University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
School of Information Studies
L & I SCI 750
Arrangement and Description in Archives
Fall 2010
September 2 – December 14, 2010
ONLINE
Instructor: Amy Cooper Cary
Office: 588 Bolton Hall
Office Hours: By Appointment (e-mail or phone)
Phone : 414-229-6929
E-mail:
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course allows students to develop the intellectual framework and critical evaluation skills necessary for the arrangement and description of archival collections.
PREREQUISITES:
L&I SCI 650 – Introduction to Modern Archives Administration is a prerequisite for this course.
COMPETENCIES and OBJECTIVES:
Upon completion of the course, the student should have ability to:
· Understand past, present and future descriptive practices
· Develop a familiarity with management issues and related archival functions that pertain to Arrangement and Description
· Process a small collection or record series to balance theory with practice
· Develop a knowledge of the core elements and standards in the profession
· Understand how a broad range of technologies are used by archivists to manage and provide access to holdings
· Develop descriptive writing skills and basic MARC record skills
· Develop an understanding of Internet-based descriptive systems
TEXTS: There will be one required text for this course from the Archives Fundamentals Series II, published by SAA.
REQUIRED:Roe, Kathleen D. Arranging and Describing Archives & Manuscripts. Chicago. Society of American Archivists. 2005.
Journal articles and other assigned readings will also be available via UWM E-Reserve or in the CONTENT section of the D2L Course Site.
Other resources you may wish to consult (Not Required):
· SAA Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology that is available online at: http://www.archivists.org/glossary/
· Anglo-American Cataloging Rules, 2nd Ed., 1988 revision. Chicago: American Library Association, 1988, With Amendments 1993. Chicago: ALA, 1993. See also Cataloger’s Desktop (30 day free trial) http://www.loc.gov/cds/desktop/
· Library of Congress Subject Headings [Published yearly]
COURSE REQUIREMENTS & POLICIES:
Attendance and Participation: Class "attendance" is measured through participation in all discussion forums and through evidence of completing the reading assignments. Core reading assignments given in advance of discussions are designed to facilitate active participation by providing a basic level of familiarity with the topic being discussed.
I expect everyone to participate in all discussion threads, as assigned each week on the syllabus. Although personal concerns may arise that cause students to participate at varying levels each week, any student who "misses" more than three of our weekly meetings will not pass the course. You “miss” the course when you do not post to any discussion forum during an entire week (Sunday – Monday), without contacting me to request an excused absence. Late postings (after the end of the week) do not count towards a particular week’s discussion. For a thorough description of standards of class participation, please see CLASS PARTICIPATION GUIDELINES in the Content section of the D2L site.
Participation by Students with Disabilities: It is UWM policy that no student will be discriminated against because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, disability, ancestry, age, pregnancy, marital or parental status, political affiliation or belief, arrest or conviction records or disabled veteran or Vietnam era veteran status. It is expected that mutual respect will be practiced in this course with regard to these factors as well as with regard to issues of academic freedom. It is the goal of the class that everyone feel comfortable in fully participating in all discussions. Anyone needing special accommodations in order to meet any of the requirements of this course, please contact the instructor as soon as possible.
Plagiarism: In accordance with University policy (see the appropriate part of the Graduate Student and Faculty Handbook), plagiarism in assignments, exams, or other class contributions will not be tolerated. This includes uncited cutting and pasting from Internet resources. Evidence of plagiarism will be handled within the guidelines of Student Academic Disciplinary Procedures of the Wisconsin Administrative Code (http://folio.legis.state.wi.us/cgi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=47234300&infobase=code.nfo&jump=ch.%20uws%2014). If you are unsure about the definition of plagiarism, see the UWM Libraries tutorial at http://www.uwm.edu/Libraries/courses/searchpath/mod6/04-plagiarism.html
D2L and Student Privacy: Certain SOIS courses utilize the instructional technology Desire to Learn (D2L) to facilitate online learning. D2L provides instructors the ability to view both individual data points and aggregate course statistics, including the dates and times individual students access the system, what pages a student has viewed, the duration of visits, and the IP address of the computer used to access the course website. This information is kept confidential in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), but may be used for student evaluation.
For other UWM policies applicable to this course, please see the SOIS Uniform Policy Statement for Syllabi, in the CONTENT of the D2L site.
COURSE EXPLANATION & KEY COURSE ELEMENTS:
In addition to the graded assignments, there are several key elements to this class.
Processing a Digitized Collection: In order to give you processing experience in a DE environment, this class is designed around the processing of a single collection of digitized material. The material in question is the property of the Milwaukee City Archives. Students may not use any part of the collection materials for personal use in websites, blogs and other printed or electronic representations without the express permission of the Archivist at the Milwaukee City Archives.
Readings Discussions: Readings are assigned weekly to engage students in the discussion of archival theory and literature. Readings in this course have been selected to give students both a sense of some of the current archival literature pertaining to arrangement and description, as well as exposure to some of the older, "classic" articles. Readings are reviewed primarily through threaded discussion questions. The Instructor will also post any pertinent summaries or lectures to the board each week. Participation in this aspect of class will be included in the area of Attendance and Participation as noted above.
