An unexpected visit

My final class of the year was with a small group of high school students. Their teacher had been in one of my sessions when she was a student and wanted to bring some of her students to the Archives. Yeah! This is one of my goals for doing sessions with B.Ed. students.

I divided the allotted time into a combination of looking at records related to their curriculum, interesting books from Special Collections, and a tour of Archives and Special Collections. The exercises with archival documents were very short, asking only two questions about the content and allowing for some discussion time. I also gave them some information about the process of research. During the tour, I had laid out a few documents that I thought would catch their interest.

It all went very well. The documents and books that I selected did make an impact on them. They took pictures of the material they used. The group stayed longer than expected and had lots of questions during the tour. Indeed, we all learned a lot.

Where Did You Say You Came From?

During the summer, the prof of Canadian Immigration History and I discussed a number of ideas for the class session in September. We agreed on using the Archives to help the students practice for an oral history assignment. Who better to practice interview skills, I thought, than with dead people? There are both similarities and (significant) differences.

The session was divided into three parts: interviewing dead people, blind dating, and moving beyond the records. I brought in a few secondary sources about oral history to wave around during the session so that students knew they could get lots of help in the Library.

First up—an interview with a dead person, J.F. Herbin to be exact. You can find a similar lesson plan here (http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/07/counting-canadians.html ; for this class I did a modified version). We spent close to 30 minutes going through this guided example. I tell the students a few details about the individual and then quiz them about other sources of information. As students brainstorm a source, like a newspaper, I encourage them by giving out a copy of the newspaper and asking for details from that source. Every student gets a source to explore. In the end, we all have a piece of the puzzle and as a group put together the person’s life. This first part of the class demonstrated to the students what they needed to do during the following two parts.

Next was blind dating to give the students an opportunity to practice doing background research with archival records. Four groups of records had been pre-selected for this class, all related to immigration. Normally, I set out records and the students sit randomly at tables without knowing what records are there. But, I did something unusual this time; I told the students about the records that were on each table so they could choose to work with ones of interest to them and they chose where to sit. We spent 30 minutes looking at the records, doing critical analysis of them. The groups were given a sheet of critical analysis questions that I developed from Social Studies that Sticks by Laurel Schmidt (2007). They were asked to select one set of the questions and use them as a jumping-point to find major themes within the records, build categories of key concepts found in the records, and look for what is missing from the records. Each student in the group worked independently to prepare for the next part of the session.

Part three, moving beyond the records, was to prepare the students for an actual interview. You can find the basic lesson plan here (http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/12/thinking-outside-box.html). The groups at each table worked together to discuss a number of questions about the records. These questions were meant to provoke further discussion about forming interview questions for the assignment.

You may wonder about music for this class. I played Sting’s “Englishman in New York”, although I could have used “Illegal Alien” by Genesis.

This class was almost 90 minutes long, so I was able to do three, separate lessons, relate them, and offer them as one class. I think it worked well, giving the students lots of time to experience and guidance with the records. Many of the students returned to work on the research necessary for their assignment.

Lit Review: Broadening Student Understanding…

A good friend of mine recently brought my attention to an article in Social Education 77 (5), pp. 228-231, by Lee Ann Potter entitled “Broadening Student Understanding of Wartime Experience through Original Works of Art and Personal Accounts”. It is a most interesting article that discusses the incorporation of various sources (i.e., oral history, photos, correspondence, videos, etc.) to encourage critical thinking. The author outlines how this is done. Here's my take on what she said.

The students are provided with some sources and challenged to identify if they think any sources are missing. If so, what types of sources? Then challenged again to identify what the missing sources might add to their understanding of the event. As the new sources are provided, the students are asked to speculate on the creator, title, and date of the new item(s) and then create a list of questions based on these sources. After that list is built, the students are given the metadata about these items. As a group, the students discuss how this changes their view of the event. Then, the students are shown a video (or videos) that are directly related to the event, adding another dimension [I would love to do this with my classes]. The group discussion that follows incorporates the newest information from the video. How are the students’ views changed about the event or the items that reflect the event? Finally, the students are asked to read the relevant section in their textbook to build and understanding of the event. [Now comes the best part.] The students were asked to produce their own interpretation of the event based on the more-rounded information, using the various sources. [Are you wondering what my sessions might be doing next term? If I can find a class with which this will work, I will let you know!]

