UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROJECT
Interview #1380
SEWELL, ALYSON
SEWELL, ALYSON (1987 - )
Graduate Student
At UW: 2009-Present
Interviewed:
Interviewer:
Index by:
Length:
Series:
2014
Troy Reeves
Troy Reeves/Stephen Pierce
2 hours, 37 minutes
2011 Capitol Protests
Abstract: In her 2014 interviews with Troy Reeves, Alyson Sewell discussed her graduate
school experiences as UW-Madison. She talked about the time period from the late 2000s
through 2014 and the following topics: Madison, UW-Madison German Department;
UW-Madison Teaching Assistant Association; 2011 Wisconsin State Capitol Protests.
This interview was conducted for inclusion into the UW-Madison Oral History Program,
specifically for the 2011 Capitol Protests oral history project.
Key Words: Ohio State University; graduate student funding; Madison WI; UW-Madison
German Department; UW-Madison Teaching Assistant Association (TAA); segregated
(“seg”) fees; teaching; Dutch; Joe Salmons; US Dept of Education Foreign Language and
Area Studies Grants (FLAS); Wisconsin Idea Seminar; Coalition for Affordable Public
Education (CAPE); 2011 Budget Repair Bill; “I heart UW” campaign; 2011 Wisconsin
State Capitol Protests.
First Interview Session (April 3, 2014): Digital File
Time
Keywords
00:00:00 Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction.
00:00:47 Question: Why UW-Madison? Answer: Sewell related how she got interested in
graduate study while conducting research with her undergraduate advisor and with
the realization that she could be funded through graduate education. When she began
looking at graduate schools, UW was universally recommended and she got
guaranteed funding through a University Fellowship (5-yr package).
00:03:00 Question: Teaching as an undergraduate? Answer: She said that she was definitely
interested, but just trying to figure out what that meant. She said research, however,
was newer to her as an undergraduate, and hers focused on reviewing how
commenters used German language in online chat on specific German websites.
Sewell, Alyson (#1380)
00:06:18 Question: Had you been to Madison before? Answer: AS had visited a friend once,
but had been accepted to graduate school already, so she called it an unofficial visit to
campus. She then came for an official visit during the spring of 2009, and moved to a
Gorham Street apartment in Madison to attend graduate school in the fall of 2009.
She explained why she’d decided on the neighborhood she chose, and reflected on the
kinds of questions she asked (and didn’t ask) on this official visit.
00:11:12 Question: Double undergraduate major in German and mathematics? Answer: AS
considered these majors related in that they used the same parts of the brain (in her
research interests). It allowed her to combine data and context. While she did not
know it when she was still taking large undergraduate survey courses, her
mathematical interest eventually led her to become a social linguist.
00:14:28 Question: Where did you initially hang out in Madison? Answer: As she got to know
some graduate student cohorts, she got involved in a shuffleboard league at Woody
and Ann’s. This hangout helped her meet a better cross section of Madison that many
grad students don’t see. One of those graduate student cohorts introduced her to the
Teaching Assistants’ Association (TAA). Becoming involved in the TAA let her see
faculty, staff, and graduate students as workers within a large university.
00:17:28 Question: More on Woody and Anne’s? Answer: She played shuffleboard at Woody
and Anne’s until her older cohort graduated and moved on, when the shuffleboard
team disbanded. Asked about other campus hangouts, she talked about meeting
people at the language tables either inside or outside Memorial Union. She also
attended low-key house parties at her cohorts’ apartments or houses.
00:20:08 Question: The TAA during your first year? Answer: Even though her fellowship did
not require her to teach, she paid TAA dues that first year as an associate member
since she knew she’d have to teach. She figured that whatever the TAA advocated
that year would impact her in the future, explaining in detail the example of an
attempt by the Division of Recreational Sports to raise segregated (seg) fees. Though
the measure failed, efforts spearheaded by the TAA motivated members and
prompted a significant voter turnout by undergraduates. AS noted that earlier in 2014,
a similar initiative passed, but AS said that the Division of Recreational Sports
learned their lesson and sought input, including from the TAA.
00:27:02 Question: Compare undergraduate and graduate coursework? Answer: She saw little
difference between coursework at OSU and UW, though she noted the difficulty of
the graduate school course depended on the specific professor.
00:28:54 Question: Your second year as a TA? Answer: Explaining that German TAs were
actually instructors, she indicated that her stress level increased as she learned to
teach, although she liked it a lot. AS listed the classes she taught during her three
years as an instructor and how she adjusted to the new experience of teaching.
Sewell, Alyson (#1380)
00:32:44 Question: Balancing teaching and coursework? Answer: While she reiterated her
increased stress level, she said she got better at balancing periods of seclusion (preparing to teach) and socialization. Follow up: How did you learn how to teach? Answer:
She quipped that “you just do it,” noting that observation from her cohort and faculty,
asking advice and support of them and soaking in as much as possible from her
methods class all helped. She also reflected quite a bit on her teaching after each
session. She added here that her stress level during this first year of teaching included
breaking up with one boyfriend then dating someone new, in this case a cohort.
