I think oral history is a great way to learn about literacy in cultural context. Through first-hand interviews, it is possible to hear, from the original source, real experiences and stories that have played an important role in a person’s life and literary history. Interviews are unique in the sense that not only do we get to hear a story from the interviewee, but we also get to hear the voice, the expressions, and the emotion that play a part in the story – a part that is often underestimated or forgotten. For the purpose of writing a literacy biography, I feel that the stories presented to me during the interviews were much more valuable orally than they would have been simply on paper. Orally, I received immediate reactions to the questions I presented. The interviewees did not have much time to think about their answers or develop as concise of a story as they might have been able to through writing. I could have given each of my interviewees a sheet of paper with questions and asked them to fill it out, but I might have been missing their initial, unedited thoughts, as well as the ability to ask additional questions to probe deeper into the topic. Following the interview, it is then our job, as writers, to translate the stories to paper in a way that holds on to as much of the emotion and expression as possible. Having a recorded interview to play back while writing the biography makes it much easier to include correct quotations and accurate information.

• What do you wish you had known before you recorded your first interview? Would you do anything differently if you could do the research over again? Would you select different subjects, frame new interview questions, or explore specific topics in more depth?

If I were do do this project over again, I would think more about the direction I would like to steer the interview before beginning. Prior to the interviews, I had come up with a rather extensive list of questions, but the topics of the questions were too broad for the purpose of the paper. I was lucky to get sufficient information for a focused biography, but had I not created some additional questions on the spot to get more detail on a particular portion of the interview, I might have had far to much broad information, and not enough detailed information to write a paper with a clear focus or purpose. Of course there is basic background information that is vital for a biography, but from there, delving deeper into a specific part of the interviewees experience regarding family, school, or work, for example, can be very valuable. Also, as much work as it might be, I think I would have benefited from transcribing my interviews. Depending how long the interviews are, it can be difficult to find particular segments or quotes to use in the paper, and having a copy in print may make it easier at times. Regarding the interview subjects, I don’t think you can really go wrong as long as you find people who have the time to sit down for an interview and the willingness to share their personal stories. Everybody’s literacy history is important – it is up to us as the interviewers to ask questions that help the interviewees recall their experiences. Personally, I had two great interview subjects who were eager to share and enjoyed being part of the project.

• Any other advice for students in next year’s literacy seminar?

Don’t procrastinate! It is very time consuming to plan an interview, not to mention doing the interview, editing the sound file, transcribing if necessary, and writing the actual biography.  Be prepared to schedule an interview far enough in advance that you will be able to reschedule if necessary (my first interviewee had a death in his family the week we planned to do the interview and we had to reschedule three times before it actually happened – had I not scheduled far enough in advance, I may not have been able to complete the assignment on time). Enjoy the experience, and make it enjoyable for your interviewee. Best of luck!

Talking with people about their early experiences with reading and writing is probably the most interesting way to learn about literacy. As a researcher, the real advantage of oral history is that you can put the subject’s learning process into a context that is truly unique to them. People rarely give you an account of their literacy acquisition that is stripped down to basic (boring) facts. Their personality engages you, and they tell you about things going on in their life and/or the world at the time they were learning to read, write or speak, and it crafts a very interesting story–one that is multidimensional.   

Some advice I would give students/researchers pursuing this kind of study is to brush up on your interview techniques. Give your interviewees leading questions that prompt them to give rich responses. Also, start off with two or three “warm-up” questions to make them feel comfortable and help them open up—do not lead off with your best questions. On a technology note, be sure to have a quality recording device that you can easily transfer into an audio file on the computer—and make sure the batteries are charged and that you know how to use the device beforehand.   

If I were doing the research again, I would spend more time on my own autobiography.  This process turned out to be very valuable. I learned a lot about myself, and it was fun remembering early experiences with literacy. This examination of your own history is a great springboard for your research in the oral histories of others. It gives you a lot of ideas as far as what kinds of questions to ask, and allows you to have a sort of conversational interview with your subjects. 

