L516
INTRODUCTION TO ARCHIVES AND
RECORDS
MANAGEMENT
Fall 1999 – Section 6939
Wednesdays, 9:05 am – 11:50 am
Library 031
Instructor
Philip C. Bantin, Director of the Indiana University Archives
Office Hours: Tu & Th, 12:00 – 1:00 pm and by appointment
(812) 855-5897
Short Course
Description
This course will provide an introduction to the
basic theories, methodologies, and most significant problems relating to
archives and records management. The
course will also introduce students to the ways archivists are responding to
the challenges of managing and preserving electronic records.
Long Course
Description
This course is an introduction to the basic
theories, methodologies, and most significant problems relating to the
management of records and especially archival records. The course will address the following key
questions:
1)
What
are archives, and why are they important?
2)
What
principles and concepts guide the work of archivists?
3)
What
are the basic components of an archival program?
4)
How
are archival records appraised, arranged and described, and made available for
use? More specifically, in the area
of appraisal, students will be introduced
to the classic writings of appraisal theory, will review some of the main
debates about the purpose and practice of appraisal, and will examine the
prominent models for appraising records.
In the area of arrangement and description, students will learn how
archival records are processed and will be introduced to the ongoing debate on
descriptive standards. In the area of
reference and use, students will examine the basic characteristics of a
reference program, will review the literature on measuring use to define
archival practice and principles, will examine the nature and need for public
programming, and will review the legal and ethical issues related to access to
archival records.
5)
What
are the basic elements of a records management program?
6)
What
has been the impact of the new information technologies on archives and records
management theory and practice? The
course will introduce students to the ways that archivists are responding to
the challenge of managing and preserving electronic records.
7)
Where
is the archival profession headed?
Students will review educational standards and the search for an
archival identity.
Prerequisites
There are no prerequisites for this course. This is an introductory course designed to
provide students with information on the basic theories and practices of
archives and records management.
Course
Objectives
This course will introduce students to the basic
theoretical principles and methodologies and the various practices involved in
administering archives and records management programs.
This course will provide a basic understanding of
archival work, which will enable students to better understand the role of
archives in the world of information management and allow them to perceive
differences and similarities between archivists, manuscript curators, rare book
librarians, librarians, and other practitioners in related information fields.
This course will provide a basic understanding of
archival work so that students can make an informed decision about pursuing a
professional career in archives.
This course will provide a basic understanding of
the importance of records in the modern information age and of records
management as an important tool and function in an archival program.
This course will provide a basic understanding of
how new information technologies are
transforming archival theory and practice and how archivists are
attempting to meet this challenge.
This course will introduce students to the classic
writings in the archives and records management professions.
This course will encourage students to begin
thinking critically about strategies for managing the archival record in the
modern information age.
This course will prepare students for internships in
an archival repository and prepare them to take more advanced classes or
workshops on archival administration or records management.
Course
Requirements - General
Course requirements include the following:
**
Adequate preparation to discuss required reading assignments
** Full
participation in class discussions
**
Preparation of 3 short papers (3-4 pages long in response to questions posed by
the instructor; due
on week 3, week 6, and week 10 of the course).
**
Preparation of a major paper (15-20 pages) reviewing and evaluating the
existing literature on an
archival or records management issue.
Paper due on week 14 of the
course.
**
Knowledge of basic archival issues, concepts, and strategies so as to
successfully complete a final
exam
The weighing for the grade is as follows:
Major
Paper 30%
Short
Papers (3) 30%
Final
Exam 25%
Class
Participation 15%
This assignment involves reviewing and analyzing the
literature on a particular archives or records management topic. In this paper, the student will demonstrate
that he/she has completed some in-depth reading on some aspect of archival
administration or records management, and understands and can identity the
major issues surrounding the topic. This is not an original research
paper. More specifically, the paper
must include:
1.
A
review of the literature stressing in particular how the profession has defined
the topic or issue and how theory or ideas on this principle or topic have
changed or evolved.
2.
An
evaluation of the literature’s strengths and weaknesses, including any
conclusions about areas where
additional research is needed.
Students must show evidence (through footnotes) of
having read at least 15 articles and/or monographs on the topic. These 15 references must be in addition to
the required course readings on the subject.
The paper should be in the 15 to 20 page range.
Students are required to inform the instructor of
their choice of topic by week 8. The paper is due on week 14.
Short Paper 1
due at the end of class on Week 3: Question to Answer (Pick One)
Hilary Jenkinson and T.R. Schellenberg offer two very different sets of theories about the mission of an archives and the responsibilities of an archivist. Whose ideas make more sense to you and why?
Tell me what you think archives and archivists will
become in the 21st century.
What will be their missions and primary responsibilities? And, if you are an archivist or records
manager in the next millennium, what role would you like to be playing?
Short Paper 2
due at the end of class on Week 6:
Question to Answer
** Which of the appraisal models do you think would prove to be the most useful and effective? Please articulate specific reasons for your choice. In your explanation, compare your favorite appraisal model with at least one other model.
Short Paper 3
due at the end of class on Week 10:
Question to Answer (Pick One):
** Some archivists contend that use and users of archives should ultimately define or be the basis for archival practice and theory. Do you agree? If so, explain why this is the case. If not, explain what role use should play in defining archival priorities.
** In your opinion, what is the most critical, most important legal or ethical issue confronting the archival profession? Why is it so critical, and how might the profession address it?
Final Examination – The Final Exam will consist of essays and short answer questions, and will cover all topics reviewed during the course.
Students are expected to actively participate in
class discussions. A portion of the
grade will be dependent on the instructor’s evaluation of the student’s preparation
for and participation in class activities.
Throughout the course, there will be opportunities for students to
explore issues and discuss readings with the instructor and fellow students.
All assignments must be submitted on the dates specified in the syllabus. Students handing in assignments after the due date will lose one letter grade in the assessment of the grade. If a student cannot deliver an assignment on the due date, it is his/her responsibility to discuss the situation with the instructor. A grade of I (Incomplete) will be assigned only if exceptional circumstances warrant it.
