history – Online Portfolio

April 13, 2018

Since my March post, I have been working on designing and creating an oral history page for Lucile Quarry Mann. After listening to more than 30 hours of audio recorded interviews and reviewing the transcripts, I selected at least 4 interesting segments from the interviews as featured items. I enjoyed the selection process because I became more familiar with Lucile Mann’s life. Her life with Dr. William Mann was exciting and adventurous. Also, I enjoyed listening to Pam Henson’s interviewing techniques because they will help me to develop a better understanding of oral history and approaching it from a different perspective. Pam’s discourse with Lucile Mann revealed exciting stories about the couple and how they contributed to the Smithsonian history and culture.

The process of linking the images to the selected interview segments was very challenging. First, I had to research the Smithsonian Archives for images to match the interview segments. Second, I had to splice the exact point an interview segment begins and ends. Third, I had difficulty narrowing down my selections. I tried my best to stay within the 5 minutes or less for the interview selections. Fourth, I was unable to find specific images for one of the interview segments that I thought would be a great featured item to entice the audience to listen to the full interviews. Even though the interviews were audio recordings, I was determined to make a video that synchronizes the audio recording segment with the images that were from the Mann family collections (e.g. photo albums, field books, and journals). During this process, I constantly thought about my audience. I created and designed for two different personas who would be most interested in listening to the oral history interviews, especially Lucy Mann’s interviews. Here is a link to the video in YouTube: https://youtu.be/lhpLiLftZpc

In one of our weekly meetings, I informed Pam and Lisa that I was unable to find most of the images for one of the segmented interviews. Pam sent excellent files for me to search for more images. These files allowed me to explore another segment that might be interesting to the audience. Pam designed the Oral History Intro Page. Lisa designed the Oral Histories summaries page. I designed Lucile Quarry Mann’s page for the Oral History Collection. However, when we had our meeting, we provided feedback for each other’s design because it was a collaborative effort. I designed Lucile Mann’s page in a landscape layout, so that it would closely resemble an actual web page. I tried to stay within the current guidelines of the Smithsonian’s Natural History website. I used my skills from my GMU course in designing a digital platform for a public humanities and history website. For L. Mann’s page, I tried to keep it less crowded and spaced out with a main image of Lucile Mann, a short bio section, an image carousel, segment clips with transcript, and a video that combines the audio recording of interview with images in synchronization. I had to post it in YouTube because the video was too large to send via email. I also added closed caption and transcript. I included a link to access the full interviews with a short description to tap into the curiosity of the audience to find out more about Lucy’s adventurous life. For the description, I kept the language simple and engaging. I learned this technique in my GMU coursework in Digital Humanities. Also, I added a Finding Aid link and links for additional resources that reference Lucile Q. Mann within the Smithsonian Archives and website.

My project was challenging, but I enjoyed it. It made me think about ways to redesign my own public humanities website. It also encouraged me to work with people from different professions and listen to good feedback. Collaboration, Communication, and Creativity are key elements in presenting a living history on a digital platform. This project has given me a chance to work on honing my video making and audio synchronization skills. Therefore, I look forward to seeing the finished product.

December 2017

From November through December 12th, I worked on project summaries for the Smithsonian Transcription Center. My mentor, Ricc Ferranter, introduced me to Trello (web-based project management board) and walked me through the process of drafting and launching project summaries for crowdsourcing. Each slideshow required research, and I enjoyed researching various topics. The more I read each one, the more I wanted to know about certain things. The biggest challenge was trying to select one of the items in the documents that will capture the audience and lead them to transcribe them. There was so much interesting information that the selection process was challenging and fun. The Smithsonian Transcription Center relies on crowdsourcing for their transcriptions, so my goal was to draft short and engaging summaries with a good hook. In addition to writing summaries, I researched information about the selected topic and selected online sources that will provide additional information about it.

Crowdsourcing is challenging, but it has its benefits. By drafting and revising the project summaries, I learned to tweak my words to capture a broad audience. Keeping the summaries short (3-4 sentences) was a great challenge. To make the summaries a little more interesting, Ricc suggested that I add web links for specific information; so the transcribers can have access to additional information via the web. Working with Ricc was awesome. He provided helpful feedback for each of my summaries. Ricc taught me to see things from a different perspective.

Working as a virtual intern is an amazing experience. Ricc and I communicated on a weekly basis by phone, email, and Trello. He was very patient and informative. He provided useful and informative feedback. Using Trello helped me to organize my assignments and to communicate any changes or updates with my Smithsonian mentor. Working on a digital platform was convenient for both of us. Also, waiting to see how the transcribing process from the digital volunteers was coming along was exciting. Ricc would provide an update, and I would take a peek at the transcriptions.

