lit review: Interpretive Master Planning

Ok, I have gone a bit off the garden path—I know. Seems I can find relevance in most anything.

Interpretive Master Planning by John Veverka (1998) was brought to my attention during some student presentations last week. I took a peek, thinking there might be something of use here. I was right.

Although this book gives guidance on building displays, there is some helpful cross-over advice for teaching classes. After all, displays are a form of teaching. Veverka writes that a display is to “provoke visitor interest and to relate the interpretive message to their every-day lives” (2). I believe that my classes should do exactly the same thing.

The author gives examples of activities and their learning concepts/principles. He also explains the theory and planning behind display design to make the display’s message most effective. He ends the book with a section about making presentations, including checklists for planning and implementation. As a budding Toastmaster, I always find this sort of advice helpful and thought-provoking.

If you agree that teaching and displays are related, take a look at this short book and bibliography. It is an easy read with lots of visuals and point-form text.

Full title: Interpretive Master Planning: The essential planning guide for interpretive centres, parks, self-guided trails, historic sites, zoos, exhibits and programs.

Snapshot impressions #5--fifth class of the Fall 2012 term

I like to joke about this one, saying that "Civil War is coming to the archives." Although misleading, this statement is true.

The American Civil War class has come to the archives annually for more than three years. This is an exciting classroom experience for me. Why? The professor not only sees the value in the archives, and therefore wants to forge deeper connections between the archives and all of his classes, but he uses the archival sources as an opportunity to tease out details from previous lectures. I am always in awe of his ability to do this. I have learned a great deal about the War from these sessions alone.

In the past, the prof has asked me to find connections between the University, the Province, and the Civil War. It was no small task that first year, but I did find a few connections. After listening to the prof talk during that first archives session, I investigated more leads and more even more connections. He wanted more, though; he wanted personal narratives to make that connection. On that front, I am still searching.

This year, I was asked to find sources that gave political, social, and economic context to the War. Again, I set Amber on the trail of sources. We had more than I realized. Amber and I examined each source for that context and chose the best of possible sources. I wanted one source for each student in the class of 45. This time the speed dating exercise would probe deeper into the source, making a direct connection to the course and allowing time for the prof to lecture based on details discovered by the students.

We did four rounds of dating. The first round was short, asking each student to find one, interesting detail. The second round was also short, asking about the purpose of the book. The next two rounds were more probing with questions asking about connections to other events in the states between 1861 and 1865 and if the source gave voice to the North or the South as well as how the source helped with the students' understanding of why the War happened. As each round was completed, the prof made direct connections to the content of his previous lectures. He also prompted the students, drawing out their responses during the discussions.

My observations, with the benefit of hindsight:

• four rounds was too many, given the time we had to do the session and the depth of the questions. The students responded that they wanted more time to examine their source and think about the questions
• directly linking the lectures to the sources makes the archives relevant to the students' needs
• working closely with the prof to deliver the session is very valuable. I need to find ways to do this with more profs

Snapshot impressions #4--fourth class of the Fall 2012 term

The Pre-Confederation history class comes annually for a session in the archives. Each time, the course is taught by a different professor with a different emphasis. The number of students enrolled gets larger every year. In essence, I reinvent the session on a yearly basis. I need stability for this course. I need to create a session that is broad enough to satisfy the goals of different profs without my starting from scratch year-after-year.

Fortunately, I have two things in my favour this term. My keen research assistant, Amber, wants to find a solution for this "problem". She scoured the holdings for appropriate sources with speed dating in mind. The speed dating method is really made for this class; all other sessions were merely practice runs. We can maximize our time and put multiple resources in the hands of students. Not only is Amber keen for this exercise to work, but the prof is too. He had not taught this class before and could see the value in this session. All that is left are the logistics!

We divided the class of 57 students into two sections. The archives can accommodate 20 people comfortably (40 people squished). We chose a number in between. The prof took half of the class for 45 minutes of instruction in the classroom while I gave the first session to the other half. Then we swapped.

I have explained speed dating in previous posts, so I will not get into specifics again. My observations of this session:

• due to time restraints, the sessions were very quick. I could not accomplish everything that I wanted. Still, the students saw a wide range of relevant materials.
• speed dating was well received by the students and generated lots of discussion.
• the first and second group approached the session very differently, with different results.
• the enthusiasm of the prof is key to the success of the session. The prof asked us to shape three archival questions to be used on his final exam.

Overall, the session met the goal of the prof and the needs of the students. What's more, I  now have a flexible session that I can opt to use next year and the year after and the year after that...

Taking a shallow breath

As I sit here, reflecting on my sessions, it feels as though I am repeating myself in the blog. I guess it appears that way because the same technique is bing used throughout the term's sessions--speed dating. Still, it is a technique that works and it is one that needed perfecting.

