Ross Weeks wrote:
>I, for one, would like to see museums give more motivated "neophytes" >>thechance to see what value they can add to a museum in a year's "interim"appointment.  And we may need to do something like the universities havedone long ago:  have "tenure track" positions and "non-tenure track" posts.
> A generation may pass before most museums can offer more attractive
> compensation if all of their professional positions are treated as
> semi-permanent, with periodic raises, etc. etc.  That's just my view.

I agree. I don't know about a tenure track per se, but there's gotta be
a better way! Having just entered the museum profession as an exhibit
developer in science museums three years ago, I find myself torn.  I
love my work, it offers creative expression, creative problem solving
opportunities, many chances to work with scientists and to share my
passion for science with the public.  But... it seems that almost every
available position is contract or temporary.  It's nice to move around
for a while, never spending more than two years in one place.  But I'd
like to settle down, have a chance to get to know the audience and the
place.  I can only imagine that such a situation leads to better
exhibits.  Frankly, I'm disillusioned by what seems to be a growing
trend in hiring temporary workers to develop and make permanent
exhibits.  I'd love to hear what more "seasoned" professionals think
about this.

Jenifer Lienau
Cranbrook Institute of Science