ArchivesNext

Like most small Federal government agencies, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) usually only gets our attention when it’s in trouble. And I think that is just as true among archivists as it is among the general public. There is almost no discussion of NARA on the archives blogs, and very little discussion on the A&A listserv. The exception is when there is a public controversy–then people post links to news stories and occasionally some archivists weigh in with opinions. But when the controversy dies down in the media, so does the interest in the archival community. It shouldn’t be that way.

Read the rest of this entry »

You’ve probably seen it elsewhere, but since the deadline has been extended, please go and take a look at the blog (natch) set up to support a submission to the SAA Council “requesting appointment of a task force to explore the desirability and feasibility of accreditation of archival education programs.” If you are interested in signing on or adding your feedback, you have until August 4, so don’t procrastinate. This issue has come up a few times on this blog and countless times in the discussions on the listserv. Kudos to Christine and everyone else involved for getting something organized and taking action!

Russell James’ name should be familiar to regular blog readers, SAA members, and A&A listserv subscribers. Now in addition to being a Mover & Shaker in Archives, he’s joined the ranks of the bloggers. You can read his thoughts at Records Junkie.

The Accidental Archivist noted that:

As you may know, there was a big controversy about a year ago when LAC [Library and Archives Canada] cut back on reading room hours (including limiting the evenings) in September 2007. Many researchers, including historians, were angry since many make trips to Ottawa to do research and seek to make the most of their visit by logging as much time as they can in the reading room. LAC officials stated that funds were being moved to some sort of digital archive effort. This explanation was not viewed as satisfactory by many and thus, the Public Consultations and Services Advisory Board was formed.

So much for the background. Earlier this month, LAC published a DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SERVICE STRATEGY BY LAC SERVICES BRANCH to provide a frame for public comments.

The AA has some views on the discussion paper, but I thought some of you might want to take a look for your own information and perhaps even submit comments.

Every post over at hangingtogether.org is worth reading, but if you missed Gunther’s post yesterday, “It’s still: Think Global, Act Local,” you might want to go check it out. Maybe nothing new to some of you, but I thought it was a very nice summary.

I always suspected my readers were a serious group, but 16% of those responding to the movie poll haven’t seen any movies this summer. Sigh. I know we’ve all got a lot of work to do (and blogs to read), but c’mon, get out there and enjoy a summer blockbuster before the chill of autumn is upon us!

I have a guilty conscience for not writing sooner about something Merrilee posted on July 15 over at the hangingtogether blog. She wrote:

Susan Allen (Associate Director of the Getty Research Institute and Chief Librarian of the Getty Research Library) has started a list of reasons (”beyond sentimentality”) that special collections are important. I asked if she would share her list, and she agreed. Take a look, and if there are things that are not on this list, please add them in the comments. Are there other, similar lists elsewhere? Let us know!

The list of seventeen things is an odd one. (Please go look at it now. See what I mean?) Its title is “Ways in Which Scholars/Librarians Use Rare Materials.” This seems to me to be a much more specific list than one devoted to why special collections are important. Obviously special collections/archives may have value other than for their usefulness to scholars or librarians. I also found some of items in the list confusing, probably since they had been lifted from such a specific context.

But the purpose of this post is not critique Merrilee’s list (which is actually Susan Allen’s, I believe), it is to address her question. Can we add to this list and do you know of other similar lists out there?

So, our purpose is to identify the value (that is the way in which the collections may be used) of special collections. For the purposes of this exercise, I suggest that we just lump archives and special collections together, and if you have thoughts about why that shouldn’t be done, please share your comments. Trying not to duplicate what’s already on the list (as I understand it), here is what I’ve come up with so far:

1. Use of original materials provides users a tangible link to the past which can create an emotional connection for the user.

2. Archives and special collections contain first person accounts that document historical events.

3. Archives and special collections contain materials that document the lives of historically underrepresented groups.

4. Archives and special collections contain materials that document the use and transformation of our environment over time.

5.  Archives and special collections materials contain information about past events that can be used by citizens, business, and government to support their business functions.

