"Unfacilitated" Doesn't Mean "Unpeopled"
Have you noticed what happens at the self-checkout lane at the supermarket?
The whole premise is that you don't need a person. Scan, bag, pay, leave. And yet every store still posts a human at the end of the row, and every one of us has been quietly grateful for them when the machine barks "unexpected item in the bagging area" for the third time. The self-checkout isn't a facilitated experience. But it is unquestionably a better experience because somebody friendly is standing nearby.
I've been thinking about that lately in relation to museums, because we use the word "unfacilitated" as if it were a design specification.
An exhibit is either "facilitated" (there's a program, a cart, a scheduled demo) or "unfacilitated" (the exhibit has to do all the work itself, forever, with no help). Exhibit developers, myself included, spend enormous energy making sure our components can stand on their own. That's good practice.
But somewhere along the way "unfacilitated" started to sound like "unstaffed," and those are not the same things at all.
Here's the proposition I'd like to expand on: "unfacilitated" exhibits and activities still benefit enormously from human interaction between visitors and staff or volunteers. Not scripted programs. Not tours. Just people who are present, approachable, and trained to be useful in the moments that matter.
The research backs this up
This isn't just a hunch. Scott Pattison and Lynn Dierking spent years studying what they call "unstructured" staff-visitor interactions at OMSI (the unscripted conversations at exhibits, as opposed to shows or tours) and found front-line educators to be critical to the visitor experience. Their later work at interactive math exhibits, done through the REVEAL project, deliberately built "facilitation affordances" into components that already worked fine on their own, so an educator could deepen what a family was doing beyond what the exhibit alone could accomplish. In other words: the exhibits weren't broken. The humans made them better.
REFERENCES:
Pattison & Dierking, "Staff-Mediated Learning in Museums" (Visitor Studies): https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10645578.2013.767731
Pattison et al., "The Impact of Facilitation by Museum Educators on Family Learning at Interactive Math Exhibits": https://www.terc.edu/reveal/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2021/03/PattisonEtAl2018_VS_StaffImpact_PrePub.pdf
And a 2025 Curator article by Karen Knutson and colleagues looked at youth facilitators talking with families in a natural history museum, where the "exhibits" are static specimens rather than push-button interactives. Same finding, different museum genre. Families don't arrive expecting a conversation, but when a prepared young person offers one, the visit gets richer. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cura.12669
Museums that get this right
The Exploratorium's Explainers (San Francisco). The granddaddy of them all. Frank Oppenheimer wanted enthusiastic guides who would encourage visitors to play with the exhibits and discover their own questions, and the High School Explainer program has been doing that since 1969. Explainers get more than 60 hours of training, and a science background is not required. Explainers are required to have curiosity and the ability to talk with strangers. Notice that the Exploratorium's floor is famously "unfacilitated" in the programmatic sense, yet it has always been thick with people in orange vests. That was never an accident. https://www.exploratorium.edu/about/explainers
The Exploratorium's Tinkering Studio takes this a step further and says it out loud. They describe a suite of experiences that "do not need facilitation in order to be effective" but "benefit greatly from a facilitator being present," with the explicit goal of training non-expert Explainers to act as co-learners rather than authority figures. That phrase, "co-learners rather than figures of authority," is the whole ballgame. https://www.exploratorium.edu/tinkering/our-work/the-tinkering-studio-itself
NYSCI's Science Career Ladder (Queens). Closer to home for me. The red-aproned Explainers at the New York Hall of Science are high school and college students who advance through a scaffolded set of jobs, training, and mentorship. The museum reports that roughly 5,000 young people have come through the program. The brilliant part is the two-way benefit: visitors get a friendly face at an exhibit, and the Explainer gets a career pathway. A class of NYSCI Explainers can collectively speak something like 20 languages, which matters a great deal in Queens. https://nysci.org/science-career-ladder
Living Laboratory at the Museum of Science (Boston). This one turns the model inside out. Instead of museum staff talking to visitors, actual child-development researchers from Harvard, Tufts, BU, and elsewhere set up their studies on the exhibit floor in the Discovery Center and Hall of Human Life, in plain view, and are trained by museum educators to talk with any visitor who wanders over. The exhibits around them are as unfacilitated as ever. The scientists are just... there, and approachable. https://www.mos.org/living-laboratory and https://livinglab.org/
The Art Gallery of Ontario's "Ask Me" program (Toronto). Proof that this isn't just a science center trick. The AGO stationed docents in its contemporary galleries several afternoons a week specifically to have one-on-one conversations, validate visitors' reactions to difficult contemporary work, and point people toward further resources. No tour, no script, just a human wearing a button that gives you permission to talk to them. https://www.museum-ed.org/the-ask-me-program/
ASK Brooklyn Museum (a program that's gone, with a lesson that isn't). A decade ago, the Brooklyn Museum launched an app that let visitors text questions to a live team of art historians who responded in under a minute. It won awards, but it has since been phased out. ASK is no longer active.
Regular ExhibiTricks readers know I'm skeptical of technology for its own sake, and there's a lesson in the fact that the ASK app didn't last. But what I find most instructive is what the museum learned in a year of pilot testing before building anything: visitors wanted a personal connection with staff and wanted to talk about the art. The app was the delivery mechanism. The humans were the essential component. Apps come and go. That finding is still true, and it doesn't require a single line of code. https://artmuseumteaching.com/2015/07/23/the-big-ask-experiencing-the-brooklyn-museums-ask-app/
Some Takeaways
You do not need a Bloomberg grant or a 55-year-old youth employment program to do this. Some low-cost, high-impact starting points:
• Rebrand your floor staff. If the people on your floor are called "attendants," the job title is telling them (and visitors) what to expect. "Gallery host," "Explainer," "Play Guide" cost nothing and change the posture.
• Give people permission to talk. The AGO's "Ask Me" button is a visitor engagement component that costs about a dollar. So is a sign at the entrance to an unfacilitated gallery that says "Our staff love questions."
• Build one "facilitation affordance" into each new exhibit. Pattison's team did it with extension challenges. It can be as simple as a second, harder version of the activity that a staff member can offer to a family that's already engaged. Design for the human, even when the human is optional.
• Train for questions, not answers. The Exploratorium and the Tinkering Studio both emphasize that their best floor staff are co-learners. A ten-minute weekly huddle on "what's a good question to ask at the wind tube?" beats a binder of facts.
• Borrow other people's experts. Living Laboratory works because researchers want an audience. So do master gardeners, ham radio operators, retired machinists, and the woodturners' guild. They'll come for free if you give them a table and a cup of coffee.
The self-checkout lane doesn't need a person. But nobody complains that there is one.
So what does your museum call the people standing in your "unfacilitated" galleries? And are you training them to answer questions, or to ask them? Let me know in the "Comments" section below!
Paul Orselli writes the posts on ExhibiTricks. Paul likes to combine interesting people, ideas, and materials to make exhibits (and entire museums!) with his company POW! (Paul Orselli Workshop, Inc.) Let's work on a project together!
If you enjoy the blog, you can help keep it free to read and free from ads by supporting ExhibiTricks through our PayPal "Tip Jar"