All grades will be assigned according to the following academic standard, which was defined by student and faculty members of the Committee on Improvement of Instruction and approved by the faculty of the School of Library and Information Science as an aid in evaluation of student performance.
|
Grade |
Numerical Equivalent |
Definition |
|
A |
4.0
(95-100 points) |
Outstanding achievement. Student performance
demonstrates full command of the course material and a high level of
originality and/or creativity that far surpasses course expectations. |
|
A - |
3.7 (90-94
points) |
Excellent achievement. Student performance demonstrates
thorough knowledge of the course materials and exceeds course expectations by
completing all requirements in a superior manner. |
|
B + |
3.3 (87-89 points) |
Very good work. Student performance demonstrates
above average comprehension of the course materials and exceeds course
expectations on all tasks as defined in the course syllabus. |
|
B |
3.0 (83-86 points) |
Good work. Student performance meets designated
course expectations, demonstrates understanding of the course materials, and
performs at an acceptable level. |
|
B - |
2.7 (80-82
points) |
Marginal work. Student performance demonstrates
incomplete understanding of course materials. |
|
C + C |
2.3
(77-79 points) 2.0 (73-76 points) |
Unsatisfactory work. Student performance demonstrates incomplete and inadequate
understanding of course materials. |
|
C – D+ D D- |
1.7
(70-72) 1.3 1.0 0.7
(60-69 points) |
Unacceptable work. Coursework performed at this
level will not count toward the MLS or MIS degree. For the course to count toward the degree, the student must
repeat the course with a passing grade. |
|
F |
0.0 (<60 points) |
Failing. Student may continue in the program only
with permission of the Dean. |
Course
Schedule and Readings
All REQUIRED
readings are included in the course reading packet, which is available for
purchase at the IU Bookstore. One copy
of each of the required readings is also on reserve in the SLIS Library. Some of the readings are available only
on-line, in which case the electronic address is given.
WEEK 1 – SEPTEMBER 1
Orientation to
the Course; Introductions
The Nature of
Archives - What are They? Why are They
Created? Why Keep Them?
Readings:
Required
Readings:
Luciana Duranti, “Reliability and Authenticity: The
Concepts and Their Implications,” Archivaria 39 (Spring 1995):
5-10.
Kenneth Foote, “To Remember and Forget: Archives,
Memory and Culture,” American Archivist 53 (Summer 1990): 378-392.
Hilary Jenkinson, “Reflections of an Archivist,” in A
Modern Archives Reader (Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records
Service, 1984), pp. 15-21.
Steven Lubar, “Information Culture and the Archival
Record,” American Archivist, Vol. 62, No. 1 (Spring 1999): 10-22.
Sue McKemmish, “Introducing Archives and Archival
Program,” in Judith Ellis, ed., Keeping Archives, 2nd edition
(D.W. Thorpe in association with the Australian Society of Archivists, 1993),
pp. 1-10.
T.R. Schellenberg, Modern Archives. Principles
and Techniques (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956), pp. 11-16.
Optional
Readings:
Philip Brooks, Research in Archives. The Use of Unpublished Primary Sources
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), pp. 1-13.
Richard Cox, Managing Institutional Archives
(New York: Greenwood Press, 1992), pp.
1-23
Frank B. Evans, “Archivists and Records
Managers: Variations on a Theme,” American
Archivist 30 (January 1967): pp.
45-58.
Hilary Jenkinson, A Manual of Archive
Administration (London: Percy Lund, Humphries & Co. LTD, 1966), pp.
1-38.
Thornton Mitchell, editor, Norton on
Archives. The Writings of Margaret
Cross Norton on Archival and Records Management (Chicago: Society of
American Archivists, 1975), pp. 3-38.
James O’Toole, Understanding Archives and
Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990), pp. 7-25.
David Potts, “College Archives as Windows on
American Society,” American Archivist 40 (January 1977): 43-49.
Hugh Taylor, “My Very Act and Deed: Some Reflections
on the Role of Textual Records in the Conduct of Affairs,” American
Archivist 51 (Fall 1988): 456-469; also can be found in Canadian
Archival Studies and the Rediscovery of Provenance, Tom Nesmith, ed.
(Metuchen, N.J., & London: SAA and
ACA in association with The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1993), pp. 251-268.
JoAnne Yates, Control Through Communication: The Rise
of System in American Management (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1989), chapters one through three and conclusion.
WEEK 2 –
SEPTEMBER 8
History of
Archives and Records Management: Ancient to Modern; The Emergence of the
Archival and Records Management Professions
Readings:
Required
Readings:
Luciana Duranti, “The Odyssey of Records Managers,”
in Canadian Archival Studies and the Rediscovery of Provenance, Tom
Nesmith, ed. (Metuchen, N.J., & London:
SAA and ACA in association with The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1993), pp. 29-60.
James O’Toole, Understanding Archives and
Manuscripts, pp. 27-33.
Ernst Posner, “Some Aspects of Archival Development
Since the French Revolution,” in A Modern Archives Reader: Basic Readings on
Archival Theory and Practice, Maygene Daniels and Timothy Walch, eds.
(Washington, D.C.: NARS, 1984): 3-14.
Jean-Pierre Wallot, “Limited Identities for a Common
Identity: Archivist in the Twenty-First Century,” Archivaria 41 (Spring
1996): 6-30.
Optional
Readings:
William E. Brown, Jr. and Elizabeth Yakel,
“Redefining the Role of College and University Archives in the Information
Age,” American Archivist 59, No.
3 (Summer 1996): 272-287.
O. Lawrence Burnette, Beneath the Footnote
(Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1969), pp. 43-73, 130-192.
M.T. Clanchy, “ Tenacious Letters: Archives and
Memory in the Middle Ages,” Archivaria 11 (Winter 1980-81): 115-125.
Richard J. Cox, “Archives and Archivists in the
Twenty-First Century: What Will We
Become?” Archival Issues Vol.
20, No. 2 (1995): 97-113.
Charles Dollar, Archival Theory and Information
Technologies: The Impact of Information
Technologies on Archival Principles and Methods (Macerata: University of
Macerata Press, 1992), pp. 35-44.
Michel Duchein, “The History of European Archives
and the Development of the Archival Profession in Europe,” American
Archivist, 55, No. 1 (Winter 1992): 14-24.
Donald McCoy, The National Archives: America’s
Ministry of Documents 1934-1968 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1978), chapters one, three, five, six, seven, twelve, seventeen and
twenty.
Lawrence McCrank, “Documenting Reconquest and
Reform: The Growth of Archives in the Medieval Crown of Aragon,” American
Archivist 56 (Spring 1993): 256-318.
James O’Toole, Herodutus and the Written Record,” Archivaria
33 (1991-92): 148-160.
James O’Toole, “ ‘Commendatory Letters’: An Archival
Reading the Venerable Bede,” American Archivist, Vol. 61, No. 2 (Fall
1998): 266-286.
Ernst Posner, American State Archives
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), chapter one.
Rosalind Thomas, Literary and Orality in Ancient
Greece (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), chapters four, five,
and seven.
