Museum Learning Theory and Research

as Tools for Enhancing Practice 1st

Edition Jill Hohenstein
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/museum-learning-theory-and-research-as-tools-for-en
hancing-practice-1st-edition-jill-hohenstein/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Service Learning as Pedagogy in Early Childhood

Education Theory Research and Practice 1st Edition
Kelly L. Heider (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/service-learning-as-pedagogy-in-
early-childhood-education-theory-research-and-practice-1st-
edition-kelly-l-heider-eds/

Extramural English in Teaching and Learning: From

Theory and Research to Practice 1st Edition Pia
Sundqvist

https://textbookfull.com/product/extramural-english-in-teaching-
and-learning-from-theory-and-research-to-practice-1st-edition-
pia-sundqvist/

Learning with Women in Jail Creating Community Based

Participatory Research Jill Mccracken

https://textbookfull.com/product/learning-with-women-in-jail-
creating-community-based-participatory-research-jill-mccracken/

Stimulating Student Interest in Language Learning:

Theory, Research and Practice 1st Edition Tan Bee Tin
(Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/stimulating-student-interest-in-
language-learning-theory-research-and-practice-1st-edition-tan-
bee-tin-auth/
Education for Practice in a Hybrid Space Enhancing
Professional Learning with Mobile Technology Franziska
Trede

https://textbookfull.com/product/education-for-practice-in-a-
hybrid-space-enhancing-professional-learning-with-mobile-
technology-franziska-trede/

Transdisciplinary Theory Practice and Education The Art

of Collaborative Research and Collective Learning Dena
Fam

https://textbookfull.com/product/transdisciplinary-theory-
practice-and-education-the-art-of-collaborative-research-and-
collective-learning-dena-fam/

Operations Research-Operations Research: Theory and

Practice 1st Edition N.V.S Raju (Author)

https://textbookfull.com/product/operations-research-operations-
research-theory-and-practice-1st-edition-n-v-s-raju-author/

Therapy as Discourse: Practice and Research Olga

Smoliak

https://textbookfull.com/product/therapy-as-discourse-practice-
and-research-olga-smoliak/

Education Tools for Entrepreneurship Creating an Action

Learning Environment through Educational Learning Tools
1st Edition Marta Peris-Ortiz

https://textbookfull.com/product/education-tools-for-
entrepreneurship-creating-an-action-learning-environment-through-
educational-learning-tools-1st-edition-marta-peris-ortiz/
i

Museum Learning

As museums are increasingly asked to demonstrate not only

their cultural, but also their educational and social significance,
the means to understand how museum visitors learn becomes
ever more important. And yet, learning can be conceptualised
and investigated in many ways. Coming to terms with how the-
ories about learning interact with one another and how they
relate to ‘evidence-​based learning’ can be confusing at best.
Museum Learning attempts to make sense of multiple learn-
ing theories whilst focusing on a set of core learning topics in
museums. It draws attention to the development of theory and
its practical applications in museum contexts such as aquar-
iums, zoos, botanical gardens and historical re-enactment sites,
in addition to more traditional art, science, and social history
museums. Importantly, it considers learning not just as a cog-
nitive characteristic, as some perspectives propose, but also
as affective, taking into consideration interests, attitudes, and
emotions.
This volume will be of interest to museum studies students,
practitioners and researchers working in informal learning con-
texts, and will help them to reflect on what it means to learn in
museums and create more effective environments for learning.

Jill Hohenstein is Senior Lecturer in Psychology in Education

at the School of Education, Communication and Society, King’s
College London. Trained as a developmental psychologist, her
research examines the ways that children and adults learn in
informal settings, including museums, with a particular focus
on language and cognitive development.

Theano Moussouri is Senior Lecturer in Museum Studies at

the Institute of Archaeology, University College London. She
previously worked in museums as an audience researcher. Her
current research examines motivation and meaning making in
museum visitors and non-​visitors; museum professionals’ devel-
opment and sharing of knowledge; and researcher-​practitioner
collaborative research.
ii
iii

Museum Learning
Theory and Research as Tools
for Enhancing Practice

Jill Hohenstein and

Theano Moussouri
iv

First published 2018

by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an
informa business
© 2018 Jill Hohenstein and Theano Moussouri
The right of Jill Hohenstein and Theano Moussouri to be identified as
authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with
sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any
information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-​in-​Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-​in-​Publication Data
Names: Hohenstein, Jill, author. | Moussouri, Theano, author.
Title: Museum learning : theory and research as tools for enhancing practice /
Jill Hohenstein and Theano Moussouri.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routhledge, 2017. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017017357 (print) | LCCN 2017034080 (ebook) |
ISBN 9781315696447 (Master) | ISBN 9781317445944 (Web Pdf) |
ISBN 9781317445944 ( ePub) | ISBN 9781317445937 (Mobipocket/Kindle) |
ISBN 9781138901124 (hardback : alk. paper) |
ISBN 9781138901131 (pbk. : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781315696447 (ebk)
Subjects: LCSH: Museums–Educational aspects. |
Museum techniques–Research. | Learning, Psychology of.
Classification: LCC AM7 (ebook) |
LCC AM7 .H64 2017 (print) | DDC 069.075–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017017357
ISBN: 978-​1-​138-​90112-​4 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-​1-​138-​90113-​1 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-​1-​315-​69644-​7 (ebk)
Typeset in Sabon
by Out of House Publishing
v

Contents

List of contributors vi
Acknowledgements viii

1 Introduction 1

2 Theory and museum practice 11

3 The importance of methods and methodology

for museum practice 31

Topic chapters 53

4 Museums and the making of meaning 55

5 Narrative, discourse and matters of communication 99

6 Degrees of authenticity in museums 136

7 Remembering, reminding and reminiscing in

museums 170

8 The role of self and identity in learning 196

9 Motivation: from visiting to devotion 232

10 Questioning culture and power in museums 264

11 Conclusions 290

Glossary 296
Index 306
vi

Contributors

Chapter 4
Frances Jeens, Head of Learning, Jewish Museum London, UK.
Frances contributed The Role of the Museum as a Place to Ask
Anonymous Questions scenario.

Chapter 5
Sue Brunning, Curator, European Early Medieval & Sutton Hoo
Collections, Department of Britain, Europe and Prehistory, the
British Museum, UK. Sue wrote and contributed the Experience
on Room 41 scenario.

Chapter 6
Katherine Johnson, Youth Education Programs Director at the
Chicago Botanic Garden in Glencoe, IL, USA. Katherine wrote
and contributed the Authentic Nature Play at the Chicago
Botanic Garden scenario.

Chapter 7
Sharon Willoughby, Manager Public Programs, Cranbourne
Gardens, Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria, Australia. Katherine
wrote and contributed the Authentic Nature Play at the Chicago
Botanic Garden scenario.

Chapter 8
The following contributors gave the authors permission to use
information from the Colored Girls Museum website in order
to construct The Art of Voicing Black Women’s Identity as Seen
Through Everyday Objects scenario.
Michael Clemmons, Curator, Colored Girls Museum,
Philadelphia, PA, USA & Associate.
Vashti DuBois, Executive Director/​
Founder, Colored Girls
Museum, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
vii

Contributors vii
Ian Friday, Associate Director, The Colored Girls Museum,
Philadelphia PA, USA & Director-​Workforce Development –​
CSPCD, Temple University, CSPCD, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Chapter 9
The information for the scenario was provided in notes, inter-
view and a paper (Davies, 2014). It was then written by the
authors and further edited by Glynn Davis, Adam Corsini and
Roy Stephenson.
Adam Corsini, Archaeology Collections Manager, Museum of
London, London, UK. Adam wrote sections of, edited and con-
tributed the Linking up Museums and People through Serious
Pursuits scenario.
Glynn Davis, Senior Collections & Learning Curator at
Colchester Museums, Colchester, UK (formerly Archaeological
Collections Manager at the Museum of London’s Archaeological
Archive). Glynn provided original material for, edited and con-
tributed the Linking up Museums and People through Serious
Pursuits scenario.
Roy Stephenson, Head of Archaeological Collections and
Archive, Museum of London, UK. Roy edited the final ver-
sion of the Linking up Museums and People through Serious
Pursuits scenario.

Chapter 10
Myles Russell Cook, Curator of Indigenous Art, National
Gallery of Victoria, Australia & Lecturer, Design Anthropology
and Indigenous Studies, University of Melbourne, Australia.
Myles wrote the original paper which is used in the Aboriginal
People and Museums Working Together scenario.
viii

Acknowledgements

This book is the result of the collaborative effort and sup-

port of many people, including our colleagues at the School of
Education, Communication and Society, King’s College London
and UCL Institute of Archaeology, museum colleagues and our
students. Ideas presented in this book have been discussed with
many people and have been honed by our students’ questions.
Our very special thanks go to Marie Hobson. The discussions
we had with her and her feedback on one of the chapters had
special impact and proved to be a turning point in the develop-
ment of the topic chapters in particular. We would also like to
acknowledge the invaluable assistance and support of our sce-
nario writers and/​or contributors: Sue Brunning, Adam Corsini,
Glynn Davis, Frances Jeens, Katherine Johnson and Sharon
Willoughby. They have all been extremely generous with their
time, met with us and provided feedback and ideas throughout
the process, from developing the book structure and its con-
tent to sourcing photographs and reading various parts of the
manuscript. Michael Clemmons, Vashti DuBois and Ian Friday
have been most helpful and their ideas and vision have been a
true inspiration to us. Many thanks Myles Russell Cook and
Roy Stephenson for their contribution to the scenarios too.
A number of people helped us with developing the book con-
tent and its structure. In this regard, we would like to thank the
Public Engagement Group of the Natural History Museum in
London, and the Learning Team of the Jewish Museum London
who have contributed ideas and support with great generosity.
We would also like to thank the following for their ideas and
support: Carol Chung, Ruth Clarke, Sally Collins, Pippa Couch,
Kathryn Creed, Chris Winch, Victoria Donnellan, Sabine Doolin,
Christine Gerbich, Tim Grove, Stuart Frost, Juliette Fritsch,
Conny Graft, Naomi Haywood, Morna Hinton, Gina Koutsika,
Effrosyni Nomikou, Emma Pegram, Juhee Park, Emily Pringle,
Beth Schneider and Lucy Trench. Others helped enormously by
assisting us in identifying and contacting possible scenario con-
tributors; our thanks go to Marianna Adams, Jamie Bell, Dirk
vom Lehn, Jennifer Schwarz Ballard and Asimina Vergou. Many
ix
newgenprepdf

