The Untold History of Museum Education at the Royal Ontario Museum Kate Zankowicz
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Document generated on 09/25/2021 6:38 a.m. Ontario History In Search of Ruth Home The Untold History of Museum Education at the Royal Ontario Museum Kate Zankowicz Women and Education Article abstract Volume 107, Number 1, Spring 2015 Ruth Home developed the education department at the Royal Ontario Museum from 1928-1945. She was an important figure in the history of the museum, and URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1050679ar more broadly, in the history of museum-based education in the province. She DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1050679ar played a major role in expanding museum audiences and developed programming that was geared towards what were then considered women’s See table of contents interests and worked to connect the museum to schoolchildren and teachers. This paper analyses Home’s career as a means of offering insight into the early gendered dynamics of museum education and exploring the origins of many of the programs we currently associate with museum education today. Publisher(s) The Ontario Historical Society ISSN 0030-2953 (print) 2371-4654 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this article Zankowicz, K. (2015). In Search of Ruth Home: The Untold History of Museum Education at the Royal Ontario Museum. Ontario History, 107(1), 60–87. https://doi.org/10.7202/1050679ar Copyright © The Ontario Historical Society, 2015 This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit. Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal, Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to promote and disseminate research. https://www.erudit.org/en/ 60 ONTARIO HISTORY In Search of Ruth Home The Untold History of Museum Education at the Royal Ontario Museum by Kate Zankowicz t took me years to nd a photo of her. gramming that was geared towards what Buried in the archives of the Royal were then considered women’s interests Ontario Museum, it required the and worked to connect the museum to Isleuthing of a very dedicated technician schoolchildren and teachers. who used some miraculous search term To my knowledge, this is the only I could never have thought of to nd it. photo of Home that is held at the ROM Ruth M. Home developed the education archives. Despite the fact that she found- department at the Royal Ontario Muse- ed most of the educational programs we um from 1928-1945. She was an impor- take for granted today at the ROM, her tant gure in the history of the museum, name is virtually unknown in the muse- and more broadly, in the history of mu- um’s institutional history.1 seum-based education in the province. Formed by the amalgamation of She played a major role in broadening University of Toronto museums in 1914, museum audiences and developed pro- the ROM was a conglomeration of ve 1 ere are in fact two theses written that have considered Home’s career, although neither have considered the gendered dimensions of museum education. e author is indebted to the work of Riley Moynes and Eileen Mak for their initial forays into the archives. See Riley Moynes’s “Teachers and Pter- anodons: e Origins and Development of the Education Department of the Royal Ontario Museum, 1914-1974” (Doctor of Education Degree, University of Toronto, 1978), as well as Eileen Mak’s “Patterns of Change, Sources of Inuence: A Historical Study of the Canadian Museum and the Middle Class, 1850-1950,” (PhD diss., University of British Columbia, 1996). Home is also mentioned briey in Lovat Dickson’s Museum Makers: e Story of the Royal Ontario Museum. (Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum). Ontario History / Volume CVII, No. 1 / Spring 2015 OH spring 2015.indd 60 15/03/2015 3:33:07 PM in search of ruth home 61 Opposite page: e only photo of Ruth Home held at the Roy- al Ontario Museum Archives, here pictured with Homer A. Abstract ompson at a ROM archaeo- Ruth Home developed the education department at the Royal On- logical dig in Fort Ste. Marie, tario Museum om 1928-1945. She was an important gure in the 1941, ROM2015_14428_1. history of the museum, and more broadly, in the history of museum- based education in the proince. She played a major role in expand- museums, devoted to ing museum audiences and developed programming that was geared towards what were then considered women’s interests and worked to the double-pronged connect the museum to schoolchildren and teachers. is paper analy- focus of “science and ses Home’s career as a means of oering insight into the early gendered industry”: Archaeolo- dynamics of museum education and exploring the origins of many of gy, Geology, Mineral- the programs