Block 2. Heritage, Conservation & Preservation

Heritage, Preservation and Conservation  

 Both Museums and Archives groups are involved intimately with all these three terms, but are we absolutely sure we are talking about the same things when we employ them?  You might think so, but, trust me, even the professionals aren’t quite so sure…..

I don’t want you to simply Google them or repeat ‘parrot-fashion‘ (uncritically) definitions you have acquired – rather I want you to think what you mean when you use these words.  This is important because we base our decisions and actions in business as in personal life upon what we understand and believe (and not upon some official definition in a report on a shelf somewhere).

You should find this more interesting and perhaps more taxing in terms of your English given your language will need to incorporate technical terms and be capable of making marginal differentiations and offering nuances.  I strongly suggest you log these terms in a vocabularly / special terms list throughout the programme.

Instructions:

 Depending upon cohort sizes: 2 x mixed and broadly numerically-balanced teams drawn from Mus and Arch.   [This task is not small … it clearly has three key elements, having a bigger team will enable you to have an efficient division of labour after your first whole-team brainstorm)

NB…. GOOD definitions should always go further than addressing just the ‘WHAT’ – they also consider the who, where, when, why and how!

1. Start silently and alone – produce your own personal definitions  in English (WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE WEB OR YOUR BOOKS OR COURSE NOTES)
2. From your personal definitions, discuss together in English with the members of your team and brainstorm up the best team narrative definition (not just a bullet list of  WWWWWH points) you can (still WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE WEB OR YOUR BOOKS OR COURSE NOTES)… and write them down in English in a WORD document.
3. Critique your definitions: remember that a good definition will usually answer most, if not all the ‘question words’: what, why, who, how, when and where.  Improve your definitions where possible and write down the improved definitions in the best English you can.  Be prepared to present it to us. (ALL THIS still WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE WEB OR YOUR NOTES!)
   
4. Consider where online you might be likely to find a range of expert and reliable definitions and interpretations (brainstorm this up BEFORE you attempt to search – it is likely to be far more productive than a general search)
5. Go online, find and record such definitions (for those you feel add significantly to your own definitions – incorporate elements of them [in your own words or with quotations] into your Word document providing sources and URLs / hyperlinks  and a full bibliographic reference). Critique such definitions in the light of your own thinking and team definition … is yours better / ‘perfect’ as it is, or do you need to incorporate some of the experts’ thinking into your own definition or vice-versa?  I want to see the evolution of your thinking.
6. Produce a written (word processed) report showing how your definitions evolved though the above stages to become definitive, submit this in hard copy format to TJ for assessment (date to be advised) and prepare to discuss and defend your findings in class. To be specific about how you do this, for each of the three terms you must cover in your written report:
   
   • present the team’s own initial narrative version [Pt. N°2 above] – and recount any particular difficulies or disagreements you encountered in producing it. [NB. I am not forcing you to have to agree here, but to identify where your ideas and perceptions are different and why!]
   • present certain definitions you found online and discounted because they added nothing to your original definition [do you find yourselves a little surprised that certain ‘important‘ sources do not always offer decent/comprehensive definitions?].
   • present certain definitions you found online and decided to incorporate elements thereof / ideas therefrom (or perhaps borrow brilliant phrases / expressions)  in order to improve your definition.  Where and why/how did this source ‘add something‘ and what was it you had ‘missed‘.
   • present your final ‘Master’ definition of each term and offer a brief explanation as to why you blieve it is the best and why you feel others are not as good!

You should notice my intention here: this is a sort of ‘micro literature review’ where you don’t just ‘cite and dump’ + ‘cite and dump’, but rather you consider and critique what is in the existing literature: you don’t just accept it.  You also attempt to synthesise it and evaluate it: what does it all mean / add up to?   That is the approach you need to take to the Literature Review / Secondary Research componet of your M2 Rapport de Stage…You need to adopt the spirit and approach at the heart of this assignment when you write your ‘rapport’.  I’m rehearsing you (faire des repetitions) for this.

We will then attempt to record the key attributes of the respective definitions from each team with a view to developing a ‘Master’ definition for each of the three terms which we believe encapsulates all the key attributes in the best form of words possible.  I am happy to ‘host’ your definitions on Tonyversity (with due credt to you as the source) if you will so permit.  This will mean that you and others – even your teachers – could cite and attribute your work!  I trust you enjoy that thought!

I hope you can prove to yourselves that you can do better than the ‘experts‘ if you have a mind to think for yourselves and challenge and test ‘received wisdom’.

NB.  Don’t worry if you can’t totally agree about your definitions.  First, it is permitted! Second, many of the ‘experts’ can’t agree either!!

Deadline To Be Advised [henceforth TBA]