Comments for Hot Brainstem http://hotbrainstem.org Go archives Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:58:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= Comment on Not on Google? It Doesn’t Exist: Findability and Search Engine Optimization for Archives (and Libraries and Museums) by Archives Outside » August 2010: Link roundup post http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/08/14/not-on-google-it-doesnt-exist-findability-and-search-engine-optimization-for-archives/comment-page-1/#comment-1968 Archives Outside » August 2010: Link roundup post Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:58:10 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=541#comment-1968 [...] Not on Google? It Doesn’t Exist: Findability and Search Engine Optimization for Archives (and Libr... [...] [...] Not on Google? It Doesn’t Exist: Findability and Search Engine Optimization for Archives (and Libr… [...]

]]> Comment on Teaching primary sources: Secondary in, Primary out, Flip it, Repeat by Alexis http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/07/29/teaching-primary-sources-secondary-in-primary-out-flip-it-repeat/comment-page-1/#comment-1865 Alexis Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:34:12 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=494#comment-1865 Also, kudos to you for coming up with such thorough assignments that really challenge students and teach them about the value of understanding how history is constructed. Historiographical methods are the hardest part of history to teach, and perhaps why there is so little focus on this at the high school and undergraduate level. Also, kudos to you for coming up with such thorough assignments that really challenge students and teach them about the value of understanding how history is constructed. Historiographical methods are the hardest part of history to teach, and perhaps why there is so little focus on this at the high school and undergraduate level.

]]> Comment on Teaching primary sources: Secondary in, Primary out, Flip it, Repeat by Alexis http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/07/29/teaching-primary-sources-secondary-in-primary-out-flip-it-repeat/comment-page-1/#comment-1864 Alexis Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:29:56 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=494#comment-1864 This is an amazing amount of work for students and I think that all of this is really some thing like a 3 credit college course. Smaller chunks would be good for high school students. Also, it really depends on the students you are working with. This requires a lot of logistics to come together, like students being near a well-used repository, and access to the sources the author used. All in all, though, it is the BEST way to teach students what history is and how it is constructed. I used to use similar assignments with students where I would have them compare primary sources about an event to a short textbook narrative of said event. It was the ONE way I could get introductory students, and non-history majors to "get it." I used to send my students to the archives and ask them to construct narratives on a topic using a certain set of materials, and then we would compare narratives. I really think this prepares students to understand what historiography and history are. This is MUCH more difficult to teach than I initially imagined, and I want a chance to do it again some day, even better than the first few times I did it!!! This is an amazing amount of work for students and I think that all of this is really some thing like a 3 credit college course. Smaller chunks would be good for high school students. Also, it really depends on the students you are working with. This requires a lot of logistics to come together, like students being near a well-used repository, and access to the sources the author used. All in all, though, it is the BEST way to teach students what history is and how it is constructed. I used to use similar assignments with students where I would have them compare primary sources about an event to a short textbook narrative of said event. It was the ONE way I could get introductory students, and non-history majors to “get it.” I used to send my students to the archives and ask them to construct narratives on a topic using a certain set of materials, and then we would compare narratives. I really think this prepares students to understand what historiography and history are. This is MUCH more difficult to teach than I initially imagined, and I want a chance to do it again some day, even better than the first few times I did it!!!

