Telling Their Stories:
Student Production and
Delivery of Digital Video Interviews via the Internet
As presented at the International Oral History Association
July 12-15, 2006
Sydney, Australia
Howard LEVIN
Director of Technology
The Urban School of San Francisco
1563 Page Street
San Francisco, California 94117
USA
415-626-2919
English
IOHA member
Project Website: www.tellingstories.org
Sub-Themes: Memory and Trauma,
Archiving Memory, and Teaching and Learning.
Telling
Their Stories:
Student
Production and Delivery of Digital Video Interviews via the Internet
Abstract
Modern digital production and editing tools now make it
possible for students to contribute with meaningful and immediately useful
research previously reserved to professionals. This is a case study of one
American high school—The Urban School of San Francisco[1]—where
students conduct professional-style interviews in the homes of elders who
suffered trauma as youngsters in the course of key 20th century historical events. Working in
teams of three, students in ÒTelling Their Stories: Oral History Archives
ProjectÓ—an elective history class—prepare background research and
interview questions. They travel to each subject's home, set up a
professional-style mobile digital video studio, and complete a two-hour
interview. Students then transcribe each interview into a full-text transcript
using the digital video files transferred to their personal laptops. Students
edit the digital files into hundreds of mini-movies directly corresponding to
the text. The result of their work is a public Internet site containing the
interviews, complete with full-text, video and audio. Telling Their Stories:
Oral History Archives Project <www.tellingstories.org> currently
contains over 50 hours of interviews with 18 subjects.[2]
Current topics include: survivors and refugees of the European Holocaust,
American soldiers who helped liberate Nazi concentration camps, and Americans
of Japanese descent who were interned during World War II. This paper explores
the Telling Their Stories (TTS) model by examining the process and efficacy of
publishing student conducted oral histories using digital video and web-based
technologies. The author's hope is that this information will inspire teachers
and oral historians to copy and adapt these practices leading to additional
oral histories published on the Internet by students.
AuthorÕs Note – The
project, ÒTelling Their Stories: Oral History Archives Project,Ó was chosen for
the 2004 Leading Edge Award for outstanding use of technology by the National
Association of Independent Schools.[3]
Project Background
The original inspiration for
the project came from the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation
(VHF), a Steven Spielberg–funded project through which more than 50,000
Holocaust survivors throughout the world have been interviewed.[4]
Of particular interest is the VHF's groundbreaking use of digital technologies
that provides keyword search and access to specific sections of over 120,000
hours of interviews. Telling Their Stories (TTS) opens opportunities for new
applications of the VHF concept. Whereas the VHF project involves a
sophisticated keyword coding system, TTS involves full-text transcription.
Whereas VHF is only viewable at a handful of museums and research centers, TTS
interviews are available via the Internet. And finally, whereas VHF is a
massive multi-continent professional undertaking, TTS is a model for local
schools and universities.
The author first conceived of
the course in 1992 while teaching high school history at the Overlake School in
Redmond, WA. Using more traditional methods and tools of oral history, students
conducted interviews of Holocaust survivors and transcribed interviews using a
basic word processor. The process did not reach potential due in great part to
the cumbersome nature of the tools used: the time devoted to working with
analog tapes did not provide the educational benefit for students and the
resulting products lacked the sophistication necessary for wider distribution.
Nearly 10 years later, using
the phenomenal advances in Internet, digital video and editing technologies,
the current TTS course began in the spring of 2002. The author teamed with
veteran history teacher, Deborah Dent-Samake, who received oral history
training from the Charles Morrissey Oral History Workshop.[5]
Dent-Samake leads the daily course and the author facilitates the more
technical aspects of the project. During the first year, students interviewed
five Holocaust survivors. One year later a new group of students conducted
follow-up interviews with the same five survivors, as well as adding a sixth
subject. This pattern of a two-year cycle of interview and re-interview of the
same subjects has worked well to enhance the depth of interviews. The first
year students conduct essential research including a pre-interview, and develop
a chronological overview with their subject. The second year students study the
previous yearÕs interviews to construct cumulative questions that often delve
further into the subjectsÕ story. The course continues to explore 20th
century history topics best studied using primary source, live oral history
using this two-stage interview cycle.