Acknowledgements ix
thanks to Eleni Vomvyla, Antigonos Sochos, Paul Marshall,
Pippa Couch, David Francis and Heather King for their sugges-
tions of relevant literature.
We much appreciate the kind assistance of the following
museum staff who assisted with sourcing and with copyright
permissions for photographs: Iain Calderwood, the British
Museum; Michael Clemmons and Ian Friday, the Colored Girls
Museum; Sarah Williams, Museum of London; and Alamy
Customer Service staff. We would particularly like to thank the
following museums for giving us permission to use their photo-
graphs free of change: Colored Girls Museum, Chicago Botanic
Garden, Jewish Museum London and Royal Botanic Gardens
Victoria.
We would like to thank the two anonymous referees for their
feedback and our editors at Routledge: Matthew Gibbons,
Senior Editor; Lola Harre, Editorial Assistant; and Molly
Marler, Editorial Assistant.
This book would not have been completed without the help
of family members. Katerina Roussos has been very patient
while this project was completed and she has also been the
inspiration for one of the fictitious characters in our scenarios.
George Roussos has been an endless source of encouragement
and support.
x
1

1 
Introduction

Theory can be seen as a lens through which research is fil-

tered. As a result, the ideas that are seen to be important for
use in developing evidence-​ based practice are all influenced
by particular perspectives about learning, about research, and
about museums. This is not always done in a conscious way
in museum practice. As practically minded people, museum
professionals are often drawn to empirical research and mod-
els that are developed in order to address pertinent questions
for museum practice. We argue that, although there is noth-
ing inherently wrong with these approaches, issues of theory-​
evidence gap, methodology and theoretical assumptions require
attention. Similarly, models developed with p ­ractitioners in
mind need to be mindful of and address these issues. This is
an area where academic researchers and museum professionals
can work together to develop theoretically sound and practice-​
relevant frameworks, through research-​practice collaborations.
This book represents the culmination of multiple years of
work on the part of us, and many others in the worlds of
both museums and learning theory. We have been aware for
some time, through literature, work experiences, and conver-
sations with various stakeholders, that it has been difficult to
formulate a way to coherently discuss theories about learning
in museum contexts in a manner that is accessible but also
represents theories as they are seen in the world of academia.
That is, the divide between academia and practice seems to
grow rather than shrink in many ways, despite the attempts
to bridge gaps. We hope this book helps to provide a useful
window between theory and research on the one hand and
practice on the other. In this introductory chapter there are
several topics we will highlight: definitions of learning, what
we refer to as a museum, the purpose of considering learning
theory in museums as we see it, as well as the outline of the
chapters that follow.
Though on the surface it might seem rather obvious, there
are many different institutions that could count as a ‘museum’.
2

2 Introduction
The Museums Association in the UK states that ‘Museums
enable people to explore collections for inspiration, learning
and enjoyment. They are institutions that collect, safeguard and
make accessible artefacts and specimens, which they hold in
trust for society’ (Museums Association, n.d.). This definition
purposely includes art galleries and historical collections. We
are using the term museum rather more broadly here to include
both these traditional museums, containing objects of value
(however that is defined), which offer a public the opportunity
to see these objects so they may experience them in an authentic
way. But we are also referring to science centres in which there
may be very few ‘objects’ of value, but rather there are hands-​
on experiences of phenomena that the scientific community has
discovered. In addition, zoos and botanical gardens which both
contain living ‘objects’ can be thought of in ways that are simi-
lar to museums. Furthermore, heritage and archaeological sites
constitute other forms of what can be thought of as open-​air
museums. There are also historical houses and other buildings
of interest that qualify as museums in this view. Finally, newer
ways of interacting with publics through dialogue events, re-​
enactments, and demonstrations can be considered within the
auspices of museums. Gurian (2002) categorised museums into
five types: object-​centred, housing objects of value; narrative,
including those that interpret the story of particular groups
(e.g., United States Holocaust Memorial Museum); client-​cen-
tred, including children’s museums and science centres, many of
which do not have collections but instead provide experiences
and afford visitors opportunities to witness phenomena; com-
munity-​centred, being of –​and for –​the community in which
they are based; and national, which tend to attempt to represent
the interests of a whole country. Though each type of museum
may have specific needs and details with respect to the consid-
eration of learning, there are undoubtedly many things that are
shared by these institutional types.
Though much of the research that we present has been car-
ried out in more ‘traditional’ object-​centred and client-​centred
museums, it is important to consider the ways that other con-
texts may have similar or different relations to the findings of
research and be able to utilise the guidance that various theor-
ies might put forth. Of course, the studies reviewed here take
a specific view of museums, although this is not always expli-
cit. Museums are often seen as social institutions for personal,
social, dialogical, collective or emancipatory learning, with vari-
ous degrees of reference to the ideological process of education
or learning policy and mission. At the same time, we acknow-
ledge that there is a growing use of digital technologies in muse-
ums for presentation of exhibit material as well as interactive
guided tours, amongst other uses. Although we refer to studies
3

Introduction 3
involving digital technologies in museum learning in several
places throughout the book, including a section in Chapter 6
on authenticity, we do not devote a great deal of space specific-
ally to how learning can be enhanced (or indeed inhibited) by
the use of digital technology. This may be an omission on our
part. However, it was necessary to make choices about what we
were able to include, due to space limitations.
We want to clarify from the outset that we think of learn-
ing as something that is cognitive, affective and psychomotor
(Bloom, 1956). Whereas a very traditional view of learning
would perhaps suggest that priority should to be given to the
cognitive aspects of learning (e.g., knowledge for facts and
‘understanding’ how or why things have occurred in the way
they have), we also hold dear the notion that learning is much
broader than just cognitive gains. That is, learning is also emo-
tional, attitudinal and aspirational, but bodily, too. This means
that people develop and change in the ways they feel about vari-
ous ideas and concepts such as impressionist art, biomedical
technologies, changes in positions of power across the globe,
etc. They also can sometimes become highly skilled at an activ-
ity, such as driving a car, without being able to think about
or talk about the details involved in carrying out that activity.
So, though there is still an emphasis on cognitive learning in
various educational institutions, including museums, we think
is it important to recognise the non-​cognitive in learning theory
and research. That being said, much of the research in museums
does tend to take a cognitive focus. We try to present work in
this book that goes beyond the cognitive but we are also limited
by the research that has been carried out.
It is important to point out that whereas thinking of learning
as memory for facts is perhaps conventional, it might not be the
most useful way to capture the types of learning experiences
occurring in museums. There are numerous reasons to reject
mere factual learning as the standard upon which to judge
museum learning. Thinking about learning as only a cogni-
tive outcome will result in missing issues to do with conceptual
development as opposed to ‘information’ as important elements
of learning. But adding the affective and motoric types of learn-
ing to the mix will bolster arguments as to why a focus on facts
as items to be learned will miss out on valuable opportunities
in museums that would not count as learning facts. Moreover,
whilst some theoretical perspectives about learning prioritise a
notion of learning that exists within people’s heads (e.g., con-
structivism, information processing), there are alternative views
that would suggest learning and conceptual development are
processes that occur in the interactional space in relationships
between people (e.g., sociocultural theory). These latter types of
perspectives tend to cut across cognitive and affective, or even
4

4 Introduction
motor, learning. There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that
factual (and conceptual) cognitive learning can be connected
to affective and even bodily learning (Martin & Briggs, 1986).
But even this type of finding suggests that cognitive learning is
somehow more important than attitudinal or emotional learn-
ing. We feel that Falk and Dierking (1997) were right, twenty
years ago, to have highlighted the need to go beyond think-
ing about learning as memory for facts and have attempted to
address this in multiple ways throughout the book.
Learning can be defined as a relatively permanent change in
thought or behaviour, which might include cognition, opinions,
skills or mindset as indicated above. These changes could be in
areas that are of less obvious relevance to learning in museums,
like firing patterns in particular neurons in the brain. But they
can also appear in more observable actions, such as answers
on a ‘test’ of knowledge. And they might also be in less tan-
gible areas such as a vague sense of belonging to a group or
feelings of being drawn to certain forms of art but not others.
Illeris (2007) has pointed out that learning can be viewed as
an outcome: this change in thought or behaviour mentioned
above. But he notes that one could also see learning in terms of
a process or even an interaction. The process of learning could
be closely tied to the outcomes. That is, certain mental and
emotional mechanisms might be necessary to bring about the
learning outcomes that are seen. On the other hand, learning as
an interaction implies that it is not an individual process, but
rather involves at least two actors. The exchange between these
actors can lead to different outcomes or even processes. The
way one chooses to think about learning (outcome, process, or
interaction) could affect the choices that are made in consider-
ing theory and research as valuable, but also how to apply the
ideas from theory and research in practical settings.
It is sometimes difficult to make sense of the myriad research
outcomes about a given topic. One only has to consider the
news reports about the so-​called benefits to our health of fats
versus carbohydrates versus protein versus sugar, among other
potential nutrients, to see how research does not always provide
easy to follow guidelines or practical advice to the everyday
consumer. We aim in this book to try to unpick some of the rea-
sons that research findings can be at odds with one another. We
think that one important element of such differences can be due
to differences in theoretical perspective. Theoretical perspec-
tives about learning (or other types of theory) are not always
compatible with one another. If one buys into a particular type
of learning as more important (e.g., outcome or cognitive), and
this is more consistent with a particular theoretical perspec-
tive about learning, there is a good chance that the approach
to research will differ from the approach taken by a different
5

Introduction 5
researcher with a different understanding of what learning
should be seen as (e.g., interaction or affective). As covered
in the next chapter on theory, sometimes theories can be built
up in a way that reinforces biases about the fundamental con-
structs they cover, such as learning. These biases will undoubt-
edly influence the research that is based on these theories and
any resulting guidance for practice. This may be one reason that
findings from two different studies about the same topic can
appear to come to varying conclusions. As such, consideration
ought to be given to the theory that drove the research before
trying to derive practical implications from studies.
To complicate matters, there are also disciplinary boundaries
that can serve to both help and hinder understandings in the
field of museum learning. For example, we draw from literature
in psychology, sociology, history, philosophy and anthropology
as ‘primary’ disciplines in this book. However, there are inter-
disciplinary fields that are also useful in the consideration of
theories to do with learning, particularly as relevant to muse-
ums. These fields include education, women’s studies, museum
studies, cultural studies, tourism and leisure studies, and herit-
age studies, among others. Sometimes theories in two differ-
ent disciplines can sound very similar to one another, and are
developed in parallel to each other but only very rarely refer to
each other in a cross-​disciplinary way. For example, both the
theory of Figured Worlds (Holland, Skinner, Lachiotte, & Cain,
2001) and the concept of ‘scripts’ (Schank & Abelson, 1977)
relate to the ways that people come to understand expectations
about how to act in particular situations. However, scripts tend
to approach the idea from a very cognitive point of view, pro-
viding a way for people to act efficiently in their everyday lives;
whereas Figured Worlds uses the idea about expectations as a
fuzzier set of guidance, which helps people act in ways that are
appropriate to their identities.
Some researchers coming from disparate fields tend to pick
and choose aspects of psychological and learning science theor-
ies that suit them (or they have easy access to). This approach
often results in reducing quite complex theories, constructs and
principles to rather simplistic interpretations of what are, in
effect, umbrella theories. One problem with this situation is that
these researchers may only focus in on a small number of stud-
ies, representing particular interpretations of these theoretical
perspectives whilst ignoring the complexities developed within
the academic discipline by the original authors of the theories.
As a result, this may lead to ignorance of what these disciplin-
ary perspectives have to offer, which can mean that whole fields
of study can miss out on meaningful dialogues. On the other
hand, other researchers have made efforts to marry up dif-
ferent disciplinary perspectives and create more sophisticated
6