For my internship, I used some of the skills I learned about crowdsourcing from my GMU Digital Public Humanities coursework. I had to constantly think about my audience, which meant shortening my sentences and being selective with my words to engage the audience. I recalled the persona exercise I had to do for one of my courses, and I put that into practice when drafting the summaries. Researching and adding the links to the summaries reinforced the concept of what is appropriate for a broad audience. Also, I had to think about copyright issues and be selective with web content when linking the websites to the project summaries. By using what I have learned from my coursework, I was able to draft project summaries for a broad audience.

My internship work with Ricc and the Smithsonian Transcription Center connected me to a digital world of communication. Even though I did not know the digital transcribers, I had a virtual connection with them by writing the project summaries. After my project summaries were launched on the STC website, I was able to see how the audience responded to each one of them. The virtual communication between different audiences to meet a certain goal via the web is truly amazing. The concept of digital humanities is reflected in this internship project. History comes alive when digital volunteers partake in the crowdsourcing efforts with Smithsonian Transcription Center.

What I enjoyed most about the internship is being introduced to different historical documents for review and research. Also, I enjoyed communicating with Ricc about my process and what things I need to revise/edit. Ricc is a very supportive mentor. I admire Ricc’s work and dedication. He does his best to keep the digital volunteers interested in the transcribing. I also had a chance to see how the public responds to my project summaries. My internship assignment with the Smithsonian Transcription Center opened my mind to thinking about my audience throughout the entire process, and it helped me to understand and appreciate crowdsourcing. Therefore, I have gained a new perspective on how digital humanities keeps history alive through digital communications.

A Reflection on Previous Interviews

After viewing the previous interviews, I learned that the process of revising and narrowing a lesson is the norm. During the project making process, I was a little worried that I was not getting my point across; and I continued to add more material. Celeste and Jeri mentions starting with an existing argument, and I thought about Dr. Kelly’s advice to narrow my focus on what part of the historical content does not make sense to my students. I will narrow my focus and not make it bigger than it should be. Also, I will select 1-3 primary sources to help my students think about history and make connections to the novel. Teaching students to access primary sources online from reliable websites is very important. Also, teaching students what to do with the primary sources is very challenging but exciting. The focus on digital media or digital resources are mentioned in all of the interviews. Maura Seale makes an excellent point about teaching students to engage with the primary sources by exposing them to archives and collections. Devon Hardy’s emphasis on Learning Objectives is spot on because she knows the importance of keeping the audience in mind while creating a digital history project. I added a few learning outcomes on my site. She also mentioned learning assessment, which is very important these days in education. For the future, I will have to consider a plan to design an assessment for my project’s learning outcomes.

Designing my project site will require a few more changes because I would like to use it as a supplement to my course in ecampus. It would be a good ready to go class as mentioned by Erin Bush. If ecampus (Blackboard) is down, then I can always refer to my project site without worries. Also, I can make additional changes without dealing with weekly and unwanted system updates. My project did not turn out what I wanted initially, but I enjoyed the process of creating it. Nate Sleeter also mentioned that his project did not come out exactly as he was hoping. Therefore, I came to the conclusion that digital history projects are work in progress due to changing times, advancing technology, differing perspectives, innovative teaching methods, broadening of diversity, and new ideas. There is always going to be something interesting to uncover when learning about the past, and in the field Digital Humanities, a digital history project is one of the means of engaging the general public, students, and/or scholars to explore, examine, and analyze the past.

Response to “National Parks and New Audiences”

Coslett and Chalana incorporate interesting ideas that reflect ways of teaching historical thinking to the general public. After providing a historical background of two historic sites: WM-NHS and SJI-NHP, they point out the elements that best represents them. At the same, they also point out the elements for improvement in order to increase their presence for more visitations and reaching out to a broader audience. They express the need for uncovering the complexities of history by arguing that the NPS should continue to be progressive with improving their parks because “the agency recognizes the need to expand its interpretive approaches to incorporate different cultural groups” (104) and “without straying too far from the founding mandates” (103). For WM-NHS and SJI-NHP, the authors argue that the physical and online presence need to be improved in order to uncover some parts of history that need to be acknowledged while adhering to the mandates. Besides the permanent exhibit (physical site) that is divided into sections that present information about the Whitmans and Cayuse, some of the language and outdoor signage need improvement at WM-NHS. For SJI-NHP, Coslett and Chalana advise themes beyond the “Pig War” that should be explored and continue to be uncovered such as the Native people and women’s experience. They also mentioned that both parks used film to engage the audience. Even though Coslett and Chalana point out the steady progress of the parks, they argue that the parks “fall short of directly engaging the park’s more complex and controversial human histories, particularly with regard to the perennially marginalized contributions and experiences of Native peoples” (122). Their argument echoes what most of our readings in this course have mentioned. Uncovering the complexities of history is an ongoing process that includes changes in language, historical studies, humanities, technology, and people. Asking questions about sources is unavoidable even in physical spaces such as the historic sites. Being skeptical about the presented information invites the questions from the audience in order to face the challenges that sometimes changes need to be made in order to uncover the complexities of history.