Efficacy of Student
Interviews
The key to this and similar
projects is the real-world contribution of student work to an audience that transcends
the school community. Student work can provide valuable primary source material
for students and researchers throughout the world. They are crossing the
boundary of "learner" to "contributor." Their work has real
meaning beyond the classroom. Students are not merely modeling and practicing
techniques used by professionals; they are completing purposeful and meaningful
work to be used by others throughout the world. The author refers to this
concept as ÒAuthentic Doing.Ó
Authentic Doing tasks can take
multiple directions such as providing new research, data-collection, and
community service. Authentic Doing is NOT simulating the work of professionals;
Authentic Doing involves completing and distributing the work of professionals.
The results provide service and contribution far beyond the classroom. A class
mock-debate may be a great way to engage student thinking and generate higher
levels of motivation, however, this is not an Authentic Doing task.
Interviewing candidates and posting these unique sets of questions and answers
on a public website prior to an election is Authentic Doing.
Elements of Authentic Doing
1.
Work provides a service to a community beyond the classroom
(other classes within the school, the school, the district, the local community,
city, county, region, state, country, world).
2.
Product is unique and provides real utility to the broader
community, i.e., the product is not a repeat of previously existing projects,
but rather provides something new.
3.
The project is age appropriate. Given the goal to publish work
relevant and usable to a wider audience, the tasks required should not
over-reach their capability.
4.
The product is age independent. The benefactor groups
(readers, viewers, recipients) transcend the specific age of the student
producers.
The TTS model of conducting and
publishing oral histories is a prime example of an Authentic Doing project that
helps educators achieve a goal that previously was deemed unreachable, i.e.,
engaging students in real-world tasks that authentically contribute to the
research knowledge pool. This is due in part to new opportunities afforded by
breakthroughs in digital media and Internet technology. Modern technology
provides the tools to finally enable students to be both learners and
meaningful contributors through what is arguably a paradigm shift in the
processes of oral history collection, processing and distribution to a global
audience. The previous constraints afforded by physical tools, financial
supports, and access to regional, national and international publishing
apparatus have all but evaporated given todayÕs access to inexpensive
sophisticated tools and ubiquitous access to the Internet. The cost and
complexity of past publishing systems served to prevent even the conception of
worldwide publishing of student interviews. Today, those constraints are gone.
The question remains, however,
about the efficacy and appropriateness of engaging students in Authentic Doing
tasks leading to worldwide publication. A complete answer is beyond the scope
of this paper; however, consider the comments of former students in a TTS
course when asked to respond to the following question: ÒAs someone who
experienced the project, what would you say to historians and high school
history teachers who would argue that high school students are not
sophisticated enough to conduct interviews for world-wide publishing?Ó[6]
High school students are perfect for oral
historyÉthey are figuring out who they are. In a culture where their
appearances are evaluated but their true voices aren't heard, learning how to
really listen to another person's story provides not only a sense of
connection, but has the potential to foster a feeling of being worth it, of
mattering enough to be told. Interviewing gave me a sense of responsibility—that's
how oral storytelling works throughout history—a passing on of an
important story. We were the ones to receive it, and we're the ones to keep it.
It teaches us that individuals' stories do matter, that each person matters.[7]
They have made a colossal error
in judgment. If students are interested in the topic and are willing to take
the time to find answers to worthy questions, they are qualified to connect
with survivors.[8]
All 18 responding students
commented in a similar manner, all expressing confidence in their preparation
and subsequent contributions. Several comments urged skeptics to simply look at the work on the website.
Unlike traditional oral history
projects which focus almost solely on extracting and documenting personal
stories for the benefit of others, the TTS model adds an equally important
layer of importance, that being the impact on the interviewers, in this case
high school students. Says Kenneth Kann, a TTS volunteer and experienced oral
historian:
It is
remarkable that something like this could emerge out of a high school history
class. This is the best conceived oral history class I have seen. I cannot
imagine a more valuable educational experience for students.[9]
The author does not argue that
high school students, regardless of their preparation, can conduct interviews
with equal sophistication of professionally trained oral historians. However,
given the variety of unique factors about oral history, engaging students in a
TTS project is an ideal opportunity to both enhance the learning process and
the body of work. First, unlike the presumption of publishing analytical work
of students, the TTS model focuses solely on the collection and distribution of
data, i.e., oral testimonies. The work of analysis is reserved for professionals
and remains a private—though appropriate—function within the
classroom. Thus the work is age appropriate, but the content is age
independent. Second, the TTS model centers on the urgency of collecting stories
of elders who witnessed key historic events. Given the enormous numbers of
aging witnesses to events such as the Holocaust, students can play a vital role
in capturing stories that soon will be lost. The project provides meaningful
work and the collected stories provide new material for use by others.