6 Introduction
and overarching theoretical perspectives. Beyond the theoret-
ical level, the interaction of different disciplinary perspectives
can also be useful at a methodological level. Where we have
encountered potential dialogues in and between disciplines and
fields, we try to point them out for the reader to help make
sense of the vast array of theoretical perspectives that exist.
We feel it is important to declare our own backgrounds here
in order to honestly acknowledge any biases we have. We have
attempted to be inclusive in this book. But inevitably we are
unable to make space for everything. We are undoubtedly influ-
enced by our own perspectives about what is important. Given
our statements about theory forming a lens with which to view
research and practice, disclosure of our perspectives seems essen-
tial. One of us is a developmental psychologist who researches
cognitive development and language. Hohenstein’s primary
theoretical perspectives stem from Piagetian, social constructiv-
ist, information processing and sociocultural backgrounds. At
the same time, her research has tended to utilise quantitative
methods, both observational and experimental. This research
has been conducted primarily in museums and other sites of
non-​formal learning, like the home. Moussouri’s view of learn-
ing in museums has been influenced by social constructivist and
sociocultural perspectives. Having completed her first degree in
education, one of the first things she noticed when working in
museums was how few of the learning theories developed with
formal learning settings in mind can be applied in museum set-
tings. This shaped her approach to research, which is driven by
research questions related to the value and relevance of muse-
ums in people’s lives and grounded in museum practice. Her
research is exploratory and qualitative in nature.
Related to the above disclosures, we are both empirical social
scientists. As such, we tend to rely on empirical, rather than
theoretical, research in our presentations of theory and research
in this book (see Chapter 3 for more information on empirical
methods). This means that our background leads us to favour
studies that involve collecting data from relevant individuals or
sources as opposed to those that start with an intellectual ques-
tion and present analyses of exhibitions and experiences solely
from the theoretical perspective of the author. We are aware
that work from heritage studies often uses this technique in aca-
demic writing. As a result, we tend to draw less from that field
than perhaps we could have.
This book begins with a chapter that discusses the import-
ance of theory for both research and practice. We present the
ways that theory develops over time, and how it can be difficult
to change a discipline’s dogmatic reliance on particular theor-
etical perspectives. But we also highlight the mediational role
theory plays in the influence of research on practice: if theory
7

Introduction 7
has influenced research and research is used for evidence-​based
practice, then logically, theory also influences practice. At the
same time, it can be difficult to make sense of the various the-
ories about learning in museums. We emphasise the need to pay
attention to what researchers mean when they align themselves
with a particular theoretical perspective. Moreover, research-
ers might not even explicitly talk about theory in their stud-
ies, which can also introduce confusion to the issues of theory,
research, and practice.
Following from this discussion of theory, Chapter 3 presents
some very brief notes about methods and methodology. We
think it is important to consider not just the theoretical perspec-
tives about learning, but also the approaches that are taken to
conducting empirical study. As such, we have attempted to out-
line some of the nuts and bolts to social science research, with
a complete awareness of our inability (both due to space limita-
tions and lack of expertise) to provide either a how-​to manual
for conducting research or a more thorough consideration of all
of the available methods. We hope that this cursory coverage of
methods and methodology will, if nothing else, help by indicat-
ing further references to follow for those who would like them.
Because we have tried in this book to ground the presentation
of research and theory, we introduce our ‘topic’ chapters, 4–​10,
with a scenario that was contributed by practitioners from a
number of museums around the world. The use of scenarios
counterbalances the abstract nature of the theoretical discus-
sions by grounding them in current museum practice and think-
ing. Hence, each topic chapter is a form of dialogue between
theory, research and practice. The ensuing discussion presents
our interpretations of how the practice-​based scenarios relate
to a variety of domain-specific theories. This is followed by the
presentation of a number of either museum-​based or museum-​
relevant empirical studies within the same domain.
We note here that the selection of topics is purposeful and
yet may seem arbitrary. Each topic enabled us to look at a set
of pertinent questions about learning in museums and can be
approached in a cross-​disciplinary way. We understand there
will be overlap between topics at times; however, it seems
important to separate the topics so that (a) readers can eas-
ily locate concepts they are interested in and (b) we can pre-
sent the material in a more easily digestible amount of content.
Attempts are made in the chapters to review learning research
within each topic in a critical way, recognising that in a book of
this size, it would be impossible to thoroughly cover all aspects
of every topic.
Chapter 4 starts off this series of topic chapters by consider-
ing the making of meaning. This broad subject covers a num-
ber of perspectives about how different kinds of people (e.g.,
8

8 Introduction
children, school groups, adults) have been shown to experi-
ence museum visits. A great number of theoretical perspectives
are drawn upon here, including constructivism, sociocultural
theory, information processing, interest, experiential learning,
among others. The range of theories attempts to span cognitive
and affective ways that people can make meaning in museums.
The following chapter focuses on narrative and language
as tools for learning in museums. On the one hand, narra-
tive is something that individuals use to help organise their
identities, their understandings of world events and their rela-
tionships to other people. On the other hand, discourse is a
bridge between people, which some theoretical perspectives
(e.g., sociocultural theory, social constructivism) suggest is a
key tool for learning. Chapter 5 draws together elements of
narrative, discourse and communication to draw attention to
the myriad research tools that can be utilised to understand-
ing how language, storytelling and communication interact in
museum learning situations.
It is often thought that one of the key attractions of museums
is their ability to facilitate access to authentic objects and experi-
ences. Chapter 6 considers how learners interpret the authentic-
ity of what they are experiencing. We delineate the relationships
between the historical, cultural and institutional contexts within
which authenticity has been identified and studied and the way
evidence about how people perceive authenticity has been col-
lected and interpreted. Authenticity is not only a nebulous term
but its meaning has been coloured by predominantly Western
European views of the ‘authentic’. This clearly has connections
to learner motivations to see and be moved by ‘authentic’ objects
or to have ‘authentic experiences’ in ‘authentic settings’.
Chapter 7 connects learning experiences in museums to mem-
ory. We consider both personal and collective memories and
their importance for setting out a learning agenda in museums.
Whilst there are obvious implications from a learning agenda
for personal memories, particularly as traditionally learning has
been equated with memory for facts, the need to consider how
a learner’s previous experiences lead them to filter new experi-
ences can be important for setting out exhibitions and activities
in museums, too. Moreover, the ways that events are collec-
tively remembered by communities will have implications for
how museums approach topics they are exhibiting and organis-
ing activities around. As such, it will be important to consider
not just how the majority culture views particular events, but
also the views of minorities and marginalised groups.
Chapter 8 considers issues related to self and identity in muse-
ums. This chapter discusses the interrelation between the per-
sonal, social, cultural and cross-​cultural dimensions of identity.
We argue that theoretical and methodological approaches to
9

Introduction 9
studying identity in museums need to address both personal and
collective identities since they mediate how people make sense
of, act and reflect on their experiences in museums.
We then turn to discuss the many ways that motivation
can be explored in museum settings in Chapter 9. Motivation
seems an obvious element to learning and yet is still so poorly
understood. Multiple theoretical (e.g., flow, serious leisure, soci-
ocultural theory) and methodological approaches (e.g., ethnog-
raphy, quasi-​experimental approaches) have been proposed to
help illuminate the ways that motivation interacts with other
elements of learning, including cognitive outcomes, attitudinal
changes, identity formation, and engagement with experiences
both inside and outside school. In this central chapter we pre-
sent several different theoretical perspectives drawn from mul-
tiple disciplines (e.g., anthropology, sociology, psychology) in
order to try to make sense of the many connections between
motivation and museum learning.
Our final topic chapter, Chapter 10, addresses a variety of
issues involving culture and power in museum settings. It looks
at the power relationships that exist within cultures and the
role these play in shaping human experience and behaviour. It
examines how particular approaches to knowledge construc-
tion and learning that have been used in museums enact and
reproduce power relations. This can determine whether people
choose to visit, and the ways in which they engage with and
respond to the museum content, with their group members and
museum staff.
In concluding this book, we draw attention to ways that we
see research and practice as possibly working together. Though
many have tried to create collaborations between researchers
and practitioners before us (some successful, others less so),
we think it is important to keep trying to forge links between
research and practice. Helping to highlight the major theoreti-
cal perspectives used in museum learning research may provide
tools for both groups to find common language for setting up
useful partnerships. We also return to the multiple subjects in
our topic chapters, hoping to synthesise some messages from
each. We recognise from the outset that these topics overlap
a great deal. Whilst there have been multiple cross-​references
within the topic chapters, some ideas about the ways the topics
interact with one another are presented in this final chapter.

