Wed, 23 May 2012 00:42:56 -0800WeeblyTue, 22 May 2012 18:39:14 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2012/05/reconnecting.html_Hi everyone,

As the Graduate Student Committee gets our blog back up and running, we will be writing a series of short posts on how graduate students can reach a broader audience (including each other) with their work, whether through blogs, twitter, or op-eds.  Bill Cronon, as president of the AHA, has focused his monthly reflections on the intersections of professional, amateur, and digital history.  Jack Dougherty, Kristen Nawrotzki, and other scholars in our own field have written on similar topics in their open-review volume, Writing History in the Digital Age.  As these writers have noted, making our work publicly accessible presents a paradox for graduate students and young faculty.  We are often the most familiar with new media trends and technologies (no offense to the active bloggers among our senior colleagues), yet with masters', dissertation, and tenure committees looking over our shoulders we are also under the most pressure to guard our research until it is published in traditional journals.

Nonetheless, there remain several reasons to reach out:

(1) For those of us who (like it or not) are bound for non-academic jobs, popular and online publications offer practice writing in different registers.  Moreover, they are more likely to be seen by readers outside the field, from high school students and teachers to amateur historians.

(2) Blogging has lowered the bar for entry into publishing.  One can easily start a professional blog or apply to be a guest writer on a more established site, both of which can build ties in the field.  Blogging with other scholars (or here!) can also help one work through problems with research or writing.

(3) It is conceivable that tenure rules will evolve by the time we are coming up before committees, and even if they don't, an online presence might help with hiring committees.


On that note, I have a few questions:

(1) While there are obviously archival materials that we should keep close to our chest, I wonder if anyone has found resources that would not revolutionize our field but could make for good public consumption?  For example, several months ago slate.com began a series on report cards from a New York City trade school in the 1930s.  (The first article of the series was posted on the History of Education Facebook page.  More here.)  The Denver Post also released a wonderful montage of color photos from the 1930s, many of which feature children and schools and seem to invite some sort of historical commentary.  Has anyone found anything quirky in the archives that will never make it into my published work but could nonetheless spark some good conversations?

(2) Do any of you blog about history or education?  If so, would you mind sharing a link to your site in the comments section?

(3) What other blogs in the field are you reading?  A few on my list include the U.S. Intellectual History Blog (with HES regulars Tim Lacey and Andrew Hartman), Sherman Dorn's "One Blog Schoolhouse," and Larry Cuban's "School Reform and Classroom Practice."


I look forward to any thoughts or feedback!

Best,
Cam Scribner
HES Graduate Student Council
]]>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 09:30:55 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2012/02/the-graduate-student-committee-is-looking-for-new-members.html_***Update: We are extending the deadline for applications until March 1, 2012! 
The application link: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N5L8BCC

Attention graduate students!


Are you looking for a way to be more involved in the History of Education Society? If so, you’re in luck! The History of Education Society’s Graduate Student Committee would like to invite you to apply for one of the three positions available for the next two-year term.   If selected, you’ll become part of the process that makes the HES annual meeting such a wonderful and friendly meeting by helping to plan graduate student focused events. The description and mission of the group are as follows:


The History of Education Society Graduate Student Committee is a diverse group committed to advancing the individual and collective experiences of graduate students with intellectual interests in the history of education. The Committee advocates for graduate students as participants in the profession and practice of the history of education.

The time commitment for the committee roughly involves the following:
* monthly conference calls
* sub-committee work between calls
* attendance at the Annual Meeting and availability to help support graduate-student events
* timely response to emails and other correspondence


If you are interested in applying, please do so online by accessing this link: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N5L8BCC


We will accept applications until February 11, 2012. 