I would also recommend discussing the purpose and audience of the interview more in-depth before conducting the interview to make the interviewees more comfortable.

Hope this helps!

-Brandon

It was really interesting to investigate using the oral history methodology.  I felt as thought the advantages were the ability to delve into the literacy development of another individual.  Likewise, it was really interesting to see the social, political, and economical effects of society on the various individuals.  Some disadvantages were that it was hard to really delve into the oral history of the subjects because it was a short amount of time.  Despite this, it was a great experience.

What, if anything, did you learn through first-hand interview research that you might not have otherwise known?

I learned a lot about the development of literacy in the lives of both the individuals.  Likewise, I learned how diverse the opportunities to education are.  

* What do you wish you had known before you recorded your first interview?

I wish I would have refined my interview questions.  I felt as though I had too broad of a scope for the interview.

Would you do anything differently if you could do the research over again?

I would interview both my subjects at different times.  Since both were in the same room, I feel as though I may have gotten somewhat different responses.
* Any other advice for students in next year’s literacy seminar?

Have fun!

In my experience in this course, I have come to realize that oral histories are such a deep way to connect with others. Hearing their stories and experiences is such an intimate and interesting means by which we can understand other people’s experiences with literacy, no matter how they may define it. You will definitely laugh and perhaps even be touched emotionally by the stories you will hear. Though at times, technologically challenging, performing oral interviews and hearing oral histories is a unique way that we can get to personal stories and anecdotes that would other times be forgotten. Bridget is very passionate, and it’s great to have a leader that has done so much work with oral histories as she has. She is there to help you along the way!

One disadvantage I came across was the fact that once a topic was brought up during the interview, I would steer that way because I was interested, instead of staying to specific questions. I found that sometimes my interviewees would kind of get off topic or focus specifically about one story or one topic like class or ethnicity than come back to the topic. One thing that may help would be having a specific list of questions, or deciding how you would like to “spin” your interview beforehand. In the long run, if you’d like to write your final paper focused on gender, drive your questions this way. I found it difficult to take many questions into the interview and compose a draft that encapsulated all different aspects of the interviewee because then my paper seemed to lack a sense of focus, as it seemed to just list facts without much of a personal touch. I wish that I had a clear focus of which way I would have liked my final paper to go, so I could focus on these points more intensely instead of getting a mish-mash of ideas, insights and stories. Perhaps, if you’re having a difficult time deciding what topic you’d like your seminar to have, consider your literature review. This may be a useful resource and since you’ll already be an expert on the topics it covers!

As for the course itself, I found that we reached very interesting discussions about the readings and interviews, as well as our own personal experiences. Listen to your classmates, engage with the texts, and post to the blog. Whether it be a link, a question, an opinion, or a particular line or passage that interests you, highlight it while reading and post about it. You’ll be surprised how many others enjoyed, or didn’t enjoy that same particular passage.

Above all, enjoy! You’ll walk away with insights, a new perspective about oral histories, and, if you’re lucky, a some fantastic connections with bright and energetic people from your class or through your interviews.

Congrats Grads!!! Best of luck to all of you who are on your way there, no matter what stage you may be in!

All the Best,

Jessica

Through the first-hand experience of inquiring into the reading and writing lives of two very different women, I learned that the key to effective inquiry is to remain open-minded about the value and meanings of others’ life experiences. As an anthropologist, I must search, dig, and examine. As a journalist I must be curious and open-minded. If what I learn from the object of my inquiry is true for them, my job is to understand why it is true; make objective, complete, and logical connections to their truth; and honor their truth. This open-minded attitude can go a long way to advance the study of literacy so that changes in beliefs, ideologies, and practices, where needed, can occur.