One From the Song Book

Some time in August, the planning began for a course for which I had done a session before, but not using my new methods. Of course, I had to completely change the session to incorporate speed dating, discovery, interrogation, and – yes – music. The prof, who is open to new things, was in total agreement. We decided to offer the session twice so that the class of 40 students could be divided into two sessions of 20, each lasting 1.5 hours in length. The class assignment was a choice of one with historic textbooks, an archival collection, a historiographic essay, or an oral history.

To get those creative juices flowing, part one was a speed dating exercise with the historic textbook collection – I called it Timeless Texting. I have used this method many times for various classes. The challenge is to select only 20 or 25 books out of the 2200 titles we have in this special collection, ranging in dates between 1800 and 1983 on all topics. Normally, the class has a subject area to which I can limit my search, but Educating Canadians covers the entire scope of this collection. I limited myself to two titles for each decade, spreading out the subjects as evenly as possible to provide comparisons. During the 30-minute activity, we discussed biases when approaching a book, making fun of old textbooks, and expectations on content. This was also an opportunity for me to explain the purpose of speed dating, which is not apparent to everyone. I explained that the students need to learn and practice skills for assessing a source and collecting bibliographic data – speed dating.

Between this exercise and the next one, I played some music for the students. Years ago, the Archives recorded the campus Choir singing and chanting Acadia-related songs and cheers. Many of the students had not heard these before. The music interlude was directly relevant to the class and the students enjoyed them. Very effective.

The next part was discovery with archival collections. As I have in other sessions, students were given five collections related to the topic with the correlating finding aid. They looked through the boxes for one item of interest, completed an information sheet, and we openly discussed the records and items at each table (lesson plan here: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/12/hunting-and-gathering.html). The purpose was to practice gathering historical details and information. This part took about 30-minutes. Then, I had more Acadia-related music and song books to share with the students before we began the next exercise.

Part three was the interrogation section and would help with the oral history assignment. The purpose was for students to practice interrogating sources and to brainstorm new ideas. First, I instructed the students to switch tables. You see, in part two they had heard about the records at the other tables and I suspected that something may have caught their interest. Now was their chance to check out another group of records. After the switch, everyone selected one item, completed a sheet of questions, and then brainstormed about other sources of information that could be helpful. (lesson plan here: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/12/thinking-outside-box.html). As the students packed up to leave, I played the song that is part of the Acadia convocation ceremony. Many had not heard it before, but everyone understood the significance of playing it at the end of this class.

Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Nothing Blue

At the start of September, I was asked to bring two, large classes of History students to the Archives. Because the reading room can only accommodate 25 students comfortably—up to 40 students uncomfortably, each class was divided into two sections. Fortunately, the History Librarian was able to work with the other section of students each time and we swapped at the mid-point. This is a strategy that works well for me, the Librarian, and the professor. The students especially benefit as they learn about primary and secondary sources in one class.

The first of the two classes was Environmental History. The prof wanted students to be able to evaluate primary and secondary sources through the lens of an environmental historian. I had 45 minutes to excite and educate them. I turned to one of the workshop format lesson plans of last year, modified it to suit the topic and time-frame, and developed a new lesson plan for this class (http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/11/no-paving-projects.html). I learned several things while this session was in progress and, luckily, had enough time to make alterations during the first session. First, let the students look through the material without having the questions in hand. When the questions are in hand, the students are less focused on the discovery aspect and more focused on answering the questions. The purpose of the questions is to give the students a focus AFTER they have looked at the archival material after all, the instructions are to select one thing from the box, take a good look at it, and then answer the questions. Second, I need to allow sufficient time for student to talk about the sources they found. Some students want to talk more than others so this part is hard to judge, but if I am prepared with interesting details about each collection than I can keep the discussion going. Sometimes the discussion can come back to the questions that the students have been asked to answer. Third, there is merit to allow time for students to go to another table and look at other sources of interest. We have just discussed these sources as a group and I expect something may have peaked their interest. Give the students exploration time at another table.

I tried a new idea for the History classes this year. I introduced music that was relevant to the topic. For example the Environmental History class left the room listening to Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, although I also had Midnight Oil’s Beds Are Burning ready to go. For the next class, Pre-Confederation Canada, music was more of a challenge!