6. Archives and special collections can be used by educators at all levels to teach across all disciplines.

7. Archival materials can have evidential value.

I could probably break each of these down into many smaller values, but I think that covers quite a bit of ground. I know my readers are a knowledgeable and creative group, so I’m looking forward to seeing a lot of comments on this question: What are archives and special collections good for?

As the 68 votes were being cast in last week’s poll question, the numbers changed but the ratios remained the same. In answer to the question “What ‘web 2.0′ service do you think has the most potential for archives?” you chose:

Flickr (and other other images sharing sites) (23 votes)
Wikis (22 votes)
Blogs (14 votes)
Audio and video podcasting (5 votes)
Social networks (Facebook, MySpace, etc.) (4 votes)
Second Life (0 votes)
Other (please explain) (0 votes)

I’m not surprised at the two top vote-getters. Are you? I thought blogs would be a bit higher, given how relatively widespread their use is becoming. I also think people are underrating the value of podcasting.

There will be more follow-up questions on 2.0 topics, but for this week’s poll I thought we’d bow the forces of nature. It’s summertime, so please take a few minutes to share, “What’s the best movie you’ve seen so far this summer?”As always, comments are welcome–either about your movie choice or the results of last week’s poll.

When I first started this blog, I did not want to write posts that concerned my former employer, the National Archives. I have changed my mind. I’ll write more about that in the next post.

The recent post, “Why Is It So Hard to Get Documents from the National Archives About the National Archives?” at the History News Network site is an example of the kind of story I feel obligated to write about. The post describes the difficulties researcher Anthony Clark has had in obtaining records from NARA’s Office of Presidential Libraries. Having worked at NARA, I read Mr. Clark’s post from a somewhat different perspective. I set aside the issues Clark raised about the FOIA process and NARA’s responsiveness (or lack thereof). What concerned me was this statement:

After several unexplained delays, NARA finally told me in June 2007 that officials consider every record that NL has ever created or received as “operational” (NARA’s term of art for records they deem “necessary for current operations or reference”) and available only through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Others who had concerns about that statement posted comments to the site (including Richard Cox and Maarja Krusten). I contacted some old friends and asked what was going on. I did not think it was possible that all records created since 1964 were “operational”–something else had to be going on. What I heard, through unofficial channels, is what was posted today in NARA General Council Gary Stern’s comment on the HNN site. The Office of Presidential Libraries (NL) had concerns about the records schedule that applied to its records and so had not transferred any of them to the National Archives. NL (the NARA acronym for the Office of Presidential Libraries) believed that under the schedule many records of permanent historical value would be destroyed, and so they held on to them.

While NL’s concern for the preservation of those records is laudable, what it did not do at any time since 1964 was work with NARA’s records management staff to negotiate the correct disposition of its records (or transfer any of the records that had been appropriately scheduled as permanent). Mr. Clark (and probably many other researchers) should never have had to engage in the FOIA process to access those records.

I was very pleased to see NARA admitting that it had make a mistake and committing to fixing it. What concerns me is the very real possibility that NL would not now be addressing its records scheduling problem if Mr. Clark had not made his situation public.  I have heard that NARA has been aware for some time that it needs to be more aggressive in its own records management, and that this has been identified as a priority. These are good intentions, but clearly they were not implemented in time to help Mr. Clark or other researchers seeking access to NL’s records.

Is it possible NL deliberately delayed updating their schedule in order to make it more difficult for researchers to learn more about the operations of the Presidential libraries? Of course it’s possible. Is it likely that this kind of foot-dragging and non-compliance with the records schedule goes on in other NARA offices and other government agencies? Of course.

Like all organizations, NARA has a tendency not to address its problems until they become the subject of a public controversy. In this case, NARA’s records management program and NL (at a minimum) have known since 1999 (at a minimum) that NL was not in compliance with NARA’s records schedule. Apparently this was considered such a low priority that at no time in the intervening nine years was a more appropriate schedule shepherded through the review and approval process. I know everyone in the Office of Presidential Libraries is very busy with very important matters, but, really, nine years?

