bedroom, complete with a monster in the closet. It is the visitor’s task to put together
how these drastically different exhibits come together in the overarching narrative.
Overall, it’s important to understand that QEMs are different in that the presentation of facts or history is not
a necessary component of the exhibition; rather, visitors are presented with the opportunity to develop and enhance
their inquiry skills in the investigation of a fictional history in an all-encompassing, fictional environment. While
traditional museums usually inform visitors how each object fits into a historical narrative or context, querical
experiential museums challenge visitors to uncover the narrative and/or context on their own. The focus is therefore
on historiographical skills – the skills that help students understand the history of history, of how history is written
(Loewen, 2007)--over historical facts.
The Argument for QEMs
While a seasoned educator might hesitate at taking their students to a museum without historical objects,
artifacts, or information, QEMs are indicative of best practices that have been previously identified across museum
research. Specifically, these museums 1) follow a constructivist design, 2) provide an active and interactive experience,
4) foster social connections, and 5) promote inquiry and critical thinking.
Follow A Constructivist Design
Meow Wolf’s name has a unique beginning: according to the documentary Meow Wolf: Origin Story (Capps
& Spitzmiller, 2018), the co-founding artists sat in a circle, drew two different words out of a hat, and voted on the
best combination. It was over time and effort that Meow Wolf developed from a name, to an idea, to an exhibition,
and finally to the QEMs that exist today. This article argues that student experiences at QEMs are akin to “meowing
wolf”: when first visiting the installation, the meaning of every component, every exhibit, is not immediately clear;
instead, students discover, connect, collaborate, and make meaning on their own the further they navigate the QEM
environment. This meaning-making is what this article means by the idea of “meowing wolf.”
Indeed, the idea of “meowing wolf” is similar to what scholars would term the constructivist approach to
learning. First popularized in the 20 th century, constructivist learning theory is the belief that knowledge is internally
constructed by the learner and influenced by interactions with both the environment and other people (Shaffer, 2010).
As opposed to traditional lecture and text, in which learning is incremental and knowledge is believed to exist outside
of the learner, constructivism argues that “both knowledge and the way it is obtained are dependent on the mind of
the learner” and that learners “construct knowledge as they learn; they do not simply add new facts to what is known,
but constantly reorganize and create both understanding and the ability to learn as they interact with the world”
(Hein, 1999, pp. 75-76). Famous constructivist thinkers include Jean Piaget, whose theory of cognitive human
development indicated that a child regularly assimilates new information to fit into their internal knowledge structure
or makes accommodations to that internal knowledge structure to better reflect new information (Block, 1982); John
Dewey, who emphasized that learning occurs through actively connecting prior knowledge with lived experience
(Shaffer, 2010); Lev Vygotsky, who popularized the idea of zone of proximal development and the notion that an
individual constructs knowledge through social interaction with more skillful peers (Vygotsky, 1980); and, more
recently, Howard Gardner, whose theory of multiple intelligences indicated that knowledge can be constructed
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4through a variety of modalities, including bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, linguistic, logical-mathematical,
naturalistic, intrapersonal, spatial, and musical (Gardner, 1983; Shaffer, 2010).
In reflecting the ideas of these influential scholars, constructivist museums allow visitors to draw their own
conclusions about the meaning of exhibits, provide a range of modalities through which to acquire information, pose
open-ended questions to stimulate thinking, and often have no fixed pathway through which to navigate each exhibit,
allowing for visitors explore according to their own inclinations (Hein, 1999). In short, these museums allow the visitor
to take control of their own learning based on their own needs and inclinations, thereby enhancing the whole
experience. Some have argued that these qualities are why constructivist principles should be standard in museum
education and design (Hein, 2005; Hein, 1999; Noel & Colopy, 2006; Shaffer, 2010).