Are we there yet? Perhaps.

Amber and I have taken these past few days to relfect on the term and project into next term. More on our progress later. I still have two more sessions to share.

Snapshot impressions #3 -- third class of the Fall 2012 term

Finally, a chance to let loose and really experiment. The third class of the term was a public history seminar with five students. The professor wanted me to talk about challenges and opportunities for archives. She gave me three hours to do so. Let’s have fun and generate some interesting discussion too!

Since I had lots of time, I also wanted to get their feedback on my own (future) research question. So, two weeks in advance of the class, I asked each student to select and read a finding aid created by my institution. I gave them no further instructions. They all came in with difference ideas of what would happen. Because they had advised me of their choices in advance, I had pulled the records for them. When they arrived for class, I gave them a printed copy of their finding aid and asked them to look at it in conjunction with the online version. After a few minutes, I have each student the records that matched their finding aid. When they had looked at all of this information for 30 minutes, I gave each student six questions to answer with a 25 minute deadline. We then came together for a group discussion. I collected some great feedback on our finding aids for my future research project.

Now, let’s turn to the challenges and opportunities that I was asked to address. I wanted to get the students’ ideas instead of leading them to see my points of view. As each student arrived for the session, I gave them a paper with the words “opportunities/challenges” and lots of blank space. I asked them to do a word association and write down their ideas. After a few minutes, I collected all of the slips of paper for my review. While the students worked on the finding aid exercise, I had an hour to prepare for the opportunities and challenges portion of the class. I was already semi-prepared as I had guessed many of their responses would be about funding, digitization, etc., but I wanted the time to get organized for the discussion. When we came together for this exercise, they found that I had written all of their responses on two white boards. I started by asking the students which point they wanted to discuss first. This was their chance to tell me what they wanted to talk about in the class. As we talked, we also discussed some prepared, supportive, and relevant videos (e.g., Tom Nesmith’s questions to Min. Moore in a Winnipeg café), newspaper articles (e.g., the funeral and protest in front of LAC), and digital documents.

In the final part of the class, I asked them a few questions about personal responsibility with respect to public history. Amber and I had prepared six questions and written them on flip charts. In this portion of the class, I brought out the flip charts and placed them all around the room. The questions literally surrounded us with the intent to generate discussion. Each student selected a question to ask the group and start a discussion. The questions had no specific order and we discussed them randomly.

Want to see how I did it? Check out “No expiration date” at this address: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/11/no-expiration-date.html

How did it all go? There were mixed results. I found the students were, at first, reluctant to engage in the open format. As the class continued though, the students became more comfortable with leading the discussion. The finding aid section was very productive. When the students were working individually, looking at records, and answering questions about the finding aid, they were very engaged.

All five of the students have returned to ask additional questions and work on their assignments. They have come to me with well-considered questions and a list of potential research sources.

Will I try this format again? Yes—yes, I will.

Snapshot impressions #2 – second class of the Fall 2012 term

The next class presented somewhat more of a challenge. Not only was the class 45 students-large, the professor wanted her students to learn how to do historical research about the role of nutrition when treating diseases such as cancer or heart disease. My mind went immediately to the cover of a past Archivaria featuring medical archives. The cover shows a poster which claims that the staff are 100% tuberculosis free.

Tuberculosis—that was my hook. This archives does not have information about cancer or heart disease (to my knowledge), but records of the local Sanatorium are housed here. The problem was that the San records were unprocessed. I decided to take the risk and let the students use the records. Why? From my quick survey, there did not appear to be any original order that the students might destroy. I also felt that the students would not remove any records, which seemed to have no monetary value. Besides, the benefits of allowing the students to see the records were too great to pass up.

I divided the students into groups. Each group was given a box of unprocessed archival records and a selection of books received from the Sanatorium’s medical library. After setting the stage and advising on handling, I invited them to go through their box and books. I encouraged each group to discuss the contents while answering a number of pre-determined questions. This was meant to be more of a self-driven exercise, allowing time for the students to share their learned knowledge. Three of the five groups engaged in meaningful discussions.

To read about this exercise, visit my other blog at http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/10/100-tb-free.html.

Before and after the exercise, I read a few paragraphs from one honours thesis, published in 2007, and written by a History and Biology student. The purpose of these short readings was to demonstrate that historical research can bring together meaningful and (sometimes) untraditional disciplines.

Was the exercise successful? Yes. One student asked to make an appointment to review sources for another class assignment. One student asked about other archival sources in the country. But, perhaps the best gauge of success was in the answers to our exit question. Approximately one-third of the students answered the question in a way that demonstrated an understanding of historical relevance to their research. A few students related past treatment of tuberculosis to current treatments.

