LIS 2223 Archival Access and Advocacy, Spring
Term 2006
Instructor: Richard J. Cox
Office
SIS 614
Telephone: 412-624-3245
Office Hours: Mondays
E-mail: rcox@mail.sis.pitt.edu
or rjcox111@comcast.net
The successful application of the
archival functions of reference or access and advocacy is essential to the use
of archival records and historical manuscripts and the adequate management (and
health) of the programs caring for them.
Archival reference or access to
archives and historical records is a fundamental and necessary function of the
professional archivist and the archival repository. This archival
function possesses significant differences from related functions in other
information professions because of the nature of the records being
serviced.
Archival advocacy, often called public
programming or outreach, which archivists have adopted to build public support
for their programs, is a closely related function. Advocacy is particularly
important to archivists, manuscripts curators and other records professionals
because of the many competing information sources and because of technological
and other changes to the manner in which archives and historical records are
made accessible.
Archival access and advocacy are the
archival functions bridging the professional work of archivists and other
records professionals to a variety of publics interested in the welfare of the
documentary heritage. Archival access and advocacy depends on the quality
of appraisal and descriptive work while also enhancing both the meaning and
understanding of archives as a public good. These functions also
highlight the value of records for evidence, information, societal and
organizational memory, and accountability.
Given the nature of these archival
functions, ones certainly not unique to the world of archives and records
administration, it is logical that a considerable portion of the focus of this
course will be on public policy and ethics issues as well. The archivist’s and records
manager’s interest in and investment of energies in policy and ethical matters
has increased dramatically in the past two decades, and this course will
reflect these changes.
The purposes of this course are to
introduce students to the theoretical foundations, principles,
and practices of archival access and advocacy so that they are proficient in
carrying out these crucial functions.
Students will learn about
§
how archival records series and
manuscript collections are handled in the reference room setting
§
increasing use of online systems and
the Internet/World Wide Web to provide both access to and advocacy on behalf of
archives and historical manuscripts programs
§
factors supporting the importance of
understanding actual and potential use of archival records
§
how use relates to archival advocacy
§
issues such as media coverage of
archives and historical manuscripts, tensions between privacy and access, national
security and the implications for records professionals, and intellectual
property and copyright
§
influence of public policy and applied
ethics on archival access and advocacy
§
other critical matters affecting the
use of archives and historical records.
Course Outline
This course will consist of two
sections:
§
detailed review of the basic
principles and methodologies of archival reference and
access
§
consideration of archival public
programming, outreach, and advocacy, with a focus on particular case studies
regarding the importance of records and archives.
Course Requirements and Grading: Masters Students.
There are a number of requirements for
the course. Students will be expected to be able to discuss the reading
assignments and to participate in class discussions. The class will
generally be run like a seminar, with discussions focusing on the assigned
readings; the instructor will provide formal introductory lectures on key
aspects of archival arrangement, description, and reference throughout the
course. Each student will be expected to complete one major assignment.
Failure to complete this assignment will result in a failing grade in the course.
The major assignment can be an analysis
of use of records in a particular archives or records repository, a review of a
case study reflecting the value of records and archives in society, or a
critical evaluation of the use by archives of Web homepages for providing
access to their records (an examination of at least five to ten archives
homepages on the World Wide Web). This assignment is due by session 14
(April 18, 2006) of the course.
The analysis of the archives homepages includes the writing of a
critical evaluation of how the repositories are treating finding aids, the
tools being offered for determining holdings, how the value of records are
being described, and any other aspects the student believes are relevant to the
topic of archival access and advocacy. Students deciding to do this assignment
should use http://www.uidaho.edu/special-collections/Other.Repositories.html
, which is a master web site for archives home pages. Students should use
the home pages to contact the archivist or archivists involved in its design in
order to write the evaluation. And, the students should consider the
effectiveness, potential or real, of making traditional finding aids available
over the Internet. This paper should be at least 15 pages. The paper needs to be a critical assessment,
not merely a descriptive one.