QEMs are prime examples of both a constructivist museum and the constructivist mindset: often, QEMs are
multi-room, or multi-story, complexes in which the visitor can explore to their heart’s content; there is no one “correct”
way to visit each room or object. Many, such as Meow Wolf, do not even have a map of the entire installation, leaving
it to the visitor to navigate according to their own intuition. Further, QEM’s do not explain the meaning of each room
or exhibit. Instead, the visitor must interact with and interpret each area according to their own thoughts and
experiences. Finally, QEM’s are unique in that the visitor experience isn’t merely limited to reading placards or
examining encased objects; rather, there are opportunities to read, touch, crawl, listen, and imagine–among other
interactive experiences. Indeed, the interactive component of the QEM is one of its most important elements, and is
described in-depth in the following section.
Provide An Interactive Experience
Museums educate students most effectively when they provide the opportunity to “do” something. Indeed,
interaction in the museum environment helps cement the idea that history is not just the past, but is constantly shaped
by actions in the present and future (Anway & Mayer, 2010; Hein, 2005; Pumpian et al., 2006; Ringel, 2010; Russick,
2010) Interactive components—elements of a museum that allow visitors to imagine, play, and engage multiple
senses—are particularly helpful in this regard.
In his work on engaging children with the past, Spock (2010) claims that provoking imagination is key to
learning in museums. While he notes that “imagination” has traditionally been looked down upon in the Western
tradition, Spock argues that exercising imagination is akin to exercising a muscle that helps develop thought, memory,
and empathy and that “imagination is the primary act of thinking historically” (p. 118). Indeed, McRainey (2010) insists
that engaging all five senses in a museum—creating a sensory landscape—has the potential to inform, engage, and
stimulate the brain beyond text or sight alone. This means that an exhibit that engages multiple senses creates a
deeper, longer-lasting impression than one that involves merely reading a placard or viewing an object (Burnham &
Kai-Kee, 2011).
Interactive experiences are the very essence of the QEM. Inviting visitors to touch, play with, and otherwise
experience each room is one of the founding principles of QEMs. There are very few objects, if any, that are not meant
to be touched in such a museum. While the interactive components of the QEM do not necessarily revolve around
historical events, they provide the opportunity to think, explore, and problem solve in memorable ways. For instance,
there is a room in Meow Wolf: House of Eternal Return that is covered with lighted buttons and displays. An astute
visitor is able to discover that, if they touch a series of buttons in the correct order, lighting up each display in a
specific way, a hidden machine in the corner of the room will print out a small slip of paper with a secret message. A
visitor must think critically and identify the patterns on the walls in order to solve this puzzle. The memory of this
experience and the gratification of obtaining a “prize” for solving the problem may encourage students to solve other
puzzles in the future.
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4The active and interactive experiences at QEM allow for students to do more than just have fun; they allow students
to engage with and nurture skills that extend far beyond the day of the visit. They also invite students to share these
skills and experiences with peers, as is discussed in the next section.
Help Foster Social Connections
An important component of constructivism is that students readily learn in a social environment. In terms of
museums, this takes the form of inspiring conversation and interaction among students and those around them,
whether that be a parent, fellow student, or museum staff. Social learning is especially grounded in the work of
Vygotsky, notably his theory of zone of proximal development, which suggests that students can increase their own
learning level through the support of peers with more sophisticated abilities (Hein, 1999; Pumpian et al., 2006; Shaffer,
2010). Such social learning can be accomplished through the creation of exhibits that are universally accessible and
that create an opportunity for dialogue (Anway and Mayer, 2010; Bingmann et al., 2009; Rand, 2010).