WEEK 3 –
SEPTEMBER 15
Basic Concepts
and Components of an Archival Program
Basic and Essential Archival Concepts -
Provenance, Fonds, Original Order, Evidence, Permanence, Process, Function, Record, Life Cycle,
Continuum Theory
History of Archival Theory and Practice
Administration of Archival
Repositories: Identifying Basic
Components of an Archival
Program
SHORT PAPER
NO. 1 DUE
Readings:
Required
Readings:
Required
Readings on Basic Archival Concepts and the History of Archival Theory and
Practice:
Terry Cook, “What is Past is Prologue: A History of
Archival Ideas Since 1898, and the Future Paradigm Shift,” Archivaria 43 ( Spring 1997): 17-63.
Charles Dollar, Archival Theory and Information
Technologies: The Impact of Information
Technologies on Archival Principles and Methods (Macerata: University of
Macerata Press, 1992), pp. 45-51, 72-74.
Ira Penn, Gail Pennix, and Jim Coulson, Records
Management Handbook (Hampshire, England: Gower Publishing, 1994), pp.
12-18.
Richard Cox, Managing Institutional Archives,
pp. 25-47.
Optional
Readings:
Optional
Readings on Basic Archival Concepts and the History of Archival Theory and
Practice:
Glenda Acland,” Managing the Record Rather Than the
Relic,” Archives and Manuscripts 20 (May 1992): 57-63.
Jay Atherton, “From Life Cycle to Continuum: Some
Thoughts on the Records Management-Archives Relationship,” Archivaria,
Vol. 21 (Winter 1985-1986): 43-51; also can be found in Canadian Archival
Studies and the Rediscovery of Provenance, pp. 391-402.
David Bearman and Richard Lytle, “The Power of the
Principle of Provenance,” Archivaria 21 (Winter 1985-1986): 14-27.
Richard Berner, “Historical Development of Archival
Theory and Practices in the United States,” Midwestern Archivist 7, no.
2 (1982): 103-117.
Frank Boles, “Disrespecting Original Order,” American
Archivist 45 (Winter 1982): 26-32.
Maynard Brichford, “The Origins of Modern European
Archival Theory,” Midwestern Archivist 7, no. 2 (1982): 87-101.
Brian Brothman, “Orders of Value: Probing the
Theoretical Terms of Archival Practice,” Archivaria 32 (Summer 1991):
78-100.
Michael Buckland, “On the Nature of Records
Management Theory,” American
Archivist 57, No. 2 (Spring 1994): 346-351.
Terry Cook, “The Concept of the Archival Fonds in
the Post-Custodial Era: Theory, Problems and Solutions,” Archivaria 35
(Spring 1993): 24-37.
Richard Cox, “Why Records are Important in the
Information Age,” Records Management Quarterly 32, No. 1 (January 1998):
36-52.
Michel Duchein, “Theoretical Problems and Practical
Problems of ‘Respect des Fonds’ in Archival Science,” Archivaria 16
(Summer 1983): 64-82.
Luciana Duranti, “Diplomatics: New Uses for an Old
Science,” are serialized in Archivaria, Part I, 28 (Summer 1989): 7-27;
Part II, 29 (Winter 1989-90): 4-17; Part III, 30 (Summer 1990): 4-20; Part IV,
31 (Winter 199091): 10-25; Part V, 32 (Summer 1991): 6-24; Part VI, 33 (Winter
1991-92): 6-24.
Luciana Duranti, “The Records: Where Archival
Universality Resides,” Archival Issues 19, No. 2 (1994): 83-94.
Peter Horsman, “Taming the Elephant. An Orthodox
Approach to the Principle of Provenance,”
in The Principle of Provenance (Sweden: Sweden National Archives,
1994), pp. 51-63.
Chris Hurley, “Ambient Functions: Abandoned Children
to Zoos,” Archivaria 40 (Fall 1995): 21-39.
Chris Hurley, “What, If Anything, Is a Function,” Archives
and Manuscripts 21, no. 2 (1993): 208-220.
Hilary Jenkinson, A Manual of Archive
Administration (London: Percy Lund, Humphries & Co. LTD, 1966), pp.
38-125.
Sue McKemmish, “Are Records Ever Actual,” in The
Records Continuum. Ian Maclean and Australian Archives First Fifty Years,
Sue McKemmish and Michael Piggott, eds. (Clayton, Vic: Ancora Press, 1994),
pp.187-203.
Frederic Miller, Arranging and Describing
Archives and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990),
pp. 19-30.
James O’Toole, “On the Idea of Permanence,” American
Archivist 52 (Winter 1989): 10-25.
Ira Penn, “Understanding the Life Cycle Concept of
Records Management,” Records Management Quarterly 17 (July 1983): 5-8.
David Roberts, “Defining Electronic Records,
Documents and Data,” Archives and Manuscripts 22 (May 1994): 14-26.
T.R. Schellenberg, Modern Archives. Principles
and Techniques (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956), pp. 113-132..
Peter Scott, “The Record Group Concept: A Case for
Abandonment,” American Archivist, 29, no. 4 (October 1966): 493-504.
Don C. Skemer, “Diplomatics and Archives,” American
Archivist 52, No. 3 (Summer 1989): 376- 82.
Elizabeth Yakel, “The Way Things Work: Procedures,
Processes, and Institutional Records,” American Archivist 59, No. 4
(Fall 1996): 454-464.
Optional
Readings on the Basic Components of an Archival Program:
William Mahar, The Management of College and
University Archives (Chicago: Society of American Archivists and Scarecrow
Press, 1992): 17-34.
Paul McCarthy, “The Management of Archives: A
Research Agenda,” American Archivist 51 (Winter/Spring 1988): 52-69.
Anne-Marie Schwirtlich, “Getting Organized” in Keeping
Archives, pp. 25-73.
Michael Swift, “Management Techniques and Technical
Resources in the Archives of the 1980s,” Archivaria 20 (Summer 1985):
94-104.
Thomas Wilsted and William Nolte, Managing
Archival and Manuscript Repositories (Chicago: Society of American
Archivists, 1991), pp. 15-34, 55-67.
WEEK 4
(SEPTEMBER 22) AND WEEK 5 (SEPTEMBER
29)
ARCHIVAL
APPRAISAL
WEEK 4:
Appraisal - Basic Definitions; The Traditional Foundations of Archival
Appraisal Theory and Practice; The Evolution of Appraisal Theory; The Context
of Archival Appraisal
Required
Readings:
Charles Dollar, Archival Theory and Information
Technologies, pp. 55-60, 76-78.