In this assignment, students could
focus on one repository homepage, compare three to five homepages of similar
repository type (such as state government archives or regional historical
societies), or compare and contrast three to five homepages of different types
of repositories (such as contrasting municipal government to state government
repositories or evaluating the differences and similarities of private local
historical societies to publicly funded government records programs). For examples
of such
essays, students should read William Landis, “Archival Outreach on the World
Wide Web,” Archival Issues 20, no. 2
(1995): 129-147, Jenni Davidson and Donna McRostie, “Webbed Feet: Navigating
the Net,” Archives and Manuscripts 24
(November 1996), and David Wallace, “Archival Repositories on the World Wide
Web: A Preliminary Survey and Analysis,” Archives
and Museum Informatics 9, no. 2 (1995): 150-168 (bearing in mind
that these are early explorations of the Web and its use). It is expected that students will
carry out this evaluation by examining scholarly and other critical evaluation
of the Web, the topical areas or programmatic types represented by the archival
repositories, and other relevant literature necessary for producing a
thoughtful and comprehensive analysis.
The review of the case study must focus on one particular incident,
event, movement, or controversy that stresses the importance of records and
archives in society. The case study should review the history and details
of the particular case, consider how or if archivists and other records
professionals were involved in the case, and summarize what the case adds to
our understanding of the value of records in society. Examples of article
length analyses of such case studies are David Bearman, "The Implications
of Armstrong v. Executive Office of the President for the Archival Management of
Electronic Records," American
Archivist 56 (Fall 1993): 674-689 and Bruce P. Montgomery, "Nixon's
Legal Legacy: White House Papers and the Constitution," American Archivist 56 (Fall 1993):
586-613. Students should also review the various essays in Richard J. Cox
and David A. Wallace, eds., Archives and
the Public Good: Accountability and Records in Modern Society (
The analysis of use of records in a particular archives or records
repository must result in a detailed description of use in a particular
archives or records repository, based either on three days of observation of
reference interactions or an analysis of user records the archives or records
repository maintains. The student is responsible for contacting and
working out arrangements for conducting the user analysis. The student
needs to determine a particular methodology for the study, such as David
Bearman, "User Presentation Language in Archives," Archives and Museum Informatics 3
(Winter 1989-90): 3-7, and follow this particular methodology, producing a
comparison of findings.
Students who are expanding on papers
completed in LIS 2220, Records and Knowledge Management, should be more
specific in their written paper proposal handed in on session four (February 1,
2005). Students continuing to work on such papers must demonstrate a
considerably wider range of reading of the appropriate professional literature
and/or a more sophisticated research methodology (as well as demonstrating a
connection with the topics being treated in this course). In order to receive
a passing grade the student will have to present a paper that must reflect
deeper thinking about the topic and a greater grasp of the nuances of
professional debate, theory, methodology, and practice. It is also
expected that these papers will be longer than the 20-25 pages length because
of this fuller treatment by the student. The final version of this paper
is also due week 14 (
The final grade for Masters students
will be based on the following:
Class participation and discussion
40%
Project or Research
Paper
60%
Whatever major writing activity the
student is undertaking must be described in a page-long statement handed in on
week 4 (January 31, 2006) of this course.
Course Requirements and Grading: Doctoral Students
The primary assignment for doctoral
students taking this course is a major, publishable paper of 25-35 pages on any
aspect of archival access, reference, or advocacy that the student is
interested in or that relates to the student's ongoing dissertation research.
This paper should show a wide
reading of the existing literature and can look at the topic from a theoretical
or applied perspective. Broad examples of topics for this paper are as
follows:
§
citation analysis and the
implications for archival reference services and access
§
impact of electronic records and
other new information technologies on archival reference and access
§
implications of media coverage of archives
and records matters (such as Holocaust survivors’ assets, tobacco industry
litigation, or the Enola Gay exhibition controversy) for archival access and
advocacy
§
implications of issues like
intellectual property, privacy, and government secrecy for archival access and
advocacy
Students should hand in a one page
description of what they intend to look at and write about in this paper by the
fourth class session (January 31, 2006). The paper is due the last week
of the course (April 25, 2006).
