About Resource
Science Together was a partnership between the Museum of Life and Science (MLS) and Families Moving Forward (FMF), a shelter for families experiencing temporary homelessness. This program was focused on co-creation of sustainable informal science education experiences. Truly equitable partnerships of this kind are rare because of a variety of structural factors. Grant requirements can prevent sustained and flexible partnerships, and nonprofit structures can prevent employees from creating meaningful relationships with people experiencing homelessness. After navigating these challenges over the course of four years, the Science Together team has taken away a few key lessons:
- Funding that lasts beyond the federal grant cycle is a key element to sustained partnerships with shelters and people experiencing homelessness
- Equitable active-listening practices are critical to maintaining flexible and responsive informal education programming that fits a shelter’s needs
- Museum staff must assess the needs of their audience, and meet them through inclusive educational practices
How to Use
This resource is relevant for organizations who are building or planning to build partnerships with shelters and people experiencing homelessness. The decision to use “homeless” as the primary term throughout the article is explained in the introduction, which emphasizes that this was the preferred term of the of the Families Moving Forward community members. The abstract and introduction include key lessons that educators can keep in mind throughout partnership development, and the following sections contain useful vignettes that concretely show the application of these lessons in practice.
In “The format” section (pg. 5) the authors describe the structure of the Science Together program. Their model includes monthly programming, weekly staff meetings, and periodic check-ins with families to adjust programming based on the community’s shifting needs. The authors include information about how they modified their practices during the COVID-19 pandemic to demonstrate the responsiveness of their model.
In the “Replicable lessons learned” section (pg. 6), the authors outline primary takeaways that could be applied to others’ work with a variety of communities. This section includes examples of what these lessons look like on the ground, for example, the “Build for accessibility” section emphasizes that principles of universal design should be applied to all elements of relationship-building and educational programming.