Snapshot impressions #1 – first class of the Fall 2012 term

Our first session was really four sessions. Why? The class was large so the archives session needed to be capped at 20 students per session.

So, I did the same session four times over two weeks in order to reach everyone. The discipline’s liaison librarian attended two of the four sessions. Class one was the more experimental as I needed to “feel out” the exercises and their flow. Class two and three went well with a few modifications. By class four, my heart was no longer in it. I was not looking forward to doing the session again. But, that final group of students was so enthused and energetic, they carried the day. The fourth session may have been the most rewarding.

Each time I did very little as an introduction. The activities that got students thinking critically started immediately. I challenged them to think about dining on campus with a visual, conceptual, and verbal experience. In fact, they entered the room to find one of the tables set up like a formal dining table. Then, I moved to guiding them through their own discovery of the history of nutrition as it had been taught on campus since 1925. Finally, the students did a speed-dating exercise with several predetermined sources and specific questions. Although these activities were done with guidance, the students were still free to form their own impressions or judgments on sources, while experiencing the process of research. They approached the exercise with some reluctance and then with enthusiasm. Even the least enthused students perked up at various points of the session and participated fully in the discussion.

I have provided the entire lesson plan at http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/10/nutritional-archival-sources-now-being.html.

The students showed their new found appreciation of the Archives by returning, often with their entire group, to work on the assignment. This was the highest return rate ever for a single class. What’s more, the students continued to use the research room while bringing in sources from the regular, Library stacks. Often they asked questions or for resources and advice that were well outside of my specialty. In the spirit of collaboration with my Library colleagues, I referred students regularly to the Reference Desk for additional help.

There has been a lot of positive, second-hand feedback too. Both the professor and the department Head have commented to me directly about the feedback they have received from students. Many students did not at first see how the Archives could help them with this assignment, but they have changed their minds. I am told that the students have continued to share their findings with other students in the department.

These sessions were a risk. But, I was determined to expand my sessions beyond the “traditional” courses that use the Archives. Nutrition was one of the “non-traditional” courses selected. Was it the most successful experiment of the year? More sessions are to come.

Active learning—that’s where it’s at

My research assistant, Amber, and I had little time to gather our thoughts and explore how to best approach the faculty before they came to our door. No posters. No emails. I guess the word was already out. Three faculty members teaching four courses asked for sessions this term. Another two profs asked for sessions next term. Our work was already cut out for us.

First up—Nutrition. This was unfamiliar territory to us. The prof was keen. We wanted to make it work. Because the classes were large, we scheduled small sessions, dividing the class into four groups. Each group received the same session. (One student was so excited that she signed up for all four sessions. I love it!) Why did we do this? The in-session assignment required the students to move around the room.

Past or Portal?, reviewed briefly in another post to this blog, gave me the idea of speed dating sources. With our limited reading room space, we needed a cap of 20 students to allow for their physical movement between tables. I could have had each student pass around the sources, but I didn’t want the material to get damaged. So, the students moved around the room.

Strong encouragement from my research assistant, who is an Education student, caused me to refrain from my usual session “formula”. No longer would I see the boredom in students’ eyes while I explained the mandate and how to access collections. That’s all embedded in the session and delivered as a matter of fact during the exercise. We have decided to aim the sessions towards active learning. The sessions offered now challenge the students’ pre-conceived understanding of sources while providing a safe venue for hands-on examinations of the resources.

Nutrition’s four sessions, offered in September, were the first opportunities to test this method. Our immediate impression was that it was a success. Of course, some tweaking was done between the delivery of each session, but the method was sound. We are now planning the other session along the same lines. Some form of speed dating is involved.

Active learning—that’s where it’s at.

lit review: Past or Portal?

I am reviewing the 2012 publication, Past or Portal? Enhancing Undergraduate Learning through Special Collections and Archives, for Archivaria.  This title is so exciting that I want to say a few words about it here too.

The work consists of 47 short, case studies from 93 authors.  Each case study explores a method of introducing resources in the classroom--either through single sessions or an entire course.  I have discovered many ideas within the book and have started using them immediately in my newly developed sessions this term.

What have I decided to adopt?  Let me just mention speed dating and capturing "cool stuff".  Speed dating is a structured process by which selected items are set out for the students to examine one-on-one.  They answer a set of questions regarding the source and then discuss them as a group.  This has worked so well that I am planning to use it in many of my new sessions.  Capturing "cool stuff" is an attempt to create buy-in from the students.  I have created a brief sheet of questions on which students can tell us about any source that they find cool.  This is purely optional for the student.  Their sheets will be put on the Facebook site.  It's more about raising awareness than anything else, but I hope that students will be excited to share their comments.

a new project--a new grant

It's now time to give an update on my activities over the past few weeks.  What a busy time it has been!

