In Defense of Allowing Scanners in Research Rooms

At the Modern Archives Institute this past winter, lecturer after lecturer mourned the fact that the National Archives allows scanners in its research rooms, often citing that once you allow scanners in, you can never turn back. They encouraged us to ban scanners in our own research rooms and to only let staff/volunteers digitize records. I have never agreed with this concept, for a number of reasons. I believe that the damage done by researchers scanning records is negligible and in this economy, we are wasting money by trying to control things.

One argument against scanners is that researchers do not know how to properly handle records while scanning them. However, most researchers who bring scanners are not new. They are aware that they need copies of a large amount of records and have to make an investment in scanner. These researchers have used records before and therefore know how to handle them. And if they don’t handle records properly, shouldn’t your reference staff be monitoring them? By and large, the majority of the digitization staff hired by archives that I have met had little to no training or experience with records. I’ve seen staff handle records in a very poor manner, mainly because they are not qualified to work in an archive in the first place.

Another argument against scanners is the light exposure. It’s true that extended light exposure, like other bad environmental conditions, can damage certain types of records. But one scan isn’t going to do much damage. Yes, we should be worried if a record is so popular that it is copied fifty times in one year by researchers. But if a record is this popular with researchers, then shouldn’t it already be a priority for digitization for the repository?

Let’s face it; the vast majority of archives don’t have the funding to create the ideal situation for its records. If your institution’s HVAC breaks on a regular basis, if you don’t have enough space to properly store your records without causing damage, or if you can’t afford to retain qualified employees, you are not justified in banning scanners because of the damage risk. Maybe we need to accept that our institutions aren’t perfect and we can only demand so much when we ourselves have the funding to do very little.

*This is a special blog post related to self-motivation and trust for school*

I’m in the process of completing a unit of my technology course for MARA, and there are two things that I can’t seem to stop thinking about: self-motivation and trust. These two subjects, which were both discussed in the unit, are what I have decided to write about. They show how different online learning is compared to traditional learning and how the MARA degree will help me in the workplace.

I think that the most important part of online learning is self –motivation because it can be so unnecessary in traditional classrooms. The “Tips for Success” mentioned that this type of motivation is essential. Before starting this program, I completed a Master’s Degree in Applied History. In that program, I felt as if my biggest responsibility was showing up to class. Professors constantly reminded us what work needed to be done and what the deadlines were in class. A significant part of the final grade of each course was showing up and participating. Sure, there were readings and papers to be done, but in general we were given a set period of time to get everything done, as outlined by the professor. Because there is less (and sometimes no) scheduled time for classes in an online environment, I have to make sure that I participate on a daily basis. Ironically, I had a very high score on the online learning readiness assessment. I believe that this is because I know that I am going to have to be self-motivated in order to succeed in this program and am forcing myself to be self-motivated.

In my other Master’s program, there was almost no teamwork necessary. It is clear that in the MARA program, I will have to be a member of successful teams. I have been a member of many teams in various working environments, and one thing that struck me as extremely important in Dr Haycock’s lecture was the 5 dysfunctions of teams. The first dysfunction, the absence of trust, has recently been an important issue of mine in the workplace. I naturally trust almost everyone I meet (I know, that is bad.) Usually, only negative actions will break my trust. However, I have recently been a member of a team that was not trusted. Another team member had obvious issues with trust and could generally be described as a control freak. Even though everyone on the team had either equal or more experience than her, she would not trust anyone to do any important tasks and treated everyone else as her underlings. She would insist on doing everything herself, and if she was not doing a particular task, she would go out of her way to oversee it. This created issues because she wasted time since not every task needed her assistance. It also hurt my confidence as a team member because it made me feel as though she had reasons to not trust me when I had done nothing to destroy her trust. I eventually had to have several meetings to find a solution to the problem. I specifically remember discussing the lack of trust with my supervisor. I feel that the products of our team would have been much different if trust had been established in the beginning.