The second of the two classes during the first week of September was Pre-Confederation Canada. Again, I taught the class in two sections, swapping at the mid-point with the History Librarian. This was class a re-run of the Pre-Confederation lesson plan done in 2012 when I tried speed dating resources (explained here http://classroomarchivist.blogspot.ca/2012/11/snapshot-impressions-4-fourth-class-of.html). I did modify the sources somewhat but the questions and format remained the same with one exception. I asked the students to reflect on how this item was similar to or different from the one they saw before. That question intuitively came out of the Critical Dietetics conference session and, I felt, need to be considered during the exercise. What music did I end up playing? Kastin’s Akua Tuta, as there was a prominent indigenous peoples section and assignment in the course. I also had chosen a song by Susan Aglukark as a backup.

Overall, the introduction of music was not a huge hit for students—not in these classes anyway. In the next class, I used it more effectively.

Who Killed the Apple

Personally, I have a great relationship with a professor or two in Nutrition. This is the second time I was invited into a Nutrition class. But, this is the first time I have considered myself a “performer” as much as an instructor. Why? I didn’t have the Archives to back me up. The class was too large to bring to the Archives. I had to go to them. I needed a new tactic. A performance was the answer—infotainment. I walked into the class prepared for a murder mystery show. It was the afternoon of 31 October.

“Historical research is similar to that of an investigation,” I told this research methods class. “So, today we are going to undertake [laughter] a murder mystery.” Then, I dramatically removed a cloth that was draped over the following crime scene…

“The question is, Who killed the apple [long pause] industry in the Annapolis Valley?” More laughter followed.

Remember this was a nutrition class, so I needed to link in nutrition somehow. First though, I briefly proved that the Valley was once full of orchards by showing then/now images of places they recognized. Then, I lined up unlikely suspects such as the witch in Snow White, Isaac Newton, etc. Using primary and secondary sources, we discussed the history of the apple, its nutritional value or the loss thereof as a suspect, and the varieties of apples. Eventually, after looking at historical images of farming equipment, cartoons about Maritime Rights, diaries, posters, government reports, and newspapers, a possible ‘murderer’ became more apparent. But I left the question of who killed the apple hanging in the air, careful not to answer it. I hoped that they students would see that the journey to find the answer was the real reason for the class. After all, archives are a place of questions—not always a place of answers.

Yes, I stressed over this one. I used a power point—something I rarely do. I like flip charts and white boards. I wrote out my presentation as a speech—something I rarely do. I like to speak naturally and go off topic now and again. But once I started to think of the class as a “performance” instead of my usual class, I was a bit more settled with it. I prefer activities that use lesson plans and archival sources, but this was fun too.

Dietetics Adventure=Archives Discovery

In August, I gave a session at a conference for critical dietetics. It was a small but totally engaged group of academics that came to the Archives for a session. Remember the first Nutrition class that came to the Archives in September 2012? (see posting http://classroomarchivist.blogspot.ca/2012/10/snapshot-impressions-1-first-class-of.html) This conference session recreated parts of that lesson plan (posted here http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/10/nutritional-archival-sources-now-being.html) so that participants could share the students’ experience.

We had a delightful afternoon learning about the history of nutrition at Acadia and the development of the teaching of nutrition/home economics/hygiene in grade schools. I hope that the participants were inspired to find ways to use historical sources in their own classrooms and build relationships with the university archivists.

Education students come to visit -- more than once

Back in July, I had the pleasure of spending an afternoon with a group of M.Ed. students. Whenever Education students come to the Archives, the prof and I have great fun as we work so well together. This is an opportunity for me to co-teach a class. The students were given ample time to do their activity (modelled after http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/03/more-than-just-pretty-face.html, which was created for a History class) with five groups of records that were challenging and applicable to their curriculum studies course. After completing the activity, the class discussed primary sources in the grade school curriculum. My assessment is that the class was both engaged and challenged. That said, the students were a bit anxious about the activity at first, which is to be expected (see soap box below). My teaching method may not be what they had anticipated in an archives.

SOAP BOX: My method in class is to give few detailed instructions about the activity. Instructions are on the handout after all. I opt to talk less and give more time to work with the sources. That makes students uncomfortable. But being uncomfortable is part of the process. Even if I explain the activity in great detail and set up the sources with lots of information, I have observed that the students are still uncomfortable. Why? This is often their first time with primary documents; the first time in an archives; anxiety is high. Each student has to come to terms with these circumstances on their own. My approach is to treat them like adults instead of coddling them. Give them the tools they need and let them go to it. I am always in the room to answer questions and provide one-on-one support if needed. END

The professor thought the July class was successful. So much so that she brought her two other Education classes back in October to do the same activity. Again, I selected sources that were relevant to the curriculum for their target grade-levels (elementary and secondary). This time, I set up the activity as a competition between the five groups in each class. They accepted the challenge and blew us away with their ideas for potential displays. During both classes, the room was an explosion of noise! It was rewarding to facilitate those classes.