I am glad that NARA says steps will be taken to correct the problem, but I will reserve judgment until I see that the proposed new schedule is available for public comment.  Richard Cox wrote in a comment on the HNN blog:

. . .  sometimes archivists have not provided the best management for their own records possessing archival value (the shoemaker’s children syndrome). If one systematically evaluated how archivists are maintaining their own records, I am sure more examples of such problems might surface (although without the difficulties of requesting access or forcing FOIA requests).

If NARA’s own records management program is like the shoemaker’s child, then maybe it is up to all of us to keep our eyes on its feet and make sure that NARA’s good intentions result in accessible records. Perhaps we in the archival and records management community should call on NARA to put forward their plan for ensuring all its units have current and complete schedules and that all appropriate records are successful in graduating from “operational” to “archival.”

I’ve got a post in the works on this story over on HNN. Stay tuned.

If you didn’t read Richard Cox’s post on the CoSA report, “Closest to Home”: Archival Programs for Local Government Records, you should.

Two online surveys you should consider completing:

• “Career Satisfaction of Young Archivists“(note that you don’t need to be “young,” that is under 35, to complete this survey) which runs through July 30, and
• “The Impact of Minimum-Standards Processing on Archival Practice: An Early Assessment“(note that they neglected to include a category for college/university archives on this survey–if that covers you, you can skip question #1, and if you would like, indicate in the open text response box for question #20 that your institution is an academic archives).

If the archives blogs aren’t keeping you busy enough, you might want to check out some of the eighty (yes, that’s 80) history blogs recommended on the Cliopatria group blog (hosted by HNN).

Friend of the blog “t” suggested that some people might want to check out the 3rd International Conference on “Engaging the Other” in San Francisco, September 4 through 7 (following on the heels of SAA). The conference is intended to “address the roots of fear based belief systems and stereotypes, prejudice, polarization, enemy images, and artificial barriers of misunderstanding and distrust that divide us.”

Archivists/foodies (and I know you’re out there) who will be in San Francisco for SAA might also want to know that (hat tip to EdibleNation):

Slow Food Nation, the largest celebration of American food in history, is coming to San Francisco Labor Day weekend (August 29 to September 1, 2008).

At the peak of harvest season, and on the eve of a Presidential election, Slow Food Nation will bring together local citizens and visitors, farmers and food artisans, political leaders, environmental advocates and health-care experts, community educators and artists. Participants will savor food from across the U.S. at Taste, a 50,000 square foot pavilion; meet farmers and producers at a marketplace surrounding a 10,000 square foot newly-planted urban garden in the heart of the City; learn from visionary speakers (Wendell Berry, Marion Nestle, Carlo Petrini, Michael Pollan, Eric Schlosser, Vandana Shiva and Alice Waters); and engage in political discourse to shape a more sustainable food system. Slow Food Nation will also feature a music festival (Slow Food Rocks: Gnarls Barkley; G Love & Special Sauce; the John Butler Trio; Medeski Martin & Wood; New Pornographers and Ozomatli), workshops, films, dinners, hikes and journeys.

This sounds great to me. Maybe we can get some information about it up on the SAA wiki.

If you haven’t already, don’t forget to vote in this week’s survey. So far wikis and Flickr are in the lead. The survey will be available until sometime Monday morning, but why wait, vote now!

Your votes on last week’s poll mirrored the thoughts I had on the question: you gave a slight edge (2 votes) to the statement that looks matter in our profession “just as much as they do in society in general.” The “just as much” statement got 16 votes, but not surprisingly almost as many people (14) thought that looks were “less important than in society in general.” We got some interesting comments on this question when it opened last week–anyone surprised by the results?

I can’t wait to see your thoughts on this week’s question: What “web 2.0″ service do you think has the most potential for archives?” Your choices are: blogs, Flickr (and other image sharing sites), audio and video podcasting, social networks (Facebook, MySpace, etc), Second Life, wikis or other (please explain). Note that on this poll you can select more than one answer, but please try to be selective. All of the services have potential, but which one do you think has the most?