Stuff I Learned At Work Today

Today at work, I learned the following things about the National Archives in the 1940s: archivists had to count the amount of records they gave researchers; in 1941 property passes were first issued; and upon exiting, archivists were required to check researcher’s notes for accuracy.

Originally, reference room staff was required to count the amount of records they gave researchers and check that there was the same number of records upon return. Considering how much time this would have wasted, I’m not shocked that this practice is no longer in place. Staff would spend a considerable amount of their day counting records. It would also seriously limit the amount of records a researcher could go through. So I think we are all glad this practice has ceased.

In 1941, property passes were first issued to researchers. Apparently, things like books needed a pass back in the day. These property passes were used similar to coat checks. I remember when they got rid of property passes (roughly two years ago) and I was both relieved and frightened. I know they were a hassle, but at least they prevented property theft. And I had no idea property passes had been around for so long.

But the thing I find craziest is that archivists were required to check notes for accuracy. Needless to say, this is basically the opposite of what archivists are supposed to do today. But as a person who has been paid to prove other historians wrong, if this much detail had been paid attention to in archives over the years, there would be a lot less controversy in history. But it would also explain why so many early archivists were trained as historians and not librarians. They believed that it was necessary to understand the content of the records. I still think this is true, even though I know that no archivist could possibly know the content of all the records within their archives. Knowledge of the records creates an ease of access for researchers. But I won’t get into the generalist vs specialist debate today, especially because we all know what the current researcher views are about the topic.

As a conclusion, I would like to reiterate that I learned all of this at work today. I didn’t actually read the records that contained this information; they were read to me by my supervisor. So if any of it is wrong, I apologize.

I'm Back...And in Need of Stuff

So after being on hiatus for the past year, I've decided that it might be worth it to do this whole blog thing because for some reason, people have actually read this blog. The Internet must be getting really boring...

Anyway, I'd just like to let everyone know that I'm currently obsessed with Coach's Nala pumps (see above) for the following reasons: 1) I would like to point out that they are named after a Lion King character. 2) Their classic shape means that they are totally wearable to work.

I want a pair in each trendy color!

Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 5

This past week, NARA launched its Citizen Archivist Dashboard. The dashboard is NARA’s newest foray into the digital world. While this is a great way to do digital and engage the public at the same time, I’m a little concerned with the name. I get the whole Citizen Archivist thing, but it’s not the easiest thing for lay people to understand. But as far as the term “dashboard” is concerned, I don’t get it. It is a database that anyone can work on. Usually we find dashboards in cars. Not a lot of people can work on them. Just saying.

Archivists vs. Historians

Today I read “The Archive(s) Is a Foreign Country: Historians, Archivists and the Changing Archival Landscape” by Terry Cook. Cook, a Canadian archivist, sought to explain why there is so much distance between archivists and historians. He argued that historians do not understand how much archivists influence and control history. Obviously this can be applied to the National Archives in the United States and around the world. But Cook basically ignores the historian’s perspective.
For one thing, the two professions are separate professions for a reason. Without archival training, the historian has no knowledge of how archives evolve over time. This is very similar to how archivists do not need to know historiography. It is simply not part of their profession. Historians and archivists have different professions because they do different things.
Cook also failed to realize that historians’ time in the archive is often limited due to time and financial restraints. I consider myself lucky that I can spend so much time in the National Archives. But most researchers do not have this luxury. Last week, I overheard a researcher say she was a doctoral student doing research for her dissertation on Civil War camps. She only researched at the National Archives for two days. This researcher, like many others, did not have the time to explore all avenues of research. Reference archivists know what is often requested and only tell researchers about the most popular records related to their research. In this way, they continue to control what becomes history. Often, having a large amount of time to research, experience researching, and the willingness to look everywhere can yield results that are not controlled by an archivist. But few have this opportunity.
Cook needed to realize that archival work is not one-sided. While historians are not trained to understand the archivists’ craft, historians can choose to impact history by expanding their research.

Things I Would Like To Point Out Pt. 4

I would like to point out that 49 years ago today, the Constitution and the Declaration made it to the archives. Yes, that's right, it wasn't always in the rotunda.