00:36:45 Question: So it was both self-reflection and collegiality? Answer: Yes; she clarified
that while she was personally reflective, she also got a lot out of TA mentoring the
department required and also met other TAs a lot to talk through teaching better. She
noted here that her second year she taught not only a new class but new language,
Dutch. [Note: Her first year she taught 1st year German.]
00:40:09 Question: Teaching Dutch? Answer: She explained that, for the dept’s second
language requirement, she took Dutch. (noting here that no one told her that she only
needed reading knowledge in this language. If she knew that then, she would have
done reading competency in French.) She then earned a grant to travel to the
Netherlands to get Dutch immersion to be able to teach it. By teaching Dutch, she
freed up a TA-ship in German for one of her cohorts. When asked about Netherlands,
she offered an overview of the application process for FLAS and her 8 weeks there.
00:45:44 Question: Let’s talk about your research? Answer: AS observed that when she came
to UW-Madison, she initially wanted to study second-language acquisition (SLA);
but switched her research focus to German language speakers in Wisconsin when she
realized she enjoyed this more. Explaining how she proposed her initial research
question (on the existence of German speakers in Wisconsin) as part of a 2010 class
project for Joe Salmons’ language and migration class, she discussed her initial forays
into her research focus, interviewing and research methods.
00:49:04 [no question] Continuing to discuss her research, she explained how she expanded her
paper for Salmons’ class to become her master’s thesis. The thesis included
significant new research (oral interviews), so she explained how she and her advisor,
Joe Salmons, worked through the process of getting resources for it. This research,
German speakers in some counties in Eastern Wisconsin, has continued blossoming
into her dissertation research.
00:52:44 Question: Popcorn sampling? Answer: AS spoke here about outreach presentations
she’d done, the Wisconsin Idea Seminar and a Wisconsin Humanities Council grant
that gave her opportunities to present her research to a wider audience. She enjoyed
that aspect of it; she since done guest lectures in several classes. The interview
concluded with AS and Reeves discussing possible topics for the follow-up interview.
00:56:11 End of First Interview Session
Sewell, Alyson (#1380)
Second Interview Session (April 8, 2014): Digital File
Time
Keywords
00:00:00 Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction.
00:00:49 Question: Why does Alyson Sewell (AS) use oral interviews in her research? Answer:
AS observed that since she was trying to document what the varieties of German used
in Wisconsin sound like, she felt it necessary to create recording that she could analyze and then archive for future use. This was especially trenchant since all research
used only a small slice of the data that was actually collected in interviews and since
she wanted to do something that would be of use to communities outside academia.
00:04:00 Question: You used the term ‘consultant’ where oral historians would use ‘narrator’?
Answer: She hesitated to generalize how linguistics term interviewees, citing several
examples; but she called them consultants because she felt it put them in the position
of being the expert. Asked to elaborate on how terminology might empower her
consultants, she observed that regardless whether they knew what she called them, it
was very important to her and her audiences how she defined people and things.
00:08:54 Question: Why archive interviews? Answer: AS discussed the reasons why her
research protocol had changed from her first IRB proposal (which included her
storing interviews digitally) to a point presently where the Max Kade Institute
archived all of her interviews under Salmons’ IRB protocol. She and the interviewer
also discussed the importance of informed consent.
00:12:44 Question: Do you use a questionnaire? Answer: As with her previous answer, AS
described the change over time in her model of questioning, especially as regarded
questions about personal history and English and German language use and exposure.
She also noted the difference in questions between her 1st and 2nd interview with her
consultants. She and the interviewer then spoke of open and closed ended questions
and about AS’ possible future oral history projects.
00:19:21 Question: Research leading to dissertation? Answer: Emphasizing her training as a
social linguist or socio-linguist, AS discussed how her approach differed—that no one
had written about these types of varieties of German in WI, that it emphasized social
variables in language use, and that it used a different kind of interview structure from
previous research. She also noted that her research will include full transcription of
her interviews, as well as attempting to transcribe applicable interviews inside the
Max Kade Institute’s collection.
00:25:52 Question: How much was AS involved in the book, Wisconsin Talk? Answer: She
stated her involvement fell into two categories: indexing and proofreading; she
explained why she thought the book’s leadership did not ask her to submit a chapter
for it. When asked about her own publications, AS talked of the most recent one;
some ideas came from other people, such as her advisor. She also spoke of a soon-to-
Sewell, Alyson (#1380)
be published work that came from her own idea, but her research has advanced past
her arguments in it.
00:32:28 Question: Final thoughts on her research? Answer: She focused here on the
importance of finishing it to be able to point her consultants to it or to at least confirm
with them that she completed it.
00:34:37 Question: Pre-2010 election involvement in politics? Answer: Up to that point, she
involved herself only in local TAA issues, but observed that it was not until February
2011 that she realized what the 2010 election might mean to her.
