Annoucements: Survey for reference, access or outreach archivists & opportunity for Mid-Atlantic archivists to win $$$

I’ve been asked to pass along two announcements:

Did you create a web site or virtual exhibit that promotes the use of archives this year? If you work in the mid-Atlantic region you could be awarded $250 just for doing your job! That’s right. Act fast- submissions must be received by JULY 31, 2010. Check here to see if you qualify for the C. Herbert Finch Award and apply today! It’s free- what do you have to lose?

http://www.marac.info/mc/page.do?sitePageId=93982&orgId=marac

And:

Greetings colleagues,

The Reference, Access, and Outreach Section Steering Committee is developing a resource document that describes the core skills and competencies necessary to be effective as reference, access, or outreach archivists.

To build on the base of knowledge available in archival literature and other related professions, the committee has developed a brief survey for those practicing in any of these three spheres of archival work to share their perspectives and experience.

We appreciate your participation in and your patience with the survey. We are eager to have a rich range of input that isn’t predefined by us. This means we have asked a lot of open-ended questions and haven’t provided a lot of check boxes. To address potential survey fatigue we have set up the survey so that you can complete it over time as long as you use the same computer throughout. Also, it is perfectly reasonable to skip questions. All answers will remain confidential and will be used for the purposes of gathering information to develop this resource document. The survey will be available through October 2010.

Here is the link to the survey:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/referenceaccessoutreachskills

If you have questions/problems related to the survey, please contact Jill Severn at jsevern@uga.edu

Thanks for your participation,

RAO Survey Team

Jill Severn
Jessica Miller

I support the proposed SAA dues increase, but . . .

When I attend the annual SAA business meeting I will be voting for the proposed dues increase, and I hope you will too, should you be lucky enough to be there. To me, even salary-less as I am, the amount of the increase and the phasing-in are reasonable and the rationale provided was convincing. SAA has made every effort to get the word out about the increase and why they think it’s necessary, and I haven’t seen anyone state publicly (or even privately) that they don’t think it’s reasonable.

However, Read more »

How can more members get involved with the SAA Annual Meeting – and involved in general?

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that per the previous post the SAA Annual Meetings are held in locations that are affordable to the largest number of members possible. That still doesn’t mean that the meeting will be engaging for all the members who attend, and there will still be lots of members who can’t attend for one reason or another. [Oh, wait, disclaimer time: Please note that in this and all future blog posts, all the views represented are strictly my own and nothing I say should be interpreted in any way as representing the views of SAA or the SAA Council.]

Two recent conversations on Terry Baxter’s blog inspired this, so I’ll be stealing, I mean referencing ideas liberally from his posts (see here and here). Yes, as Terry points out, this is about diversity, in the broadest sense. The annual meeting is one of the premier products produced by the staff and members of SAA; countless hours of work go into making it as intellectually stimulating and professionally rewarding as possible. Given its importance, it seems odd that SAA has not put more emphasis on making meeting content available to those who cannot attend. Read more »

Excellent article about how SAA decides where to have Annual Meeting, but are assumptions valid?

[This post will be one of a planned series about some SAA issues, including a discussion of other issues related to the Annual Meeting and one about issues related to the proposed dues increase. Please note that in this and all future blog posts, all the views represented are strictly my own and nothing I say should be interpreted in any way as representing the views of SAA or the SAA Council.]

The Jan/Feb 2010 issue of Archival Outlook contains an excellent article by SAA Executive Director, Nancy Beaumont, describing the process by which SAA determines its site selection for the annual meeting. The first thing I’d like to say is that this article offers terrific insight into a complicated process, and I applaud Nancy for providing this kind of transparency into a decision-making process that is, I know, always subject to criticism and second-guessing. I think SAA can truly benefit from more transparency of this kind, on every level.

In earlier discussions on this blog and elsewhere, people have complained that the annual meeting almost always takes place in very large cities which dictate very high room rates for the conference hotel (and for most hotels nearby as well). For many people, the cost of the hotel room is the biggest chunk of their expenses for attending the annual meeting. Why, they ask, can’t we meet in places like Portland, Pittsburgh, Nashville, Minneapolis, Cleveland . . .

Why not, indeed?

Read more »

So, what’s going on here? (Independence Day edition)

That was the title of my very first post, and it seemed appropriate to reference it for this one. Hopefully some of you noticed that I’ve sort of fallen off the grid since I returned from the ACA meeting in Halifax in June and I think I owe you a bit of an explanation. Read more »

Two great conferences coming up (and both are free)

I’ve been asked to share information about two great conference opportunities, both with no registration fee. Note that the BPE is accepting proposals until June 30.

EAC-CPF: Moving Forward with Authority
Location: National Archives and Records Administration (Archives I)
700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20408-0001
Date: Monday, August 9, 2010
Time: 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

With the release of the Encoded Archival Context – Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families (EAC-CPF) schema in March of 2010, questions regarding implementation are looming large within the American archival community. The National Archives and Records Administration is hosting a preconference that will bring together stakeholders to discuss the important role that authority control plays in archival description and strategies for implementing EAC-CPF in order to continue the ongoing transformation and enhancement of archival description.