I have been awarded a grant from the Nova Scotia Provincial Archival Development Program.  This grant allows me to continue my practical research and development of archival information literacy sessions.  The funding is being used to re-hire the Education student, Amber, from the last project and buy a few helpful tools.  The student will be working on the project in a part-time capacity between September and March.

Under the PADP grant, we will be targeting specific courses and working with selected faculty to develop learning tool sets that will provide a practical, hands-on approach to using primary sources.  We will build on the findings of our research from the Winter 2012 term.  The idea is to create eight sessions and learning packages with assignments that can be offered again and again over the next few years.  This will be very beneificial to me as well and reduce the amount of time that I spend designing and re-designing sessions each year.

For the grant application, we selected eight courses within the disciplines of History, Education, and Nutrition.  Four professors teaching these eight courses indicated their interest in working with us.  Approximately 355 students could be impacted by these new sessions.

Wait until you see what we have been up to since the project started.

lit review: Social Studies That Sticks

Reading this book was like striking g-o-l-d.  The entire book was useful and interesting--full of good stuff.  Much of the text has an immediate use for my own research.  Even more of the text gave me ideas to incorporate into my online Archival Research Guide.

Laurel Schmidt's Social Studies That Sticks: How to Bring Content and Concepts to Life (2007) is aimed at American educators in the K-12 classroom.  But, the "content and concepts" featured in this text can easily be adapted for undergraduates.  In fact, a few sections in this book apply to sessions that I am constructing for History, Education, and Nutrition.

All of the chapters follow a similar pattern.  Each has a section about assignment objectives, assessing prior knowledge on a topic, sources that can be used in an assignment, sample questions to ask of sources, methods of digging deeper into evidence, examples of applications of an assignment, and assessing the actual learning that took place.  I was especially excited to go through the sections about biography, objects, and propaganda.  The detection of bias in records and in the researcher is explored and provides links to online tests for bias detection.  The book strongly supports incorporating textual records, visual records, and literary works not only to build context but to strengthen examples used in the classroom.

lit rev: Integrating Information Literacy into the Higher Education Curriculum

Back to the library literature for thoughts about information literacy.  I strongly feel that we have a lot to learn from our sibling profession, especially when it comes to information literacy.  This book reinforces that feeling and started me thinking about how to better coordinate my sessions with the librarians at my institution.

Published in 2004 by Jossey-Bass, Integrating Information Literacy into the Higher Education Curriculum: Practical Models for Transformation, has helped to both reinforce by research findings-to-date and think on a larger scale for the delivery of sessions.  I took notes from all parts of the book, but the chapters written by Ilene Rockman were the most informative.

Rockman defines information literacy and explains why these skills are necessary to foster in students.  After graduation, these students will require a wide range of skills and use them in all professions and life situations.  She presents many good arguments and cites many studies to support why information literacy should be part of a wider university curriculum.  A stand-alone, undergraduate course for information literacy is explored here and throughout the book.  She encourages a university-wide, non-subject-specific course because she states that students do not always see how to use these skills for other courses; I have observed that too in my research.

Rockman's chapter entitled "Successful Strategies for Integrating Information Literacy into the Curriculum" had some great ideas. She discusses problem-based learning as a good method for delivery because it results in active and self-directed learning for the students.  Problem-based learning also develops critical thinking skills.  "It is an instructional strategy that takes real-life situations and creates learning opportunities for the students." (page 48)

Susan Carol Curzon discusses "Developing Faculty-Librarian Partnerships in Information Literacy".  She provides strategies for forming these partnerships by: identifying partners (i.e., Senate, teaching and learning centres, part time faculty, department chairs); creating awareness on campus (i.e., talking about critical thinking, meeting the concerns of professors and students, supporting with assessment); avoiding partnership pitfalls (i.e., not dictating curriculum to faculty, involving faculty in the development of a program, offering timely sessions, defining information literacy clearly); and discussing and planning the models of partnering with faculty to teach information literacy (i.e., introductory session, general education session, learning outcomes focus, faculty focus, entrance requirement).

Other chapters were less useful for my research at this time, but I noted their general content.  Chapter 3 discusses online tutorials and how to develop them so that students can learn.  Chapter 4 explores building a literacy program on a university-wide scale and embedding information literacy in the university's curriculum.  Chapter 5 discusses the assessment an information literacy course at a large institution, while chapters 6 and 7 talk about how to do the assessment and resulting program development on a wider scale.  These chapters are all interesting, but are a little beyond my ability and scope.

lit review: Evocative Objects

Sometimes a book just jumps off the shelf as you walk by it.  That happened to me yesterday with Evocative Objects: Things We Think With edited by Sherry Turkle and published by The MIT Press in 2007.  It is just too funny that the editor discusses bricolage in the opening chapter.  That is exactly what I am doing with my sessions.  But I digress...