NOTE: How do I judge if my lessons are successful? By noise level. I feel that noise level equals student engagement. I encourage all my classes to be noisy during the activity. The Archives is closed during my classes, so no one is being disturbed—it’s all good.

A wealth of lesson plans save the day

Oh my! Upon looking back, it seems that I have not written about any of my classes since April or reported on my classroom activities since May.

No, I have been in hibernation—quite the opposite. Since June, I have delivered ten lesson plans and spoken at two conferences. Now that mid-November is here, and I anticipate a bit of a lull, perhaps I can tell you about all of these experiences.

The best thing about my teaching this term is that I have greatly benefitted from the research that Amber and I did in 2012/2013. The lesson plans and methods to develop those plans were adaptable to this term, allowing me to switch up components as well as easily build new components. For example, I could return to a lesson plan for one class, modify it slightly according to our observations, and re-offer the lesson; it was essentially and “off the shelf” package. Indeed, that was one of the goals of our research. In other classes, I could take parts of two or more lesson plans and combine them to suit the course to build new objectives. Finally, I used our six methods (discussed here http://classroomarchivist.blogspot.ca/2013/04/i-just-have-to-tell-folks-about-this.html) to develop new lessons when I could not find a plan that was suitable. All in all, the term was less stressful because I had a wealth of lesson plans and methods to develop new lessons. Whew!

lit review: Defining Relevancy

You might think that I picked up Defining Relevancy: Managing the New Academic Library, edited by Janet McNeil Hurlbert and published by Libraries Unlimited in 2008, just to read the chapter "Opportunities for Small and Medium-Sized College Archives in the Digital Age" by Carole P. Johnson. OK, well I did; but, the chapter was not insightful for this research project. [Sorry, if you want to find out about that chapter, I encourage you to seek out the book.] I did find a few other chapters to be more fitting to my cause and so will discuss them here.

Christopher Cox, "Changing Demographics: Meet the Students and Faculty of the Future" explains Millennials as 'diverse' (p.3). To my surprise, this group was born between 1982 and 2002 (really, I had no idea the scope was that wide). Qualities that Cox explores of this diverse group, with which we are all speaking for the considerable future in academia, are:

• 'they are ethnically diverse and celebrate diversity',
• 'they are nontraditional',
• 'they expect choices and instant gratification' [yeah, I'll say],
• 'they are digital natives',
• 'they enjoy gaming and media', and
• 'they learn best experientially and collaboratively' (p.4-12).

Naturally, I focused on the description of learning experimentally and collaboratively as my sessions have built in more and more of these elements. Cox encourages problem-based and active learning over lecture-based classes. He also encourages using online and offline collaborative spaces.

Section III groups together three information literacy articles worth noting by Sterngold, Lombard and LeVan, and Steffen. Let me start with the case study by Lombard and LeVan.

Emmett Lombard and Sally LeVan's, "Faculty and Information Literacy Case Study" provides insights on two need of faculty--scholarship and teaching support. The cumulative data, harvested comments, results, and appended questions are all included in this case study. If you are looking for the faculty's voice on these issues, this article may provide insights. Perhaps what I took most from this study was the methodology and the questions themselves. In my own survey of faculty, I might have benefited from this short, multiple-choice format, at least to begin the conversation. I will keep that in mind for next time I do a survey.

Arthur H. Sterngold provides some interesting insight with "Rhetoric Versus Reality: A Faculty Perspective on Information Literacy Instruction". I must admit; this fellow had me intrigued from the first sentence. Sterngold proposes that "librarians serve more as consultants to faculty than as direct providers of IL instruction" (p.85). Yes I know, this argument is not popular with my colleagues; but, he does provide a faculty's perspective and it should be heard in order to understand that perspective at the very least. It is only a 10-paged article; get a copy and see what Sterngold says in his own words.

Susan Swords Steffen's article, "Through the Information Literacy Lens: Managing the College Library in the Twenty-First Century", discusses the pressures of reduced resources  to scale-back or eliminate information literacy. She argues that despite this, successful information literacy can be provided and incorporated into other aspects such as serving users, reorganizing library spaces, using technology, and emphasizing the importance of information literacy for students.