We look forward to hearing from you!  Please feel free to contact Emily Hodge, incoming GSC chair, with questions at emh5280@psu.edu.  For more information, read outgoing chair Amy Martinelli's blog post about her experiences on the GSC - found just below this post! ]]>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 18:41:28 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2012/01/the-graduate-student-committee-a-great-way-to-serve-by-amy-martinelli.html_ For the last two years I have served as a member of the History of Education Society’s Graduate Student Committee.  My adviser suggested that I apply to meet more people within the society and to get involved in the process of organizing the annual meeting.  I had attended HES twice before and noticed the wonderful work of the GSC who organized fun social outings and opportunities to meet other graduate students in our intimate field.  I couldn’t be happier that I took his advice.  Working with the GSC has not only helped me to hone my organizational and leadership skills as the chair of the committee, but has also helped me forge wonderful relationships with those I served with, scholars in our field, and many of you!  As my tenure on the GSC comes to an end, and as the outgoing chair, I’d like to take this opportunity to share some insight into the inner workings of the GSC and encourage you to apply for one of our three open positions. 

I know that many people have questions about the GSC: What do we do?  How do we choose our members?   So I’d like to address some commonly asked questions.

What is the GSC and what do we do?

The GSC is comprised of graduate students from across the country who help to plan events for graduate students at the annual meeting of HES.  The position lasts two years and includes planning social and professional events for graduate students at HES; we also help to run the registration tables. 

For several years, our “main event” has been a social outing between graduate students and faculty members—the “Night on the Town Dinner.”  Perhaps many of you have joined us in the past for this great event.  One of the greatest attributes of the faculty in History of Education is their accessibility and enthusiasm when it comes to helping graduate students succeed.  It is for this reason that this event is always such a success.  The “Night on the Town Dinner” provides opportunities for networking and fascinating conversations between grad students and faculty all in a relaxed environment.  The planning for this event occurs months in advance because we need to find a place that will fit our large group and offer a good meal at a reasonable price.  This process is fun but can be frustrating!  We are constantly working to make this process easier on our members and those of you who attend the meetings.  This year, we introduced an online payment system that nearly half of the graduate students who attended took advantage of.  We hope that this system will continue next year to make the process just a little easier, and represents the ways that the GSC is continuously working to make connecting easier. 

The “Night on the Town Dinner” is certainly the highlight of the GSC’s work but it is certainly not all that the GSC does.  Each year the GSC designs a session during the meeting that is specifically designed for graduate students.  This can take many forms.  This year, we used the time to conduct a panel discussion of graduate students and faculty members who shared their experiences in the things that matter to graduate students at various stages of their education from preparing for comprehensive exams to finding a job to publishing.  The GSC works collectively to determine what form this session will take each year. 

To be sure, there are events that have come to be seen as traditions each year, but the great thing about being on the GSC is that there is ample opportunity for change as well.  This year, we felt that there should be more opportunities for graduate students to socialize together.  We proposed to the HES executive committee that the GSC sponsor a graduate student breakfast.  Through the generosity of Karen Graves and the Denison University College of Education, we were able to have this event at the meeting site.  We also diversified our membership connection by creating this website, vigilantly using the list-serv, and connecting with new members through our facebook page. 

In all, we do a lot during the annual HES meeting and throughout the year to try to keep graduate students connected with each other. 

How do we meet?

The GSC is comprised of a group of graduate students throughout the United States.  This year we had students in Pennsylvania, Washington, Indiana, Georgia, and Florida.  Clearly, working together takes an awful lot of planning and off-site work.  This year, our group decided to meet once a month for about an hour through conference call technology.  We have tried to use webcams to connect “face-to-face” but it has not been easy.  Working through phones calls and emails, we are able to do what we need to do without ever even meeting, in many cases.  While it would be nice to meet in real life, we make the most of the long distance communications that we can use to facilitate meetings together and it has worked well, so far. 

How do I become a member of the committee?

Each year new members are selected to become a part of the GSC.  The term to serve is two years, so we encourage those who apply to do so when they will have at least two years left of school.  However, we welcome students at any stage in their programs to help add to the diversity of our perspectives.  If you are interested in joining the GSC please stay tuned for more information about this year’s application process.  We plan to begin the application stage in February and will do so online.    