]]> Comment on Teaching primary sources: Secondary in, Primary out, Flip it, Repeat by Maureen http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/07/29/teaching-primary-sources-secondary-in-primary-out-flip-it-repeat/comment-page-1/#comment-1677 Maureen Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:51:26 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=494#comment-1677 When I was in college, we had to do something close to your second exercise for a class -- basically, we had to take a chapter in a monograph or an article, read through the cited sources, and then write a paper about whether we believed that the author had enough evidence to make the argument she was making. This was a great exercise for a number of reasons: 1. The same reasons that (I think) motivate your pedagogical activity -- reminding students that history is produced by people, and people can make mistakes or come to different conclusions. 2. Our instructor was setting the standard that history must involve an argument. You have to make a point, or else you're reading a compendium of archival sources. Doing so is a lot of fun, but they don't mean anything in and of themselves. Furthermore, I'm not certain that it's possible to read through, pick through, and exclude historical information WITHOUT making some sort of implicit argument. Anyway, the instructor is Sharon Ullman, at Bryn Mawr, and she might be interested in working with you if you wanted to make this a reality. When I was in college, we had to do something close to your second exercise for a class — basically, we had to take a chapter in a monograph or an article, read through the cited sources, and then write a paper about whether we believed that the author had enough evidence to make the argument she was making. This was a great exercise for a number of reasons:
1. The same reasons that (I think) motivate your pedagogical activity — reminding students that history is produced by people, and people can make mistakes or come to different conclusions.
2. Our instructor was setting the standard that history must involve an argument. You have to make a point, or else you’re reading a compendium of archival sources. Doing so is a lot of fun, but they don’t mean anything in and of themselves. Furthermore, I’m not certain that it’s possible to read through, pick through, and exclude historical information WITHOUT making some sort of implicit argument.

Anyway, the instructor is Sharon Ullman, at Bryn Mawr, and she might be interested in working with you if you wanted to make this a reality.

]]> Comment on Can you skip learning EAD and go right to Archivists’ Toolkit or Archon? by Chris Prom http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/05/11/can-you-skip-learning-ead-and-go-right-to-archivists-toolkit-or-archon/comment-page-1/#comment-1480 Chris Prom Fri, 09 Jul 2010 18:59:34 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=317#comment-1480 Interesting discussion, thanks for posting it. You said: "Is it negligent to skip straight to AT? No, and it doesn’t make someone a bad archivist. It is less than ideal and maybe even a bit risky, but it’s also a very practical approach. And the more I think about it, the more I realize that this is the most immediate value of a tool like AT/Archon." That's very perceptive. When we developed Archon, the idea was to make EAD and online access possible for those who would never have time/inclination to edit raw xml. I don't particularly think one needs to know anything about EAD in order to do good description. However, it is essential that one understand DACS, ideas such as access points, levels of description, difference between intellectual hierarchy and physical order, etc. Most of the problems that implementers run into with Archon, in my experience, is because they don't understand these concepts or are clearly using the application to describe archives in ways that DACS does not recommend. However, I would also add that a basic understanding of EAD and DACS go hand in hand, so familiarly with EAD is a good benchmark of whether an individual is ready to begin using a tool such as AT/Archon. Interesting discussion, thanks for posting it. You said:

“Is it negligent to skip straight to AT? No, and it doesn’t make someone a bad archivist. It is less than ideal and maybe even a bit risky, but it’s also a very practical approach. And the more I think about it, the more I realize that this is the most immediate value of a tool like AT/Archon.”

That’s very perceptive. When we developed Archon, the idea was to make EAD and online access possible for those who would never have time/inclination to edit raw xml. I don’t particularly think one needs to know anything about EAD in order to do good description. However, it is essential that one understand DACS, ideas such as access points, levels of description, difference between intellectual hierarchy and physical order, etc. Most of the problems that implementers run into with Archon, in my experience, is because they don’t understand these concepts or are clearly using the application to describe archives in ways that DACS does not recommend.

However, I would also add that a basic understanding of EAD and DACS go hand in hand, so familiarly with EAD is a good benchmark of whether an individual is ready to begin using a tool such as AT/Archon.

]]> Comment on Can you skip learning EAD and go right to Archivists’ Toolkit or Archon? by librarchivist http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/05/11/can-you-skip-learning-ead-and-go-right-to-archivists-toolkit-or-archon/comment-page-1/#comment-1167 librarchivist Tue, 11 May 2010 18:16:35 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=317#comment-1167 Thanks for bringing up this question. I just posted a response on my blog: http://librarchivist.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/who-cares-about-learning-ead/. Thanks for bringing up this question. I just posted a response on my blog: http://librarchivist.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/who-cares-about-learning-ead/.