The preconference will consider U.S., European, and Australian EAC-CPF initiatives and projects, and also explore the potential for collaboration with the Virtual International Authority File and the library and museum communities. Primary objectives for the day will be to answer two key questions: Why should my archive or library implement EAC-CPF? What are practical strategies for implementing EAC-CPF? A panel discussion and break-out sessions will constitute the schedule for the
day. Question about the developing schedule and program content can be addressed to Kathy Wisser at the email below.

There is no charge, and we encourage all interested information professionals and students to attend. Though there are no charges or formal registration, preconference organizers would like to have a running count of attendees. If you plan to attend EAC-CPF: Moving Forward with Authority, please email Kathy Wisser (katherine.wisser [@] simmons.edu).

Best Practices Exchange

The Best Practices Exchange (www.bpexchange.org) is an informal gathering of practitioners working to create systems to manage, preserve, and provide access to digital government information. The Exchange provides an opportunity for them to discuss their real-world experiences, including best practices and lessons learned. Past attendees include librarians, archivists, information technologists, educators, and researchers.

BPE 2010 will take place in Phoenix, Arizona, 29 September through 1 October. The program includes keynote addresses by David Ferriero, Archivist of the United States, and Laura Campbell, Associate Librarian for Strategic Initiatives, Library of Congress and the leader of the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program.

Exchange sessions — the heart of the program — feature two or three individuals sharing their experiences and ideas about how to manage digital collections. Presentations are typically fifteen to twenty minutes, followed by informal, collaborative discussions with other practitioners.

Don’t let a lack of funding keep you from participating! Due to the generous support of the Library of Congress, National Digital Information and Infrastructure Program, there is no registration fee and some meals are provided. A limited number of scholarships that cover three nights in the conference hotel are available for those who make presentations.

CALL FOR PROPOSALS

Individuals are invited to propose presentations that will spark participant discussion in four areas.

1. New ways of working
The advent of new tools and new media suggest that libraries and archives will have to develop new ways of working in order to take advantage of them. What you are doing and what should our professions be doing to meet these new opportunities? Topics could include: innovative collaborations; new skills; strategic plans and prioritization; education and outreach; and evaluation and measurement.

2. New tools
Are you using or developing a new tool? Are you using an “old” tool in a new way? This is the chance to show off the newest tools, share creative uses for “old” favorites and pass on tips and tricks. Rapidly evolving technologies are allowing for automation, collaboration and innovation. Sessions in this track can be more “show and tell” like than those in other tracks, but actual demonstrations aren’t required.

3. New media
More and more of the content people are creating, and which we will have to manage, is new to us. What are the expectations and the models? Who is creating what and how will archives adapt to the changes technology continually introduces? This track will focus on the collection and preservation of social media, the rising use of digital audio and video, and complex, evolving records types such as content from geographic information systems.

4. Policy and Administration
All our activities take place in an administrative, legal and fiscal context. This track will spotlight the challenges involved in designing, developing and managing programs for the long-term sustainability of digital objects. Potential topics could include ensuring program and project transparency; finding and maintaining funding sources; achieving procedural accountability for a trusted digital repository; collaboration; supporting and developing partnerships; and developing and maintaining institutional policy and procedures.

As the digital preservation is changing constantly and those working in the field are always coming up with new ideas, a fifth track is available for other topics. If you have a great idea, we want to hear about it.

PROPOSALS
Proposals should include a 200-500 word abstract, the proposed track (if applicable), and the name, title, and organization of each presenter. Please send all proposals to bpexchange.org by 30 June 2010. The Committee will respond to all proposals by 1 August. Submit proposals online through the conference web site (via the Call for Proposals page).

Re-use–how much is too much?

Sorry I’m light on posts lately. I’m getting ready for a day-long (!) workshop at the ACA meeting in Halifax. In preparing I was thinking about a question and thought I’d throw it out to all of you.

If your institution is using multiple social media platforms–Facebook, Twitter, blog, Flickr, for example–it’s really easy to use multiple venues to share the same information. Say, when you put up a blog post you then share a link to it on FB and Twitter. On the plus side this means that people who are following you in only one venue will know about it. On the minus side people who are following you on multiple sites will get repetitive information (which can be annoying). What do you think–both as producers and consumers? What do you think about repeating info on different venues?

Reminder: Nominations for Best Archives on the Web due Tuesday, June 1

Do I need to say anything more?

Here’s a link to the nomination information: http://www.archivesnext.com/?p=1336

This is a great opportunity to get public recognition and exposure for your work or the work of an archives you admire. Don’t delay, nominate today!

Horrors! The archives have been hacked! Wait–that’s a good thing.

This post is written in response to the call for submissions to a new kind of publication, Hacking the Academy, “a book crowdsourced in one week, May 21-28, 2010.”