Final Thoughts

Finally, I’d like to take a moment to thank my outgoing committee for all the hard work that they have done to make my years on the GSC especially fun and rewarding.  I am confident that the remaining members and our new members will only continue to improve upon the traditions that have continued at HES.  I can’t wait to see what comes next!

]]>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 18:37:53 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2012/01/history-of-education-job-posting-west-chester-university.html_ The Department of Professional & Secondary Education of West Chester University invites applications for a full-time, tenure-track position beginning Fall 2012 at the rank of Assistant Professor in the Foundations of Education.  We are especially interested in colleagues with expertise in the history of education within the United States and critical pedagogy. A doctoral degree in history of education, critical pedagogy, foundations of education, or a closely related discipline is required.   ABD will be considered with a firm and verified completion date.  Position requires strong classroom and communication skills, and a commitment to Teacher Education. K-12 and/or college teaching experience preferred as well as a record of, or a clear agenda for, scholarship in the discipline.
Submit cover letter, and, vita to Dr. John Elmore and Dr. Curry Malott, Search Committee Co-chairs, Department of Professional and Secondary Education, West Chester University, West Chester, PA 19383. Review of applications will begin on January 30th, 2012 and continue until position is filled. ]]>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 18:28:32 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2011/12/teaching-history-by-jake-hardesty.html At my university, undergraduates do not take a course solely devoted to the history of education.  Instead, a portion of a required course, Education and American Culture (H340), is reserved for the history of education.  Though it can vary by instructor, usually about half the semester is devoted to examining how schools have historically developed, while the other half focuses on current issues in schools.  In a meeting before my first time teaching the course, my faculty supervisor suggested that this transition between history and current issues would be an excellent opportunity to solicit student feedback before the end of semester evaluations.  I liked the idea, and each of the five times I have taught the course, I devote a portion of the first class session on current events to students’ thoughts about the class so far.  Students have about ten minutes without me in the room to discuss what they like and dislike about the course and we then discuss the course as a group.  It was during this group discussion last spring a student – who, it must be said, was very polite about it – said, “The course is great, but it’s still history.” 

I have thought about that comment on and off since last spring.  In a way, the comment still puzzles me, simply because it is so foreign to me as a history of education student.  And though I can’t say that I have discovered a definitive solution (if one exists), my student’s remark has helped me appreciate teaching problems that are unique to historians of education.  I should probably mention at this point I am not offering any answers in this post.  To be honest, I don’t know that I have worked through all the implications of what my student said.  Instead, I want to codify some of the issues, the problems, which confront historians of education as teachers.  Two main points about my student’s comment stand out to me now: one about history, and the other about education. 

First, I have come to believe historians of education who teach in schools and departments of education are, in a very real way, handicapped before the course begins.  Skills that are valued in many teacher education programs are inconsistent with what is taught in history of education courses.  The majority of education students’ coursework focuses on the “how to” issues they will grapple with as teachers – how to write a lesson plan, how to deal with parents, how to teach in a pluralizing society.  Such courses all have a discernible sense of direction; they all point to a student’s future career as an educator.  Students can easily identify how such methods courses are meant to prepare them, since each provides skills they will need to realize as teachers.  In order to use technology effectively, they take a class on that topic.  In order to understand the needs of exceptional students, education students take a class focusing on that population. 

In this climate, history is at a distinct disadvantage.  History of education courses are not designed with the sense of direction, as our students understand it, that many other school of education courses are.  That is, we do not teach students how to do something, but how to know something.  We teach a skill set that is not applicable to their future careers in the way that the majority of their classes are.  As a result, our courses, like other foundations courses, are outliers in schools and departments of education.  History of education doesn’t point toward teachers’ future careers the way other classes can and do.  And, I’m afraid, it’s the (perhaps unintentional) emphasis on causality – “take this class to be able to do that in the classroom” – that has become increasingly entrenched each year.  My point here is that courses don’t really exist in isolation.  The fact that history of education courses are surrounded by “how to” courses in schools and departments of education will have some effect on students’ sense of importance of the class. 