]]> Comment on Can you skip learning EAD and go right to Archivists’ Toolkit or Archon? by Who cares about learning EAD? « Touchable Archives http://hotbrainstem.org/2010/05/11/can-you-skip-learning-ead-and-go-right-to-archivists-toolkit-or-archon/comment-page-1/#comment-1166 Who cares about learning EAD? « Touchable Archives Tue, 11 May 2010 18:15:46 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=317#comment-1166 [...] aids Matt (@herbison) over at Hot Brainstem posted a good question to his blog: “Can you skip learning EAD and go right to Archivists’ Toolkit or Archon?” He suggests that the “right way” to create accessible finding aids (EAD, DACS, [...] [...] aids Matt (@herbison) over at Hot Brainstem posted a good question to his blog: “Can you skip learning EAD and go right to Archivists’ Toolkit or Archon?” He suggests that the “right way” to create accessible finding aids (EAD, DACS, [...]

]]> Comment on Survey of Archon & Archivists’ Toolkit use by Jayson http://hotbrainstem.org/2009/07/10/survey-of-archon-archivists-toolkit-use/comment-page-1/#comment-625 Jayson Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:51:14 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=55#comment-625 I'm curious about how it was that you were able to move your data from AT to Archon. I'm in the process of figuring this out myself and any time saving tips you might have would be very greatly appreciated! I’m curious about how it was that you were able to move your data from AT to Archon. I’m in the process of figuring this out myself and any time saving tips you might have would be very greatly appreciated!

]]> Comment on Using Camera Phones to Improve Reference in the Archives and Library by Megan Fraser http://hotbrainstem.org/2009/12/07/using-camera-phone-to-improve-reference-in-the-archives-and-library/comment-page-1/#comment-458 Megan Fraser Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:47:20 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=243#comment-458 I think you mean "vault/cage/lehr." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Lehr I think you mean “vault/cage/lehr.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Lehr

]]> Comment on Using Camera Phones to Improve Reference in the Archives and Library by matt http://hotbrainstem.org/2009/12/07/using-camera-phone-to-improve-reference-in-the-archives-and-library/comment-page-1/#comment-407 matt Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:10:40 +0000 http://hotbrainstem.org/?p=243#comment-407 Christine and Jim, one of the things I like best about the sendable-photo approach is that I can do it "where the stuff is," whether in book stacks, in the vault/cage/lair, or in the basement storage room with oversize ledgers. No photocopier or scanner needed...which brings me to my second point: For whatever reason, I tend to find that I'm taking quick and dirty snapshots of material that is either oversize or more fragile than I want to put on the flatbed of a photocopier or scanner. This is probably why, in my lower-priority daydreams, I have a sweet overhead book-type scanner that automatically compiles a PDF like Jim's photocopier does -- but this runs afoul of the "where the stuff is" benefit. Having said all this, if anyone has an extra PDF-networkable photocopier or overhead scanner, I'd swallow my pride and accept it. Christine and Jim, one of the things I like best about the sendable-photo approach is that I can do it “where the stuff is,” whether in book stacks, in the vault/cage/lair, or in the basement storage room with oversize ledgers. No photocopier or scanner needed…which brings me to my second point: For whatever reason, I tend to find that I’m taking quick and dirty snapshots of material that is either oversize or more fragile than I want to put on the flatbed of a photocopier or scanner. This is probably why, in my lower-priority daydreams, I have a sweet overhead book-type scanner that automatically compiles a PDF like Jim’s photocopier does — but this runs afoul of the “where the stuff is” benefit.

Having said all this, if anyone has an extra PDF-networkable photocopier or overhead scanner, I’d swallow my pride and accept it.

]]>