QEM are inherently places of ageless social connection. While walking through each room at a QEM, it’s not
uncommon to see a visitor discover a hidden secret or compartment and squeal with delight to those around them,
friend or stranger, wanting to share their finding with anyone and everyone nearby. At an exhibit in Otherworld,
visitors can trick each other into pushing a button that triggers a short clip of “Never Gonna Give You Up” by Rick
Astley – a song popularized by the “rickrolling” phenomenon of the early 2000s and still recognizable across age
groups even today (Maring, 2021). Going further, some exhibits, such as the button room described above, require
more than one person to successfully operate. While the ability to read is useful for solving QEM mysteries, most of
the exhibits do not require reading at all and many secrets can be discovered simply by looking around. Even here, a
trade-off can be negotiated: readers can divulge content to non-readers, those with flexibility can describe areas
accessible only through crawlspaces, and those with more analytical minds can help discover patterns and decipher
codes that are otherwise illegible. In the end, QEMs lend themselves to a unique social experience that can help
students learn and discover together.
Promote Inquiry Skills
The College Career, and Civic Life (C3) framework developed by the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS,
2013) holds that the purpose of social studies is to prepare students for their postsecondary futures, including the
disciplinary practices and literacies needed for college-level work and the critical thinking, problem-solving, and
collaborative skills needed for the workplace. This framework is broken down into four separate yet interlocking and
mutually reinforcing dimensions known as the Inquiry Arc: 1) developing questions and planning inquiries; 2) applying
disciplinary concepts and tools; 3) evaluating sources and using evidence, and 4) communicating conclusions and
taking informed action (NCSS, 2013, p. 12). The most effective social studies classroom incorporates all four of these
dimensions throughout the school year. While the central mystery to be uncovered at a QEM might not involve actual
historical events, the unique nature of a QEM allows students to nonetheless act as historians in an alternate history.
While there is no actual fracture in the universe, Meow Wolf contains countless artifacts and clues that help explain
how it might have happened. While Otherworld Industries doesn’t actually exist, connecting the clues between each
room can help a visitor discover what could have gone wrong with the alternate realm tourism company. Like an
archeologist at a dig site or a historian analyzing an old diary, students at QEMs engage in an authentic inquiry
experience and develop skills that last far beyond the Exit door. The section below further details how QEMs fit into
each dimension of the Inquiry Arc.
Dimension 1: Developing Questions and Planning Inquiries
The C3 framework encourages both students and teachers to develop compelling questions—and their
secondary, supporting questions—that can promote vigorous exploration through the disciplines of civics, economics,
geography, and history (NCSS, 2013, pp. 23-27). In short, these questions are the jumping-off point for further inquiry.
QEMs such as Meow Wolf are centered around a compelling question: “What happened?” Supporting questions
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4might include “where is the family that lived here?”, “what do these mysterious symbols on the wall mean?”, and “is
there any connection between these emails and the portal in the refrigerator?” While perhaps unconventional in
nature, such questions nonetheless stimulate students’ inquiry skills and desire to learn more – leading into Dimension
2.
Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools
This second component of the Inquiry Arc describes the process of students identifying potential solutions
to compelling questions through differing disciplinary tools (NCSS, 2013, pp. 29-51). Examples of Dimension 2 in
action include creating timelines, comparing historical perspectives, identifying historical sources, and identifying
cause and effect. These are the same skills students can draw on while walking through a QEM. For example, a student
might walk into the office room at Otherworld and, like a historian, immediately look for primary sources concerning
the apparent fracture in the universe, such as the memos posted on the wall or the photographs laid out on the desk.
Another student, like an archeologist, might look for physical evidence of a sudden event or circumstance that caused
everything to go wrong, such as a mysterious switch in what appears to be a normal maintenance closet. Yet a third
student, like a geographer, might attempt to map the exhibit rooms and question how their order might be related
to the overarching narrative. At QEMs, the development of disciplinary skills is limited only by imagination.