Second, and certainly related, students seem to think of history as little more than a chronology of events.  This is their default understanding.  From time to time I’ve asked my students what they think history is, and, practically without fail, I hear that it is a collection of names and dates.  For whatever reason(s), many undergraduates see history as little more than a progression of events, organized within their respective eras.  The “Old Deluder Satan” law was written during the colonial period; Horace Mann worked during the common school period.  Fair enough, there is obviously a real truth here.  Students do need a background of various people, events, etc. to frame their understanding.  Still, I wonder how much we are being, well, dishonest with our students when we present the past as a finished product.  Such a view is certainly absent in our professional lives.  Through books, articles, and presentations, we are consistently revising and deepening our understanding of the past.  History is anything but settled.  And yet, from my conversations with undergraduates, that is the overwhelming understanding they share. 

My time teaching in graduate school is the first opportunity I’ve had to consider the challenges that come up when teaching history of education.  My sense, though, is that, as teachers, we face perhaps more challenges than ever before, internal and external, new and old.  What I’ve tried to do here is address the challenges, both from education and history, that face those of us that teacher history of education courses.  I’ve taken the high (or perhaps low) road and avoid any answers.  Obviously, solutions are important, and necessary.  Still, each generation of teachers conceives of problems facing them differently.  At this point in my career, I am trying to make sense of how our field fits in schools and departments of education.  I would certainly welcome issues others have encountered and any possible resolutions. 

]]>Sun, 25 Sep 2011 20:48:13 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2011/09/publishing-your-work-by-cam-scribner.htmlMy first course in graduate school was sort of a getting-to-know-you roundtable. Every week, students would read an article or chapter by a different professor in the department and then discuss it with him/her.  The most interesting presentation by far came from a sociologist who was near retirement.  He had us read one of his articles that had been rejected for publication, with the reviewers’ criticism attached.  I think we were supposed to learn a lesson about humility but also (given the tone of some of the comments) about the occasional pettiness of academic publishing.  For me, it was just great to see the process of article submission, which, like so many things in academia, can seem shrouded in mystery.  I hope the following post can offer the same sort of guidance to other graduate students out there.

Two years ago, in a burst of ambition, I resolved to get my first article published.  I was only a few years into graduate school but thought that I could produce a piece on par with some of those that I had read.  And whatever the outcome, it seemed, the submission process itself would be a learning experience.

At the outset, I decided to get some practice.  When a call went out on the H-Net listserv for book reviewers, I took it.  I also submitted an article to a state magazine of history and toyed with other writing outlets (review essays, op-eds, and serious blog posts) that could hone my prose and force me to stay current on historiographical and policy debates.

Next, I selected the piece that I wanted to submit, a seminar paper about social studies reform during the Cold War.  Most people, I suspect, would choose a portion of their master’s thesis or a chapter of their dissertation, but I thought that the piece in question was colorful and added something to current historical debates.  Moreover, if it got accepted it might leave me with a deeper reservoir of material for later submissions.

Where to submit?  Friends and professors suggested that I find a small, focused but reputable source, something that I myself read.  I thought History of Education Quarterly was the best fit for my material, but others might look at the Teachers College Record, Journal of Negro Education, Paedagogica Historica, etc.  An easy way to gauge whether a journal is a good fit is to look at its tables of contents over the past few years (almost always available online), or to look at the vitae of young scholars that you admire and see where they have published.

Some painfully obvious advice: before submitting, edit ruthlessly.  After spending several weeks reorganizing and embellishing sections of my paper, I began to pare down extraneous material.  It was shocking how much there was.  Going through a draft with fresh eyes, I had to reevaluate whether every quote was crucial to the argument, whether I could phrase my points more concisely, and if I really needed the padded footnotes that often buttress my writing.  (No.  Yes.  No.)  Also, I had to review my sources several times.  Editors are serious about fact-checking and, as Emily mentioned in an earlier post, it can be difficult to retrieve file and folder numbers long after conducting research. 