Yes, the old-fashioned, traditional academic archives/special collections is fading into obsolescence. Any one who works with archives knows they’ve fundamentally changed in the last decade or so but how do these changes affect the relationship of the archives with “the academy”? In the spirit of the publication, here are some quickly-written footnote-free thoughts, presented for your consideration and discussion.

Getting access

In the “old days,” how did access work in academic archives/special collections? Scholarly researchers worked hand-in-hand with experienced archivists to locate materials of interest and spent time sitting in our reading rooms, reviewing page after page of materials. Of course, this wasn’t the way it worked at every archives all the time for every user, but really, how much thought was given to expanding usage beyond the community of historians and scholars? Were genealogists, family historians, and casual researchers encouraged? I don’t think so.

Now? As much as possible, archives and special collections are digitizing materials and putting them online, via their own websites and commercial sites. Which means anyone and everyone has access to those materials. No mediation or guidance by the archivist, no travel expenses. Access has been democratized. Which is great, right? More access is better, isn’t it?

Yes. Of course. But what comes along with that? Some collections are being digitized in their entirety, which means no selection, editing, or footnotes–good for scholars perhaps, but not for all kinds of users. Do we still need edited collections of documents anymore? Other collections are being digitized selectively, and selection is not always good for scholars. And what about the hordes of collections and materials that aren’t being digitized? Good for scholars because these “hidden collections” provide potential new material for publication, but is it bad for scholarship because many students (and perhaps some scholars) will tend to reference only the materials they find online?

And this democratization is connected with a shift in how most archives and special collections are measured and assessed by their institutions. Greater importance is being placed on measuring results and outcomes, rather than solely on the amount of material collected and processed, or the number of publications that reference the collection. This is good for most users, but it surely displaces providing a high level of service to scholars as the primary focus of the academic archives/special collections.

In short, archivists and special collections librarians are no longer the “handmaidens of historians.” We serve more users, of different kinds, and our success is measured by how broadly our materials are used.

Sharing findings

Just as access has been democratized, so has publication. A research discovery doesn’t have to wait to be announced in a peer-reviewed publication. If policies permit, users of archives can create their own digital copies of materials and post them on their own sites. Clever researchers can re-use and re-purpose digital images they find on the web. More and more archives are creating their own forums for sharing information about their collections.

Anyone with an interest can publish their thoughts about what they find in the archives. Good for the archives, good for most users . . . good for “the academy”? I’ll leave the question about whether expanded publication options are good for the academy to the experts. My interest is archives, and the relevance of this shift for our discussion is that the archives doesn’t need scholarly publications any more. Well, that’s a bit extreme. Let’s say we used to have an almost exclusive relationship, and now the archives is free to date around and see other people. The academic archives and special collections are not reliant on traditional academic publishing to get word out about our collections or raise our profile. We can do that ourselves. We love it when your publications use our materials (and we love it even more when you send us a copy), but they’re not the only, or even the primary, means of gaining recognition for our collections.

So, yes, the relationship between archives and scholarship has changed, and I think that’s a good thing for the archives. What do scholars think of this change? In a way, it doesn’t matter because the clock isn’t going to turn back. But still, I’d be interested in hearing your responses to this argument. I’ve never worked in a special collections or college/university archives, and so I’m open to being corrected about my assumptions. What about the implications for scholarship? And remember, just as this post is a candidate for publication, so are your comments and tweets in response to it, so be smart and share your opinions.

Celebrating real “citizen archivists”

During the discussion a few weeks ago about how people think the term “citizen archivist” should be used I started collecting references to people who I think provide good examples of real citizen archivists. Again we are talking here about:

people who take responsibility for carrying out archival functions for records or papers that are either their own personal property or which are currently not under the custodianship of an archives or archivist. [my phrasing]

people working _outside_ established institutions who are doing archival-quality work (not simply collecting), typically in an area that is neglected or inadequately addressed by established collections. Citizen archivists collect and add value to records of significance, many of which ultimately find their ways into institutions. [Rick Prelinger's phrasing]

Celebrating the work of these kinds of community or amateur archivists acknowledges what we all know–that the archival community is larger than the archival profession itself. We know we certainly don’t have enough paid archivists to care for all the world’s valuable records and documents; the world needs people to step forward and take responsibility for documenting the people and places they care about and preserving their history. And, of course in some cases a community may want to retain responsibility for maintaining their own records rather than turn over custody of their collections to an archival repository. There are many reasons why people step forward to become what some people call “citizen archivists,” but surely they all share the kind of dedication to preserving historical materials that inspires many professional archivists.

Here are a few of the examples I’ve run across:

If you’re a member of SAA you can find another example in the most recent issue of Archival Outlook which has an article describing the work of the admirable citizen archivist, Erica DeGlopper, who took responsibility for the Art Shay photography collection. (May/June 2010 issue, what, no hat tip, SAA to the discussion on this blog about the term? Tsk, tsk!)

But as I said these are just the examples I’ve run across recently–I’m sure you know of others. Please share in the comments your suggestions for people or organizations that you think qualify as citizen archivists!