Doctoral students working in, or who
have worked in, archival repositories are encouraged to select topics for this
longer assignment relating to these institutional settings and repositories.
Students interested in pursuing this kind of focused assignment should plan to
make prior arrangements with the
Instructor.
In writing this paper students are
required to have mastered the readings in this syllabus, and they should be
able to demonstrate that they have examined relevant literature and studies in
related fields such as library and information science and historical studies.
Doctoral students who go beyond the archival literature in their background
reading will do better on these papers, producing something with potential for
publication.
The final grade for Doctoral
students will be based on the following:
§
Class participation and discussion
(30%)
§
Research paper (70%)
Students should adhere to the latest
edition of the Chicago Manual of Style
in the preparation of their papers. Students should acquire, if they do
not have a copy already, the latest edition of Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses,
and Dissertations published by the
Any paper submitted not meeting the
standards of this style manual will lose
one letter grade for the particular assignment.
Course Requirements and Grading: Class Participation and
Discussion
Class participation and discussion,
as the final grade weighing reflects, are extremely essential for this course's
success and the student's educational experience:
Each student will be expected to
participate fully and regularly in class discussions about the readings,
session topics, and other matters related to archival science.
Each student will be expected to
meet at least once during the course
with the Instructor in order to discuss his or her progress and work on the
assignments.
Students who do not fully participate in class discussions will receive no higher
than a "B" for this course.
The Instructor will take into account
the possibility of a larger class size affecting class participation when
considering the grade for the course.
Each student also will be expected
to read the daily national edition (seven day coverage) of the New York Times, making note of news and
other coverage of stories with implications for archives and records
management. Students will be expected to bring to class relevant articles
for discussion and analysis. A portion of the beginning of each class
will be devoted to these discussions. Students should check into the
availability of a subscription to this newspaper, or make arrangements with a
local bookstore or newsstand for reserving a daily copy of this newspaper for
purchase. Students also can read the
newspaper online, but the online version is different from the print edition
and provides a different experience.
If students need to take an
incomplete, they must request permission to do so from the Instructor by Week
14 (April 18). Students, unless there are extremely adverse or emergency
situations, will have until
Each week includes a set of required
readings. Students should read the required essays and books and be
prepared to discuss them in class and to draw on them for their writing assignments.
The reading list is not intended to be comprehensive, but it is rather intended
to introduce students to the classic writings and most important texts on the
topic of archival access and advocacy.
A number of books are recommended
for purchase through the Society of American Archivists, including
Mary Jo Pugh, Providing Reference Services for Archives and Manuscripts (
Elsie Freeman Finch, ed., Advocating Archives: An Introduction to
Public Relations for Archivists (Metuchen, New Jersey: Society of American
Archivists and the Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1994).
Karen Benedict, Ethics and the Archival Profession: Introduction and Case Studies (
Menzi L. Behrnd-Klodt and Peter J.
Wosh, eds., Privacy and Confidentiality
Perspectives: Archivists and Archival Records (
Other volumes should be purchased
through any online or other bookstore of the student's choice (some of these
volumes also may be available for purchase through the Society of American
Archivists); the required volumes include:
Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, Margaret
Jacob, Telling the Truth About History
(New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1994).
Erna Paris, Long Shadows: Truth, Lies and History (
Deborah Lipstadt, History on Trial: My Day in Court with David
Irving (
Richard J. Evans, Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and
the David Irving Trial (
Athan G. Theoharis, ed., A Culture of Secrecy: The Government Versus
the People’s Right to Know (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1998).
Timothy W. Luke, Museum Politics: Power Plays at the
Exhibition (
Barbie Zelizer, Covering the Body: The Kennedy Assassination, the Media, and the
Shaping of Collective Memory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1992).
Janna Malamud Smith, Private Matters: In Defense of the Personal
Life (Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., 1997).
Edwin Black,
Richard J. Cox and David A. Wallace,
eds., Archives and the Public Good:
Accountability and Records in Modern Society (
Richard J. Cox, Flowers After the Funeral: Reflections on the
Post-9/11 Digital Age (
The books are available at the
Course Schedule
INTRODUCTION
Session 1 (January 10, 2006)
Introduction to Course and Course
Requirements
Lecture: “
Recommended
Mark Edmundson, Why Read? (
Richard Rhodes, How to Write: Advice and Reflections (New York: Quill, 1995).