Even after all that, my first round of revisions included some forehead-slapping mistakes in fact and emphasis.  But overall the revision process was relatively painless.  The reviewers offered some comments that were quite helpful in clarifying my argument.  I ignored others that seemed too far afield.

Some less obvious advice: be cognizant of the time lag that “peer review” entails.  After receiving your draft, a journal needs to secure anonymous reviewers, send them copies, wait for their comments, return it to you for revisions, and then repeat the process several more times.  In my case, there was only one round of significant revisions, followed by an acceptance with more minor changes, and that took over six months.  Even now I am not sure exactly when the piece will go into print.  Most journals, I think, have a delay of at least a year or two and—as happened to me with a different, non-academic article—publication dates can get pushed back multiple times.  None of this bothers me at the moment, but I can imagine that pressing job interviews or tenure reviews could make the process a bit more hectic.  In short: plan ahead! 

Anyway, I hope this post is in some way helpful to aspiring scholars out there.  I would love to hear about others’ experiences (positive or negative) in the comments section.

]]>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 20:54:11 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2011/09/my-last-research-trip-by-gail-wolfe.html

The title of this blog post is as much hopeful as it is descriptive. I intend to finish up and graduate this spring, and I’m currently writing the fourth chapter of my dissertation. In brief, my dissertation explores programs for and policies targeting pregnant girls in the public schools in Chicago and Washington, D.C. from the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s. I was in the midst of writing a chapter about the treatment of pregnant girls in the Chicago Public Schools [CPS] in the 1950s and early 1960s when I realized that I needed to return to Chicago to get some information about the Illinois School Code. At that point, I had already spent five full weeks in the archives over a period of more than two years. With naïve optimism, I had convinced myself that I was done with the data collection phase of the dissertation. Realizing that I needed to take one more research trip was something of a bitter pill, but one that I came to accept. At the end of August, I packed my bags and flew to Chicago to spend the week of August 29th through September 2nd in the archives.

My experience, admittedly limited, is that research trips are like novels with unique narrative arcs. This trip, like the ones that preceded it, delivered unexpected twists and turns, highs and lows. On Monday morning, I took the Metra train from my friend’s apartment in Western Springs to Union Station and then walked the five or six blocks to the Chicago Public Schools building at Clark and Adams. On previous visits to Chicago, I spent many hours on the sixth floor of this building, where the Board of Education maintains a small collection of historical documents and artifacts. On my last visit, in April of 2010, the archivist mentioned that the Board held transcripts of its meetings in an off-site facility. He thought it might be possible to request a small number of transcripts for transfer to the Board office. Although my primary target for this trip was the Illinois School Code, I was intrigued by the possibility of getting my hands on relevant Board meeting transcripts. In early August, I e-mailed the archivist a request for a dozen or so transcripts. He didn’t give me any assurances, but said that he would do what he could. I arrived at the Board office on the morning of August 29th, eager to dig into the transcripts. Much to my disappointment, the archivist informed me that the transcripts he ordered for me hadn’t materialized. My original plan was to devote Monday and Wednesday to the transcripts. Without them, I was able to wrap up my work at CPS in a matter of hours.   

Fortunately for me, I had a number of other objectives for the week. I needed to research the Illinois School Code at the Harold Washington branch of the Chicago Public Library. I also wanted to search the library’s collection of digitized articles from the Chicago Defender. And I planned to return to the Chicago History Museum to finish searching through their extensive collection of materials from the Welfare Council of Metropolitan Chicago. So I simply went about my work for the week. And now for a surprising plot twist: On Wednesday, I received an e-mail from the archivist at CPS, telling me that my transcripts would be delivered to the Board office by the end of the day. If I was still in Chicago and could rearrange my schedule, I was welcome to come in on Thursday and search through the materials. I happily changed my plans. When I arrived at the Board office on Thursday morning, I found several stacks of office-sized packing boxes. The binding around the boxes and the condition of the materials inside (i.e. crumbling rubber bands and discolored paper clips) told me that these transcripts hadn’t been touched – let alone viewed – since they were packed up in the 1960s and 1970s. How exciting! After getting a general sense of how the transcripts were organized, I began a targeted search for discussion of pregnancy and pregnant girls. I’m pleased to report that I uncovered some real gems, including a lengthy and heated debate about whether or not pregnant girls should be allowed to attend one of the district’s vocational high schools in the early 1970s. I also gained insight into why, at around the same time, Board members repeatedly deferred a proposed policy that would allow pregnant girls to remain in their regular schools. What tremendous finds!