References
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives.
Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Falk, J. & Dierking, L. (1997). School field trips: Assessing their long-​
term impact. Curator: The Museum Journal, 40, 211–​218.
10

10 Introduction
Gurian, E.H. (2002). Choosing among the options: An opinion about
museum definitions. Curator: The Museum Journal, 45, 75–​88.
Holland, D., Skinner, D., Lachiotte Jr, W., & Cain, C. (2001).
Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Illeris, K. (2007). How we learn: Learning and non-​learning in school
and beyond. London: Routledge.
Martin, B. & Briggs, L. (1986). The affective and cognitive domains:
Integration for instruction and research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
Museums Association (no date). www.museumsassociation.org/​about/​
frequently-​asked-​questions (last accessed 21 February, 2017).
Schank, R.C. & Abelson, R.P. (1977). Scripts, plans, and understand-
ing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11

2 
Theory and museum practice

‘There is nothing so practical as a good theory’

(Lewin, 1952, p. 169)

What’s in a theory?
One often hears that it is important to pay attention to the-
ory when considering options for developing a suitable learn-
ing experience, in museums and elsewhere. But why? In this
chapter, we explore what theories are, how they are useful for
research and for practice, and what might be useful as well as
problematic about reliance on theoretical knowledge in prac-
tice. Following this discussion, we turn to the way that theories
about learning can be conceptualised. And finally, we provide
an in-​depth exploration of a single theory, constructivism, to
highlight the ways that it has been interpreted and used differ-
ently by a variety of authors across learning disciplines.
There are a number of ways of thinking about what a theory
is. The common, everyday definition of ‘theory’ might suppose
that it is conjecture or speculation that could possibly explain
some phenomenon of interest. For example, one might have a
theory that cats are inherently independent creatures, which
helps explain why the pet cat has not managed to learn to come
when called in the evening, even after bribing it with cat treats.
In social sciences and natural or physical sciences, a theory is
much more elaborate, built upon a multitude of previous the-
ory and research. One definition of ‘theory’ appearing in the
Oxford English Dictionary suggests that a theory is:
a scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explana-
tion or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypoth-
esis that has been confirmed or established by observation or
experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for
the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general
laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed.
(OED online)
12

12 Theory and museum practice

Some researchers suspect that it is part of human nature to cre-
ate and revise theories about how the world works (Gopnik
& Meltzoff, 1997). However, the use of theory in a system-
atic way is more closely tied to the development of scientific
ideas (see Kuhn, 1996; Popper, 2002). In this sense, a scientific
theory is thought to be a ‘comprehensive explanation of some
aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence’
(Ayala et al., 2008, p. 11). Theories are supported by evidence
that comes from a large body of research showing findings that
support the concept being purported by the theory. The ideas
that are put forward in a theory should generally be testable.
If there is no way to falsify a theory, some would consider it to
be unscientific (Popper, 2002). For example, Popper regarded
Sigmund Freud’s theories about psychological development as
unfalsifiable because there was no possibility of testing them.
As a result, he considered them to be merely metaphysical. In
addition, theories should lead to predictions about the subject
of the theory. An example of such a prediction can be found
in germ theory and the idea that the introduction of certain
micro-​organisms to otherwise uncontaminated food or living
organisms could account for the appearance of some diseases.
The work of scientists such as Louis Pasteur led to the testing
of these principles and refutation of previous theories about the
spread of infection (Pasteur, 2014).
So in short, a theory helps to explain phenomena that occur
in the natural world, relying upon a large body of evidence, and
leading to testable predictions of future outcomes in the same
area. To further complicate matters, one can also distinguish
laws from theories by saying that laws describe occurrences in
the natural world without providing a broader explanation for
their existence. Newton’s law of universal gravitation proposes
that any two bodies enact a force against one another, which is
related to the mass of each of them and the distance between
them. Newton referred to this exertion as ‘force’. The phenome-
non that he described is generally thought to be true and is used
in countless situations in which it is useful to calculate the size
of a pull between objects. However, his ideas about why this
phenomenon occurs have been replaced by Einstein’s theory of
general relativity as a better explanation of the phenomenon.
So whilst the law continues to play a role in the description of
gravity, the theory has changed over time (Freundlich, 1920).
This is to say that theory is not the same as law. Moreover, law
and theory both differ from a hypothesis, which is generally
thought to be more akin to the predictions that can be gen-
erated from a theory (Committee on Defining and Advancing
the Conceptual Basis of Biological Sciences in the 21st Century,
2007). Together, laws, theories and hypotheses help to generate
research questions and studies that help to build new theories
13

Theory and museum practice 13

or refine old ones in the interest of furthering understanding
about the phenomena in question. Finally, it is also useful to
be aware of models, which can be used to describe ways that
phenomena or processes take place. A model can be used to
develop theory; but it can also just show how other ideas can be
perceived to fit together. For example, the contextual model of
learning (Falk & Dierking, 2000) unites theories from a num-
ber of different perspectives to try to illuminate how they inter-
act. But rather than develop new explanations for learning, it
refers to previously developed explanations to apply them to
the museum context.
As mentioned above, these ideas all come from work within
the natural and physical sciences. How do they relate to what
is done in social science and education? One might think that
because the subject of study varies greatly between social and
physical sciences, that the ways their study is governed by the-
ory should also vary greatly. There are many who argue that
the study of social sciences calls for different types of theories
to the natural sciences (Turner, 2001). In other words, social sci-
ences, according to such perspectives, are so different because of
the complex nature of humanity and life that perhaps hypoth-
esis testing should not be seen as an objective in social science.
As such, perhaps theory itself would hold less sway over those
involved in social science research. However, there are good
reasons to doubt this claim. As noted by Parsons in addressing
the Institute of the Society for Social Research in 1937, ‘our
study of fact, however little we may be aware of it, is always
guided by the logical structure of a theoretical scheme, even if
it is entirely implicit’ (1938, p. 15). He went on to suggest that
researchers only investigate the notions that they find interest-
ing, rather than everything that is available to them, which is
ultimately guided by some theoretical framework. Moreover,
Suppes (1974) stated in his presidential address to the American
Educational Research Association that ‘a powerful theory
changes our perspective on what is important and what is
superficial’ (p. 4). In other words, even in social science the
theoretical framework one adopts will shape subsequent ideas
about what matters in considerations of research and practice.
In light of these ideas about the nature of theory and how it
can shape ideas in both the natural and social sciences, we set
out below several of the ways in which theory can be useful in
research and practice.

What are they good for?

Just because theories are ‘out there’ does not mean that every-
one will think that it is important to find out about them. After
all, if a person knows about the findings of research (which
14

14 Theory and museum practice

may or may not be the case), why is it necessary to know about
the theoretical perspectives that helped to shape those findings?
Here we explore some of the reasons why theory is important
both for research and for practice. These reasons include the
way that theory helps researchers both prepare for their own
studies and be aware of potentially opposing perspectives.
But, in a similar way, theory can help provide a lens through
which to build evidence-​based links to practice. As such, theory
informs the work of both those conducting research and those
influencing practical situations.

Theory and research

When researchers set out to conduct a study, they will often carry
with them a set of biases, either implicit or explicit, that drive
the types of questions they will ask about the world. Knowing
something about the theoretical perspectives about that topic
will help them not only to understand previous research that
has been conducted but also to formulate focused questions
that can be addressed using pertinent research tools. On the
other hand, if they are ignorant of the theoretical perspectives,
they may try to conduct a study that has been done before or
may lack the insight to narrow a topic sufficiently (Greenwald,
Pratkanis, Leippe, & Baumgardner, 1986).
Theory helps researchers to communicate about the per-
spectives they take towards a topic. When researchers publish
about the research they have carried out, the declaration of a
theoretical position may alert others who read the research to
the reasons they conducted the research in the way they did.
Likewise, when researchers have background knowledge about
the theoretical perspective, they are more easily able to identify
the reasoning used in an article about current research. In con-
trast, if the reader is less aware of the differences in theoretical
perspective, she may find it difficult to understand the rationale
for conducting the study.
At the same time, understanding the theory used in carrying
out one study enables researchers to build upon theory, adding
pieces of evidence that create a bigger picture of how the world
works. That is, when deciding upon which study to carry out,
researchers will often consider how the results could help paint
a more complete theoretical picture in addition to how the
results might be useful in a practical sense. In this way, theory
can advance through an accumulation of studies that support,
shape and question it (Greenwald et al., 1986).
This process by which theory is used to help guide perspectives
on explanations about occurrences in the world can be thought
of as a lens that can help researchers to focus on problems in
ways that illuminate understandings. At the same time, theory
15

Theory and museum practice 15

can also be a set of blinkers that might prevent researchers from
looking beyond the potential explanations allowed by the the-
oretical perspective they have adopted. In this way theory can
be a restrictive force in the studies that are conducted. Kuhn, in
his book about theoretical change, asserted that ‘Further devel-
opment, therefore, ordinarily calls for … the development of
esoteric vocabulary and skills … leads … to an immense restric-
tion of the scientist’s vision and to a considerable resistance to
paradigm change’ (1996, p. 64). This type of narrowing of focus
can also create a tension between the findings that arise from
research conducted through different theoretical paradigms.
Take as an example two researchers who are interested in
child language development: one of them tends to think that
children are born with an innate predisposition to learn lan-
guage because of a structure in the mind or brain (nativism); the
other tends to think that learning language is like learning any
other material, but that language is a particularly useful thing
for infants to know about (social constructivism). These two
researchers are likely to approach the task of finding out how
children learn about language in rather different ways. The one
with a bias toward innate predisposition may focus on so-​called
universal tendencies that children display in the early stages of
language learning. In contrast, the researcher who thinks learn-
ing language is no different from other learning may ask more
questions about the linguistic environments infants are exposed
to for clues about early learning. This theoretical habit forma-
tion can be seen in the practice of theory-​confirming studies,
which aim to test theories in such as way as to support or fals-
ify them, as opposed to result-​centred methods which set out to
establish conditions under which findings are either obtained or
are not (Greenwald et al., 1986). In fact, such biases correspond
to the theoretical distinctions in how it is believed children learn
their first language. The nativist position on language develop-
ment suggests that children learn the same way regardless of the
differences in environmental language (so long as the environ-
ment provides a sufficiently rich stimulus) (e.g., Pinker, 1994).
On the other hand, the social constructivist position argues
that children rely on the language they hear to the extent that
they do not go beyond the examples they are given until they
have gained enough experience to be relatively confident about
creatively using language (Tomasello, 2003). In addition, the
methods they use to pursue the research they carry out also
quite often differ, and this usually leads to reinforcement of the
differences between the theoretical perspectives.
The example about language development research shows
how theory can act as a potential barrier to communication
about research within the academic community. But one can
imagine it might also create confusion and/​or misunderstandings
16

16 Theory and museum practice

outside academic circles. Despite there being partial truths in
each side of the argument, the general public may wonder which
side is ‘correct’, or how to use the findings that were seemingly
generated at cross-​purposes.