Processing Discussion Forum: Each student will contribute to a weekly “practical” discussion of processing issues on the D2L discussion board. Discussion will take place either in the form of analysis of case studies, evaluative exercises, or comments on the large scale processing project that you’re working on. Participation in this aspect of class will be included in the area of Attendance and Participation as noted above.
E-Guest Forums: Guest experts will join the class to discuss specific topics during specific weeks. These are listed in the syllabus. Each student will be expected to contribute to the discussion during these weeks. Participation in this aspect of class will be included in the area of Attendance and Participation as noted above.
WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS & GRADING: [Due dates are specified in the chart below]
Participation: Participation includes participating in all discussion aspects of the class. Because we are in an online forum, participation is an extremely important aspect of the course. Please review the CLASS PARTICIPATION GUIDELINES in the Content section of the D2L site. (20%)
Processing Reports: While you are processing your collections, you will be responsible for bi-weekly written report (2 – 4 pages) discussing the processing decisions you are making and the issues you are facing. These are informal, reflective writings, and may encompass methodology, problems you’re encountering, preservation concerns or other issues that the readings make you consider when processing the collection. 4 Assignments, 5 points each. (20%)
Preliminary Arrangement Report: A preliminary report on the potential arrangement for the collection. 10 points (10%)
MARC Record: Create an accurate MARC record at the collection level for the collection. 10 points (10%)
EAD Inventories Survey: You will be asked to choose two repositories that present their descriptions using Encoded Archival Description (at least one must describe an electronic records series). Critically analyze at least 2 collection-level records from each repository. Provide a written essay of 2 – 4 pages discussing these records. 10 points (10%)
Final Project: Provide a complete finding aid for the collection, using the template provided by the Milwaukee Public Library Milwaukee City Archives. Include a corrected version of your MARC record for the collection. 30 points (30%)
Assignments must be submitted to the D2L Drop Box, or by Electronic Mail no later than midnight on the date due. All assignments must adhere to the current Chicago Manual of Style guidelines in all matters of format, citation, and documentation. Spacing on assignments should be 1.5 spaces between lines, with 1” margins.
GRADING
Put your name and the assignment date on all assignments. All due dates assume that the assignment will be turned in before MIDNIGHT on the date due. If you turn in an assignment after midnight, you will be marked down.
Category / Percentage / Points / Due DatesParticipation / 20% / 20
Processing Reports / 20% / 20 (4 assignments, 5 points each) / #1: October 17
#2 October 24
#3: November 7
#4:
Preliminary Arrangement Report / 10% / 10 / October 31
MARC Record / 10% / 10 / November 21
EAD Inventories Survey / 10% / 10 / December 5
Final Finding Aid / 30% / 30 / FRIDAY DECEMBER 17
TOTAL / 100% / 100 Points
Grading scale for ALL students:
100 – 95 / A / 76 – 73 / C94 – 90 / A- / 72 – 70 / C-
89 – 87 / B+ / 69 – 67 / D+
86 – 83 / B / 66 – 63 / D
82 – 80 / B- / 62 – 60 / D-
79 – 77 / C+ / Below 60 / F
COURSE SCHEDULE:
Week 1
Sept. 2nd – 11th / Introduction to key concepts
Course Introductions
Syllabus Discussion / · Roe, Introduction and Chapter 1, xiii – 10.
· Carmicheal, David. Organizing Archival Records. New York: AltaMira Press, 2004. Chapters 1 – 2, pp 1 – 17.
· Sweeney, Shelley. “The Ambiguous Origins of the Archival Principle of ‘Provenance.’” Libraries and the Cultural Record 43:2 (2008), 193 – 213. [CONTENT]
1
WEEK: / TOPICS, ACTIVITES, & ASSIGNMENTS / READINGS:Week 2
Sept. 12th – 18th / Arrangement Principles
Processing Forum: Case Study #1 (from Carmicheal, David. Organizing Archival Records) / · Roe, Chapters 2 and 3
· Muller, S., J. A. Feith and R. Fruin. Manual for the Arrangement and Description of Archives, 2nd. Ed. Trans. Arthur H. Leavitt. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2003, v – 99. (For pages 12 – 99, read each numbered “rule” and scan the commentaries).
· Schellenberg, T. R. Modern Archives: Principles and Techniques. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. Chapter 14, pp. 169 – 193. Available online at http://www2.archivists.org/sites/all/files/ModernArchives-Schellenberg.pdf
· Holmes, Oliver W. “Archival Arrangement – Five Different Operations at Five Different Levels.” American Archivist 27(January 1964): 21 – 41.
· Hackbart Dean, Strongest Link: Management and Processing of Archival Collections.” Archival Issues 27:2 (2002), 125 – 136.