Dimension 3: Evaluating Sources and Using Evidence
In this third component of the inquiry arc, students are asked to find, evaluate, and incorporate evidence into
their responses to the compelling question (NCSS, 2013, pp. 53-57). In the classroom, this might mean tasks such as
consulting an encyclopedia or finding scans of primary sources online. It also means students should evaluate this
evidence to look for inconsistencies or potential bias. At QEMs, there are myriad sources for students to analyze and
evaluate. At Meow Wolf, for example, there are newspapers, magazines, and scrapbooks to be found that contain
clues to the central narrative. A “promotional video” playing on a screen in a strange room is yet another informational
artifact, although students might want to question the reliability of the source. Students can also draw on their
personal interaction with the space as a source of evidence, asking why the bathroom of the house is warped and
twisted while the bedroom next door is perfectly normal (albeit abandoned)? Overall, QEMs allow students to discover
and evaluate sources in real-time, developing historical inquiry and thinking skills as they navigate the interactive
labyrinth. Such skills, developed in a fictional environment, can be drawn upon while investigating the real one.
Dimension 4: Communicating Conclusions and Taking Informed Action
Dimension 4 is when students are called on to formalize their arguments and explanations after forming
questions, applying disciplinary concepts and tools, and evaluating sources and evidence (NCSS, 2013, pp. 59-64).
Products of Dimension 4 can include essays, reports, and other presentations that not only demonstrate student
thinking, but also open the student up to critiques from peers and lay the groundwork for potential action beyond
the classroom. Dimension 4 is the culmination of the Inquiry Arc and is accordingly the culmination of a QEM visit: it
naturally occurs when students discuss with their peers, or even formally present to their class, their conclusions of
“what happened” to cause the museum to appear the way it did. When students are able to discuss the artifacts found
and secrets unearthed, as well as discuss what it means in the context of the QEM universe, they are communicating
(and defending) their own solution to the central mystery.
QEMs provide more than just the opportunity for a “fun” field trip. Instead, these museums provide a genuine learning
experience grounded in previous research by virtue of their constructivist designs, interactive elements, promotion of
social connections, and invitation to engage in extended inquiry
Conclusion
The traditional museum is an arena to showcase famous art, interpret historical events, and witness artifacts
or structures of significant cultural importance. However, these museums rarely feature fully interactive or sensory
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4components that guide students to inquire or form deep memories. On the other hand, the querical experiential
museum is a new type of institution that evokes imagination, play, and inquiry, but rarely features actual historical
artifacts. This distinction is not to denigrate one type of museum in favor of the other; rather it is to demonstrate that,
in concert, these museums can help students form the memories, knowledge, and skills that will be useful in adult
life. When students are Meowing Wolf, they are observing the mysteries in front of them and asking questions,
practicing disciplinary skills, searching for evidence, and forming conclusions in accordance with best practice and
NCSS vision. In short, they are thinking like a historian – even if the history they are thinking about centers around a
missing family, furry walls, and interdimensional space travel.
Suggested Querical Experimental Museums
• Factory Obscura, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma https://www.factoryobscura.com/meet
• Meow Wolf: House of Eternal Return, Santa Fe, New Mexico https://meowwolf.com/visit/santa-fe
• Meow Wolf: Omega Mart, Las Vegas, Nevada https://meowwolf.com/visit/las-vegas
• Meow Wolf: Convergence Station, Denver, Colorado https://meowwolf.com/visit/denver
• Otherworld, Columbus, Ohio https://otherworldohio.com/
• Seismique, Houston, Texas https://seismique.com/
References
Anway, A., & Mayer, N. (2010). Shaping the space: Designing for kids. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick (Eds.),
Connecting kids to history with museum exhibitions (pp. 201-218). Left Coast Press, Inc. .
B Lab. (n.d.). About b corps. Retrieved August 9, 2021 from https://bcorporation.net/about-b-corps
Bingmann, M., Grove, T., & Johnson, A. (2009). Families and more: Intergenerational learning In A. Johnson, K. A.
Huber, N. Cutler, M. Bingmann, & Tim Grove, (Eds.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Block, J. (1982). Assimilation, accommodation, and the dynamics of personality development Child Development,
53(2), 281, https://doi.org/10.2307/1128971
Burnham, R., & Kai-Kee, E. (2011). Teaching in the art museum: Interpretation as experience. J. Paul Getty Museum.