Theory and practice

There is a substantial body of literature now to suggest that
people who work in learning settings, devising, facilitating or
assessing, should use research-​based evidence to enable them
to better fulfil the needs of the learners as well as the institu-
tions that employ them (Hammersley, 2001). This is true in
museums as well as other educational establishments (Center
for Advancement of Informal Science Education, 2015).
Increasingly, fundraising organisations and advocacy groups
seek assurances of evidence-​based approaches to teaching and
learning before providing the backing that educational institu-
tions need. Of course, theory affects research that one could try
to use in a particular museum setting by virtue of it having been
used to devise the research itself. That is, when people make use
of research-​based evidence, they are necessarily using the theory
that guided the research, at least indirectly.
In addition, it could be argued that practitioners are able
to more directly employ theory in the work they do. In this
way, they would not only be able to more easily understand the
research they might read about, but they would also be able to
start from the theoretical foundations about learning (in muse-
ums) and apply that knowledge more directly to the setting in
which they are working. In turn, one could then conduct one’s
own studies within the museum setting using one or more theo-
retical perspectives as a basis for the research. Some writing
dealing with whether practitioners can improve their practice
through the introduction of theory comes from the work on the
philosophy of work-​based knowledge.
There is a philosophical argument, built upon the distinc-
tion between knowing how and knowing that, which questions
the merits of the use of theory in order to improve practice.
According to Ryle (1945), many academics had previously
equated the understanding of action (knowing that) with the
ability to carry that action out (knowing how). In this case it
would only be necessary to acquire the knowledge associated
with a task in order to perform the task itself. What Ryle asserted
in his address was that ordinary people could easily conduct
highly skilled work without the need to refer to a conscious set
of knowledge. A corollary of this argument is that a person can
have a complete understanding of the knowledge without being
able to apply the knowledge in practice. Moreover, he suggested
that in order to truly have a good understanding of a topic,
17

Theory and museum practice 17

one must have had to make use of it in practice. Therefore,
according to this idea, the best way to gain understanding is
not through education of facts, but rather through hands-​on
experience. The claims laid out in this address were popularised
in many writings, leading some to claim that practitioners do
not need to know about theory in order to do their jobs well
(Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).
In a more recent rebuttal of this argument, Winch (2009) has
provided an argument drawing upon formal logic to refute the
idea that practitioners’ performance will not be enhanced by
a good understanding of knowledge about the topic relevant
to their field. In his critique of Ryle’s arguments, Winch draws
upon the logic laid out in previous publications (e.g., Stanley
& Williamson, 2001) to show that Ryle’s (1945) ideas about
knowledge and practice can be broken down into three claims:
(1) If a person does something, they have knowledge about that
thing; (2) if a person uses knowledge about a topic, they some-
how affirm knowledge about that topic and (3) knowledge of
how to do something is knowledge that for some idea about
that thing (Winch, 2009, p. 89). Winch uses several examples
of practice and judgement about practice to show that knowing
that can be extremely useful in making decisions and evalua-
tions about workplace situations. For instance, a surgeon who
has been trained to operate with a specialism in a given aspect
of anatomy will make use of theoretical knowledge about the
biological constitution of a person’s body when encounter-
ing new problems, rather than merely relying on a build-​up of
expertise through experience. The surgeon will undoubtedly
gain valuable expertise through practice. But one would hope
that as a patient, the knowledge that would be present in addi-
tion to the knowledge how. And Winch points out that whilst
Ryle’s (1949) point that learning how is not the same as learn-
ing that, this does not mean that learning that will not be use-
ful for acquiring knowledge about how to perform in a given
occupation.
In addition to the distinction between knowing how and
knowing that, many have noted that thinking about one’s activ-
ities is beneficial to practice. Perhaps the most well-​known for
this perspective is Schön (1983). Schön made popular the idea
that one ought to be a ‘Reflective Practitioner’, though such
ideas were proposed by Dewey much earlier (1938). Schön
referred to a person’s reflective practice as ‘reflection in action’,
in which the person could think on their feet in order to make
decisions about the best action to take in a given work situa-
tion. In contrast, one can also think about the reasons for acting
in a particular way, the origins of those actions and the useful-
ness of them: ‘reflection on action’. More recently, a distinction
between ‘reflectivity’ and ‘reflexivity’ has been introduced with
18

18 Theory and museum practice

respect to the practice (Chilvers, 2012). Whereas reflectivity
refers to Schön’s reflection on action, reflexivity tends to include
a sense of being open to change in addition to thinking about
the influences on one’s actions. One of the elements that can be
included in a reflective or reflexive experience is the ways that
theory or research evidence can be brought to bear on the situ-
ation. For example, are there any studies that can shed light on
the learning, affect or memory of the visitor in a given museum
context? In this way, individuals might also alter the course of
practice through reflection on theory rather than merely being
affected by previous practice.
Here we have reviewed ways that theory can be helpful (or
not) to practice, both from the perspective of how theory shapes
research through design and interpretation and also the way
that practice can benefit from reflection on theoretical and prac-
tical experiences. We turn briefly to consider the ways that theo-
ries are developed in order to shed further light on the types of
theories that have been generated within the study of learning.

Where do they come from?

Theories in a given area are generated over the course of a rela-
tively long period of time, through the accumulation of research
and problem-​solving on the part of many different people. In
order to try to understand better the ways that things work in
the natural and social world (i.e., to be able to explain and pre-
dict occurrences), research has often begun with a set of ques-
tions that can be addressed with a systematic study of some
aspect of the world. When questions are first asked, they might
be extremely broad because of a lack of background informa-
tion to help narrow down the scope of the question (e.g., ‘Why
are we here?’). Once people begin to formulate some responses
to the question, then these responses can be evaluated and re-​
evaluated in light of further evidence that becomes available.
This recurs in an iterative pattern, usually for many years. When
responses to a question start to create a pattern that can be sys-
tematised to provide a set of guiding principles around a topic,
the beginnings of theories start to appear. This process stems
from an inductive process for the development of theory: the
use of empirical data to create generalisations (Eisenhardt,
1989; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Alvesson & Kärremon, 2011).
It is useful in thinking about the way that theories are gener-
ated to remember that research findings are not infallible (see
next chapter for more detail on research methods and method-
ology). In other words, the findings from any given study do
not equate to ‘fact’. And new methods and ways of testing ideas
are constantly being invented. This means that new findings
(and sometimes old findings) can call into question research
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
"But oh! Remember, if there is no room for Christ in your heart, there will be no room
for you in Christ's heaven."

"My friend, He is knocking now; it may be His last knock. He is calling now; it may be
His last call."

"'Oh, let Me in.'" He cries, "'and I will make you happy; I am bringing you forgiveness,
and peace, and joy, and rest, and all that you need. Oh, let Me in before it is too late! I
have waited so patiently and so long, and still I wait. Will you not, even this night, undo
the door?'"

When the little service was over the people went back into their houses, and Angel and
her mother went on with their work. And as Angel wiped the cups and saucers, she
sang softly to herself the chorus of the hymn—

"Oh! My soul, for such a wonder,

Wilt thou not undo the door?"

"Yes, I will!" said her mother suddenly, bursting into tears; "I will undo the door; I will
keep Him waiting no longer."

CHAPTER V

ANGEL'S BIRTHDAY

IT was a bright, sunny morning, some weeks after that little service was held in
Pleasant Place.

The sunbeams were streaming in at Mrs. Blyth's window, for the cobwebs and spiders
had some time ago received notice to quit, and the dust had all been cleared away, and
found no chance of returning.

Mrs. Blyth was a different woman. Her troubles and trials remained, and she had just as
much to do, and just as many children to look after, but she herself was quite different.
She had opened the door of her heart, and the Lord Jesus had come in. And He had
brought sunshine with Him into that dark and ignorant heart. Life, instead of being a
burden and a weariness, was now full of interest to Mrs. Blyth, because she was trying
to do every little thing to please Jesus, who had done so much for her. Whether she was
washing the children, or cleaning the house, or turning the mangle, she tried to do it all
to please Him. She remembered that He was looking at her, and that He would be
pleased if she did it well. It was wonderful how that thought helped her, and how it
made the work easy and pleasant.
So, through the bright, clean window, the morning sunbeams were streaming on little
Angel's head. Her mother was standing by her side, watching her as she lay asleep, and
waiting for her to awake.

As soon as ever Angel opened her eyes, her mother said—

"Little Angel, do you know what to-day is?"

"No, mother," said Angel, rubbing her eyes, and sitting up in bed.

"It's your birthday, Angel; it is indeed!" said her mother. "I hunted it out in your
grandmother's old Bible. It's the day you were born, just seven years ago!"

"And am I really going to have a birthday, mother?" said Angel, in a very astonished
voice.

"Yes, a real good birthday," said her mother; "so get up and come downstairs, before
any of it is gone."

Angel was not long in putting on her clothes and coming down. She found the table put
quite ready for breakfast, with a clean tablecloth, and the mugs and plates set in order
for her and her little brothers and sisters; and in a little jar in the middle of the table
was a beautiful bunch of flowers. Real country flowers they were, evidently gathered
from some pleasant cottage garden far away. There were stocks and mignonette, and
southernwood, and sweetbrier, and a number of other flowers, the names of which
neither Angel nor her mother knew.

"Oh mother, mother," said little Angel, "what a beautiful nosegay!"

"It's for you, Angel," said her mother: "for your birthday. I got it at the early market.
My father always gave me a posy on my birthday."

"Oh, mother," said little Angel, "is it really for me?"

But that was not all, for by the side of Angel's plate she found a parcel. It was tied up in
brown paper, and there was a thick piece of string round it, fastened tightly in so many
knots that it took Angel a long time to open it. Her little hands quite shook with
excitement when at last she took off the cover and looked inside. It was a little book, in
a plain black binding.

"Oh, mother," said Angel, "what is it? Is it for my birthday?"

"Yes," said her mother; "look at the writing at the beginning. I'll read it to you."

It was very uneven writing, and very much blotted, for Mrs. Blyth was only a poor
scholar; but little Angel did not notice this—it seemed very wonderful to her to be able
to write at all.

Now, what was written in the little book was this:

"Given to little Angel by her dear mother; and she hopes she will promise to read it, and
will keep her promise better than I did."

"But I can't read, mother," said Angel.

"No; but you must learn," said her mother. "I mean that you shall go to school regular
now, Angel. Why, you're seven years old to-day!"

Poor little Angel's head was nearly turned; it was such a wonderful thing to have a
birthday.

But the wonders of the day were not over yet; for when, after breakfast, Angel asked
for the clothes to mangle, her mother said: "They're all done Angel; I'm just going to
take them home. I've done a lot these three nights when you was in bed, that we might
have a bit of a holiday to-day."

"A holiday, mother!" said Angel. "Oh, how nice! No mangling all day!"

"No mangling all day," repeated the mother, as if the thought were as pleasant to her as
to Angel.

But the wonders of the day were not yet over.

"Angel," said her mother, as they were washing the children, "did you ever see the
sea?"

"No, mother," said Angel; "but Tim has; he went last Easter Monday with his uncle."

"Well," said her mother, "if it doesn't rain, you shall see it to-day."

"Oh, mother!" was all that little Angel could say. And who do you think is going to take
you, child? "I don't know, mother."

"Why, Angel, your father is. He came in last night as soon as you'd gone to bed. He sat
down in that arm-chair by the fire, and he said, 'Dear me! how comfortable things is
just now at home! If they was always like this, I wouldn't stop out of an evening.'"

"So I said, 'If God helps me, John, they always shall be like this, and a deal better, too,
when the children gets a bit bigger.' And your father stopped at home and read his
newspaper, Angel, and then we had a bit of supper together. It was like when we was
first married, child; and as we ate our supper, Angel, I said, 'It's Angel's birthday to-
morrow, John.' And your father said, 'Is it? Why, to-morrow's Saturday. Let's all go to
the sea together;' and he took quite a handful of shillings out of his pocket. 'Here's
enough to pay,' he said. 'Have them all ready at dinner-time, and we'll go by the one-
o'clock train.'"