1
WEEK: / TOPICS, ACTIVITES, & ASSIGNMENTS / READINGS:Week 3
Sept. 19th – 25th / Arrangement, Continued
Processing Forum: Case Study #2 (from Carmicheal, David. Organizing Archival Records) / · Greene, Mark and Meissner, Dennis. “More Product, Less Process: Revamping Traditional Archival Processing.” The American Archivist 68:2 (Fall/Winter 2005), 208 – 263.
· Hunter, Gregory. Developing and Maintaining Practical Archives. New York: Neal Schumann, 2003, Chapter 5.
· Boles, Frank. “Disrespecting Original Order.” American Archivist 45 (Winter 1982): 26 – 32.
· Miller, Frederic. Arranging and Describing Archives and Manuscripts. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990, chapter 7.
1
WEEK: / TOPICS, ACTIVITES, & ASSIGNMENTS / READINGS:Week 4
Sept. 26th – Oct. 2nd / The Broader Context: Relationships to Appraisal, Accessioning Preservation and Description
Processing Forum: Case Study #3 (from Carmicheal, David. Organizing Archival Records) / · Roe, pp. 45 – 70.
· Boles, Frank. Selecting and Appraising Archives and Manuscripts. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2005. Chapters 5, 6. [CONTENT]
· Ritzenthaler, Mary Lynn. Preserving Archives and Manuscripts, 2nd Edition. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2010. Chapter 8, pp. 224 – 263. [CONTENT]
· Miller, Frederic M. Arranging and Describing Archives and Manuscripts. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1990. Chapter 4.
· Meehan, Jennifer. “Making the Leap from Parts to Whole: Evidence and Inference in Archival Arrangement and Description.” The American Archivist, 72 (Spring/Summer 2009): 72 – 90. [CONTENT]
1
WEEK: / TOPICS, ACTIVITES, & ASSIGNMENTS / READINGS:Week 5
Oct. 3rd – 9th / What do we do with a digital collection? Electronic formats and other types of materials….
FINAL PROJECT: Digital Collection Accessible: Mss Collection #10 Carl Pretrius Dietz During this week, you’ll receive instructions on how to download the digital collection that you’ll be working on this semester. Full instructions for the final project will be available in CONTENT.
Processing Forum: Digital Archival Collections: a comparative discussion / · The Mildred Wirt Benson Digital Collection, University of Iowa Digital Library http://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/mwb/
· Wolfe, J. “The Mildred Wirt Benson Digital Collection: Digitizing the Mysterious Nancy Drew Author.” Microform and Imaging Review 37:1 (Winter 2008), 34 – 37.
· Cunningham, Adrian. “Digital Curation / Digital Archiving: A View from the National Archives of Australia.” The American Archivist 71(Fall/Winter 2008): 530 – 543. [CONTENT]
· Hazen, D. et al. , “Selecting Research Collections for Digitization,” CLIR REPORTS #74, August 1998. Available at http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/hazen/pub74.html -- see especially “Describing, Delivering and Retaining the Digital Product.”
· Eisloeffel, Paul J. Chapter 7: "Cataloging," in The Film Preservation Guide: The Basics for Archives, Libraries, and Museums. San Fransisco: National Film Preservation Foundation, 2004. pp. 70-75. Available on-line at http://www.filmpreservation.org/preservation/fpg_7.pdf.
· Stielow, Frederick J. The Management of Oral History Sound Archives. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1986. Chapter 4: "The Processing and Organization of Collections," pp. 53-82.
1
WEEK: / TOPICS, ACTIVITES, & ASSIGNMENTS / READINGS:Week 6
Oct. 10th – 16th / “More Product Less Process” and other New Approaches
Processing Forum: Case Study #4 (from Carmicheal, David. Organizing Archival Records)
Discussion of Processing Issues
Processing Report #1 Due Sunday October 17. / · REVIEW: Greene, M. A., et. al., “More Product, Less Process: Revamping Traditional Archival Processing” The American Archivist v. 68 no. 2 (Fall/Winter 2005) p. 208-63.
· Hyry, Tom. “More for Less in Archives.” Annotation 33:2 (Spring 2007) p. 7 – 10.
· Weideman, C. “Accessioning as Processing” The American Archivist v. 69 no. 2 (Fall/Winter 2006) p. 274-83
· McCrea, D. E. “Getting More for Less: Testing a New Processing Model at the University of Montana.” The American Archivist v. 69 no. 2 (Fall/Winter 2006) p. 284-90
· Van Ness, Carl. “Much Ado about Paper Clips: ‘More Product, Less Process’ and the Modern Manuscript Repository.” The American Archivist vol. 73 (Spring /Summer 2010): 129 – 145. [CONTENT]
· Prom, Christopher J. “Optimum Access? Processing in College and University Archives.” The American Archivist 73 (Spring/Summer 2010): 146 – 174. [CONTENT]
· Meissner, Dennis. “Introducing EAC-CPF 2010.” Archival Outlook (May/June, 2010). 10 – 11. [CONTENT]
1