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!

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.