"Oh, mother," said little Angel, "it is so nice to have a birthday!"

True to his promise, John Blyth came home at dinner-time, with the shillings still in his
pocket. His mates had tried hard to persuade him to turn into the Blue Dragon on his
way home, but he told them he had an engagement, and had no time to stay.

What a happy afternoon that was!

Angel had never been in a train before, and her father took her on his knee, pointing
out to her the houses, and trees, and fields, and sheep, and cows, and horses, as they
went by. And then they arrived at the sea, and oh! What a great, wonderful sea it
seemed to Angel! She and her little brothers and sisters made houses in the sand, and
took off their shoes and stockings and waded in the water, and picked up quite a
basketful of all kinds of beautiful shells; whilst her father and mother sat, with the baby,
under the shadow of the cliffs and watched them.

And then they all came home together to tea, and her father never went out again that
night, but sat with them by the fire, and told Angel stories till it was time to go to bed.

"Oh, mother," said Angel again, a sleepy head on the pillow, "it is nice to have a
birthday!"

CHAPTER VI

THE GREAT BIRTHDAY

THE bells were ringing merrily from the tower of the old church close to Pleasant Place.

The street near the church was full of people bustling to and fro, going in and out of the
different shops, and hurrying along as if none of them had any time to lose. The shops
were unusually gay and tempting, for it was Christmas Eve. Even Pleasant Place looked
a little less dull than usual. There were sprigs of holly in some of the windows, and most
of the houses were a little cleaner and brighter than usual.

Angel and her mother had been very busy all day. They had just finished their
mangling, and had put all the clothes out of the way for Christmas Day, when they
heard a knock at the door, and Angel went to open it.

"It's a basket, mother," she said. "It can't be for us."

The man who had brought the basket laughed.

"It's for an Angel!" he said. "Have you got any of that article in here? Here's the
direction I was to bring it to—'Little Angel, No. 9, Pleasant Place.'"

"Then, please, it's for me," said Angel.

"For you!" said the man. "Well, to be sure! So you are the angel, are you? All right,
here's your basket!" And he was gone before they could ask more.

The basket was opened with some difficulty, for it was tightly tied up, and then Angel
and her mother put out the contents on the table amidst many exclamations.

There was first a plum-pudding, then a number of oranges and apples, then a large
cake, and then a pretty Christmas card, with a picture of a robin hopping about in the
snow, and these words printed on it, "A Happy Christmas to you all."

"Where can they all have come from?" said little Angel, as one good thing after another
came out of the basket. At the very bottom of the basket they found a tiny note.
"This will tell us about it," said Mrs. Blyth. "Why, it's directed to you, Angel!"

So Angel's mother sat down, stirred the fire, spelt it carefully out, and read it aloud by
the firelight.

"MY DEAR LITTLE ANGEL,"

"I send you a few little things for Christmas
Day. I hope you will have a very happy day. Do not
forget whose Birthday it is. Your friend,"
"MABEL DOUGLAS."

"Whose birthday is it, mother?" asked little Angel.

"The Lord Jesus Christ's," said her mother reverently. "Did I never tell you that, little
Angel? It's the day we think about Him being born a little baby at Bethlehem."

"SO YOU ARE THE ANGEL, ARE YOU? HERE'S YOUR BASKET."

Angel was sitting on her stool in front of the fire thinking, and it was some time before
she spoke again. Then she said suddenly, "What are you going to give Him, mother?"

"Give who, Angel?"

"What are you going to give the Lord Jesus for His birthday?"
"Oh, I don't know," said her mother. "I don't see how we can give Him anything."

"No," said little Angel sadly; "I've only got one penny,—that wouldn't buy anything good
enough. I would have liked to give Him something on His birthday; He did such a lot for
us."

"We can try to please Him, Angel," said her mother, "and do everything that we think
He would like."

"Yes," said little Angel, "we must try all day long."

That was a very happy Christmas Day for Angel and for her mother.

"This is the Lord Jesus' birthday," was Angel's first thought when she awoke in the
morning; and all through the day she was asking herself this question, "What would
Jesus like?" And whatever she thought He would like that she tried to do.

Angel's father was at home to dinner, and was very kind to her all day. He had not been
seen inside a public-house since Angel's birthday. It was a very good little Christmas
dinner. As they were eating it, Mr. Blyth said:

"Emily, have you seen those bills on the wall at the top of the court?"

Angel's mother said, "No; I have not been out to-day."

"There's to be a meeting to-night in that little schoolroom just a bit of way down the
street. That new young minister's going to speak; and it says on the bills it will all be
over in half an hour. I've a good mind to go and hear what he's got to say. Will you
come with me?"

"Yes, that I will," said Mrs. Blyth, with tears in her eyes. She had not been inside a
place of worship with her husband since the first year they were married.

"Can't Angel come too?" said her father, as he looked at her earnest little face.

"Not very well," said Mrs. Blyth; "we can't all go. Some one must stop with baby and
the children."

When Angel's large plum-pudding was put on the table, a sudden thought seized her.
"Mother," she whispered, "don't you think Jesus would like poor old Mrs. Sawyer to have
a bit of it?"

"Yes," said Mrs. Blyth, "I'll cut her a slice, and one for Annie too, poor girl. Will you take
them in?"

So Angel went next door with her two slices of plum-pudding. She found Mrs. Sawyer
and her niece Annie just beginning their dinner. There was nothing on the table but
some tea, and a loaf of bread with a few currants in it, so Angel felt very glad she had
brought the pudding. She was sure Jesus would be pleased they should have it; and she
thought it would make Him glad on His birthday to see how Mrs. Sawyer and Annie
smiled when they saw what she had brought them.

"Are you going to this meeting to-night?" said Annie, as Angel turned to go.

"No, I'm not going," said Angel; "but father and mother are. I must mind the children."
"I'll tell you what," said Annie; "if you'll bring them in here, I'll mind them. I can't leave
aunt, and they'll be a bit of company for her."

And so it came to pass that Pleasant Place beheld the wonderful sight of Mr. and Mrs.
Blyth and Angel all going together to the little meeting in the schoolroom.

A good many Pleasant Place people were there; and they looked round in astonishment
as Mr. Blyth came in, for they thought him about the most unlikely man in the whole
court to be there. And his wife and little Angel, as they sat beside him, prayed very
earnestly that he might get a blessing.

Mr. Douglas's text was a very strange one for Christmas Day—at least, so many of the
people thought when he gave it out. It had only four words, so that even little Angel
could remember it quite well—

"GIVE ME THINE HEART."

"Suppose," said the minister, "it was my birthday, and every one in my house was
keeping it. They all had a holiday and went out into the country, and there was a very
good dinner, which they all very much enjoyed, and altogether it was a very pleasant
day to them indeed."

"But suppose that I, whose birthday it was, was quite left out of it. No one gave me a
single present; no one even spoke to me; no one took the slightest notice of me. In
fact, all day long I was quite forgotten; I never once came into their thoughts."

"Nay, more. Not only did they do nothing whatever to give me pleasure, but they
seemed all day long to take a delight in doing the very things which they knew grieved
me and pained me, and were distressing to me."

"Surely, my friends, that would be a strange way of keeping my birthday; surely I

should feel very hurt by such conduct; surely it would be a perfect sham to pretend to
be keeping my birthday, and yet not take the slightest notice of me, except to annoy
and wound me! My friends," said the minister, "this afternoon I took a walk. In the
course of my walk I saw a number of people who pretended to be keeping a birthday.
And yet what were a great many of them doing? They were eating and drinking and
enjoying themselves, and having a merry time of it."

"But I noticed that the One whose birthday it was, was quite forgotten: they had not
given Him one single present all day long they had never once spoken to Him; all day
long He had never been in their thoughts; all day long He had been completely and
entirely passed by and forgotten."

"Nor was this all. I saw some who seemed to be taking a pleasure in doing the very
things He does not like, the very things which offend and grieve Him—drinking and
quarrelling, and taking His holy name in vain."

"And yet all these, my friends, pretended to be keeping the Lord Jesus Christ's
birthday!"

"But, I trust, by seeing you here to-night, that you have not been amongst their
number. I would therefore only put to you this one question—"
"The Lord Jesus Christ's birthday! Have you made Him a present to-day?"

"A present!" you say. "What can I give Him? He is the King of kings and Lord of lords.
What have I that is fit for a present to a king?"

"Give Him what He asks for, my friends. He says to you to-night, 'Give Me thine heart.'"

"That is the birthday present He is looking for. Will you hold it back?"

"Oh, think of what we are commemorating to-day. Think how He left His glory, and
came to be a poor, helpless babe for you; think, my friends, of all His wonderful love to
you. And then I would ask you, Can you refuse Him what He asks? Can you say—"

"Lord, I cannot give Thee my heart. I will give it to the world, to pleasure, to sin, to
Satan, but not to Thee,—no, not to Thee. I have no birthday present for Thee to-night?"

"Oh, will you not rather say—"

"'Lord, here is my heart; I bring it to Thee; take it for Thine own.

Cleanse it in Thy blood; make it fit to be Thine'"?

"Will you not this night lay at your King's feet the only birthday present you can give
Him—the only one He asks for—your heart?"

"Mother," said little Angel, as they walked home, "we can give Him a present, after all."

It was her father who answered her.

"Yes, Angel," he said, in a husky voice; "and we mustn't let Christmas Day pass before
we have done it."

And that night amongst the angels in heaven there was joy—joy over one sinner who
repented of the evil of his way, and laid at his Lord's feet a birthday present, even his
heart.

There was joy amongst the angels in heaven; and a little Angel on earth shared in their
joy.
 "PLEASE, MR. SOLEMN, WHEN YOU DIE,
WHO'LL HAVE TO DIG YOUR GRAVE?"

LITTLE DOT

CHAPTER I

OLD SOLOMON'S VISITOR

IT was a bright morning in spring, and the cemetery on the outskirts of the town looked
more peaceful, if possible, than it usually did. The dew was still on the grass, for it was
not yet nine o'clock. The violets and snowdrops on little children's graves were peeping
above the soil, and speaking of the resurrection. The robins were singing their sweetest
songs on the top of mossy gravestones—happy in the stillness of the place. And the
sunbeams were busy everywhere, sunning the flowers, lighting up the dewdrops, and
making everything glad and pleasant. Some of them even found their way into the deep
grave in which Solomon Whitaker, the old grave-digger, was working, and they made it
a little less dismal, and not quite so dark.
Not that old Whitaker thought it either dismal or dark. He had been a grave-digger
nearly all his life, so he looked upon grave-digging as his vocation, and thought it, on
the whole, more pleasant employment than that of most of his neighbours.

It was very quiet in the cemetery at all times, but especially in the early morning; and
the old man was not a little startled by hearing a very small voice speaking to him from
the top of the grave.