Once again, I have turned to library literature for inspiration with my endeavours on information literacy. Although the library does provide a close relationship and some good insights, the archives must find their own path for literacy instruction. In this way, I believe that archives will define their own relevancy within the academic sector and beyond.

Discover Deeper Meanings: Just Add Archives

or, the session at WILU. 

[Much to my shock and dismay, WILU does not stand for Wendy’s Information Literacy Universe!?!]

On 8 May, Amber Klatt and I were fortunate to make a presentation to ten, enthusiastic participants at the Workshop for Instruction in Library Use (WILU) on the campus of the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton. We had 45, carefully-planned, jam-packed minutes to unfold our research. Here’s the nutshell version.

Everyone introduced themselves and told us briefly about their favourite teacher; why was that person your favourite? This provided some good insights for us all. After a quick review of the agenda, it was “get to work” time. We divided the participants into smaller groups. Our handout had two sets of questions and the participants were given reproduced archival material that matched one of those sets. This allowed us to reproduce an activity that would normally happen when students come to the Archives. [Curious? Here is the history activity; here is the biology activity.] The activity ended with a larger discussion on the question, “Why would a third year student seek out these resources?” Conscious of the clock, Amber launched into a short lecture on the benefits of our research to students, faculty, us and the Archives. [I picked up at that point, bragging that since 2007, 1400 students have had an Archives class! But, I digress.] I briefly explained the six methods that we used to deliver our classes to students and the factors that unconsciously structured our choices. Finally, it was the participants turn to think about ideas for their own classes. Amber explained an activity whereby everyone would write down a class delivery idea, then share it with someone, and then share both of those ideas with someone else. In this way, participants would come out of the session with four, new ideas to bring home with them.

Amber and I structured the session to provide an experience for the participants—not a lecture. We wanted them to step into the shoes of a student for the activity, then step back into the educator role to examine that activity, and finally leave with some new ideas. Our evaluation slips reflected that we were successful in doing just that. Thanks to everyone who participated for making it such a great session.

Here are some of my parting thoughts that I shared with the group, and will now share with you:

·         Archives are not passive places.

·         Archives are relevant to curriculum at the university level. Our research has proven that!

·         Archives can contribute to literacy instruction in meaningful ways.

·         With the right tools and partnerships, an Archivist can be an active educator. Amber Klatt (now a graduate of the B.Ed. program) added a depth to the classes and questions that I could not have done alone.

I just HAVE to tell folks about this project. Really, I do. It’s a requirement.

As part of my grant application, I indicated that I would share my findings with colleagues. Keeping up this blog, and its companion, is only one way to share my research. Bringing a number of stakeholders to the same room and talking about the research is my usual way of sharing. Last week, I held a meeting with those stakeholders. I invited 25 faculty and administrators to participate in an activity using primary documents (about 30 minutes) and a presentation of the research findings (15 minutes). Only eight people came, but they were so engaged and enthusiastic that the group remained long after the session was over.

Many of the research findings have already been shared on this blog; but, some data was compiled only for the purpose of the meeting. I want to share it as you may be surprised by the findings.

Let’s start with numbers.

Below is a chart, showing the number of students, by discipline, taking an archives session between 2007 and 2011 (before my research began). “Other” refers to students in Theology and Interdisciplinary courses, which did not come every year. 

 

Here is a chart showing the numbers of students, by discipline, receiving an archives session between 2011 and 2013 (during the time of this research). “Other” refers to Psychology and English course.

 

Before this research started, the numbers of students having archives sessions were already very strong. During this research, the numbers became stronger. This increase came with no publicity on my part; the faculty heard about my sessions and asked for a session without my prompting. 

You can see from the charts above that History continues to grow. Education dropped off in 2012/13 because of a leave, but I already have a class booked for the summer term and expect their numbers to rise again. Kinesiology and Nutrition are expected to continue booking sessions in the Fall.

Now for the sessions themselves...

With respect to the “learning packages” we hoped to develop, there were great results. Our grant application stated that we would develop packages for eight courses; instead, we developed twelve packages and delivered ten. These packages fit into six categories and future sessions will be developed to fit within them. They are:

1.       Information: to provide an overview or introduction.

2.       Speed dating: to quickly assess many, course-relevant sources.

3.       Discovery: to slowly explore a source or group of sources for a common theme.

4.       Questioning: to explore a source in order to answer a specific question(s).

5.       Research Workshop: to practice course-specific research.

6.       Combination: some or all of the above sessions in various combinations.

I cannot state strongly enough the important of my research assistant, Amber Klatt. Her experience and education was vital to the success of this research. She has helped me understand how to create meaningful archives sessions that give the students the right tools to actively teach themselves about primary sources. I have said time and time again, the success of this grant was not what we were doing, it was how we were doing it. 

