The Why of Reframing History

Someone recently asked the why question in relation to Reframing History. The origin is pretty straightforward. I was/am thinking about a project-based course with a podcast or podcasts as the outcome. I'm following the lead of Robert Cassanello. In my opinion, Robert has been one of the most consistent scholars engaged with podcasts. His podcasts on the history of Central Florida is one of the best podcasts you will ever hear.

Robert used the class-based model for some part of that podcast. My own "Classroom as Platform" approach is no stranger to student collaborators, so it made sense. Reframing History started as a test of the Anchor app. Season 1 was a conversation between Scot French and me about local history. To be honest, in that first season, I rapidly prototyped different modes using Anchor to make the podcast. It evolved quickly and part of my thinking was about creating a consistent "feel" for the podcast and also having clear steps to explain to students.

What you hear are choices made from process review. Others are stylistic. One choice is not using Anchor to record directly. In Season 1 we tried that and I found it problematic. Thus, I switched to recording sessions using zoom or face to face and uploading to Anchor.

From a style perspective, every episode is

-Cold Opening ( You are here)

-Archive Audio ( Mood Sound)

-Introduction (Information on who and why)

-Conversation (We chat)

-Goodbye (Thanks for listening)

The cold opening is because...why not.

Mood sound is an archival clip I think aligns with the interview subject and work. In my heart, I want to believe people ask themselves, "What that clip...ah I see." I know that doesn't happen, but I can dream. The Introduction is pretty basic and then we chat and I say goodbye!

Season 2 has been worthwhile because every one of these conversations allowed me to learn something. I hope that you, the 30 to 40 people who seem to listen to every episode learn something as well ( who are you people?).