I looked at the book briefly, wondering if there were any assignment ideas contained within the pages.  The answer?  Perhaps.

On page 7, the editor explains that the book contains autobiographical essays, created by the authors being asked to "choose an object and follow its associations: where does it take you; what do you feel; what are you able to understand?"  I think this is an interesting method for students to get into making sense of historical context and understanding.  I had been considering journal writing as an assignment, but this would take the concept to another level.

The book's brief chapters each focus on an object of the author's choice: a cello, ballet slippers, a laptop, a rolling pin, slime mold, etc.  34 objects in total, all described with a very personal connection.  I most enjoyed the chapter about "The Archive" by Susan Yee, who eloquently describes doing archival research with original and digital documents.  I also enjoyed "The Suitcase" by Olivia Daste, who targets emotion when describing her relationship with her grandmother's objects.

"There is a power of boundary objects and the general principle that objects are active life presences." (page 9)  This is exactly what I need students to experience.  How to create that experience is another matter.

lit review: Hands-On Information Literacy Activities

Although the museum education literature is interesting, I was not finding much in the way of "how to" insights.  So, I have changed by tactic.  Turning away from museum education material, I searched for books about information literacy for libraries.  Here is where I found some "how to" ideas that can be adapted to the archives. 

When it comes time to build new sessions, one book will be most helpful--Hands-On Information Literacy Activities by Jane Birks and Fiona Hunt, published in 2003 by Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.  This book is accompanied by a CD-ROM of worksheets and activity supplements.  The book itself provides step-by-step examples of activities in the form of games, assessments/reviews of sources, and core activities. 

The "games" section reminds me of an example I have used with grade 7 students.  I printed off several types of primary and secondary sources on individual sheets, distributed them to the class, and asked the students to paste their source in either the primary or secondary column drawn on a flip chart.  I didn't only use "traditional" sources; I included things like an x-box game and the programming code to build that game.  The "games" section also reminded me of the brainstorming shout-out parts of my sessions.  Guess I have been using games all along, but didn't think of it that way.

The "assessment" section gave examples of diagnostic tools, research methods, scavenger hunts, brainstorming ideas, using the catalogue, using web sites, and evaluating web sites and databases.  Of course, I already work closely with the librarians who deliver this information.  But, this book has caused me to think about using exercises to demonstrate how to use a finding aid and digital collection databases.  I also need to think about building into my sessions opportunities for students to learn how to ask for records and explain how I can mediate the research process in a way that makes sense to them.

The "core activities" section demonstrates how the examples can be layered to build a progressive learning session using games and assessment exercises.  To me, this is the most interesting section--albeit too short.  I have been wondering how to layer sessions in a way that will build on skills learned.  Is there a way to create a mock-up session that demonstrates the reference and research processes?  I am certain that there is.

I plan to return to this book.  Today I only made a few notes, but there are ideas in this book that can be adapted to my new sessions.  I need to put some of these examples into action.

lit review: Museums and Design Education

Again, I was taken completely by surprise after pulling a random book off the shelf just to see if I it included anything relevant.  Odd how that happens!  This time I discovered Museums and Design Education: Looking to Learn, Learning to See, edited by Beth Cook, Rebecca Reynolds, and Catherine Speight and published by Ashgate Publishing Limited in 2010.  Because the book has a British focus and is aimed at university design programs, I was not sure it would be relevant.  I found chapters 4 and 6 most interesting, although I read through a fair bit of the book.

In general, Museums and Design Education is supportive of museums and universities working together.  In fact, it gives a brief history of the origins of university museums being specifically created (at least in Britain) to support higher education programs such as biology, medicine, and archaeology. 

The book makes a number of other noteworthy points, such as:
[these points incorporate those included in Chapter 4: "Creative Differences" by Jos Boys, and Chapter 6: "Student Use of a University Museum" by Rhianedd Smith]

• that not a lot of theoretical research has been done on support for university students from museums--I would argue that for archives as well;
• the co-operative work between universities and museums is ad hoc and not done through a formal program supported with policy and procedure;
• undergraduate students find it more difficult to determine their research needs as they are still learning their style, skills, etc.  They cannot easily shapre their learning experience.  This comes with time;
• museums cannot meet the needs/teach the skills without assistance, partnerships, staff, and money;
• grade-school curriculum is standardized and so museums can find an easier fit than with the less-structured university course.  This makes a "one size fits all" session difficult to create;
• the museum's sessions are one-offs and about short-term goals that enrich the visitor's experience.  Universities build activities in layers, at different levels of difficulty, with long-term goals; and,
• museums do not teach in a way that anticipates outcomes; it is more about inspiration.  A display cannot really provide any outcomes.

lit review: What Does It Mean to Think Historically...