F. Gerald Ham, Selecting and Appraising Archives
and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1992), pp. 51-65.
Ole Kolsrud, “The Evolution of Basic Appraisal
Principles-Some Comparative Observations,” American Archivist 44 (Winter
1992): 26-37.
Barbara Reed, “Appraisal and Disposal, “ in Keeping
Archives, pp. 157-164, 172-175, 184-202.
Optional
Readings:
Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, Margaret Jacob, “Truth and
Objectivity,” in Telling the Truth About History (New York: W.W. Norton
& Co., 1994): 241-270.
Frank Boles, “Sampling in Archives,” American
Archivist 44 (Spring 1981): 125-130.
Terry Cook, “Many are called, but few are chosen”:
Appraisal Guidelines for Sampling and Selecting Case Files,” Archivaria
32 (Summer 1991): 25-45.
Richard Cox, Managing Institutional Archives,
pp. 49-84.
Terry Eastwood, “How Goes It With Appraisal?” Archivaria
36 (Autumn 1993): 111-121.
F. Gerald Ham, “Archival Choices: Managing the
Historical Record in an Age of Abundance,” in Archival Choices: Managing the
Historical Record in an Age of Abundance, pp. 11-22.
F. Gerald Ham, “The Archival Edge,” American
Archivist 38 (January 1975): 5-13.
F. Gerald Ham, “Archival Strategies for the
Post-Custodial Era,” American Archivist 44 (Summer 1981): 207-216.
David Kepley, “Sampling in Archives: A Review,” American
Archivist 47 (Summer 1984): 237-242.
Evelyn Kolish, “Sampling Methodology and its
Application: An Illustration of the Tension Between Theory and Practice,” Archivaria
38 (Fall 1994): 61-73.
D. Laberge, “Information, Knowledge and Rights: The
Preservation of Archives as a Political and Social Issue,” Archivaria 25
(Winter 1987-1988): 44-49.
Paul Lewinson, “Archival Sampling,” American
Archivist 20 (October 1957): 291-312.
Shauna McRanor, “A Critical
Analysis of Intrinsic Value,” American Archivist 59, No. 4 (Fall 1996):
400-411.
Thornton Mitchell, ed. Norton on Archives: The
Writings of Margaret Cross Norton on Archival and Records Management, pp.
231-265.
S. Muller, J.A. Feith, and R. Fruin, Manual for
the Arrangement and Description of Archives (New York: H.W. Wilson, 1968),
chapter 1.
Nancy Peace, “Deciding What to Save: Fifty Years of
Theory and Practice,” in Archival Choices: Managing the Historical Record in
an Age of Abundance, ed. Nancy Peace (Lexington: D.C. Heath, 1984), pp.
1-18.
WEEK 5:
Appraisal - Comparisons of Various Appraisal Models
Required
Readings:
Frank Boles, and Julia Marks Young, “Exploring the
Black Box: The Appraisal of University
Administrative Records,” American Archivist 48 (Spring 1985): 121-140.
Terry Cook, “Mind Over Matter: Towards a New Theory
of Archival Appraisal,” in Barbara L. Craig, ed. The Archival Imagination:
Essays in Honour of Hugh A. Taylor (Ottawa: Association of Canadian
Archivists, 1992), pp. 38-70.
Terry Eastwood, “Toward a Social Theory of
Appraisal,” in The Archival Imagination: Essays in Honour of Hugh A. Taylor (Ottawa:
Association of Canadian Archivists, 1992), pp. 71-89.
Helen Samuels, “Improving Our Disposition: Documentation
Strategy,” Archivaria 33 (Winter 1991-92): 125-140.
T.R. Schellenberg, “The Appraisal of Modern Public
Records,” in A Modern Archives Reader, pp. 57-70.
Optional
Readings:
Catherine Bailey, “From the Top Down: The Practice of Macro-Appraisal,” Archivaria
43 (Spring 1997): 89-128.
Frank Boles, “Mix Two Parts Interest to One Part
Information and Appraise Until Done:
Understanding Contemporary Record Selection Processes,” American Archivist 50 (Summer 1987):
356-368.
Frank Boles, Archival Appraisal (New York:
Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc., 1991), pp. 18-28.
Frank Boles and Mark Greene,
“Et Tu Schellenberg? Thoughts on the
Dagger of American Appraisal Theory,” American Archivist 59, No. 3
(Summer 1996): 298-310.
Hans Booms, “Society and the Formation of a
Documentary Heritage,” Archivaria 24 (Summer 1987): 69-107.
Hans Booms, “Uberlieferungsbildung: Keeping Archives
as a Social and Political Activity,” Archivaria 33 (Winter 1991-92):
25-33.
Richard Brown, “Macro-Appraisal Theory and the Context
of the Public Records Creator,” Archivaria 40 (Fall 1995): 121-172.
Richard Brown, “Records Acquisition Strategy and its
Theoretical Foundation: The Case for a
Concept of Archival Hermeneutics,” Archivaria 33 (Winter 1991-92):
34-56.
Bruce Bruemmer and Sheldon Hochheiser, The
High-Technology Company: A Historical Research and Archival Guide
(Minneapolis: Charles Babbage Institute, Center for the History of Information
Processing, University of Minnesota, 1989).
Bruce Bruemmer, “Avoiding Accidents of
Evidence: Functional Analysis in the
Appraisal of Business Records,” in The Records of American Business
(Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1997), pp. 137-160.
Richard Cox and Helen Samuels, “The Archivist’s
First Responsibility: A Research Agenda for the Identification and Retention of
Records of Enduring Value,” American Archivist 51 (Winter/Spring 1988):
28-42.
Timothy Ericson, “ ‘To Approximate June Pasture’:
The Documentation Strategy in the Real World,” Archival Issues, Vol. 22,
No. 1 (1997): 5-20.
Mark Greene and Todd Daniels-Howell, “Documentation
with an Attitude: A Pragmatist’s Guide
to the Selection and Acquisition of Business Records,” in The Records of
American Business, pp. 161-229.
Mark Greene, “ ‘The Surest Proof’: A Utilitarian
Approach to Appraisal,” Archivaria 45 (Spring 1998): 127-169.
Joan K. Haas, Helen W. Samuels, and Barbara Simmons,
Appraising the Records of Modern Science and Technology: A Guide
(Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1985).
F. Gerald Ham, Selecting and Appraising Archives
and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1992), pp. 1-14,
95-102.