Snapshot impressions #10 – fifth class of the Winter 2013 term

Last class of the term for me did not go even a little bit according to plan. And, it was a good plan!

This was a small group of students, so the session could be focused on their assignment needs. They wanted a tour and time to ask questions (check). The prof wanted time to discuss sources at other archives (check). I wanted the students to have time to look at sources relevant to their assignment (check). We had over two hours to do all of that, so this is what I had planned…

Everyone in the class had been to the Archives and Special Collections for a session. This was a chance to take them behind the scenes and show them the closed stacks, answering their questions about the collections and preservation issues. Then, we would reconvene and discuss sources that would help the students with their research papers. While the prof was lecturing on sources at other archives in the country, I would pull material from the Archives. When the prof finished his lecture, the students would have time to review the pulled material. After they had seen the material, we would all have an open discussion about sources and evidence.

In reality, the tour took almost half of the class time instead of 20 minutes (or so). It was done in a completely relaxed manner and the students asked many questions while expressing a deep interest in the collections. They didn’t really want to take the class as time to work on their assignment, they wanted to learn more about behind the scenes. Although I had planned the session with the professor in advance, I had completely misunderstood the expectations of the students.

What did they miss? I had planned a 20-30 minute segment for open discussion about questioning sources. The purpose was to encourage students to think about the kind of questions they are asking and, therefore, the kind of answers they are getting (e.g., presence of bias, skewing your research, etc.). The discussion was going to open with the professor talk about how studying the past has changed dramatically over the recent 100 years and how it will change in the next 100 years. Then we all would have discussed the following:

1.  What is your perspective on how history is being told today?
2. Where do you fit in the process of historical research?
3. If you write about history, are you creating history? What role do you have in creating history?
4. What history do you want to tell? How does that influence your research?

No matter. This was a great class to end the sessions offered during the term. As for the questions, I will find a way to recycle them into another session next year – guaranteed.

Snapshot impressions #9 – fourth class of the Winter 2013 term

This course was introductory, so you know what that means—too many students for one session. Fortunately, two sessions did the trick. [I find that offering the same session more than twice on the same day is too tiring and does cause me some confusion. I can’t recall if I mentioned certain details to one class or another, etc.] Two sessions works well and the students got the best of both worlds by taking the opposite session with a librarian.

The prof came to my second session and participated in discussions about the documents. Personally, I love when that happens. (I may have said this before.) I feel that it is important for the students to see the prof and the archivist together in the session and providing two perspectives on the content.

Because the prof and I had discussed the course content and assignment well in advance, my research assistant and I were prepared for this class. The assignment involved the students choosing a research topic, five of which were well represented by primary documents in the Archives. Oddly enough, that worked out perfectly—the research room has five tables. As the students entered the room, they randomly chose to sit at one of the five tables. Each table featured a single, archival document and a set of questions. All of the students had the same set of questions, aimed to help them probe the evidence on the table. The groups were given lots of time to look at the material and share their ideas before they were asked to speak about the records and discuss the questions with everyone. (Here’s how it was done: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/04/extra-extra-come-learn-all-about-it.html) 

As luck would have it, some students sat at a table with the document that was relevant to their assignment. My research assistant and I have discussed if we should label the table’s topics to reduce some of the randomness of selecting a table. We have decided against it. The luck of the draw (or serendipity) is part of the experience of visiting an archives. Yes, some students will not be engaged as a result, but others will enjoy the element of discovery. We did build in a few minutes near the end of the session for the students to roam around and look at the documents on the other tables. I hope to incorporate more “roaming” in my future sessions.

Snapshot impressions #8 – third class of the Winter 2013 term

Once a term, it seems, I have a session that allows me to really bring out my creative side. This session provided a chance to do just that. You may remember my blogging about some of those books I read during the summer that seemed to have little relevance to my research but that had spawned a few ideas for the back burner. Aha—what sources of inspiration they proved to be!

The students in this class had been tasked with a challenging assignment. To help them, Amber and I set out to create a workshop-type session for the students to practice/brainstorm for their assignment. (To see how it was done, check out http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/03/more-than-just-pretty-face.html). Briefly, we had pre-selected five groups of records that could potentially be made into five, individual displays. The students were asked to review the materials, think about how to use the materials in a display, and prepare to defend their display idea to the class.