Bruce A. VanSledright published a short article entitled, "What Does It Mean to Think Historically... and How Do You Teach It?", in the journal Social Education 68(3) 2004: 230-233.  Aimed at social studies teachers, the article explains the historian's role in researching the past, making it obvious that this involves the use of archives, museums, and libraries.

"Source work is a complex undertaking, requiring a form of critical thinking." (230).  He supports this statement by explaining how to work with historical sources by identifying the type of source and how it can help with research; understanding context and authenticity of sources; searching for bias in a source; and, corroborating sources for their reliability.

He argues that teachers need to empower students with the knowledge of how to assess sources.  (I would argue that these skills are required far beyond historical thinking.)  Students who are trained in critical thinking have an advantage.  The author briefly discusses engaging students with sources to build on the critical thinking skills.  He suggests that, to guide this engagement, teachers should apply well developed questions and assignments.

Another blog that may be of interest...

I have created another blog dedicated to my lesson plans.  Check it out at: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/

Over the years, I have created 14 examples--many more than I had realized! These examples have not previously been done as lesson plans, so I am making adaptations as I go. In the upcoming year, I expect to create an additional 8 lessons plans (at the very least).

lit review: Museums and Education: Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance

What does museum education mean?  How can it be applied or adapted?  Do museums have an educational responsibility?  If so, what does that look like?  What is learning?  Is museum learning considered "real" learning?  These are questions addressed by Eilean Hooper-Greenhill in her 2007 book, Museums and Education: Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance, published by Routledge.

This book is based on research done to obtain British government funding for museums and, hence, additional research.  I didn't read the entire work because I felt that it was not all relevant.  But, I did like what parts I read.  The book was focused on learning and understanding with respect to cultural institutions.  Archives and libraries are brought into the discussion at various points throughout the book.  The challenges of squeezing in formal learning outcomes for museum public programming are front and center.

I felt as though the author tried to explore how informal museum learning fit into the formal classroom learning.  Considering the audience, the author seemed to explain not only the differences between the two learning types, but the benefits of supporting both.  She goes into great detail about learning, understanding, and knowledge, clearly demonstrating the process by which the researchers attempted to measure each aspect.

Studies found that school teachers valued the enjoyment, inspiration, and creative thinking that was involved with their students after a museum visit.  They valued the ability to open the minds of students to explore new ideas.  Knowledge was absorbed by the visit.  Teachers discussed how the experience can shape attitudes and value for history, people, institutions, and themselves.  They did not see much worth in assessing the direct learning done by students in the museum, only the entertainment value.

Student comments mirrored the teachers', but with much less depth.

Overall, the book did not provide any clues about how to enhance learning.  It did, however, provide a theoretical framework for learning based on a solid research method.  The book supported my own research more than it gave me new ideas to explore and incorporate.

lit review: Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning in Museums

I have been looking for ideas and examples of good practice within the museum literature.  I turned to this book, Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning in Museums, edited by Scott Paris and published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates in 2002.  At first I thought the book may not be of much interest due to the focus on children and museums, which is not my user-group for this research.  As usual, I was surprised.  Yes, the child-focused examples are prominent, but the discussions were more broadly based.  I found ideas that can be borrowed/adapted/considered along with words of wisdom from the various articles included in the book.

Here are some of the observations I made:

• suggests that guided exploration works best in the museum context (is this true of archives?).  What is the right balance of guidance and exploration to enhance learning?
• lots of strong arguments about the place of museums in the context of learning.  Objects help researchers understand, challenge, and communicate in a non-traditional, learning environment.
• digital falls far short of the experience with the original.  This is explored in chapter 5.
• interesting concept of a "talk back area" for comments and responses that enhance a museum exhibit.  This is a process that shares the learning and experience of other researchers.
• John H. Falk, of the Institute for Learning Innovation in Annapolis, Maryland, has written a number of articles/books that may be of interest.  He is frequently cited in this book and in others.
• there are three overlapping contexts--personal, sociocultural, and physical--that contribute to and influence the interaction and experience with objects for learning and meaning-making.  These are all exlored in chapter 1.
• the impact of the physical environment on learning is also explored in chapter 8.
• chapter 9 includes an interesting discussion about history museums vs. science museums and the use of objects to enhance understanding.  The role of literacy and interpretation is brought into this discussion.
• first-hand investigation (self-interpreted) vs. second-hand investigation (museums interpreted) of objects is part of chapter 10, which is about inquiry and the use of text.  This is mostly discussed within the context of an exhibit, but may be applicable to archival instruction.