Session 2 (January 17, 2006)
What Are Archival Access, Reference,
and Advocacy? History and Definitions; Their Place in Archival Institutions;
Their Relationship to Each Other; Issues and Debates.
Lecture: “The Demise of the Archival Field
of Dreams in the Late Twentieth Century”
Required
Sue E. Holbert, Archives and Manuscripts: Reference & Access (Chicago: Society
of American Archivists, 1977).
Ann E. Pederson and Gail Farr, Archives & Manuscripts: Public Programs (Chicago: Society of American
Archivists, 1982).
Elsie Freeman Finch, ed., Advocating Archives: An Introduction to
Public Relations for Archivists (Metuchen, New Jersey: Society of American
Archivists and the Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1994).
Trudy H. Peterson, “
David B. Gracy, “Archivists, You Are
What People Think You Keep,” American
Archivist 52 (1989): 72-78.
Recommended
Lucille Whalen, ed., Reference Services in Archives (New
York: Haworth Press, 1986). Read selectively.
Philip C. Brooks, Research in Archives: The Use of Unpublished
Primary Sources (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969).
SECTION ONE: ARCHIVAL REFERENCE AND
ACCESS
Session 3 (January 24, 2006)
Administering Archival Reference
Programs
Lecture:
“The Reference Room as Archival Research Laboratory”
Required
Paul Conway, “Facts and Frameworks:
An Approach to Studying the Users of Archives,” American Archivist 49 (Fall 1986): 393-407.
Mary Jo Pugh, Providing Reference Services for Archives and Manuscripts (
Bruce W. Dearstyne, “What Is the Use
of Archives? A Challenge for the Profession,” American Archivist 50 (Winter 1987): 76-87.
Elsie T. Freeman, “In the Eye of the
Beholder: Archives Administration from the User’s Point of View,” American Archivist 47 (Spring 1984):
111-23.
Linda J. Long, “Question Negotiation
in the Archival Setting: The Use of Interpersonal Communication Techniques in
the Reference Interview,” American
Archivist 52 (1989): 40-50.
Avra Michelson, “Description and
Reference in the Age of Automation,” American
Archivist 50 (Spring 1987): 192-208.
Recommended
Laura B. Cohen, ed. Reference Services for Archives and
Manuscripts (New York: Haworth Press, Inc., 1997). Read selectively.
Frank G. Burke, Research and the Manuscript Tradition (Metuchen, New Jersey:
Scarecrow Press, 1997)
Janice E. Ruth, “Educating the
Reference Archivist,” American Archivist
51 (Summer 1988): 266-76.
Mary Jo Pugh, “The Illusion of
Omniscience: Subject Access and the Reference Archivist,” American Archivist 45 (Winter 1982): 33-44.
Susan L. Malbin, “The Reference
Interview in Archival Literature,” College
and Research Libraries (January 1997): 69-80.
Session 4 (January 31, 2006)
Testing Archival Access and
Reference: Research and Case Studies
Lecture:
“Do We Know Why Archival Records Are Used?”
Required
William J. Maher, “The Use of User
Studies,” Midwestern Archivist 11,
no. 1 (1986): 15-26.
Paul Conway, Partners in Research; Improving Access to the Nation’s Archives
(Pittsburgh: Archives and Museum Informatics, 1994). Read selectively.
Richard H. Lytle, “Intellectual
Access to Archives: I. Provenance and Content Indexing Methods of Subject
Retrieval,” American Archivist 43
(Winter 1980): 64-75; “Report of an Experiment Comparing Provenance and Content
Indexing Methods of Subject Retrieval,” ibid.
(Spring 1980): 191-206.
David Bearman, “User Presentation
Language in Archives,” Archives and
Museum Informatics 3 (Winter 1989-90): 3-7.
Ann D. Gordon, Using the Nation’s Documentary Heritage (Washington, D.C.:
Historical Documents Study, 1992). Read selectively.