I enjoyed observing each group of students exploring their pre-selected materials with the aim to “pitch” their display idea to the class. Every group had only two minutes to convince the other groups to vote for their display idea. After a secret ballot was taken, the votes were tallied immediately and the winner was declared before the session continued with further discussion about important record-keeping issues.

All that said, there were drawbacks with the session too that may or may not be overcome. For example, we divided the room into five groups, each with a different set of pre-selected records. Students sat randomly at tables as they entered the reading room. We did not provide any indication of the topic at each table. This meant that some students were not interested in the records at their table while others found their records fascinating. Amber and I have discussed this “luck of the draw” method and see it as both an opportunity and a challenge for the students. I am not sure if I will change my approach in the future. Another example of a drawback was that only one student was the spokesperson for each group’s pitch. We have limited the timing of each pitch to two minutes. Perhaps there is a way to allow more students in each group to speak or pitch the idea so that we can hear more voices. We want the students to have the opportunity to be heard if they want to speak.

Overall, this session was successful. It was fun to develop and fun to deliver. Perhaps I will make few changes if I have the chance to use it with another class. Generally though, I felt that this was such a successful workshop that I plan to use it as an example when I give a presentation this Spring.

Snapshot impressions #7 – second class of the Winter 2013 term

Nope, I'm not having déjà vu. Almost exactly one year later, this class returned for another session. And, it was just as exciting! This time, I re-used some of the ideas that went well last year and brought in some new and modified ideas. 

As with last year, I used a set of physical exercises to get the class moving. [This exercise is described at: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/07/anyone-here-busy.html]. To my delight, the students enjoyed it just as much this year. I also included audio chants, cheers, and music in the session. These audio clips are part of a sports-related web site that is prominently featured during the class. Using audio is certainly worth it and brings in an added dimension to the class.

New this year was a handout, one that acted as a reference sheet for the students and generated a lot of work for me. Let me explain. This is an introductory-level class. The professor wanted the students to understand the difference between primary and secondary sources as well as receive guidance with citation style. I wanted to make this an interactive exercise. So, one side of the handout gave ten examples of sources and provided a properly formatted citation example for each source (i.e., book, home movie, photograph, article, web site, etc.). I had each example in a box and randomly pulled them out while asking the students what type of source I was holding. As the students identified each one, they circled the word “primary” or “secondary” on their sheet, next to the citation. I spoke then briefly about the specific item (i.e., an interesting or funny detail) as it circulated through the class. The other side of the handout asked a few, specific questions about the presentation – key things to remember as we continued along. The handout seemed to give the students a reason to listen to the presentation.

Here’s where I took a risk. The handout also provided a space for each student to write down a question for me. I guaranteed them that I would respond. Am I a little crazy? Perhaps. Why did I do this? It was a large class and I wanted the students to feel that they could ask a question and not feel like it was “dumb”. I wanted every student to have a chance to be heard. I can tell you that there was not a single dumb question in the entire lot. Everyone asked a relevant question, some asked a detailed question, and some asked a reference question. All of the answers required thought, a bit of research, and a little tact. Did I mention that it was a large class? It took me four days to answer them all, but every student received an answer. Will I do this type of activity again? YES. In fact, the revised form is already drafted and ready to print for future classes. When I will use it requires a bit more of my discretion.

This class has returned two years in a row. Improvements and adaptations are being planned for next year. I hope that the professor comes back so that I can implement these new plans.

Snapshot impressions #6 -- first class of the Winter 2013 term

First class of the term. The challenge? to introduce the students to a variety of sources that are relevant to thei assignment AND to play nice with the librarian! Okay, I will admit it; that's not so hard. On one hand, I have lots of sources of the assignment. On the other hand, the team of librarians here are great, being both welcoming and supportive of my teaching style. This session was an opportunity to show the students how the sources in the library and archives work together within the research process. The friendly, neighbourhood librarian and I set to demonstrate just that practice.

The first part of the session addressed the benefits and challenges of secondary sources, ending with the most familiar source -- the book. This allowed me to pick up on the discussion of how a book's content is found. I took the students on a journey, deconstructing a specific book which was related to their assignment for which the archives has most of the original research and copies of the drafted manuscripts. The students were given time to explore the documents and answer a set of questions, comparing the collection to the book and thinking about the publication as a finished "product". [To see the exercise in more detail, look here: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/02/deconstruction-zone-getting-to-bottom.html] Seriously, the students became so engaged in these records that they did not want to stop working with them.

