This conversation has been very interesting, and I think the group is
touching on some very important issues. As someone who worked for five
years as a "temporary employee" at the Smithsonian, I know first hand
the challenges we are facing as professionals. However, I have to
agree that formal accreditation may be the wrong response to a
complicated problem.

Those who are interested may want to revisit Stephen Weil's
_Rethinking the Museum_ for an interesting discussion on the subject.
In short, if I am remembering correctly, Weil argues that the movement
for accreditation sets us as professionals on a path towards the
minutae of our field and moves us away from the more complex issues of
public education.

Let's continue the dialog.

Oh.... I wanted to point out that the Washington Post article about
the "museum boom" seemed to imply that the "boom" is taking place for
art and science museums mostly. Is there such a boom for history sites
or are we moving toward this uncomfortable hybrid:  the
memorial/educational center? If so, the "temple" is still alive.

Denise Meringolo
Benjamin Banneker Fellow in Public History
The George Washington University
[log in to unmask]