Margaret Hedstrom, “Electronic Archives: Integrity and Access in the Network
Environment,” American Archivist 58, No. 3 (Summer 1995): 312-324
Margaret Hedstrom, “New Appraisal Techniques: The
Effect of Theory on Practice,” Provenance 7 (Fall 1989): 1-21.
Hilary Jenkinson, A Manual of Archive
Administration, rev. 2nd ed. (London: Percy Lund, Humphries & Co.,
Ltd., 1966), pp. 136-155, 2 copies
available.
Victoria Lemieux, “Applying Mintzberg’s Theories on
Organizational Configuration to Archival Appraisal,” Archivaria 46 (Fall
1998): 32-85.
Angelika Menne-Haritz, “Appraisal or
Documentation: Can We Appraise Archives
by Selecting Content,” American Archivist 57, No. 3 (Summer 1994):
528-542.
Helen Samuels, Varsity Letters: Documenting
Modern Colleges and Universities (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1992),
pp. 253-268.
Helen Samuels, “Who Controls the Past,” American
Archivist 49 (Spring 1986): 109-124.
Jim Suderman, “Appraising Records of the Expenditure
Management Function: An Exercise in
Functional Analysis,” Archivaria
43 (Spring 1997): 129-142.
JoAnne Yates, “Internal Communication Systems in
American Business Structures: A Framework to Aid Appraisal,” American
Archivist 48 (Spring 1985): 141-158.
WEEK 6 –
OCTOBER 6
Arrangement of
Archival Records
Accessioning Records; Fundamental Principles
of Archival Arrangement; Strategies for
Effective Processing
SHORT PAPER
NO. 2 DUE
Required
Readings:
Charles Dollar, Archival Theory and Information
Technologies, pp. 60-62
Oliver Holmes, “Archival Arrangement - Five
Different Operations at Five Different Levels,” in Modern Archives Reader,
p. 162-180; also in American Archivist 27 (January 1964): 21-41.
Frederic Miller, Arranging and Describing
Archives and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990),
pp. 69-78.
Optional
Readings:
Terry Abraham, “What is Backlog is Prologue: A
Measurement of Archival Processing,” American Archivist 48 (Winter
1985): 31-44.
Richard Berner, Archival Theory and Practice in
the United States: A Historical Analysis (Seattle: University of Washington
Press, 1983), pp. 59-68.
Paul Brunton and Tim Robinson, “Accessioning” in Keeping
Archives, pp. 207-221.
Paul Brunton and Tim Robinson, “Arrangement and
Description,” in Keeping Archives, pp. 222-235.
Megan Floyd Desnoyers, “When is a Collection
Processed?” in A Modern Archives Reader, pp. 309-321.
Max Evans, “Authority Control: An Alternative to the
Record Group Concept,” American Archivist 49 (Summer 1986): 249-261.
Uli Haller, “Processing for Access,” American
Archivist 48 (Fall 1985): 400-415.
Richard Hite and Daniel Linke, “Teaming Up with
Technology: Team Processing,” Midwestern Archivist 15, no. 2 (1990):
91-97.
Paul Ericksen and Robert Shuster, “Beneficial
Shocks: The Place of Processing-Cost
Analysis in Archival Administration,” American Archivist 58, No. 1
(Winter 1995): 32-52.
Frederic Miller, Arranging and Describing
Archives and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990),
pp. 31-44, 57-68
T.R. Schellenberg, “Archival Principles of
Arrangement,” American Archivist 24 (January 1961): 11-24.
Helen Slotkin and Karen Lynch, “An Analysis of
Processing Procedures: The Adaptable Approach,” American Archivist 45
(Spring 1982): 155-163.
WEEK 7 –
OCTOBER 13
Description of
Archival Records
Description - Fundamental Principles and
Development of Finding Aids for Archival
Records; Concept of Metadata; Descriptive
Standards and the Development of MARC
Records for Archives; HTML, SGML,
XML; and Encoded Archival Description
(EAD)
Readings:
Required
Readings:
David Bearman, “Documenting Documentation,” Archivaria
34 (Summer 1992): 33-49; also in
David Bearman, Electronic Evidence: Strategies
for Managing Records in Contemporary Organizations (Pittsburgh: Archives
and Museum Informatics, 1994), pp. 222-252.
Chris Hurley, “The Making and the Keeping of
Records: (1) What are Finding Aids For?” Archives and Manuscripts, Vol.
26, No. 1 (May 1998): 58-77.
Frederic Miller, Arranging and Describing
Archives and Manuscripts, pp. 88-108.
Daniel Pitti, “Encoded Archival Description: The Development of an Encoding Standard for
Archival Finding Aids,” American Archivist,
60 (Summer 1997): 268-283.
Optional
Readings:
David Bearman, “Archives and Manuscripts Control
with Bibliographic Utilities: Opportunities and Challenges,” American
Archivist 52 (Winter 1989): 26-39.
Richard Berner and Uli Haller, “Principles of
Archival Inventory Construction,” American Archivist 47 (Spring 1984):
134-155.
Martin Bryan, “SGML and HTML Explained,” 1997 – URL
– http://www.sgml.u-net.com/book/sgml-l.htm
“Digital Libraries: Metadata Resources” on the Web
at http://www.ifla.org/II/metadata.htm
Wendy Duff and Kent Haworth, “Advancing Archival
Description: A Model for Rationalising North American Descriptive Standards,” Archives
and Manuscripts, Vol. 25, No. 2 (November 1997): 194-217.
Wendy Duff, “Will Metadata Replace Archival
Description? A Commentary,” Archivaria 39 (Spring 1995): 33-38.
Luciana Duranti, “Origin and Development of the
Concept of Archival Description,” Archivaria 35 (Spring 1993): 47-54.
“Encoded Archival Description: Part 1 – Context and Theory; Part 2 – Case
Studies,” American Archivist, 60, Nos. 3-4 (Summer and Fall, 1997).
Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Sites on the Web
– Browse – on-line at http://www.loc.gov/ead/eadsites.html
Jennifer Edgecombe, “Finding Aids,” Keeping
Archives, pp. 248-272.
Michael Fox, “Implementing Encoded Archival
Description: An Overview of
Administrative and Technical Considerations,” American Archivist, 60
(Summer 1997): 330-343.
Maria Guercio, “Archival Theory and the Principle of
Provenance for Current Records. Their Impact on Arranging and Inventorying
Electronic Records,” in The Principle of Provenance, pp. 75-86.
Kent Haworth, “The Development of Descriptive
Standards in Canada: A Progress Report,” Archivaria 34 (Summer 1992):
75-90.