Capps, M. & Spitzmiller, J. (Directors). (2018). Meow wolf: Origin story [Film]. Meow Wolf Entertainment.
Filene, B. (2010). Are we there yet? Children, history, and the power of place. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick (Eds.).
Connecting kids to history with museum exhibitions (pp. 173-195). Left Coast Press, Inc.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.
Hein, G. (2005) The role of museums in society: Education and social action. Curator: The Museum Journal,
48, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2005.tb00180.x
Hein, G. H. (1999). The constructivist museum. In E. Hooper-Greenhill (Ed.), The Educational Role of the Museum (2nd
ed.). (pp. 73-79). Routledge.
International Council of Museums. (2007). Museum definition. https://icom.museum/en/resources/standards-
guidelines/museum-definition/
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4Loewen, J. W. (2007). Lies across America: What American historic sites get wrong. Simon & Schuster.
Marcus, A. S., Stoddard, J. D., & Woodward, W. W. (2017). Teaching history with museums: Strategies for k-12 social
studies (2nd ed.). Taylor & Francis.
Maring, J. (2021). Rickrolling is never gonna give you up after passing 1b youtube views. Retrieved August 8, 2021
from https://screenrant.com/rickroll-never-gonna-give-you-up-1-billion-views-youtube/
Marriam-Webster. (n.d.). Experiential. In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved August 8, 2021, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/experiential
McRainey, D. L. (2010). A sense of the past. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick (Eds.), Connecting kids to history with
museum exhibitions (pp. 155-172). Left Coast Press, Inc. .
Meow Wolf. (2015). House of eternal return. Retrieved 08/08/21 from https://meowwolf.com/projects/house-of-
eternal-return
Meow Wolf. (2021). General meow wolf faqs. Retrieved 08/08/21 from https://meowwolf.com/faq
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Query. In Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Retrieved August 8, 2021, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/query
National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). (2013). The college, career, civic life (c3) framework for social studies
standards: Guidance for enhancing the rigor of k-12 civics, economics, geography, and history. National Council
for the Social Studies
Noel, A. M., & Colopy, M. A. (2006) Making history field trips meaningful: Teachers' and site educators' perspectives
on teaching materials Theory & Research in Social Education, 34(4), 553-
568, https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2006.10473321
Pardes, A. (2017). Selfie factories: The rise of the made-for-instagram museum. Wired.
https://www.wired.com/story/selfie-factories-instagram-museum/
Pumpian, I., Fisher, D., & Wachowiak, S. (2006). Challenging the classroom standard through museum-based
education: School in the park. Routledge.
Rand, J. (2010). Write and design with the family in mind. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick (Eds.). Connecting kids to
history with museum exhibitions (pp. 257-284). Left Coast Press, Inc.
Ringel, G. (2010). In a language they'll understand: Media and museums. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick (Eds.),
Connecting kids to history with museum exhibitions (pp. 285-304). Left Coast Press, Inc.
Russick, J. (2010). Making history interactive. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick (Eds.), Connecting kids to history with
museum exhibitions (pp. 219-240). Left Coast Press, Inc.
Shaffer, S. (2010). Never too young to connect to history: Cognitive development and learning. In D. L. McRainey &
J. Russick (Eds.), Connecting kids to history with museum exhibitions (pp. 201-218). Left Coast Press, Inc.
Spock, D. (2010). Imagination — a child's gateway to engagement with the past. In D. L. McRainey & J. Russick
(Eds.), Connecting kids to history with museum exhibitions (pp. 117-135). Left Coast Press, Inc.
Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Witherspoon, R. (2021). Art trends: The surge of immersive art experiences Creative Resources. Retrieved August 8, 2021 from https://creativeresources.threadless.com/art-trends-the-surge-of-immersive-art-experiences/ Ohio Social Studies Review, Volume 58, Issue 1, Article 4
You can also read
