This paper is a reflection on Bobby Habig, Preeti Gupta, and Jennifer Adams’ article Disrupting deficit narratives in informal science education: Amplifying community cultural wealth theory to youth learning and engagement. The article examines the significance of community cultural capital and the need for informal STEM institutions to engage more deliberately with the knowledge and lived experiences that youth bring to programs they participate in. In my response, I question whether the informal science institution of study had changed in response to these young people. As a ‘science insider,’ I explore how research experiences in informal science education institutions such as museums are tightly bounded by and connected with ancient European scientific practices that limit a deep embrace of community cultural wealth. If the aim is for youth to develop their science identities, then these informal science education institutions need to question what kind of science people they are asking youth to become. I consider how informal science education institutions might remake themselves as cultural refugia, where interrogation of the dominant Eurocentric norms of what science is can be challenged and transformed.

本文是对 Bobby Habig、Preeti Gupta 和 Jennifer Adams 的文章《破坏非正式科学教育中的赤字叙述：将社区文化财富理论放大到青年学习和参与》的反思. 这篇文章探讨了社区文化资本的重要性，以及非正式 STEM 机构需要更加谨慎地参与青年为他们参与的项目带来的知识和生活经验。在我的回答中，我质疑非正式的科学学习机构是否发生了变化回应这些年轻人。作为一名“科学内幕人士”，我探讨了博物馆等非正式科学教育机构的研究经验如何与古代欧洲科学实践紧密相连，这些实践限制了对社区文化财富的深入拥抱。如果目标是让青年发展他们的科学身份，那么这些非正式的科学教育机构需要质疑他们要求青年成为什么样的科学人。文化避难所，在这里，对科学是什么的主要欧洲中心规范的质疑可以受到挑战和转变。