we currently associate with museum education today. ogy, Natural History Résumé: Ruth Home a développé le département éducatif du Musée (later Zoology) and royal de l’Ontario de 1928 à 1945. Elle a été un personnage très im- Palaeontology.2 e portant de l’histoire du musée et, plus généralement, de l’histoire de la museum was governed fonction éducative des musées de la proince. Elle a joué un rôle majeur dans l’augmentation du public qui les équentait par le développement and funded jointly by de programmes orientés vers ce qui était considéré alors comme intérêts the province and the féminins, et en attirant au musée des écoliers et leurs professeurs. Cet article University as well as analyse la carrière de Home pour mieux comprendre la distinction qui se from private dona- faisait entre les rôles masculins et féminins dans la pédagogie des musées, et pour explorer les origines des nombreux programmes que nous associons tions. Perhaps due to aujourd’hui à la fonction pédagogique des musées. its academic ties, the ROM was always at odds with itself: was it a “museum for the whom sat on the committee of directors.3 university” or a “museum for the people Currelly was the curator of the Museum of Ontario”? e women who developed of Archaeology from 1914 to 1946, and and found the funding for museum edu- was given the rst full-time yearly salary cation programming were at the fore- of $1,000, the only paid director.4 Al- front of this identity conict. though Currelly was Director of the Ar- e voices that dominate the history cheological Museum of the ROM (called of the Royal Ontario Museum tend to the Royal Ontario Museum of Archeol- be those of Charles Trick Currelly and ogy or ROMA) he is oen refered to as other directors. Each of the ve museums the “man who collected for Canada.” His was appointed its own curator, many of autobiography, I Brought the Ages Home, 2 See Norma E. Heakes, “Education at the Royal Ontario Museum, 1914-1975”(Toronto: Royal On- tario Museum, 1975), 16-17. 3 Directors were associated with the University of Toronto as professors, with the exception of Charles Trick Currelly. ey included Dr. Coleman, Dr. Walker, Dr. Bensley, Dr. Parks, Dr. Moore and Prof Dymond. See RG 25, Committee of Directors records description, ROMLA. 4 e other museum men were university professors and so took the museum work on as part of their professorship. See bylaw 2 Nov 26 1912, SC 73, Box 3, Dorothea Hecken collection, ROMLA. OH spring 2015.indd 61 15/03/2015 3:33:07 PM 62 ONTARIO HISTORY functions as a “founding father” myth the museum directors and Home, each for the museum.5 e collections Currel- of whom had competing visions about ly was able to acquire did not, however, who the museum was for. Home’s strug- come with interpretation or interpreter. gles were perhaps symptomatic of much Museum education as we understand it broader shis within the museum eld, today did not receive institutional sup- as education departments, largely run port in the beginning and instead relied by women both paid and unpaid, were on the passion and commitment of in- started up and called upon to develop dividual educators, many of whom, like programming that brought more com- Ruth Home, had to work to legitimize munities to their institutions. Directors, their positions within a gendered and hi- who in the case of the ROM, were associ- erarchical institution. ated with the University of Toronto, had is paper consults archived annual to re-think the purposes of their collec- reports, and committee minutes at the tions and consider a popular audience. Royal Ontario Museum Library and Ar- Home developed the education de- chives (ROMLA) as well as press cover- partment at the Royal Ontario Museum age of Home’s educational work and cur- at a time when museum education was riculum articles and oers us glimpses of just starting to become dened; she was the struggles women faced in museums. the second museum “instructress” who Home’s career gives us a better under- was hired to work with schools and standing of how museum education was communities.7 She founded many of the inscribed by issues of gender and too, educational initiatives for which the mu- the evolution of education in museums, seum eventually became known: Open places that Home thought should exist Evenings, public lectures and a lm se- to “give pleasure, to amuse and entertain ries, outreach programs to schools across in the best tradition of entertainment.”6 Ontario, Museum Days, extra-curricu- Her museum education career also tells lar activities such as Saturday Morning us about the conicting notions of who Club [SMC] and Summer Club as well counted as the ‘public’ at the Royal On- as a Children’s Room underneath the tario Museum during this time.