Of course, the book was not entirely relevant to my research, but I liked the small nuggets of ideas that I may be able to consider as the research continues.  Much of what was said supports my own way of thinking about instruction.  As an example, I leave you with a quote from chapter 16:

"Encounters with real things--be they from the natural or cultural environment--ignite curiosity, imagination, memories, and questions.  Encounters with objects provide an opportunity for dialogue, inquiry, and conversation through which individuals find deeper connections not only to the world around them, but to each other as conversations twist around the object, the content, and the thoughts and experience of each individual." (Morrisey, 185)

My research grant, part 5: survey-based recommendations

Based on the results from the interviews, the following recommendations are being considered:

·         work with faculty during the class/course planning to prepare sessions, and assignments if possible, as well as integrate sessions more seamlessly;

·         help faculty to understand that this is a supportive measure and not in competition to the limited class time.  A diversity of tangible/relevant examples can be exciting for the professor too, who is used to the same resources being used for assignments;

·         do not limit to the traditional disciplines (i.e., History);

·         find non-traditional disciplines (i.e., Nutrition) that could benefit from a session;

·         build sessions in layers.  Consider more introduction-style sessions for first and second years with more detailed sessions for third and fourth years – especially research methods classes;

·         be flexible with sessions to accommodate the needs of faculty and students;

·         provide examples based on the topic of the course/assignment;

·         consider critical thinking classes offered separately from the archival literacy in conjunction with a librarian to cover both primary and secondary sources; and,

·         engage archivists in discussion about the benefits of archival information literacy to students, faculty, and archivists.

My research grant, part 4: survey results

The results of the interviews exceeded expectations and brought a few surprises.  Briefly,

·         faculty see the benefit of engaging students in primary and critical research;

·         faculty appreciate their students’ use the archives as part of their assignment;

·         faculty do not begrudge sessions in the archives and do not feel it a waste of their class time as it enriched the classroom experience instead of competing with it;

·         faculty were concerned that primary sourced assignments might overwhelm the archives’ staff;

·         faculty thought they knew what was in the archives and were surprised to find that we have even more relevant material than previously known;

·         students enjoy working with primary documents in a safe, hands-on environment;

·         students in higher-level courses find more relevance especially for the research methods aspect;

·         students in lower-level courses find more diverse topics and materials to enrich their general assignments;

·         physical material triumphed over the digital, although digital material was more accessible; and,

·         no teaching style changes were requested.  The only request on this point was from students and faculty alike – incorporate even more hands-on materials.

Spin-off results and comments from the interviews that were complete surprises included:

·         interviews raised awareness of the archives with faculty and students alike;

·         increased traffic in the archives’ reading room;

·         additional, ‘non-traditional’ faculty signed up their class for a session without invitation;

·         at least two new-to-archives classes next year will incorporate primary sources; and,

·         knowledge of primary sources and research is beneficial to students applying to graduate school – better research methods=stronger thesis=stronger application for school.

My research grant, part 3: survey participants

Ten faculty members and ten students were selected to participate in the survey.  Of them, four faculty members and over ten students were invited with the proviso that their participation was voluntary and would not involve any degree of risk.  All participants were given the option to complete a written survey or to be interviewed; everyone opted for the interview.  The interview questions were reviewed in advance by a few of the participants.

Four faculty members and twenty students from the Department of History, the Department of Psychology, and the School of Education were interviewed.  Both groups were asked ten questions that were pre-approved by the Acadia University Senate Research Ethics Board.  The interviews were done either in groups or individually, as appropriate and mutually agreeable.  All participants had attended an archives session within the past two years.

An additional six faculty members were selected for participation, but were not invited to participate.  This group had never requested an archives session and so pre-approved questions were devised to determine why.  These six faculty members were not interviewed because of the survey results (below) and because, during the research, four faculty requested sessions which had never been requested before and two faculty indicated that they plan to request a session in the Fall of 2012.  Although this group may still be surveyed for their comments, it was decided that an outreach strategy may be the best way to engage additional faculty as the need is clear.  An outreach strategy will likely draw even more faculty to request an archives session.

My research grant, part 2: expectations

Before I tell you what we found out, I should tell you what we expected to find.

We anticipated the following results from the interviews:

·         faculty were satisfied with the sessions, perhaps more so with the ones specific to the course;

·         students were not satisfied with the sessions and did not feel it met their assignment needs;

·         the reason why students did not return to the archives for other assignments;

·         the reason for faculty not requesting sessions for their other classes;

·         the reason why more faculty do not ask for a session; and,

·         a critique of the sessions’ delivery method.