Fortunately, NPS has begun to make such improvements in the 21^st century by collaborating with people with different experience such as working the design students for “Parks for People.” Another way NPS engaged with the public was “Find Your Park” that uses social media platforms such as Twitter and Instagram to bring attention the parks and reach out to a diverse audience. Coslett and Chalana refer to “dark parks” that make visitors think and learn about unpleasant things about the past such as internment camp sites, isolated leprosy community, etc. “These NPS units offer contemplative places for consideration of the less savory aspects of our nation’s struggles with violence and oppression,” and “parks like these may inspire tolerance by revealing and exploring prejudice while contributing to important communal healing processes” (124-125). The uncovering or discovery of complexities of history is part of that learning and healing process.

I would advise the NPS to continue reaching out to a diverse audience for collaborative opportunities. They might meet some innovative individuals who will bring fresh perspectives to the current historic site. Also, I would advise the NPS to work with more individuals from diverse backgrounds to help improve their online presence. I checked out the webpages for WH-NHS and SJI-NHP, and I noticed some elements that could help improve their online presence and traffic. For the WH-NHS, the images in the Photo Gallery section need metadata. Also, it would be nice to zoom in and out of each image. The Education page needs great improvement. I think if the right digital tools and more teaching resources were implemented, then it would be a great way for teachers to refer to this page. Possible voice recordings of some of the transcriptions would be nice for visitors who are visually impaired. SJI-NHP needs some updates on their web page. The last update was in March 2015. The history and culture page displays images with the text. I can actually click on the image to viewer a larger image. The Education page also falls short; it desperately needs more information to engage the teachers to view this page with their students. The Photo Gallery is a little confusing because the photos are all on one page of an exhibit and not separated. The visitor is not allowed to zoom in and out of the image. Also, I would advise taking more pictures of the physical site and post them online. Unfortunately, I did not see any questions to help the audience to think about the historical evidence and uncover the complexities online. Posting 1 or 2 questions to capture to the audience’s attention would help them to begin thinking historically about the historical evidence. The maps seem out of date or need improvements to engage the audience. An interactive map might would be useful to connect the items from the other sections of the digital site. Maybe in the future, NPS might consider adding 1 or 2 languages to increase international audience. After viewing these two sites online, my final advice would be for the NPS to reach out to individuals who are interested in improving the online presence for certain parks. Both the physical and digital spaces are significant to uncovering historical complexities, so NPS might consider working with GMU students who are in the Digital Humanities Graduate Certificate Program to help them improve their digital space and presence.

Third Piece of the Puzzle

The audience for my final project would be college students who are enrolled in Asian American Literature. Most of my students are Texas residents, and they rarely have exposure to Asian American literature at a two-year college; and a few universities offer the course. I chose them as my audience because they are assigned to read John Okada’s No-No Boy, 1 of 5 novels for the course. To help them learn about the treatment of many Japanese Americans after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, I would like to create a lesson for the 2 or 2.5 weeks they spend with the novel and historical evidence. In the past, when my students were assigned to read Okada’s novel and research history during that time period, they were shocked to find out such information was withheld from them until college. Some students explained to me that most history classes in middle and high schools spend little or no time on the topic of the treatment of Japanese Americans during WWII. Some were shocked to find out that families were forced to leave their houses and businesses, not knowing that they will be able to return to them. To add to their shock or discomfort, they didn’t understand how the U.S. government forced able bodied Japanese American men to separate from their families even after they were removed from their homes and serve in the war. But, the part that they couldn’t understand are the loyalty questions because it was confusing and contradicting, and the questions divided Japanese American families, friends, and communities. Due to this part of discomfort and contradiction, I wanted to include a lesson to help my students grapple with the historical evidence and how literature helps them see something that is still hidden or partially hidden in American history.