00:36:08 Question: How did you first hear of the Budget Repair Bill? Answer: As part of
TAAs “I[Heart]UW” campaign, she recalled that she and the other TAA leaders had a
vague awareness that the Republican-controlled government would deal with
education, probably in a way detrimental to them. The TAA planned a campaign to
deliver valentines to the Capitol in protest to the bill. As that planning continued, AS
and others heard about the Budget Repair Bill, including the language to strip
collective bargaining from public employees; she reflected that the Budget Repair
Bill shifted the rhetoric of the (much-softer) “I Heart UW” event.
00:41:47 Question: When did you decide to testify on the Budget Repair Bill? Answer: AS’
colleague, Matt Morris, called and asked her to come down and testify, under the
impression that they would be able to delay the vote as long as they had testimony.
AS went to appropriate place in the Capitol and put her name on the list. She then
furnished her memories of that evening from that point forward.
00:46:20 [no question] AS reflected on how, eventually, she was called to testify and moved
into the committee room. She heard testimony of others while she prepared to speak,
including the owner of Fontana Sports, whose testimony against the bill she found
very moving. The meeting adjourned abruptly before she could testify; she and
couple others waiting to speak sat in the room and watch it empty out and start to be
cleaned up. The silence struck her. She then left the room and bumped into a friend,
who told her that “she looked like shit.” She then went home, emailed Joe Salmons to
tell him that she would teach her class the next day but skip his seminar. That ended
that day.
00:51:20 End of Second Interview Session.
Third Interview Session (April 17, 2014): Digital File
Time
Keywords
00:00:00 Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction.
00:00:36 Question: CAPE? Answer: Alyson Sewell (AS) wanted to start the third interview
with a pre-2011 Capitol Protests part of her life, her involvement in CAPE (Coalition
Sewell, Alyson (#1380)
for Affordable Public Education), a coalition of faculty, graduate student, and
community members in which she got involved through the involvement of Salmons’
and a friend Mike Olson. She also noted that at most meetings she listened and
learned about what true activism was and how UW functioned organizationally,
reflecting about how her generation was just realizing that affordable education was
an enormous and durable issue for them.
00:05:41 [no question] AS corrected some of her recollections about the 2/14 “I Heart UW”
event. She marched with the TAs and others up to the Capitol, but she stayed outside
the Governor’s office. She recalled people, not just TAs, already inside the Capitol.
She reminded the interviewer that with “I Heart UW” event the TAA just executed an
event they devised before the Budget Repair Bill existed.
00:08:55 [no question] Since she never received the chance to testify, AS read the quote she
intended to use as part of her testimony. She then explained why she felt the quote
rang true to her and, in her mind, the rest of the protestors.
00:12:25 Question: Social media and the protests? Answer: She answered this question with an
anecdote from the first Saturday of the protests, when a professor of hers posted, “It’s
Saturday. He’s off to the Capitol.” AS decided that she would go there too. She
stayed outside and saw lots of people, groups, and signs. She noted she followed the
TAA social media through the protests, as well as reading news links on the TAA’s
and others emails to her.
00:16:32 Question: Mainstream media and its portrayal of the protests? Answer: AS followed
mainly NPR and the local paper. She also followed her hometown’s coverage, if any,
of it. When asked about any media disconnect, she said some disconnect existed, but
she could not point to an actual example.
00:18:37 Question: Balance work and protest? Answer: She felt that, except for the one
seminar she skipped, she never let any teaching/course work slip.
00:20:34 [no question] Continuing to talk about the balance between the protests and her work,
she explained how, after her initial attempt to testify, she followed the protests but
largely stopped her participation, with the exception of the night of the Senate vote.
She and cohort found out about the vote and went to the Capitol. They could not
enter, so they hung out for a bit then went home. They did leave a note on AS’
adviser, Joe Salmons, bike thanking him for participating.
00:25:18 [no question] Continuing to explain why she stopped participating in the protests, she
gave the example of feeling strongly during one strike that if she participated, she
would not be able to prepare her students sufficiently for a quiz that was upcoming.
00:29:19 [no question] Continuing to explain why she stopped participating in the protests, she
recalled writing a post for the blog, Sifting and Winnowing. She discussed the
cynicism that was engendered by the concrete example of seeing something that
Sewell, Alyson (#1380)
didn’t make any sense to her pass through the legislature as if it was a good idea. This
led her to not be involved in politics or the TAA for a couple of years.
00:35:14 Follow up: Were you involved in the recall election? Answer: Not at all, except for
she signed a petition and voted. She could not remember if she watched the results.
00:36:33 Question: Any other thoughts? Answer: She told the interviewer that Spring 2011
also coincided with her Master’s thesis. That event gave her another reason to give
her fellow TAs or others for why she chose not to participate in events. She talked
about returning to the TAA in 2013; she furnished her opinions on the changes she
has seen in the group after Act 10 passed. Specifically, the changing due structure and
other issues led the TAA to let go full-time staffers, which has led the TAA to suffer
on many levels.
00:46:05 Question: What affect the protests had on AS? Answer: It made her see the
importance of assembling and protesting, even though the result of this particular
protest discouraged her. It has led her to empathize with other protest movements in
the U.S. and the world. And she felt she would step up the next time an event
occurred or issue evolved that she felt compelled to advocate against.
00:49:45 End of Third Interview Session.
End of Oral History Interview #1380