We also expected the findings to result in clearly identifiable weaknesses in the method of delivering sessions and therefore the development of new methods to deliver sessions.  These new, stronger sessions would be tested in the Fall of 2012. 

Again, we were surprised on both fronts.

My research grant, part 1: the setup

In late 2011, I applied for the University Research Fund grant to hire an Education student who would assist me to assess and develop Archival Information Literacy (AIL) sessions.  Here's part of what I proposed:

"This research will support the preparation and construction of a set of new AIL sessions aimed to improve and enhance student research skills using pedagogically sound assignments and research tools.  The research includes examining the impact of previous AIL sessions by surveying or interviewing five (5) faculty and ten (10) students from the Faculty of Arts and the School of Education who have had an AIL session in the past.  Surveys or interviews will also be conducted with five (5) faculty from the Faculty of Arts who have not asked for an AIL session but whose class may benefit from a session.  The results of the surveys and interviews will be used to inform and develop the new AIL sessions."

That grant proposal was successful and we began our work in January 2012.  I hired an Education student to conduct, transcribe, and compile data from the interviews, keeping me at arm's length of the process so as to not influence it.  

Here are the questions that formed the basis of the interviews:

Surveys/Questionnaires/Interview questions:

Questions for faculty who have had an archives session:

1.      Why did you choose to include an archives session in your course?

2.      What were the benefits of including an archives session in your course?

3.      What were the drawbacks of including an archives session in your course?

4.      What did your class do during their session?

5.      Did the session meet your expectations and/or the needs of the class?

6.      How could the session be modified to better meet your expectations and/or needs of the class?

7.      How could the examples be improved to better meet your expectations and/or needs of the class?

8.      What type of assignment did you build to reinforce the skills your students learned in the archives session?

9.      Did the students include archival sources in their assignment?

10.  What type of session would you prefer to be offered to your classes?

11.  What skills/information should your students learn from an archives session?

12.  Do you have any other comments about the archives session?

Questions for faculty who have NOT had an archives session:

1.      Have you included an archives session in the past?

2.      Would you consider including an archives session in your future course(s)?

3.      What would be the benefits of including an archives session in your course?

4.      What would be the drawbacks of including an archives session in your course?

5.      What expectations would you have for an archives session?

6.      What needs would your students have for an archives session?

7.      Do you want your students to include archival sources in their assignments?

8.      What skills/information should your students learn from an archives session?

9.      Do you have any other comments about the archives session?

Questions for students who have had an archives session:

1.      What did you learn in your archives session?

2.      How does the archives session meet/not meet your learning needs?

3.      How can the archives session be improved or changed so as to better meet your needs?

4.      Were the example(s) helpful and assist in your understanding of how to use the Archives?

5.      How can the example(s) be improved to assist in your understanding of how to use the Archives?

6.      How can this type of session help you with assignments in your other courses?

7.      In what other courses do you feel you would benefit from an archives session?

8.      How can the Archives reach out to students to help them with their learning?

9.      Do you have any other comments about the archives session?

The results were surprising!  I will share them in a separate post.

On June 8th, at the Association of Canadian Archivists' conference in Whitehorse, I shared one of my interactive, guided class examples with delegates.  I called it "The Case of the Controversial Calendar".  It will be available as a podcast on the ACA members website. Thank you to everyone who participated.  Thank you to everyone who encouraged me to share my research endeavours via this blog.  As promised, I will use this blog to disseminate the research and practice of AIL.  Exciting times are ahead!

The title of this blog is inspired by an article of the same title, written by Wendy Robicheau for the March issue of the APLA Bulletin, available here: http://apla.ca/?q=75/3.robicheau

What is Archival Information Literacy

Archival Information Literacy (hereafter AIL) is the process of educating researchers to understand and use primary sources effectively.  While outreach and public programming raises awareness of original documents, AIL goes further to teach research skills using primary sources.  Understanding and using primary sources during the research process can build and enhance students’ aptitude for doing qualitative, quantitative, and historical research in addition to expanding their learning experience.  When reinforced with assignments and research tools, students can develop research skills, practice them in the archives, and apply them to any discipline.  A review of the literature indicates that archivists have not embraced information literacy at the same rate as librarians.  Many articles focus on defining the concept of information literacy rather than on the practice of information literacy. 

At present, the Archives at Acadia is providing students with a unique learning experience; however, that opportunity is limited.  AIL sessions have been offered since 2007 at the request of individual faculty members.  The inter-disciplinary nature of the Archives’ holdings makes it a fertile space to examine ways to increase utilization of the Archives through class visits and tailored assignments.