"What are you doing down there, old man?" said the little voice.

The grave-digger looked up quickly, and there, far above him, and peeping cautiously
into the grave, was a child in a clean white pinafore, and with a quantity of dark brown
hair hanging over her shoulders.

"Whoever in the world are you?" was his first question.

His voice sounded very awful, coming as it did out of the deep grave, and the child ran
away, and disappeared as suddenly as she had come.

Solomon looked up several times afterwards as he threw up fresh spadefuls of earth,

but for some time he saw no more of his little visitor. But she was not far away; she
was hiding behind a high tombstone, and in a few minutes she took courage, and went
again to the top of the grave. This time she did not speak, but stood with her finger in
her mouth, looking shyly down upon him, as her long brown hair blew wildly about in
the breeze.

Solomon thought he had never seen such a pretty little thing. He had had a little girl
once, and though she had been dead more than thirty years, he had not quite forgotten
her.

"What do they call you, my little dear?" said he, as gently as his husky old voice would
let him say it.

"Dot," said the child, nodding her head at him from the top of the grave.

"That's a very funny name," said Solomon. "I can't think on that I ever heard it afore."

"Dot isn't my real name; they call me Ruth in my father's big Bible on our parlour
table."

"That's got nothing to do with Dot as I can see," said the grave-digger musingly.

"No," she said, shaking her long brown hair out of her eyes; "it's 'cause I'm such a little
dot of a thing that they call me Dot."

"Oh, that's it, is it?" said Solomon; and then he went into a deep meditation on names,
and called to mind some strange ones which he read on the old churchyard
gravestones.

When Solomon was in one of his "reverdies," as his old wife used to call them when she
was alive, he seldom took much notice of what was going on around him, and he had
almost forgotten the little girl, when she said suddenly, in a half-frightened voice—

"I wonder what they call you, old man?"

"Solomon," said the grave-digger; "Mr. Solomon Whitaker—that's my name."

"Then, please, Mr. Solemn, what are you doing down there?"

"I'm digging a grave," said Solomon.

"What's it for, please, Mr. Solemn?" asked the child.

"Why, to bury folks in, of course," said the old man.

Little Dot retreated several steps when she heard this, as if she were afraid Mr. Solomon
might want to bury her. When he looked up again there was only a corner of her white
pinafore in sight. But as he went on quietly with his work, and took no notice of her, Dot
thought she might venture near again, for she wanted to ask Mr. Solomon another
question.

"Please," she began, "who are you going to put in that there hole?"

"It's a man as fell down dead last week. He was a hard-working fellow, that he was,"
said the grave-digger; for he always liked to give people a good word when digging
their graves.

Dot now seemed satisfied; and, on her side, told the old man that she had come to live
in one of the small cottages near the cemetery gates, and that they used to be "ever so
far off" in the country.

Then she ran away to another part of the cemetery, and old Solomon shaded his eyes
with his hand to watch her out of sight.

CHAPTER II

DOT'S DAISIES

DOT'S mother had lived all her life in a remote part of Yorkshire, far away from church
or chapel or any kind of school. But her husband had been born and brought up in a
town, and country life did not suit him. And so, when Dot was about five years old, he
returned to his native place, and took one of the cottages close to the cemetery, in
order that his little girl might still have some green grass on which to run about, and
might still see a few spring flowers.

The cemetery was some way out of the town; and Dot's mother, having had but little
education herself, did not think it at all necessary that Dot, at her tender age, should go
to school, and therefore the little girl was allowed to spend most of her time in the
cemetery, with which she was very well pleased. She liked to run round the
gravestones, and climb over the grassy mounds, and watch the robins hopping from
tree to tree.
But Dot's favourite place was by old Solomon's side. She went about with him from one
part of the cemetery to another, and he liked to feel her tiny hand in his. She took a
great interest, too, in the graves he was digging. She watched him shaping them neatly
and making them tidy, as he called it, until she began, as she fancied, to understand
grave-digging nearly as well as he did. But she sometimes puzzled the old man by her
questions, for Dot always wanted to know everything about what she saw.

"Mr. Solemn," she said one day, "shall you make me a little grave when I die?"

"Yes," he said, "I suppose I shall, little woman."

Dot thought this over for a long time.

"I don't want to go into a grave," she said; "it doesn't look nice."

"No," said the grave-digger, "you needn't be frightened; you won't have to go just yet.
Why, you're ever such a little mite of a thing!"

"Please, Mr. Solemn, when you die, who'll have to dig your grave, please?"

"I don't know," said Solomon uneasily; "they'll have to get a new digger, I suppose."

"Maybe you'd better dig one ready when you've a bit of time, Mr. Solemn."

But though Solomon was very fond of digging other people's graves—for he was so
much used to it that it had become quite a pleasure to him—he had no wish to dig his
own, nor did he like thinking about it, though Dot seemed as if she would not let him
forget it.

Another day, when he was working in a distant part of the cemetery, she asked him—

"Whereabouts will they bury you, Mr. Solemn?"

And when they were standing over a newly made grave, and Solomon was admiring his
work, she said—

"I hope they will make your grave neat, Mr. Solemn."

But though these questions and remarks made old Whitaker very uneasy—for he had a
sort of uncomfortable feeling in his heart when he thought of the day when his grave-
digging would come to an end—still, for all that, he liked little Dot, and he would have
missed the child much if anything had kept her from his side. She took such an interest
in his graves, too, and watched them growing deeper and deeper with as much pleasure
as he did himself. And, whether we be rich or poor, high or low, interest in our work
generally wins our hearts. And by and by Dot found herself a way, as she thought, of
helping old Solomon to make his graves look nice.

He was working one day at the bottom of a grave, and Dot was sitting on the grass at a
little distance. He thought she was busy with her doll, for she had not been talking to
him for a long time, and he gave a jump as he suddenly felt something patting on his
head, and heard Dot's merry little laugh at the top of the grave. She had filled her
pinafore with daisies, and thrown them upon him in the deep grave.
"Whatever in the world is that for?" said the old man, good-naturedly, as he shook the
flowers off his head.

"It's to make it pretty," said Dot. "It'll make it white and soft, you know, Mr. Solemn."

Solomon submitted very patiently; and from that time the child always gathered daisies
to scatter at the bottom of Solomon's graves, till he began to look upon it as a
necessary finish to his work. He often thought Dot was like a daisy herself, so fresh and
bright she was. He wondered at himself when he reckoned how much he loved her. For
his own little girl had been dead so many years; and it was so long now since he had
dug his old wife's grave, that Solomon had almost forgotten how to love. He had had no
one since to care for him, and he had cared for no one.

But little Dot had crept into his old heart unawares.

CHAPTER III

THE LITTLE GRAVE

OLD Solomon was digging a grave one day in a very quiet corner of the cemetery. Dot
was with him, as usual, prattling away in her pretty childish way.

"It's a tidy grave, is this," remarked the old man, as he smoothed the sides with his
spade; "nice and dry too; it'll do me credit."

"It's a very little one," said Dot.

"Yes, it's like to be little when it's for a little girl; you wouldn't want a very big grave,
Dot."

"No," said Dot; "but you would want a good big one, wouldn't you, Mr. Solemn?"

The mention of his own grave always made Solomon go into one of his "reverdies." But
he was recalled by Dot's asking quickly—

"Mr. Solemn, is she a very little girl?"

"Yes," said the old man; "maybe about your size, Dot. Her pa came about the grave. I
was in the office when he called, 'and,' said he, 'I want a nice quiet little corner, for it is
for my little girl.'"

"Did he look sorry?" said Dot.

"Yes," he said; "folks mostly do look sorry when they come about graves."
Dot had never watched the digging of a grave with so much interest as she did that of
this little girl. She never left Solomon's side, not even to play with her doll. She was
very quiet, too, as she stood with her large eyes wide open, watching all his
movements. He wondered what had come over her, and he looked up several times
rather anxiously as he threw up the spadefuls of earth.

"Mr. Solemn," she said, when he had finished, "when will they put the little girl in?"

"To-morrow morning," said the old man, "somewhere about eleven."

Dot nodded her head, and made up her mind she would be in this corner of the
cemetery at eleven o'clock.

When Solomon came back from his dinner, and went to take a last look at the little
grave, he found the bottom of it covered with white daisies which Dot had thrown in.

"She has made it pretty, bless her!" he murmured.

Dot crept behind the bushes near the chapel the next day, to watch the little girl's
funeral arrive. She saw the small coffin taken from the hearse, and carried on in front.
Then she watched the people get out of the carriages, and a lady and gentleman, whom
she felt sure were the little girl's father and mother, walked on first. The lady had her
handkerchief to her eyes, and Dot could see that she was crying. After her walked two
little girls, and they were crying also.

There were a few other people at the funeral, but Dot did not care to look at them; she
wanted to see what became of the little girl's coffin, which had just been carried into
the chapel. She waited patiently till they brought it out, and then she followed the
mournful procession at a little distance, till they reached the corner of the cemetery
where Solomon had dug the grave.

Solomon was there, standing by the grave, when the bearers came up with the coffin.
Dot could see him quite well, and she could see the minister standing at the end of the
grave, and all the people in a circle round it. She did not like to go very near, but she
could hear the minister reading something in a very solemn voice, and then the coffin
was let down into the grave. The little girl's mamma cried very much, and Dot cried too,
she felt so sorry for her.

When the service was over, they all looked into the grave, and then they walked away.
Dot ran up as soon as they were gone, and, taking hold of Solomon's hand, she peeped
into the grave. The little coffin was at the bottom, and some of Dot's daisies were lying
round it.

"Is the little girl inside there?" said Dot in an awestruck voice.

"Yes," said Solomon, "she's in there, poor thing. I'll have to fill it up now."

"Isn't it very dark?" said Dot.

"Isn't what dark?"

"In there," said Dot. "Isn't it very dark and cold for the poor little girl?"
"Oh, I don't know that," said Solomon. "I don't suppose folks feels cold when they are
dead; anyhow, we must cover her up warm."

But poor Dot's heart was very full; and, sitting on the grass beside the little girl's grave,
she began to cry and sob as if her heart would break.

"Don't cry, Dot," said the old man; "maybe the little girl knows nothing about it—maybe
she's asleep like."

But Dot's tears only flowed the faster. For she felt sure if the little girl were asleep, and
knew nothing about it, as old Solomon said, she would be waking up some day, and
then how dreadful it would be for her.

"Come, Dot," said Solomon at last, "I must fill it up."

Then Dot jumped up hastily. "Please, Mr. Solemn, wait one minute," she cried, as she
disappeared amongst the bushes.

"Whatever is she up to now?" said the old grave-digger.