As my trip to Chicago came to a close, I kept thinking to myself that a week in the archives feels like seven weeks anywhere else. Maintaining enough focus to search through thousands of pages of documents and to skim each document to assess its significance is downright exhausting. But, it’s also very rewarding. And I’m one step closer to crossing the dissertation finish line.

One final thought: I’m an advocate of finding ways – however small – of injecting diversion into research trips. On this trip, I was lucky enough to stumble on a fantastic coffee shop on my walk from Union Station to the CPS building. The place is called Intelligentsia and it’s located in downtown Chicago at Jackson and Federal. Think marble counters and tabletops, fantastic coffee, and a hip crew of baristas. I stopped in for coffee in the mornings before heading to the archives. It was the perfect way to gear up for the day’s work.

]]>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 19:26:04 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2011/09/invitation-to-participate-in-a-special-research-session-at-the-history-of-education-society-annual-meeting-in-chicago-november-3-6-2011.htmlSPECIAL RESEARCH SESSION: Graduate students are invited to apply to participate in a 3-day research session, culminating with a panel presentation of their findings at the History of Education Society Annual Meeting in Chicago, November 3-6, 2011: http://www.historyofeducation.org/annual_meeting.html

What are the goals of this research session?

The goals of this research project are fivefold:

·       Research a significant and ongoing phenomenon in the field of education history

·       Learn about the archives of the Chicago Public Schools (CPS)

·       Present original research at the History of Education Society Annual Meeting

·       Collaborate with other historians of education, make new friends and have fun!

The Chicago Public Schools has undergone multiple waves of reform in the twentieth and twenty-first century. The most radical of these took place in 1988 with the Chicago School Reform Act. While a highly documented reform effort, this landmark experiment warrants more attention given its complexity and significant legacy. Questions remain for historians of education to investigate: Who were the local, state and national players pushing for community involvement? What were the roots of the 1988 establishment of the Local School Councils (LSCs) embedded in the reform legislation? How did a centralized system roll out a decentralized plan of governance? How did CPS address the “training” of LSC members? What was deemed essential for them to know in order to fulfill their responsibilities? Who did the training and why? How did “charting reform” affect the work of reform in Chicago Public Schools? The CPS archives contain an array of documents and reports on the years before, during and after related to this legislation. There is also a full set of the Chicago Board of Education Proceedings.


For background reading on the focus of this project, see the following:

Jeffrey Mirel, “School Reform Chicago Style, Educational Innovation in a Changing Urban Context, 1976-

                 1991,” Urban Education, 28, no. 2 (1993): 116-149.

Dorothy Shipps, “Pulling Together: Civic Capacity and Urban School Reform,” American Educational

                 Research Journal, 40, no. 4 (2003): 841-878.

J. Q. Easton & S. L. Storey, “The development of local school councils. Education and Urban Society, 26,

                 no. 3 (1994), 220-237.


What is involved?

Participants will receive electronic links and text this fall. On the mornings of November 3rd and 4th, we will meet at the CPS archives to break into teams and conduct archival research.  On Sunday morning, November 6, we will present our research findings in a panel session at the History of Education Society Annual Meeting.

How do I apply?

Interested graduate students should email the Research Session sponsors no later than October 1, 2011. Please include a resume and explain, briefly, your interest in the project.