Margaret Hedstrom, “Descriptive Standards for
Electronic Records: Deciding What is Essential and Imagining What is Possible,”
Archivaria 36 (Autumn 1993): 53-63.
Steven Hensen, “The Use of Standards in the Application
of the AMC Format,” American Archivist, 49 (Winter 1986): 31-40.
Edward Hill, “The Preparation of Inventories at the
National Archives,” in A Modern Archives Reader, pp. 211-235.
International Council on Archives, “Statement of
Principles Regarding Archival Description,” Archivaria 34 (Summer 1992):
8-16.
Lydia Lucas, “Efficient Finding Aids: Developing a
System for Control of Archives and Manuscripts,” American Archivist 44
(Winter 1981): 21-26.
Heather MacNeil, “Metadata Strategies and Archival
Description: Comparing Apples to Oranges,” Archivaria 39 (Spring 1995):
22-32.
Avra Michelson, “Description and Reference in the
Age of Automation,” American Archivist 50 (Spring 1987): 192-208.
Glyn Moody, “A New Dawn” New Scientist 30
(May 1998) on the Web at http://www.newscientist.com/ns/980530/xml.html
T.R. Schellenberg, The Management of Archives
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), pp. 106-118, 219-239.
SGML/XML Web Page – Browse – on-line at http://www.oasis-org/cover/sgml-xml.html
Society of American Archivists, Committee on Finding
Aids, Inventories and Registers: A Handbook of Techniques and Examples
(Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1976).
Society of American Archivists, Working Group on
Standards for Archival Description, “Standards for Archival Description:
Background Papers,” American Archivist 53 (Winter 1990): 24-108.
C.M. Sperberg-McQueen and Lou Burnard, “A Gentle
Introduction to SGML” on-line at http://www-tei.uic.edu/orgs/tei/sgml/teip3sg/index.html
Robert Spindler and Richard Pearce-Moses, “Does AMC
Mean ‘Archives Made Confusing?’ Patron Understanding of USMARC AMC Catalog
Records,” American Archivist 56 (Spring 1993): 330-341.
Victoria Irons Walch, Standards for Archival
Description: A Handbook (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1994).
David Wallace, “Managing the Present: Metadata as
Archival Description,” Archivaria 39 (Spring 1995): 11-21.
TOPIC FOR
MAJOR PAPER SELECTED AND APPROVED
WEEK 9 –
OCTOBER 27
Reference,
Use, and Outreach
Theoretical Principles; Administering a
Program; Measuring the Effectiveness of Archival Reference Service; ; Public Programs and Advocacy
Readings:
Required
Readings on Reference and Use:
Charles Dollar, Archival Theory and Information
Technologies, pp. 62-65, 78-79.
Mary Jo Pugh, Providing Reference Services for
Archives and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1992).
pp. 41-53, 65-77.
Required
Readings on Public Programs and Advocacy:
Barbara Craig, “What are Clients? Who are the Products? The Future of Archival Public Services in
Perspective,” Archivaria 31 (Winter 1990-1991): 135-141.
Thomas Wilstead and William Nolte, Managing
Archival and Manuscript Repositories (Chicago: Society of American
Archivists, 1991): 79-87.
Optional
Readings on Reference and Use:
Barbara Craig, “Old Myths in New Clothes:
Expectations of Archives Users,” Archivaria 45 (Spring 1998): 118-126.
Bruce Dearstyne, “What is the Use of Archives? A
Challenge for the Profession,” American Archivist 50 (Winter 1987):
76-87.
Lawrence Dowler, “The Role of Use in Defining
Archival Practice and Principles: A Research Agenda for the Availability and
Use of Records,” American Archivist 51 (Winter/Spring 1988): 74-86.
Dianne Beattie, “An Archival User Study:
Researcher’s in the Field of Women’s History,” Archivaria 29 (Winter
1989-1990): 33-50.
Paul Conway, “Facts and Frameworks: An Approach to
Studying the Users of Archives,” American Archivist 49 (Fall 1986):
393-407.
Paul Conway, Partners in Research: Improving
Access to the Nation’s Archives (Pittsburgh: Archives and Museum
Informatics, 1994).
William Mahar, “The Use of User Studies,” Midwestern
Archivist 11, no. 1 (1986): 15-26.
Sigrid McCausland, “Access and Reference Services,”
in Keeping Archives, chapter 10.
Mary Jo Pugh, “The Illusion of Omniscience: Subject
Access and the Reference Archivist,” The American Archivist 45, no. 1
(Winter 1982): 33-44.
Janice Ruth, “Educating the Reference Archivist,” American
Archivist 51 (Summer 1988): 266-276.
Roy Turnbaugh, “Archival Mission and User Studies,” Midwestern
Archivist 11, no. 1 (1986): 27-33.
Elizabeth Yakel and Laura L. Bost, “Understanding
Administrative Use and Users in University Archives,” American Archivist
57, No. 4 (Fall 1994): 596-615.
Optional
Readings on Public Programming and Advocacy:
Gabrielle Blais and David Enns, “From Paper Archives
to People Archives: Public Programming in the Management of Archives,” Archivaria
31 (Winter 1990-1991): 101-113; also can be found in Canadian Archival
Studies and the Rediscovery of Provenance, pp. 443-459.
Terry Cook, “Viewing the World Upside Down:
Reflections on the Theoretical Underpinnings of Archival Public Programming,” Archivaria
31 (Winter 1990-1991): 123-134
Timothy Ericson, “ ‘Preoccupied with our own gardens’:
Outreach and Archivists,” Archivaria 31 (Winter 1990-1991): 114-122.
Elsie Finch, ed., Advocating Archives: An
Introduction to Public Relations for Archivists (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow
Press for the Society of American Archivists, 1994).
Elsie Freeman, “In the Eye of the Beholder: Archives
Administration from the Users Point of View,” American Archivist 47
(Spring 1984): 111-123.
Elsie Freeman Finch, “Making Sure They Want It: Managing Successful Public Programs,” American
Archivist 56, No. 1 (Winter 1993): 70-75.
Elsie Freeman Finch, “Reflections on Myths and
Realities,” Archival Issues, Vol. 20, No. 2 (1995): 115-127.
Ann Pederson, “User Education and Public Relations,”
in Keeping Archives, pp. 306-339.
Page Putnam Miller, “Archival Issues and Programs:
The Central Role of Advocacy,” Public Historian 8 (Summer 1986): 57-70.