She soon came back with her pinafore full of daisies. She had been gathering them all
the morning, and had hid them in a shady place under the trees. Then, with a little sob,
she threw them into the deep grave, and watched them fall on the little coffin. After this
she watched Solomon finish his work, and did not go home till the little girl's grave was
made, as old Solomon said, "all right and comfortable."

CHAPTER IV

LILIAN AND HER WORDS

DOT took a very great interest in "her little girl's grave," as she called it. She was up
early the next morning; and as soon as her mother had washed her, and given her her
breakfast, she ran to the quiet corner in the cemetery to look at the new-made grave. It
looked very bare, Dot thought, and she ran away to gather a number of daisies to
spread upon the top of it. She covered it as well as she could with them, and she patted
the sides of the grave with her little hands, to make it more smooth and tidy. Dot
wondered if the little girl knew what she was doing, and if it made her any happier to
know there were daisies above her.

She thought she would ask Solomon; so when she had finished she went in search of
him. He was not far away, and she begged him to come and look at what she had done
to her little girl's grave. He took hold of Dot's hand, and she led him to the place.

"See, Mr. Solemn," she said, "haven't I made my little girl pretty?"

"Aye," he answered; "you have found a many daisies, Dot."

"But, Mr. Solemn," asked Dot anxiously, "do you think she knows?"

"Why, Dot, I don't know—maybe she does," he said, for he did not like to disappoint
her.

"Mr. Solemn, shall I put you some daisies at the top of your grave?" said Dot, as they
walked away.

Solomon made no answer. Dot had reminded him so often of his own grave, that he had
sometimes begun to think about it, and to wonder how long it would be before it would
have to be made. He had a vague idea that when he was buried, he would not come to
an end.

He had heard of heaven and of hell; and though he had never thought much about
either of them, he had a kind of feeling that some day he must go to one or other. Hell,
he had heard, was for bad people, and heaven for good ones; and though Solomon tried
to persuade himself that he belonged to the latter class, he could not quite come to that
opinion. There was something in his heart which told him all was not right with him, and
made the subject an unpleasant one. He wished Dot would let it drop, and not talk to
him any more about it; and then he went into a reverie about Dot, and Dot's daisies,
and all her pretty ways.

It was the afternoon of the same day, and Dot was sitting beside her little girl's grave,
trying to make the daisies look more pretty by putting some leaves among them, when
she heard footsteps crossing the broad gravel path. She jumped up, and peeped behind
the trees to see who was coming. It was the lady and gentleman whom she had seen at
the funeral, and they were coming to look at their little grave. Dot felt very shy, but she
could not run away without meeting them, so she hid behind a hawthorn bush at the
other side.

The little girl's papa and mamma came close to the grave, and Dot was so near that, as
they knelt down beside it, she could hear a great deal of what they were saying. The
lady was crying very much, and for some time she did not speak. But the gentleman
said—

"I wonder who has put those flowers here, my dear; how very pretty they are!"

"Yes," said the lady, through her tears; "and the grave was full of them yesterday."

"How pleased our little girl would have been!" said he. "She was so fond of daisies! Who
can have done it?"

Little Dot heard all this from her hiding-place, and she felt very pleased that she had
made her little girl's grave so pretty.

The lady cried a great deal as she sat by the grave; but just before they left, Dot heard
the gentleman say—

"Don't cry, dearest; remember what our little Lilian said the night before she died."

"Yes," said the lady, "I will not forget."

And she dried her eyes, and Dot thought she tried to smile as she looked up at the blue
sky. Then she took a bunch of white violets which she had brought with her, and put
them in the middle of the grave, but she did not move any of Dot's daisies, at which she
looked very lovingly and tenderly.

As soon as they were gone, Dot came out from behind the hawthorn bush. She went up
to her little girl's grave, and kneeling on the grass beside it she smelt the white violets
and stroked them with her tiny hand. They made it look so much nicer, she thought; but
she felt very glad that the lady had liked her daisies. She would gather some fresh ones
to-morrow.

Dot walked home very slowly. She had so much to think over. She knew her little girl's
name now, and that she was fond of daisies. She would not forget that. Dot felt very
sorry for the poor lady; she wished she could tell her so. And then she began to wonder
what it was that her little girl had said the night before she died. It must be something
nice, Dot thought, to make the lady wipe her eyes and try to smile. Perhaps the little
girl had said she did not mind being put into the dark hole. Dot thought it could hardly
be that, for she felt sure she would mind it very much indeed. Dot was sure she would
be very frightened if she had to die, and old Solomon had to dig a grave for her. No, it
could not be that which Lilian had said. Perhaps Solomon was right, and the little girl
was asleep. If so, Dot hoped it would be a long, long time before she woke up again.

Solomon had left his work, or Dot would have told him about what she had seen. But it
was tea-time now, and she must go home. Her mother was standing at the door looking
out for her, and she called to the child to be quick and come in to tea.

Dot found her father at home, and they began their meal. But little Dot was so quiet,
and sat so still, that her father asked her what was the matter. Then she thought she
would ask him what she wanted to know, for he was very kind to her, and generally
tried to answer her questions.

So Dot told him about her little girl's grave, and what the lady and gentleman had
talked about, and she asked what he thought the little girl had said, which had made
her mother stop crying.

But Dot's father could not tell her. And when Dot said she was sure she would not like to
be put in a hole like that, her father only laughed, and told her not to trouble her little
head about it: she was too young to think of such things.

"But my little girl was only just about as big as me," said Dot, "'cause Mr. Solemn told
me so."

That was an argument which her father could not answer, so he told Dot to be quick
over her supper, and get to bed. And when she was asleep, he said to his wife that he
did not think the cemetery was a good place for his little girl to play in—it made her
gloomy. But Dot's mother said it was better than the street, and Dot was too light-
hearted to be dull long.

And whilst they were talking little Dot was dreaming of Lilian, and of what she had said
the night before she died.
 CHAPTER V

DOT'S BUSY THOUGHTS

A DAY or two after, as Dot was putting fresh daisies on the little grave, she felt a hand
on her shoulder, and looking up she saw her little girl's mamma. She had come up very
quietly, and Dot was so intent on what she was doing that she had not heard her. It was
too late to run away; but the lady's face was so kind and loving that the child could not
be afraid. She took hold of Dot's little hand, and sat down beside her, and then she said
very gently—

"Is this the little girl who gathered the daisies?"

"Yes," said Dot shyly, "it was me."

The lady seemed very pleased, and she asked Dot what her name was, and where she
lived. Then she said—

"Dot, what was it made you bring these pretty flowers here?"

"Please," said the child, "it was 'cause Mr. Solemn said she was ever such a little girl—
maybe about as big as me."

"Who is Mr. Solemn?" asked the lady.

 "IS THIS THE LITTLE GIRL WHO GATHERED THE DAISIES?"

"It's an old man—him as digs the graves; he made my little girl's grave," said Dot,
under her breath, "and he filled it up and all."

The tears came into the lady's eyes, and she stooped down and kissed the child.

Dot was beginning to feel quite at home with the little girl's mamma, and she stroked
the lady's soft glove with her tiny hand.

They sat quite still for some time. Dot never moved, and the lady had almost forgotten
her—she was thinking of her own little girl. The tears began to run down her cheeks,
though she tried to keep them back, and some of them fell upon Dot as she sat at her
feet.

"I was thinking of my little girl," said the lady, as Dot looked sorrowfully up to her face.

"Please," said Dot, "I wonder what your little girl said to you the night before she died?"
She thought perhaps it might comfort the lady to think of it, as it had done so the other
day.

The lady looked very surprised when Dot said this, as she had had no idea that the little
girl was near when she was talking to her husband.

"How did you know, Dot?" she asked.

"Please, I couldn't help it," said little Dot; "I was putting the daisies."

"Yes?" said the lady, and she waited for the child to go on.

"And I ran in there," said Dot, nodding at the hawthorn bush. "I heard you—and,
please, don't be angry."

"I am not angry," said the lady.

Dot looked in her face, and saw she was gazing at her with a very sweet smile.

"Then, please," said little Dot, "I would like very much to know what the little girl said."

"I will tell you, Dot," said the lady. "Come and sit on my knee."

There was a flat tombstone close by, on which they sat whilst the girl's mamma talked
to Dot. She found it very hard to speak about her child, it was so short a time since she
had died. But she tried her very best, for the sake of the little girl who had covered the
grave with daisies.

"Lilian was only ill a very short time," said the lady; "a week before she died she was
running about and playing—just as you have been doing to-day, Dot. But she took a bad
cold, and soon the doctor told me my little girl must die."

"Oh," said Dot, with a little sob, "I am so sorry for the poor little girl!"

"Lilian wasn't afraid to die, Dot," said the lady.

"Wasn't she?" said Dot. "I should be frightened ever so much—but maybe she'd never
seen Mr. Solemn bury anybody; maybe she didn't know she had to go into that dark
hole."

"Listen, Dot," said the lady, "and I will tell you what my little girl said the night before
she died."

"'Mamma,' she said, 'don't let Violet and Ethel think that I'm down deep in the
cemetery; but take them out, and show them the blue sky and all the white clouds, and
tell them, Little sister Lilian's up there with Jesus.' Violet and Ethel are my other little
girls, Dot."

"Yes," said Dot, in a whisper; "I saw them at the funeral."

"That is what my little girl said, which made me stop crying the other day."

Dot looked very puzzled. There was a great deal that she wanted to think over and to
ask Solomon about.

The lady was obliged to go home, for it was getting late. She kissed the child before she
went, and said she hoped Dot would see her little girl one day, above the blue sky.

Dot could not make out what the lady meant, nor what her little girl had meant the
night before she died. She wanted very much to hear more about her, and she hoped
the lady would soon come again.

"Mr. Solemn," said Dot the next day, as she was in her usual place on the top of one of
Solomon's graves, "didn't you say that my little girl was in that long box?"

"Yes," said Solomon—"yes, Dot, I said so, I believe."

"But my little girl's mamma says she isn't in there, Mr. Solemn, and my little girl said so
the night before she died."

"Where is she, then?" said Solomon.

"She's somewhere up there," said Dot, pointing with her finger to the blue sky.

"Oh, in heaven," said Solomon. "Yes, Dot, I suppose she is in heaven."

"How did she get there?" said Dot. "I want to know all about it, Mr. Solemn."

"Oh, I don't know," said the old man. "Good folks always go to heaven."

"Shall you go to heaven, Mr. Solemn, when you die?"

"I hope I shall, Dot, I'm sure," said the old man. "But there, run away a little; I want to
tidy round a bit."

Now, Solomon had very often "tidied round," as he called it, without sending little Dot
away; but he did not want her to ask him any more questions, and he hoped she would
forget it before she came back.

But Dot had not forgotten. She had not even been playing; she had been sitting on an
old tombstone, thinking about what Solomon had said. And as soon as he had finished