The TTS Course
The TTS course is divided into
relatively equal sections: 1/4 background history, 1/4 research and
preparation, 1/4 interview skills, and 1/4 post production.
Topic Choice and Interview
Subjects
The primary desire of the TTS project
is to enhance the existing body of work to support a wide range of users from
school-age children to history researchers. Among the first tasks is choosing an appropriate topic that
balances compelling subject matter, availability of interviewees in the
geographic region, and contribution to the broader curriculum. The TTS model
centers on capturing the stories of elders who experienced trauma during
mid-20th century historical events. Although this can obviously be adapted to
the widest range of topics spanning from the arts to sciences by interviewing
significant contributors to various professions, there is a powerful impact of
engaging students in interviews with subjects who experienced trauma in their
youth. For example, most of the Holocaust survivors and Japanese internees were
of similar age to the interviewing students at the time of their ordeals and
often this emotional connection appears within the interview. Note this segment
from Max Garcia, an Auschwitz survivor, as he turns to address the
interviewers:
The Jewish edicts come into
play, and I go into hiding after my sister has been picked up in December of
1942. She had just turned sixteen. Who is sixteen here? (Several students raise
their hands). She had just turned sixteen on the 24th of November, and she was
gassed in Auschwitz on the 10th of December. I just want you to think about
that for a minute—all of you who are sixteen.[10]
Both the student and the
subject share this impact when they discuss experiences during a relatively similar
age. Consider this comment from a
former student:
It is sometimes even beneficial
to be young because it enables you to compare your current life-style with
theirs at a similar age and find differences that make their experience unique.[11]
The elders themselves feel
quite comfortable telling their stories to teenagers and all have been open to
second interviews.
Background History
The background history phase
focuses on developing quick breadth and depth of historical content. The
corresponding curriculum focuses on developing familiarity with key events
leading up to the primary topic. Students construct timelines, complete a
series of background readings, and explore previous oral histories. Inherent in
the process is a pedagogical struggle of breadth over depth of understanding of
content. The entire set of activities—from background research to the
interview to the final editing of tape and transcripts—supports student
learning. In fact, the interview method employed, adapted from the Shoah
FoundationÕs training models,[12]
emphasizes a more subtle questioning style designed to help pull stories of
personal experience without the need for extensive historical training.
Interview Research
Following the background
history stage, students are assigned an interview subject. They work in
production teams of three throughout the remainder of the process. Students
first conduct a non-taped pre-interview questionnaire using a common form
developed for each yearÕs topic. In most cases the pre-interview is a live,
face-to-face opportunity to gather important background information as well as
to develop rapport between the subject and the student team. The pre-interview
takes approximately one hour. In some cases this occurs via phone and is often
augmented with email correspondence. Beyond the obvious benefit of recording
personal data in advance of the formal interview, the most important survey
section is the development of the subject's personal timeline. This provides
the student team with a plethora of follow-up research opportunities. In fact,
the elder subjects often take this opportunity to direct students to additional
material in the form of books, articles and films. In some cases the subjects
provide students with their own written testimonies. Using the experiences of
the pre-interview, the questionnaire, and earlier background studies, students
collaborate on further research and question development leading up to the day
of their scheduled interview.
