Primary vs Secondary Sources
20
PRIMARY VS. SECONDARY SOURCES Dana Chandler, University Archivist Tuskegee University Archives Tuskegee, Alabama [email protected]
-
Upload
jonathan-underwood -
Category
Education
-
view
180 -
download
3
Transcript of Primary vs Secondary Sources
PRIMARY VS. SECONDARY SOURCES
Dana Chandler, University ArchivistTuskegee University Archives
Tuskegee, [email protected]
“THE LEAVINGS, THE SHARDS, THE REMNANTS OF PEOPLE WHO ONCE LIVED AND DON'T LIVE ANY MORE."
A definition of a Primary Sourcehttp://www.lib.washington.edu/subject/history/historyday/his.html
Why do we use primary sources in history?
No bias, no viewpoint Only your interpretation Can give additional information
Materials Textures Printing methods Technologies
Primary Sources
A primary source is an original object or document -- the raw material or first-hand information.
Primary sources include historical and legal documents, eye witness accounts, results of an experiment, statistical data, pieces of creative writing, and art objects. In the natural and social sciences, the results of an experiment or study are typically found in scholarly articles or papers delivered at conferences, so those articles and papers that present the original results are considered primary sources.
Primary Sources
Contemporary Accounts of an event written by the person who witnessed or experienced it. FIRST HAND!
Original Documents, Unpublished – not about another document or account
Published works - as long as they are written soon after the fact and not as historical accounts
Does a Primary Source have to be the original material?
No – it can be in another form, but it can’t be edited or interpreted in any way.
For example,Patrick Henry’s “Give Me Liberty or Give Me
Death!” speech can be found in 100 Key Documents in American History
Primary Sources
Diaries Letters Memoirs Journals Speeches Manuscripts Statistical
Data Novels
Interviews Photographs Audio or video
recordings Research reports
(natural or social sciences)
Original literary or theatrical works
Poems, art, music
Include:
Primary Sources
Include:
Primary Sources
Include:
Primary Sources
Secondary Sources
A secondary source is something written about a primary source. Secondary sources include comments on, interpretations of, or discussions about the original material. You can think of secondary sources as second-hand information. If I tell you something, I am the primary source. If you tell someone else what I told you, you are the secondary source.
Secondary Sources
Interpret primary sources - at least one step removed from the event or phenomenon under review
Examination of studies that other researchers have made of a subject
Second Hand - conveys the experiences and opinions of others
Are Secondary Sources useful?
Yes – They provide the necessary background or context to be able to interpret Primary Sources
For example,World Book 2005 or your Social Studies
textbook can provide background information about the events leading up to Revolutionary War.
Secondary Sources
Usually in the form of published works
Journal articles Books Radio and TV documentaries newspapers or popular magazines book or movie reviews Biographies Encyclopedias History books Textbooks
Secondary Sources
Click icon to add picture
Sometimes things are not as they seem!
How do you know?
Ask yourself some questions:
How does the author know these details?
Was the author present at the event or soon on the scene?
Where does this information come from—personal experience, eyewitness accounts, or reports written by others?
Are the author's conclusions based on a single piece of evidence, or have many sources been taken into account?
BEWARE OF BIAS!Is it possible for a Secondary
Source to be completely objective?
Wikipedia’s entry on President Bush
The following passage describes his National Guard service:
In May 1968, at the height of the Vietnam War, he entered the Texas Air National Guard. He trained in the guard for two years, where he was among the last to learn to fly the F-102, a plane not used in Vietnam and due to be retired.
While this could be true, why would it be important to know that he was “among the last to learn to fly the F-102”? Is this a commentary on President Bush flying an outdated plane? Is it an unbiased point of view?
Encarta’s entry on President Bush
(note that Encarta lets people edit its pages but with editor approval)
Upon completing college, [Bush] became eligible for the military draft. To meet his service obligation, Bush enlisted in the Texas Air National Guard in 1968. He told the admitting officer that he wanted to become a pilot like his father, who was a highly decorated Navy flier in World War II. He did his basic training at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas, and entered a pilot-training program at Moody Air Force Base Georgia. He received favorable reports from his superiors, attained the rank of second lieutenant, and was certified to fly the F-102 jet fighter during training missions in the South and along the Gulf Coast.
Encarta doesn’t mention that President Bush being one of the last to fly the F-102, and instead notes patriotically how President Bush wanted to fly a jet like his father.
PRIMARY VS. SECONDARY SOURCES
Dana Chandler, University ArchivistTuskegee University Archives
Tuskegee, [email protected]