Ben Justice                                                          Ann Marie Ryan                           Dionne Danns

Rutgers University                                         Loyola University Chicago               Indiana University

Graduate School of Education                     School of Education                           School of Education

bjust@rci.rutgers.edu                                      aryan3@luc.edu                                 ddanns@indiana.edu

(732) 932-7495 ext. 8110                                (312) 915-6232                                                       (812) 856-8398 ]]>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 19:05:08 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2011/08/hes-mentoring-breakfast.html ATTENTION GRADUATE STUDENTS
The History of Education Society is launching a Mentoring Breakfast initiative at the 2011 HES meeting in Chicago. If you would like to discuss your scholarship with an established scholar in your field, please read on!

The Mentoring Breakfast is funded by individual donations, allowing HES to sponsor a few pairs of graduate students and their assigned mentors. This year, breakfast at The Allerton M Avenue Restaurant will be provided for each pair on Friday, 4 November, from 7:00 a.m. to 8:15 a.m.

To apply, please send the following information to Karen Graves (graves@denison.edu) by 3 October.
*Your name and contact information
*Names of three scholars you would like to meet, in order of preference (in case professors are unable to attend the conference)
*Electronic copy of an essay, or an outline of your dissertation, or the title of a work by the professor you would like to discuss along with a description of how this work informs your research

Pairings will be assigned based upon the quality of the application materials, the availability of mentors, and the availability of funds. Once the pairings are made, the mentor will receive a copy of the graduate student’s application and essay, outline, or description.

This year, funds have been donated in honor of Clarence Karier.
]]>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:09:33 -0800http://www.hesgraduatestudents.org/2/post/2011/08/my-first-research-trip-by-emily-hodge.html This is the first in a series of blog posts about different aspects of graduate school in the history of education.  This post relays the experience of the author’s first research trip.  Subsequent posts (about one a month) will address teaching, research, and publishing. 

            -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am just a year into grad school, so I was both nervous and excited when I went on my first research trip a few weeks ago.  Here I was, doing historical research “for real.”  What would it be like?  Would I find what I was looking for?  And worst of all (my secret fear), what if it was really boring?? 

For the last nine months or so, I have been researching the Emergency School Aid Act, a desegregation program started by the Nixon administration that lasted from 1970-1981.  I’ve always been interested in the politics of curriculum, so when I first read about these grants, which reportedly provided money for staff training and curriculum development in desegregating districts, I thought this would be a great topic for me.  Maybe I would find out some juicy details about how districts altered their curriculum to be more multicultural or instituted some kind of cultural sensitivity training.  It was easy to find and download hundreds of pages of congressional reports about the ESAA from the LexisNexis Congressional Database, but I had trouble finding specific details about what individual districts did with the money.  I knew that districts must have had to write grant applications, and/or reports detailing what they did with the money, but I couldn’t figure out where those reports might be.  A few people suggested looking into the regional Desegregation Assistance Centers, and my advisor suggested looking at the library catalogs of those universities that had the Centers in the 1970s.  Sure enough, I did find some hits at NYU’s library, in Albert Shanker’s United Federation of Teachers files at the Tamiment Library & Wagner Labor Archives.  One folder was even titled “Emergency School Aid Act Reports”!!  I thought I had hit the jackpot.   

I was lucky to live just an hour’s train ride from New York City this summer, so it was an easy day trip for me to get to the archive.  However, nothing else was really easy about the experience.  I was really surprised to learn how much of a process it is to do research in an archive.  It’s not something that you can just decide to do spur-of-the-moment. 

For example, the files I needed were stored offsite, so I had to email the librarian two business days ahead of time with the box numbers.  Then, the archive was only open 10-5, Monday-Thursday, so I had to make sure I got there early enough on a weekday to get through everything in one day.  I got there at about 11 AM on a Monday, had to fill out some paperwork to get library privileges for the main NYU library, then went upstairs to the archive and filled out more paperwork for privileges within the archive.

The librarian also sent me some documents to read ahead of time, so that I would be familiar with the rules (because there are a lot of rules involved in looking at archival materials!)  There were obvious rules that I expected, like using only pencils, keeping backpacks in lockers, and not having any food or drink.  Another logical rule was taking only one folder out of a box at a time, so that you keep everything organized. 