By incorporating a lesson that helps students examine and analyze historical evidence in connection to the novel, I am also learning to teach digital history with digital resources. The 21^st century student is usually inundated with media and advancing technology, while some students are disenfranchised. Despite the differences, most educators take the leap forward and try to their best to provide a learning environment that adapts to the advancing technology and access to various media. In order to proceed, educators are constantly learning new methods and techniques to engage their students. The 21^st century student faces different challenges than the past students, but it’s up to educators to foster a learning environment (e.g. face-to-face, online, or hybrid) that helps the student to think historically and critically in a world of endless information that can be accessed with a few key strokes or just speaking into a mobile device and asking Siri.

Thinking: Questions for Teaching History in Asian American Literature Course

Teaching history in a literature course is challenging because students are already required to read and analyze a literary texts such as novels, short stories, and poems. At the same time, they are encouraged to make connections to selective information in the novel by conducting research to further understand the political, social, and cultural aspects that are mentioned in the novels. By doing the research and cross-referencing the sources, they are also learning history. In my Asian American Literature course, students are asked to view primary sources and secondary sources to make personal and academic connections to the novel. Here are my questions for teaching history in an Asian American Literature course that focuses on a section about Japanese Americans during WWII:

Q 1: Are my students capable of asking questions to inquire about the historical evidence?

A 1: They are capable of asking questions that allow them to conduct research to help them understand the historical evidence. The historical evidence is usually new for them, and they begin to engage with it by asking various questions.

Q 2: Will they be able to recognize the connections between the various sources in order to reconcile the two contradictory positions between what they already know and what they need to put aside to begin historical thinking?

A 2: They should be able to make connections between the novel, primary sources, and secondary sources and realize that what they have been taught about the historical content is not enough; and they will begin to ask questions to begin their own construction of the historical knowledge. They will begin to see what was hidden or partially hidden from them as students when they were learning about the treatment of Japanese Americans during and after WWII in high school and/or college history courses.

Q 3: Will providing digital forms of the primary sources or digital resources for my students hinder their ability to investigate them to foster their historical thinking?

A 3: The digital sources will not hinder them from investigating them. It will provide another way for students to view and analyze primary and secondary sources that can be out of reach or inaccessible if they were only available in print and/or in a physical museum. Also, it will adhere to the different ways of learning or learning styles.

A Reading Response and Reflection

For my project, I plan to use my Omeka items to engage my audience in different ways. One of the activities will include tagging. I did not tag the items because I want to see the how the audience varies in their opinions about each item. Will it be objective or subjective? So far, I have developed three personas for my project; and I would like to see how each of them tags the Omeka items. The first persona is someone is familiar with Koreatown. He or she may have grew up visiting Koreatown with family and/or friends. Also, in the first persona, this person could have contributed to the development of Koreatown. The second persona is someone who has an interest in Korean culture and/or history, and he or she likes to visit Koreatown. The third persona is someone who is not familiar with Koreatown. He or she probably does not think it exists in Texas.

Similar to the Hurricane Digital Memory Book and Baltimore Uprising projects, I plan to include a section that will ask the audience to add their memories of the Koreatowns and the events. For each item, I would like to include a plug-in that allows the audience to add a comment. Also, there will be a mapping tool that allows the audience to input their location in comparison to the locations of both Koreatowns in North Texas. Another activity will include a redesign or remapping of both Koreatowns. How will it fit into your neighborhood? Or, I can ask the audience to engage in building a Koreatown near their neighborhood. Furthermore, Koreatowns Dallas and Carrollton hold festivals pertaining to Korean culture and history, so I would like to include a section that allows the audience to upload their pics and add comments to build a story based on their personal experience during one of the past festivals. This activity will be build a community of festival goers or lovers to communicate with each other.

A Response to Grele’s “Whose Public? Whose History? What is the Goal of a Public Historian?”

Similar to the broad definition of Digital Humanities, the definition of Public History is also broad because it is constantly debated and changed. From his article, “Whose Public? Whose History? What is the Goal of a Public Historian?” Ronald J. Grele defines public history to be “moving into fields long occupied by practicing non-academic historians. It is debating issues within a long tradition of debate. It is deeply embedded within a series of ongoing tendencies in the profession” (44). Grele’s definition is enlightening because he views public history to be diverse and versatile. According to John Dichtl and Robert B. Townsend’s article, “A Picture of Public History: Preliminary Results from the 2008 Survey of Public Professionals,” the comparison of the survey results from 1980 and 2008 show the changing trends such as how many public historians were employed in academia and non-academic institutions. The 2008 survey also shows that “women comprised two thirds of the respondents (65.5 percent)” compared to the 36 percent from the 1980 survey. Denise Meringolo, author of Museums, Monuments, and National Parks: Toward a New Genealogy of Public History, defines public history to be collaborative, multidisciplinary, and engaging with a focus on communication. In the following statement, Meringolo clearly defines the role of the public historian: “Public historians can produce original interpretations that connect scholarship and everyday life by respecting the ways in which their partners and audiences use history and by balancing authority against community needs” (168).