WEEK 10 –
NOVEMBER 3
Access to
Unpublished Records – Legal and Ethical Issues Related to Access
SHORT PAPER
NO. 3 DUE
Readings:
Required
Readings:
Challenge to the People’s Right to Know,” American
Archivist 58 (Spring 1995): 202-211.
Kenneth Crews, “Unpublished Manuscripts and the
Right of Fair Use: Copyright Law and the Strategic Management of Information
Resources,” Rare Books & Manuscripts Librarianship 5, no. 2 (1990):
61-70.
Elena Danielson, “The Ethics of Access,” American
Archivist 52 (Winter 1989): 52-62.
Heather MacNeil, Without Consent: The Ethics of
Disclosing Personal Information in Public Archives (Metuchen, N.J.:
Scarecrow Press, 1992), pp. 181-201.
Society of American Archivists, “ Basic Principles for Managing Intellectual Property In the Digital Environment: An Archival Perspective,” on the Web at http://www.archivists.org/governance/resolutions/nha%20response.html
Society of American Archivists, “Code of Ethics for
Archivists” on the Web at http://www.archivists.org/vision/ethics.html
Society of American Archivists, “Copyright, Archival
Institutions and the Digital Environment” on the Web at http://www.archivists.org/governance/resolutions/copyright.html
Society of American Archivists, “Text of Letter sent
on SAA letterhead to members of the Senate and House Judiciary committees in
opposition to the Copyright Term Extension Act” on the Web at http://archivists.org/governance/resolutions/copyextn.html
Optional
Readings:
Armstrong v. the EOP or the Profs Case – material on the Web at
http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/foia/PROFS_CASE/profs.html
Michael Les Benedict, “Historian and the Continuing
Controversy over Fair Use of Unpublished Manuscript Materials,” American
Historical Review 91 (October 1986): 859-881.
Charles Elston, “University Student Records:
Research Use, Privacy Rights and the Buckley Law,” in College and University
Archives: Selected Readings (Chicago: Society of American Archivists,
1979): 68-79.
David Horn, “The Development of Ethics in Archival
Practice,” ,” American Archivist 52 (Winter 1989): 64-71.
Linda M. Matthews, “Copyright and the Duplication of
Personal Papers in Archival Repositories,” Library Trends 32 (Fall
1983): 223-240.
Diane Nixon, “Providing Access to Controversial Public
Records: The Case of the Robert F. Kennedy Assassination Investigation Files,” Public
Historian 11 (Summer 1989): 29-44.
Gary Peterson and Trudy Huskamp Peterson, Archives
and Manuscripts: Law (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1985), pp.
38-46, 60-89.
Alice Robbin, “State Archives and Issues of Personal
Privacy: Policies and Practices,” American Archivist 49 (Spring 1986):
163-175.
Society of American Archivists, “Archival Issues
Raised by Information Stored in Electronic Form” on the Web at http://www.archivists.org/governance/resolutions/archival%20issues.html
WEEK 11
(NOVEMBER 10) AND WEEK 12 (NOVEMBER 17)
RECORDKEEPING
AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT
WEEK 11 and
Week 12: Records Management - Fundamental Principles
Week 12
Readings:
Required
Readings:
Paul Lasewicz, “Riding Out the Apocalypse: The Obsolescence of Traditional Archivy in
the Face of Modern Corporate Dynamics,” Archival Issues, Vol. 22, No. 1
(1997): 61-76.
William Mahar, The Management of College and
University Archives (Chicago: Society of American Archivists and Scarecrow
Press, 1992), pp. 282-303.
Ira Penn, Gail Pennix, and Jim Coulson, Records
Management Handbook (Hampshire, England: Gower Publishing, 1994), pp. 3-11.
David Stephens and David Roberts, “From
Australia: The World’s First National
Standard for Records Management,” Records Management Quarterly (October
1996): 3-7, 62.
Frank Upward, “Structuring the Records Continuum.
Part One, Post-custodial Principles and Properties,” Archives and
Manuscripts, Vol. 24, No. 2 (November 1996): 268-285.
Optional
Readings:
John Djoka and Sheila Conneen, “Records Management
as an Appraisal Tool in College and University Archives,” in Archival
Choices: Managing the Historical Record in an Age of Abundance, pp. 19-40.
F. Gerald Ham, Selecting and Appraising Archives
and Manuscripts (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1992), pp. 25-36
Wilmer Maedke, Mary Robek and Gerald Brown, Information
and Records Management (Encino, CA: Glencoe Publishing Co., 1981), pp.
2-20, 89-150.
Karen Dawley Paul, “Archivists and Records Management,”
in James G. Bradsher (ed.), Managing Archives and Archival Institutions
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), pp. 34-52.
Ira Penn, Gail Pennix, and Jim Coulson, Records
Management Handbook, 50-66, 90-141.
Betty Ricks and Kay Gow, Information Resource
Management (Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co., 1984), pp. 3-63.
Don C. Skemer and Geoffrey P. Williams, “Managing
the Records of Higher Education: The
State of Records Management in American Colleges and Universities,” American
Archivist 53, No. 4 (Fall 1990): 532-547.
Donald Skupsky, Records Retention Procedures
(Information Requirements Clearinghouse, 1990).
Donald Skupsky, Recordkeeping Requirements (
Information Requirements Clearinghouse, 1988).
WEEK 13:
NOVEMBER 24
HOLIDAY
WEEK 14 –
DECEMBER 1
Twentieth
Century “Revolution” in Recordkeeping
MAJOR PAPER
DUE
Readings:
Required
Readings:
Glenda Acland, “Archivist-Keeper, Undertaker or
Auditor?” Archives and Manuscripts 19 (May 1991): 9-15.
David Bearman, “Archival Strategies,” American
Archivist 58, No. 4 (Fall 1995): 380-413
Terry Cook, “Electronic Records, Paper Minds: The
Revolution in Information Management and Archives in the Post-Custodial and
Post-Modernist Era,” Archives and Manuscripts 22 (November 1994):
300-328.
Charles Dollar, “Archivists and Records Managers in
the Information Age,” Archivaria 36 (Autumn 1993): 37-52.
Optional
Readings:
Philip Bantin, “Strategies for Managing Electronic Records: A New Archival Paradigm? An Affirmation of Our Archival Traditions,” Archival Issues, forthcoming
David Bearman, “New Models for Management of
Electronic Records,” in Electronic Evidence: Strategies for Managing Records
in Contemporary Organizations (Pittsburgh: Archives and Museum Informatics,
1994), pp. 278-292.