There’s been discussion out there in our tiny archivo-blogosphere in response to my post about the role of blogging in the archival profession.  I think Heather on ArchivesFound followed up first, in her thoughtful post, “Blogging and the Archival Profession.” This post was noted and discussed by Dani at the Curious Child in her “Blogging Archvists.” (Dani’s post was briefly noted by Linda Clark Benedict over at Alone in the Archives.) Kind of looks like a discussion, doesn’t it?

Heather and Dani raise questions about why more archivists aren’t writing blogs or commenting on them. (Note to Heather and Dani: per the issues raised in the discussion on my post, some people say they won’t take anyone seriously who doesn’t sign their full name to their opinions. Just FYI.) Dani suggests that it might be because archivists aren’t comfortable with technology or “are used to maintaining records and not creating them.” I think she’s off the mark here. While some archivists may not be comfortable with the technology necessary to write or comment on blogs, I think they are in a minority. I also don’t think most archivists are uncomfortable creating records in addition to maintaining them.

I think the issues Heather raised on ArchivesFound are closer to the truth:

Read the rest of this entry »

Last week’s survey question was “Does your job title have the word “archivist” in it?” and of the 42 of you who answered the survey, the answer was “yes” for 34 of you. We also had one Special Collections Librarian (is that all?), two people who were unemployed or still in school, and five “other.” We got some interesting comments too, and a few follow-ups to questions about whether or not people were travelling to SAA this year, so please take a look at the post if you’re interested.

So, as far as the blog readers answering that survey question go, although people around you might not know what an archivist is, at least most of you are identified as one. Most of you are walking advertisements for the archives brand–whatever that is.

This week’s question might seem a bit on the superficial side, but underneath it raises a serious question: how much do looks matter? I stole this question from a recent post on the Freakonomics blog. We all know that looks matter in our society (and if you’re not convinced you can read more about this on the Freakonomics blog), but what about our little corner of society? This week’s question and answers are:

How important is physical appearance in our profession?
- More important than it is in society in general
- Just as important as in society in general
- Less important than in society in general

I don’t think anybody is going to say that looks are more important for us, but I’m curious to see if people think they’re actually less important than in society in general. I’d also like to hear from anyone who has opinions about how your organizational context fits into your answer. Are looks more important for corporate archivists? Less so for government?

Yesterday afternoon I had a long list of people to get back to, things to do, posts to write. I did none of those things, and I apologize to everyone who is waiting for something from me. Yesterday after lunch I picked up a copy of The Unthinkable: Who Survives When Disaster Strikes–And Why at my local library. I knew this wasn’t going to be the kind of book you keep on your night table and read a little bit of before going to sleep. It was 2:00 on a rainy afternoon, so I started reading. I finished at about 6:30 I think. You should read this book.

Given that the book uses terrible tragedies like the collapse of the World Trade Towers, the Virginia Tech shootings, Katrina, the recent tsunami and many many plane crashes, I expected it to be gut-wrenching depressing reading. It wasn’t at all. The book really is about survival–those who survive and the people behind the scenes who try to increase the odds that more people survive in the future.

When I was reading I was certainly not thinking about archives, but while I was composing this post in my head I realized how valuable it would be to people thinking about disaster planning.  If I had more time I’d go back and re-read it with that in mind, but disaster planning really isn’t the focus of this blog. But I’d love to hear what others have to say on this approach to the book.

No, I’m not recommending that you read this book because it will be valuable to you as an archivist (or whatever you are). I’m recommending this book because:

• if you’re ever in a disaster it might help you survive,
• if you’re ever in a disaster it might help you make sure other people survive,
• if you’re worried about potential disasters having this information will probably make you less worried, and
• when there are future disasters it will improve your ability to understand what happened.

It encourages all of us to take personal responsibility for our own safety and the safety of those around us. Knowledge and practice are the best tools to help prepare for the unthinkable. This book can help with one of those. Please, all my friends who live and work in Washington and New York (and LA, and San Francisco, and Chicago . . .) get this book out of your library and read it.

Ok, I’m off my soap box. Back to your regularly-scheduled archival content in the next post!