The traditional classroom experience of getting a syllabus and “working” it by reading and writing was upended in English 531. Thank goodness! Put aside all schema of the traditional classroom experience. Quickly get on board a different, better train; you will be getting off your student chairs and getting into the trenches of life. Because I quickly shifted from the traditional classroom thought pattern, I was able to open my mind to go down broader and more enjoyable tracks. I was able to see so many more connections to so many more areas of life. Seeing these connections allowed me wider opportunities to more deeply and more broadly explore themes that are interesting and enjoyable to me.

I encourage future students of English 531 to put on the dual hats of anthropologist and journalist. Look for connections; they are everywhere: in your textbook, in your life, in your everyday travels. Explore the meanings of these connections, for today and for the future. Read each article, blog each comment, review each book, interview each subject, and choose each source, from the very first to the very last, with an analytical eye toward what you will want to explore and create in your final research project. Don’t wait until that point in the syllabus that says it’s time to start working on the final research project; start working on the final research project on the first day of class. That way, everything you read and write will be useful to you for your final research project. Be willing to engage your interview subjects in your process. Make a list of more questions than you could possibly ask in a single interview. Just making the list will provide you with potential questions when the interview seems to go “off topic,” but really is only taking an interesting off-road trip. Go back later and ask follow-up questions to test what you are learning as you are analyzing and making connections. Use the theorists’ studies and tools as models to conduct, with your interview subjects, your own reading and writing experiments. Go with the flow, have fun, be creative, think outside the freshman research paper box. May the force be with you.

          One disadvantage of doing oral histories is that the interviewer must have some minimal idea of literacy methodology before doing the interview. How can the interviewer know which questions to ask and which area to probe without first having a grip on literacy theories? For example, I did two interviews with a young lady named Olfa Soussi, an Associate Professor at Benedictine University. Olfa was born in Carthage, Tunisia, and professes the Islamic faith. In my interviews with her, I focused on her extensive multilingualism and how she employed that multilingualism to gain economic advantages; in other words, I studied her as an example of how literacy can be used to gain economic power. In focusing on this question, I wholly overlooked the gender issue in her case which was screaming for attention, namely, how does a woman in the Muslim world, or in any world for that matter, obtain literacy and use it to obtain social and political equality? The reason I missed this issue is because the matter of gender and its relationship to literacy had not been addressed in class yet.  Had it been, I might have directed part of the interview towards gender. What I am saying here is this; effective preparation for the interview involves at least an awareness of the different literacy theories that have a bearing on the interview, and , depending on the circumstances, the student may have to research thoses theories on his or her own, outside of class, as those theories may not have been touched upon in class as of the time you are doing the interview.

          First hand interviews gave me a broader perspective on literacy, which probably would not have happened as effectively had I been restricted to a study of course textual materials. Almost by necessity, the course materials were divided into neat categories like gender analysis, ethnicity, etc. The consequence of this division is that the student does not get any wider, more fundamental view of literacy until, let’s say, midway into the course. The interview helped me obtain a more fundamental understanding earlier. They forced me to read, investigate, and study on my own, and consult with my classmates, far earlier than I might have.

          I believe this is a personal matter, but I wish I had done multiple interviews of the same subject. I did do two interviews with Olfa Soiussi, and I found that I had obtained much more additional information and ideas the second time around. I also discovered that the very process of interviewing others gave me all kinds of ideas as to how I developed my own literacy characteristics and acheivements. I would advise any student to utilize the interviews of others as a way of self-realization as to literacy issues.

