*Regardless of if the class is listening or reading, the teacher should provide the transcript for students to follow along with.
For a downloadable version of this guide, click here
Steps:
- Before you read/listen:
- If applicable: what is the title of this piece?
- Who is the interviewer? What do you know about them?
- Who is being interviewed? What do you know about them?
- What do you predict this interview will be about?
- When was this interview recorded? What event/topic is this interview about? What do you know about this time period/event/topic?
- Read/listen to the interview for the first time
- As you follow along
- Circle any vocabulary words that you don’t know
- Underline anything you find important
- Put a question mark “?” after anything you have a question about
- As you follow along
- After the first reading:
- Write a short summary of the piece (3-5 sentences)
- What do you think the purpose of this interview was? Do you think it accomplished its purpose?
- Do any of the speakers have accents?
- Read/listen to the interview for the second time
- After the second reading:
- Why do you think this interview was recorded? Why was this saved for historical purposes? Why is it significant?
- What is the tone of this interview?
- Put a box around five words/phrases that show you the tone
- Is this interview more historical or personal? How do you know?
- How does encountering this story firsthand change its emotional impact?
- Connect this interview to history:
- What did you find from this interview that you might not learn anywhere else?
- Did this interview support or contradict what you knew about this event already? How so?
- What other documents or historical evidence are you going to use to help you understand this event or topic?
- Compare this historical interview to an interview you’ve heard recently (state of the union, etc.). How is it similar or different?
- Identifying Bias:
- What is the interviewees relationship to the event in question? Academic, bystander, reporter, etc…
- How long was the interviewer connected after the event in question? Was it too long? Why could interviewing someone a long time after the event be a problem? Why could interviewing someone immediately after a traumatic experience be a problem?
- Can you identify any political or personal reasons as to why this interviewee is sharing their story?
- How does their story/experience fit within the contextual information we learned about? Does it follow or deviate from it?
- If it does deviate, are there any potential problems with that? Why or why not?