The Interview
The TTS model uses a simplified
mobile studio that can be set-up in approximately 15 minutes. Lighting involves
the use of a single 1000 watt bulb within a 16Óx22Ó dome box, and a white-board
reflector. The subject wears a high quality lavaliere microphone connected
directly to a digital video camera using standard miniDV tapes. The voice of
the interviewers is picked up by the subjectÕs microphone. This simplifies the
need for sound mixing since the audio portion of the interview questions is
edited out of the final movie segments. Three tripod stands hold the light,
reflector and camera. A back-up camera, microphone and light bulb are also
included in the mobile studio.[13]
Following the interview, the
videotapes are imported to large-capacity external hard drives using Apple
iMovie.[14]
Given the low cost of digital storage (approx. $5 per hour of tape), these
digital files remain as permanent storage and the miniDV tape version becomes
the archival back-up. The files stored on the digital drives are transferred to
larger capacity drives as the cost per hour continues to drop in the years
ahead, thus building a simple means of file duplicity and transfer to more
advanced archival digital media as itÕs developed in the future.
After compressing the captured
digital video into small QuickTime files using Discreet Cleaner,[15]
each 2-hour interview is transferred to student computers. Students then
transcribe their assigned segments using Listen & Type,[16]
one of many audio transcription programs available as shareware. Students on
average spend approximately five minutes for each minute of transcription
during this Òrough transcriptionÓ phase, much of which can be completed as
homework. Students use a style guide developed for TTS projects to maintain
consistency among the many student transcribers. [17]
Among the most difficult tasks students face is determining sentence and
paragraph breaks within oral speech. This becomes a critical task since each
paragraph will later be matched with a corresponding movie file. Students
follow several additional editing steps to ÒcleanÓ the transcriptions within
their production teams.
Students then use Apple's
QuickTime Pro to create the hundreds of approximately one-minute
"movie" files. This moves rather quickly since the students have
already determined where to make the paragraph breaks; the movie cuts simply
mirror these same segments.[18]
Students learn the subtleties of avoiding awkward movie cuts (not at closed
eyes or in mid-motion). They also tend to find transcription errors in the
process of reviewing the audio-visual record. Students then paste their
transcribed text into blank Macromedia Dreamweaver[19]
files and hyperlink each segment of text to its corresponding QuickTime movie.
Individual laptops facilitate the process since many of the more time-consuming
tasks are completed as homework.
Once all the text is
transcribed and checked multiple times by student teams, adult volunteers are
recruited for a final round of careful proof Òlistening and reading.Ó They
maneuver through an entire testimony, clicking each paragraph and comparing one
more time the written text to the spoken word. They make corrections and record
notes of difficult passages or words for later review. These mostly parent
volunteers, some with past oral history background, appreciate both the project
and their ability to contribute. The school librarian, Carolyn Karis, assists
Dent-Samake and the author in the final task of checking and correcting any
remaining unresolved text problems.
Technology Integration
Processes
The TTS course is a model of
integrating technology into the curriculum—the guiding principle for
computer use at The Urban School and elsewhere. The technology tools enhance
collaboration among and between the students, the teams, and the instructors.
Individual student laptops are used for all aspects of production. [20]
Students use online directions for the various steps with very little direct
instruction. The project team approach helps facilitate this; they seek each
other's help when directions are confusing. Students access their work and post
reflective journal entries online using FirstClass online communication
software. [21]
They access assignments, keep track of the complicated production schedule,
submit homework, collaborate in their project teams, and access the work of previous
years' students all online. They learn to set-up the mobile studio and operate
the professional camera, lights and microphones. Their work—published on
the Internet—is made possible by this infusion of technology. However,
the most significant elements of the course remain rooted in the historical
study and student contribution. In this way, technology is infused and
integrated, and therefore it remains simply a tool in the process.
Summary
Telling Their Stories: Oral
History Archives Project is intended to provide teachers, professors, oral
historians and community oral history organizers with a model for inspiring
student conducted and published oral histories. Following an ÒAuthentic DoingÓ
project method which directly engages students in real-world production of
material with meaning far beyond the classroom, the TTS model results in
capturing and publishing vitally important personal histories for use
throughout the world. In addition, the TTS model promotes a ÒRead, Watch,
ListenÓ approach to the presentation of oral histories using simple multimedia
tools that embrace the value of stories when presented in both transcript and
parallel video via the Internet.
