Review of Story Bridges: A Guide to Conducting Intergenerational Oral History Projects by Angela Zusman
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Story Bridges is a concise and useful guide for everyone who plans an oral history project, be it a family history, a community project, or as an assignment in a school curriculum.Much of the advice offered in this manual comes from experience with projects conducted in five different institutional settings in the United States: a semester-long oral history and film program at a private high school; an ongoing youth project at a community centre that seeks to document local history and bring together different generations; the creation of an archives of oral histories at a local library that uses cross-interviewing (see below); young people collecting life stories at a senior residence; and a full-year after-school program that has twelve-to seventeen-year-olds interview their parents.The chapters guide the reader through the roughly chronological development of a project from its development of project goals and the building of a team that includes young people to an extensive discussion of the interview process and the importance of archiving the collected oral histories.Zusman concludes with a discussion of the importance of reflecting on the project and suggests different forms of presenting the results of a project.The chapters are interspersed with useful additional information.Text boxes discuss questions such as whether to record and, if so, in what format, video or audio (WAV or mp3); how to develop project goals; how to work with a small budget.There are also a good number of insightful quotes from project managers and youth participants about their experiences."Lessons Learned" boxes list experiences in point form: "Wish we had bought better recorders," etc. and "So glad we carefully selected the interviewees" etc.All of the quotes provide valuable insights and make this guide stand out from other manuals.Chapter 3 provides useful information on how to plan a project.However, the description of how to design project goals would benefit from greater detail.The discussion of the budget similarly could be more elaborate and include some suggestions for writing grant proposals (an issue that is not at all discussed).The discussion of equipment is useful.The chapter is particularly strong in describing how to assemble a team of volunteers.Chapter 4, "Bring On the Youth," is the greatest strength of this book.It describes in detail how to recruit and work with youth in oral history projects.There is much good advice on recruiting youth and involving them in the
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.069 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".