Dichtl and Townsend argue that “Public history is one of the least understood areas of professional practice in history because the majority of public history jobs are outside of academia.” On the other hand, it can be due to two reasons: “First those of us who currently work in the field have not clearly defined what is we do, why we do it, and why it is an alternative to other forms of historical effort. Second, the debates have taken place in a historical vacuum” (Grele 41). Even though the public is ubiquitous when it comes to history, adding the term “public” to “history” seems to spark some controversy, but “another group of historians emerged to work with a non-college public: local history movement” (Grele 42). As a result, Grele argues that “it was the local history movement which offered the most thoroughgoing alternative to the historical work done in the academy” (43). However, public historians were not seen as equal to the academic historians. Meringolo also mentions two reasons or trends of thought for the debate: “Some scholars emphasize the term “public,” arguing that the environment in which historians apply their craft impacts the questions, methodology, and content of interpretation. Others underscore the term “history,” insisting that credentialed historians perform their work in accordance to the same disciplinary standards regardless of location or audience” (xvi). Both Grele and Meringolo argue that the combination of “public” and “history” sparks a debate for defining public history.

Another reason for the broad definition of public history is the debate on its origin. Grele argues that the job crisis for the academic historians was the reason for the beginning of public history because the proponents of public history “have accused the [academic] profession of ignoring the possibility of opportunities outside of the academy and monopolizing the ideological formulation of the role of the historical by accenting a narrow vision of the historian as researcher or university professor” (41). Thus, it began opening up job opportunities for historians. However, Denise Meringolo contends the origin of public history began with the National Park Service. Meringolo argues that it was Verne Chatelain (first chief historian for the NPS) who should be credited for the beginnings of public history because “it was evident to Chatelain that an advanced degree in history did not necessarily prepare historians for work in the federal government” (xiii). Therefore, in the 1930s, “Chatelain’s new technicians were among the first public historians, and they had a profound impact on the evolution of the field” (Meringolo xiv). Also, Meringolo acknowledges that it was during the 1970s that academic historians were “concerned about the scarcity of jobs for history PhDs” (xiv); but in her book, she “examines the process by which federal workers began to conceptualize the protection of landscapes and artifacts as valuable public work” (xxix) and the importance of collaborating with other professionals (e.g. scientists) and the public audience.

Public history includes both the academic and non-academic historians working together to engage the public. Also, public history is a collaboration of historians and professionals/experts in digital humanities, science, architecture, literature, medicine, textiles, folklore, mental health, media, culinary arts, art, music, religion, etc. In today’s fast-paced and social media driven society, public history plays a significant role in the form of digital public history. It not only engages the audience, it allows the public to take part in the making and preserving history. Despite the debates, a broad definition of public history allows space for more ideas of collaboration and engagement because history is never seen and told in one way. Since “Fledgling public history inherited from its late nineteenth-century origins a pragmatic approach to research and an impulse to change” (Meringolo xxxi), the broad definition of public history allows change and evolves with change.

In agreement with Grele’s statement that “Thus the task of the public historian, broadly defined, should be to help members of the public to do their own history and to aid them in understanding their role in shaping and interpreting events” (48), the types of the practice the field of public history should encourage will change throughout history; and it will include more collaboration and engagement beyond the academic setting. For example, Social media plays a big part in public history. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube probably have their own public historians; and their platforms engage the public on a daily basis. Even their audience contribute to the making of their history through crowdsourcing. Public history projects invite the public to engage with artifacts that were once lost or hidden from the public. Public history is a collaboration of historians, other professionals, public, and technology. Therefore, digital humanities public history adds another layer to the field of public history and its definition.

LEARN NC

http://www.learnnc.org

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/2800

LEARN NC provides educational resources for K-12 teachers in North Carolina. However, K-12 teachers across the nation may also find the resources helpful. The website features lesson plans and digital tools for teaching North Carolina history and culture. It also features Native American history and resources for teaching the subject.