Howard Levin serves as
Director of Technology at The Urban School of San Francisco, the first high
school in San Francisco to adopt an individual student laptop program. He
taught high school history and served as department chair of history at the
Overlake School in Redmond, WA. He is author of articles published in ISTE's
"Learning and Leading With Technology." He is a frequent presenter at
national and international conferences including: Ed-Media 2005 in Montreal,
National Association of Independent Schools, National Association for Computers
in Education, and The Laptop Institute in Memphis. He was also a volunteer
interviewer for the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History program, a Steven
Spielberg-funded project that interviewed more than 50,000 Holocaust survivors
throughout the world. More information at: <www.howardlevin.com>.
[1] The Urban
School of San Francisco, located in the heart of the cityÕs historic
Haight-Ashbury neighborhood, is a progressive American independent high school
that strives to instill a passion for learning among its 295 students. The
school is considered a regional and national pioneer in several areas including
its innovative block schedule, a renowned service learning program, narrative
evaluation system, and fully integrated 1:1 student laptop program. More
information at <http://www.urbanschool.org>.
[2] Telling Their Stories: Oral History Archives Project. The Urban School of San Francisco. 21 Feb. 2006 <http://www.tellingstories.org>.
[3] Leading Edge Program. The National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS). 21 Feb. 2006 <http://www.nais.org>.
[4] Suvivors of the Shoah: Visual History Foundation. University of Southern California Shoah Foundation Institute. 21 Feb. 2006 <http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/vhi/>.
[5] Charles Morrissey Oral History Workshops, Union Institute & University. July 2005 <http://www.tui.edu/current/conferences/oral>.
[6] ÒTelling Their Stories: Oral History Archive Project, A Survey of Impact.Ó Survey completed by 18 students from the past four years of TTS courses. The Urban School of San Francisco. 23 Feb. 2006.
[7] ÒKRB Ô03Ó (former student of the 2003 Telling Their Stories course), survey response, ÒTelling Their Stories: Oral History Archive Project, A Survey of Impact.Ó The Urban School of San Francisco. 23 Feb. 2006.
[8] ÒHL Ô07Ó (former student of the 2005 Telling Their Stories course). Survey response, ÒTelling Their Stories: Oral History Archive Project, A Survey of Impact.Ó The Urban School of San Francisco. 23 Feb. 2006.
[9] Kenneth
Kann, oral historian and author of Comrades and Chicken Ranchers: The Story
of a California Jewish Community, (Ithaca:
Cornell University Press, 1993). Written TTS evaluation, 23 March 2003.
[10] Max R. Garcia, Telling Their Stories: Oral History Archives Project. The Urban School of San Francisco. 9 May 2002 < http://www.tellingstories.org/holocaust/max/max_frameset.html>, page 6.
[11] ÒHL Ô07Ó (former student of the 2005 Telling Their Stories course), survey response, ÒTelling Their Stories: Oral History Archive Project A Survey of Impact.Ó The Urban School of San Francisco. 23 Feb. 2006.
[12] The author attended 4 days of training hosted by the VHF. June 1996 <http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/vhi/>.
[13] Refer to project website for more detailed descriptions of equipment used. Telling Their Stories: Oral History Archives Project. The Urban School of San Francisco. 21 Feb. 2006 < http://www.tellingstories.org/about>, ÒProduction GuidesÓ
[14] iMovie HD 6. Apple Computer. 21 Feb. 2006 <www.apple.com/ilife/imovie>.
[15] Autodesk Cleaner. Autodesk. 21 Feb. 2006 <www.autodesk.com/cleaner>.
[16] Listen&Type 2.1.1. Nattaworks. 21 Feb. 2006 <www.nattaworks.com>
[17] Style Guide, Telling Their Stories: Oral History Archives Project. The Urban School of San Francisco. 21 Feb. 2006 <www.tellingstories.org/about/technical/style_guide.html>.
[18] Quicktime Pro. Apple Computer. 21 Feb. 2006 < www.apple.com/quicktime/pro/mac.html>.
[19] Macromedia Dreamweaver 8. Adobe. 21 Feb. 2006 <www.macromedia.com/software/dreamweaver>.
[20] Apple iBook. Apple Computer. 21 Feb. 2006 <www.apple.com/ibook>.
[21] FirstClass 8.1. OpenText Corporation. 21 Feb. 2006 www.firstclass.com.