          The single most important piece of advice I can offer is to read some of the works of an author named Brian Street prior to the beginning of class. An excerpt of his work can be found in the course’s textbook. In the work, Street expounds on the notion that more and more authors and students in the area of literacy are using cross-cultural and cross discipline approaches to literacy analysis. Street’s insights give the new student a very broad, useful insight into all of literacy, a most invaluable insight to have at the start of the course.I would invest the time to read at least one book about literacy prior to or about the beginning of class. One book I read for the course’s book review was “The Right to Literacy” edited by Andrea Lunsford. This book contained thirty articles about legal rights to reading and writing, but more importantly perhaps it contained articles employing every imaginable literacy perspective about literacy and race, ethnicity, religion, gender, etc., a kind of literacy shopping mall. I highly recommend it for anyone, for any point in the course, but especially for the beginning, since it provides such a comprehensive review of the entire literacy area. Lastly, I would recommend that the new student adhere to a broader perspective of literacy, and not just the pigeonholes of gender, race, ethnicity, and the like. In doing my seminar paper, a paper which focused on an autobiographical analysis of myself, I found myself reading Freud, Karl Marx, Jesuit priests, and thinking about nuns and grandmothers. A person’s literacy is the totality of their experience and background. In thinking about literacy problems, such as interviewing a subject, this should be borne in mind.

Linda composed an introductory page that strikes just the right chord. The introduction clearly states the purpose and audience for the site, articulates reader benefits (“these researched stories will give you a better understanding of the complexities and power of reading and writing”), and thanks interview participants for their contributions. And it all fits on one screen! Well done.

Thanks to all for creating the wiki. I look forward to sharing it, and I appreciate your contributions to this collaborative effort.

I’ve made the wiki public today, so it will be accessible through Google and other search engines. Please pass on the link to others who may be interested in your research.
Enjoy the summer,

Bridget O’Rourke

  A disadvantage to oral history may be that the person may not tell the truth intentionally or unintentionally.  Though, truth is usually not the main goal of oral history anyway.  Instead, oral history is best used to investigate a person’s perception of event(s) which not only reveals the individual’s personality but of the culture he/she lived in, which is what we are aiming for in our case.  Also, if the interview will be recorded, the interviewee (and perhaps the interviewer too) may become uncomfortable  and the way he/she tells her story may change compared to if no recording device is used.  This happened to me in my very first interview.  My very first interviewee was a friendly co-worker who was really open to participating in my oral history project.  We normally have easy going conversations, but when I brought out the digital recorder and pressed the record button, his answers to my question were too short and non-descriptive.  I actually conducted the interview twice with him (bless his heart ) but I didn’t get enough useful material from him.  So I ended up conducting an interview with someone who was more talkative and less shy when the recorder was on. 

I learned a lot during my first hand interview research.  First off, I learned to use a digital recorder and audio file computer programs :)  Obviously, personal interview is a great way to get to know someone.  I interviewed my boss who had just come into the position just twenty four days prior.  After the interview with him, I not only had rich material for my literacy biography, but I had more respect and a better understanding of him.  I think it is best to choose someone you don’t know personally for the oral history project.  This way you get to know someone better you probably wouldn’t otherwise.  Also, when you don’t know your interviewee well, you will be open to all that can be learned during the interview and it can progress more naturally since you won’t have expectations about it when you do know the person.  Also, the interviews I did for this class has prepared me for future interviews.   I’d learned that the best interviews happen when you just let the interviewee speak.  Initially, I planned all the questions I would ask during the interview, but I ended up not asking all of them because my interviewee would tell stories that were more interesting that led to a different set of questions. The best stories and discoveries come from the least expected.  Though, if your interviewee veers off course too much, then you have to make sure to ask him/her a question about the topic you’re interested to get them back on target.

There really isn’t anything that I would change about the research I did.  I see everything as a learning opportunity. However, I wish we had more time to do more.  My interest in literacy and its impact on our culture has definitely deepened.  I would like to explore more the achievement gap between ethnic groups in America, the challenges that certain groups may face that prevent them from excelling in school.  Also, I’d like to investigate further, why and how certain individuals from these groups, despite coming from the same environment, are able to complete their high school and college education and become full litereracy participants.

So future Eng 531 students, I hope you are ready to have fun, thought-provoking discussions with Dr. O’Rourke and your classmates and to work hard.  I hope my experiences and suggestions for this class help you to do your best.  Good luck to everyone!