|
Steering Committee Minutes
Conference Call
September 7, 2005
Present: Ann Okerson, Yale University; Harriet Bergmann, Yale
University; David Valone, Quinnipiac University; Steve Berizzi,
Norwalk Community College; Sue Walker, Yale University, Walpole
Library; Suzy Taraba, Wesleyan University.
Recorder: Jessica Slawski, Yale University.
I. Introductions
Members of the group introduced themselves, their institutions,
and their positions in their institutions.
II. Role of the Steering Committee
Ann Okerson began this segment of the discussion with an overview
of the Teagle grant and requirements for process and reporting
to the Foundation. She noted that having a Steering Committee
is important for at least two reasons: 1) representation from
within the participant group helps the Project Manager (Harriet
Bergmann) and the PI (Ann Okerson) in shaping activities most
usefully on behalf of all; and (2) the Foundation will look
for signs of widest possible participation by the nine institutions.
Other members offered their views about the role of the Committee,
which included:
* Harriet Bergmann stated that the Steering Committee would
have a major role in advising and planning for the grant, particularly
the three scheduled workshops, the closing event, and review/input
to the final White Paper. Sue Walker asked whether the Steering
Committee will offer input on assessment for the grant as well?
Ann responded that an assessment will definitely be developed
by the committee, but that today's conversation needs to focus
on the upcoming October workshop, given the shortness of time.
* The group discussed frequency of meetings and how/when to
meet. All agreed that a monthly conference call from 4:15pm-5:15pm
on the first Wednesday of every month was desirable and workable.
The group will exchange e-mail messages as necessary and will
find ways to meet in person on occasion, perhaps at scheduled
events such as the workshops.
III. Workshop #1 – Using Oral Histories
in the Classroom
Harriet and Ann had met in the previous week with Andy Horowitz,
who directs the New Haven Oral History project, and Harriet
had a subsequent conversation with him. Andy will be a key
participant in the first workshop and offered a wealth of suggestions
for possible topics and participants. The three had agreed
to begin the day-long workshop with one or two student presentations.
The students, who have taken a course in which oral history
techniques were employed for their projects, would describe
what they did in the course and what the product was. Their
Yale faculty instructors would then discuss why they chose
to use oral histories in class and how effective this technique
was. The Committee agreed that this would make a very interesting
start to the day.
Harriet asked that the Committee consider who the audience
would be for the workshops: Librarians? Archivists? Faculty
that had or had not taught with such a technique? The group
agreed that all of these categories were reasonable and should
be included.
Suzy Taraba asked how many people would be able to come from
each institution, and if the workshops were going to be larger
than the first conference? Harriet said that it would be possible
to include up to 5 people from each institution. She asked
for a sense of who from each campus should be involved. She
suggested that the Library directors or liaisons to the Teagle
project contact librarians and faculty who might benefit from
the workshop. Dave noted there should be only one point of
campus contact and that this individual will target whom to
invite. All agreed with this suggestion.
Dates were discussed, including whether a Friday or Saturday
would be better. Steve noted that some people teach on Fridays
and would not be able to attend, and that Saturday would be
a better choice. Dave agreed. The group readily agreed that
October 22, 2005, will be the date for the Oral History workshop.
Steve Berizzi questioned when to expect program details about
the October 22 workshop. Harriet responded that she could prepare
a preliminary draft by September 19, share it with the Committee
shortly thereafter, and thus give everyone a month's notice.
Sue Walker suggested a Web page with all the workshop details
and possibly the ability to register for the workshop. Harriet
said it would be possible for her to do that. Ann Okerson asked
whether it would be difficult to attract 5 people from each
campus. Dave said he would not have a problem on his campus.
Suzy agreed. Ann then suggested that a wait list might also
be needed. Suzy Taraba asked if students working on these projects
would be considered. Ann and Harriet believed priority should
be given to faculty and staff.
Ann asked how the workshop should be advertised.
Sue suggested poster sessions at lunch or other forms of
advertising that
would work on a given campus. The advertising should be handled
by the Teagle liaison(s) and might vary from campus to campus.
There was also discussion of how to engage the audience during
a workshop, so that the event not be just a day-long seminar
in which the audience was "talked at." Ann suggested
playing part of an oral history interview and then quizzing
the audience to see what they learned. Suzy also suggested
that people should introduce themselves and briefly state what
they are doing or plan to do with oral history.
IV. Thoughts about Future Workshops
Harriet
Bergmann suggested that a good topic would be effective
ways to include special collections in syllabi and in the
curriculum. She also suggested a day-long workshop about
how to find and use local community resources such as those
of historical societies. Suzy Taraba suggested a workshop
focusing on community and special collections partnerships.
Ann asked if there would be enough in this topic for the
whole day. There was a consensus that relationships with
local societies are very important, so long as they are
mutual
partnerships. It was agreed that at least one speaker at
the workshop should be from the "town" side.
Ann Okerson asked if there were any further suggestions for
the final workshop. Harriet suggested the topic of assessing
the effectiveness of special collections use in the classroom,
as well as course development concentrating on ways to incorporate
special collections, i.e., how special collections were added
to the course and how assessment is done. All agreed this could
be a very effective session.
V. Other Business
Ann Okerson asked how the distribution of the faculty and
librarian surveys was going. Harriet reminded the Committee
that the final version had been sent to the librarians, who
were supposed to distribute it. Suzy and others stated they
hadn't seen the final version. Harriet said she would follow
up with the contact person at each institution, as well as
the Steering Committee.
Suzy Taraba asked who would be filling out the survey. Harriet
said that she was aiming for faculty who taught undergraduate
liberal arts, as well as librarians and archivists who work
with the faculty.
Ann Okerson suggested a closing event to bracket the year,
maybe in June, and asked if anyone agreed. Suzy Taraba agreed
that it was a good idea.
The conference call ended at 5:17pm
Respectfully submitted,
Jessica Slawski
|