David Bearman and Margaret Hedstrom, “Reinventing
Archives for Electronic Records:
Alternative Service Delivery Options,” Electronic Records Management
Program Strategies, ed. Margaret Hedstrom (Pittsburgh, PA: Archives and Museum
Informatics, 1993), pp. 82-98.
T.K. Bikson, “Organization Trends and Electronic
Media: Work in Progress,” American
Archivist 57, No. 1 (Winter 1994): 48-68.
Terry Cook, “The Impact of David Bearman on Modern
Archival Thinking: An Essay of Personal Reflection and Critique,” Archives
and Museum Informatic 11 (1997): 15-37.
Terry Cook, “It’s 10 O’Clock: Do You Know Where Your Data Are?” Technology
Review (January 1995) on the Web at http://www.techreview.com/articles/dec94/cook.html
Jim Coulson, “Our Professional Responsibility,” Records
Management Quarterly (October 1998): 8-14.
Thomas H. Davenport, Process Innovation.
Reengineering Work through Information Technology (Boston: Harvard Business School Press,
1993): 71-93.
Charles
Dollar, The Impact of Information Technologies on Archival Principles and
Methods (Macerata, Italy: University of Macerata, 1992), pp. 53-55, 75
Linda Henry, “Schellenberg in Cyberspace,” American
Archivist, Vol. 61, No. 2 (Fall 1998): 309-327.
Richard Kesner, “Automated Information Management:
Is There a Role for the Archivist in the Office of the Future?” Archivaria
19 (Winter 1984-1985): 162-172.
Heather MacNeil, “Archival Theory and Practice: Between Two Paradigms,” Archivaria 37
(Spring 1994): 6-20.
Sue McKemmish, “Recordkeeping, Accountability and
Continuity: The Australian Reality,” in
Archival Documents. Providing Accountability Through Recordkeeping, Sue
McKemmish and Frank Upward, eds. Melbourne, Ancora Press, 1993), pp. 9-26.
Sue McKemmish and Frank Upward, “Somewhere Beyond
Custody,” Archives and Manuscripts 22 (May 1994): 136-149.
Greg
O’Shea and David Roberts, “Living in a Digital World: Reorganizing the Electronic and Post-Custodial Realities,” Archives
and Manuscripts, Vol. 24, No. 2 (November 1996): 286-311.
Ann Pederson, “Empowering Archival
Effectiveness: ‘Archival Strategies’ as
Innovation,” American Archivist 58, No. 4 (Fall 1995): 430-453.
David Stephens, “Megatrends in Records Management,”
(January 1998): 3-9.
Hugh A. Taylor, “Transformation in the
Archives: Technological Adjustment or
Paradigm Shift?”
in Canadian Archival Studies and the Rediscovery
of Provenance, Tom Nesmith, ed. (Metuchen, N.J., & London: SAA and ACA in association with The
Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1993), pp. 227-249.
Frank Upward, “The Significance of Bearman’s ‘Simple
Shared Goal’ for Australian Records Managers,” in Archival Documents,
McKemmish and Upward eds., pp. 229-244.
Ian Wilson, “Reflections on ‘Archival
Strategies,’” American Archivist,
58, No. 4 (Fall 1995): 414-428.
Richard Cox and Edie Rasmussen, “Reinventing the Information
Professions and the Argument for Specialization in LIS Education: Case Studies
in Archives and Information Technology,” Journal for Education for Library
and Information Science,” Vol. 38, No. 4 (Fall 1997): 255-267.
Terry Eastwood, “Nurturing Archival Education in the
University,” in Canadian Archival Studies and the Rediscovery of Provenance,
pp. 475-507; can also be found in The
American Archivist 51 (Summer 1988): pp. 228-252.
Timothy Ericson, “Forming ‘Structures of Exquisite
Beauty’: Archivists and Education,” Archivaria 42 (Fall 1996): 118-125.
Society of American Archivists, “Development of a
Curriculum for a Master of Archival Studies Degree” on the Web at http://www.archivists.org/education/masguide.html
Optional
Readings:
Carol Couture, “Today’s Students, Tomorrow’s
Archivists: Present-Day Focus and Development as Determinants of Archival
Science in the Twenty-First Century,” Archivaria 42 (Fall 1996): 95-104.
Richard Cox, “The Master of Archival Studies and
American Education Standards: An Argument for the Continued Development of
Graduate Archival Education in the United States,” Archivaria 36 (Autumn
1993): 221-231.
Luciana Duranti, “The Archival Body of Knowledge: Archival Theory, Method, and Practice, and
Graduate and Continuing Education, Journal of Education for Library and
Information Science 34 (Winter 1993): 8-24.
Terry Eastwood, “Reforming the Archival Curriculum
to Meet Contemporary Needs,” Archivaria 42 (Fall 1996): 80-88.
Alan D. Gabehart, “Qualifications Desired by
Employers for Entry-Level Archivists in the United States,” American Archivist 55, No. 3 (Summer
1992): 420-439.
F. Gerald Ham, Frank Boles, et.al., “Is the Past
Still Prologue?: History and Archival Education,” American Archivist,
56, No. 4 (Fall 1993): 718-729.
Margaret Hedstrom, “Teaching Archivists About
Electronic Records and Automated Techniques: A Needs Assessment,” American
Archivist 56, No. 3 (Summer 1993): 424-433.
Tom Nesmith, “Hugh Taylor’s Contextual Idea for
Archives and the Foundation of Graduate Education in Archival Studies, “ in
Barbara L. Craig, ed., The Archival Imagination: Essays in Honour of Hugh A. Taylor (Ottawa: Association
of Canadian Archivists, 1992), pp. 13-37.
Tom Nesmith, “ ‘Professional Education in the Most
Expansive Sense’: What Will the Archivist Need to Know in the Twenty-First
Century,” Archivaria 42 (Fall 1996): 89-94.
James O’Toole,
“The Archival Curriculum: Where
Are We Now?” Archival Issues, Vol. 22, No. 2 (1997): 103-113.
Society of American Archivists, “Directory of
Archival Education Programs” on the Web at http://www.archivists.org/education/prog.html
Tyler Walters, “Creating a Front Door to Archival
Knowledge in the United States:
Guidelines for a Master of Archival Studies Degree,” Archival Issues,
18, No. 2 (1993): 77-95.
Tyler Walters, “Possible Educations for
Archivists: Integrating Graduate
Archival Education with Public History Programs,” American Archivist 54,
No. 4 (Fall 1991): 484-492.
Tyler Walters, “Rediscovering the Theoretical Base
of Records Management and Its Implications for Graduate Education: Searching for the New School of Information
Studies,” Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 36
(Spring 1995): 139-154.