My project entails an exploration of the oral history method. I aim to create a 2,500 word synthesis of literature pertaining to oral histories. Additionally, I plan to interview two historians who have executed oral history projects. I also hope to provide insight based on my experience.
I. Pre-writing
Now in my third semester of the iSchool doctoral program, I have learned (the hard way) some tips in terms of synthesizing research or creating a literature review: 1. find, annotate and REALLY organize journal articles (at this point, twenty-five); 2. generate a taxonomy of topics in order to avoid perfunctory summaries of articles and, instead, write thematically (Dr. Stivilia taught us this valuable hack); 3. use a dual-monitor PC in order to have articles on one screen and my Word document on the other; and 4. create bulleted sections of knowledge and quotes which can later be fashioned into an essay or report.
2. Content
I mention these steps not to appear high-minded but to state that I left off these important steps when creating my project proposal. In fact, I really underestimated the amount of work it would take to critically read, decipher concepts, organize categories using a taxonomy and transfer knowledge to the written report. Despite, my initial proposal, it is best that I coalesce all of my data at a later point, when I have fully explored the literature, the interviews as well as my own experience.
So far, I have read 17 articles and created a taxonomy of major themes, which you can access here. Also, I organized said themes and insight in a preliminary report, which is available here. You will notice that I created bullet points or lists. In my estimation, have met my goal of providing a 1,000 essay as my second project update since my draft report thus far contains 2,038 words.
The dominant themes are that oral history is a democratic research avenue which allows for
- activist scholarship
- public discourse
- reconstruction of past/popular/limited narratives
- agency for the marginalized
- research as a shared experience
- acknowledgement of the value of the everyday life of the lay person
Trust, deep listening, reciprocity, unstructured/semi-structured designs and rich description are championed.
Yet, oral history research has its flaws in that it still upholds traditional power structures, calls into question validity and reliability on account of its reliance on memory, and jeopardizes the safety of participants in highly-politicized and/or dangerous communities.
3. Accidental ‘Experiential Learning’ Experience
Ironically, writing about oral history requires me to employ some of the requisite techniques. Specifically, I employed what I would consider deep listening (that is, critical reading). I also extrapolated patterns as well as coded and quantified information, thereby utilizing the content analysis technique. In terms of my method, I paid careful attention to data quality control and knowledge organization. Moreover, I will soon interview two experts and, thereby, apply intensive interviewing best practices. In essence, this project allows me to not just know, but do. I’m reminded of a quote by Confuscious: “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.”
Considering the fact that I already have 2,038 words yet AT LEAST eight more articles, two expert interviews plus my own experience to include, there is no way that my final report will be contained to just 2,500 words. I am not sure what an adequate end goal is. Instead, I will allow the paper to naturally conclude when I have reached a point of saturation.
My next project update will describe how my interviews went!