After guiding the students through this exercise, we divided the them into two groups (one with primary sources and one with secondary sources) to answer a set of research questions that were directly related to the assignment. It was an opportunity for the students to do some preliminary research during class and be able to ask questions while their professor, librarian, and archivist were on hand.

Overall, the session went well and the students were able to do some work on their assignment. For me, the best part was being able to deconstruct a book and show the students how much research goes into a scholarly publication. It was an excellent and opportune example.

More questions than answers: reflecting on the Fall sessions

I tell students that the Archives is not a place of answers—it is a place of questions. Never has this rung more true than with this research. We set out looking to find answers, not to find questions. We were mistaken. While reflecting on the sessions offered in the Fall of 2012, more and more questions came to the surface concerning the project, student engagement, and the tools/sources being used.

The Project

·         Is there a disconnect between the expectation of the professor and the archivist? Does the professor basically want only an introduction to archives as well as a primary vs. secondary source session? Is the archivist providing a much more detailed, research-oriented session that is unwanted?

·         What ARE these sessions about? What SHOULD they be about? What are the students really gaining from their archives session? Make sure I know ‘what’ and ‘why’, then ‘how’ will become apparent. Be sure that the professors understand this too!

·         Should the professors be interviewed? The impact of sessions? How to do it better for them?

·         Should the students be asked about their session? It’s impact? How to do it better for them?

·         Should the archivist do a follow-up visit with the students two- or three-weeks after the session? Address questions? Invite them to make appointments?

Engagement

·         How can students be best prepared in advance of their visit? Involving the professor in the session engages the students. Certainly going to the class in advance of the session seems to help ease the anxiety of the students.

·         Can a few classes be taught in the space using the material to reinforce the lecture? Inviting the professor to lecture in the space or use the space with limited support of staff may increase the use of the space and help the students feel more comfortable. The Kirkconnell Room can be used in different ways.

·         We know that external factors impact the learning that occurs in the session. How can this be minimized? Perhaps the professor/instructor can deal with this over multiple classes, but this cannot be done in a single session. (I call this the “substitute teacher situation”.) Having the professor in the class may minimize this situation—they have the rapport with the students.

Tools/Sources

·         Should the primary and secondary sources be presented separately? They are both needed for research. Perhaps I need to explain them separately, do separate activities, and then do an activity that uses them together. This may help minimize the confusion over the sources.

·         How can structured serendipitous research be built in to the sessions more often? Should it?

·         When does self-driven exploration work better in a session? Does it depend on the level of the class? The social dynamic? The subject?

·         How can the other media be incorporated? For example, audio and video should be part of the session. Video is more problematic, but not impossible.

·         How can the white board and the tablet be used effectively? They are tools that I have available. Not that I should use them for their own sake, but that they may be underutilized.

·         What should be done with the departure pass? Should it continue to be used? Should it be changed to add more depth? Should it go with the student? What do I want to gain from the passes? How is this reflected in the answers/questions?

·         How can the guides be better used to supplement the sessions/process?

I had written a large document that analyzed the Fall 2012 term. In essence, the term came down to these questions/observations. Keeping these things in mind, we tackled the next term with a brand new set of tools and variables. The results from the second term were very different.

Where did I go?

Yes, it has been a few weeks since I have updated you on the research project. But that does not mean that progress has been slow.  Oh no, not so.

Although I did take a short break in December, the first few days of January was a time to reflect on the Fall term. I took three days to assess the classes offered in the Fall. I even wrote up a report to share with you. And then IT happened...

Between January 2nd and 4th, three profs requested an archives session. By January 8th, I had received three more requests. Six classes -- all asking for sessions to be given within the same two-week time frame! As you can well imagine, my report (and this blog) quickly went by the wayside. Sorry about that.

My research assistant, Amber, and I have been busy planning and delivering sessions ever since. There has been little-to-no time to reflect on the project. Still, this insane pace brought out some creative ideas.

How did it all work out, you ask? I negotiated the sessions to be spread out a bit more widely and one prof decided to withdraw her request (due to a change in the assignment), so I did five sessions in three weeks. Of those sessions, four were completely new. The last session was held only this week. Yes, it WAS a busy January/February.

The good news is that I can now return to reflection and analysis of the entire year. I have planned some special presentations about this research -- and, I can blog about it again!