A rule that I did not expect was to have to use a digital camera as a “copier.”  They didn’t have scanners available, so you could either just take notes by hand, or take digital photos by bringing in your own camera.  I opted for taking digital photos, so I nervously toted my husband’s expensive digital SLR all day around NYC because I didn’t think my point-and-shoot would get the job done.  Unsurprisingly, there was also a whole set of rules for taking digital photos.  You could not use a flash.  You had to keep the document lying flat on the table, and not stand on your tip-toes or otherwise lean over it…yet somehow take an image that would be legible, not at a weird angle, and not have your shadow on it!  You also had to write down the box, folder, and title of every document you photographed, and turn it in to the archive.  And don’t even get me started on the rules for copyright permissions (they were really confusing; I will definitely not cross that bridge until I come to it!) 

The many rules were one confusing aspect for an archive neophyte like myself.  Another area of uncertainty was how to approach these huge boxes of files.  Should I read in-depth, one folder at a time, taking pictures as I go?  Should I try to leaf through everything quickly and then go in-depth?  Should I just skim to see what might be relevant, take a picture of it, and read it later at home?

I decided that I would just try to get a sense of what was there before I took any photos, so I just took some handwritten notes as I looked through the files the first time, starring things in my notes that I wanted to copy later.  Of course, I started reading way more in-depth than I originally intended, so I spent hours on the first box.  Then, I skimmed through the rest quickly because I realized if I didn’t start taking photos soon, I would never be finished.  I did my best to take good pictures while following all of the rules.  My images turned out really well, all things considered, but they are annoying large files (and when I reduce the picture quality, I can’t read the words anymore.)  Now, I have 150 jpegs that I am still trying to muster up the energy to crop and convert to linked pdfs.

But on to the good stuff – what I found!  Unfortunately, I did not find ESAA district reports in the file labeled “ESAA Reports” (go figure), but I DID find some juicy stuff that made the trip well worth it.  There were some fascinating controversies in the NYC districts about the ESAA money.  One of the ESAA requirements was that each district form a grant advisory board with 50% minority members.  Although this requirement was intended to ensure minority representation in the South, this requirement backfired in heavily minority districts in the North.  A district that was 95% minority would still be advised by a board that was 50% white, due to the one-size-fits-all rule.  Another area of controversy was a questionnaire administered to elementary students asking them about their racial attitudes.  The idea was to see if there would be any kind of change in racial attitudes that could be correlated with the ESAA funds.  The questionnaire asked students things like, “How do you parents feel about black and white students going to school together?  How do they feel about brown and white students going to school together?”  Many community members felt that this questionnaire’s language was offensive, and did not want it to be administered, even if that meant losing a chance at the grant money.  I also found many examples of districts that were denied ESAA grants for not meeting its civil rights requirements.  The Office of Civil Rights would compare the numbers of English Language Learners in a given district from several different reports.  In many districts, the numbers didn’t match up, and OCR would refuse to give them grant money unless they extended ESL services to all eligible students.  Their language was quite harsh.  In one district, there were 4,120 students listed as ESL in one report, but only 1,877 in another.  OCR said, “Your district has apparently failed to properly ascertain whether or not these 2,233 students are in need of educational services to remedy their English language difficulty.  The large discrepancy between these two reports demonstrates a failure on your part…”  (Ouch!)  Districts could file waivers to receive the funds once they had corrected their civil rights violations.  From everything that I have seen so far, it seemed like a good system for ensuring compliance and thorough desegregation.

Despite the many rules I listed above, going to the archive was a great experience.  I did learn quite a bit about the ESAA that I never would have found from only reading congressional reports.  I also want to give a huge shout out to the employees at the Tamiment Library.  Everyone was very helpful, from the librarians, to the students working in the archive, to the library employees giving me my ID badge.

By the way, I was relieved to know that even though my head was spinning by the end of the day, going to the archive was actually pretty interesting (not boring, as I feared).  Whew!

]]>