VIII. Lessons Learned
(prepared by Bill Adair, Rosenbach Museum and Library)
What would we have done differently? Firstly, we would have allowed for more time for this project - 3 months, rather than 3 weeks, would have been ideal. It would have permitted students to better prepare for each class, develop their own voices more organically, and spend more hands-on time with the technology. The short time frame for our project was counteracted in part by the large instructional and curatorial team. With three museum educators, three graduate student educators, two middle school instructors and one interactive designer we were able to meet the challenge. But that is not a sustainable model for future incarnations of a project like this - which we strongly believe should occur. Instead, a three month timeframe would allow a more limited team (perhaps one museum educator, a middle school instructor and an interactive designer) to complete the task equally well if not better.
Under these circumstances the students could exercise an even greater control over the project content and design. With more time students might also build their own archive of pictures related to the subject, utilize the multimedia components on their own to a greater extent, and develop more in-depth skills in analyzing and writing about primary source materials.
In spite of its lightening speed, this project did successfully blend traditional studies of history with new technologies and new pedagogies. The students’ voices were heard and respected throughout - if a bit anxiously at times. It was clear that many of these middle school students were skeptical of authoritative interpretations of history from the start and their primary interest was in debunking the myth of the honorable Ben Franklin. Their investigations into the complexities of Franklin’s life - his enormous scientific, political and civic accomplishments balanced with serious personal flaws - provided them with a nuanced view of history that seemed to surprise many students.
Their deepening understanding of the exhilarating and agonizing 18th century in America gave them both a more rigorously critical and a more tolerant view of the past. Most importantly, the project, with its open discussions about democratic values, race, gender, families, and the human condition seemed to provide them with a wiser view of the dynamic and complicated 21st century.