Archivists

I had an interesting online dialogue with Mark Pearson, who works as an Instructional Technologist at Earlham and also administers the course management system Moodle and Earlham Learning Spaces. We were talking about Institutional Repositories, and he read a paper I wrote a while back. One question he had was why an archivist does not consider herself to be a librarian. It's really good question, because in some ways (and officially here at Earlham, I think) I'm considered a librarian. But the work I do is very different from being a reference/instruction librarian or subject specialist, or other library positions. I don't mean different in being better or worse, just different. I wrote this in response and would be curious if any other archivists or librarians think I'm way off or got something right:


It's interesting that you are asking the question of why an archivist does not see herself as a librarian. That's a great question. There are many similarities between the professions as both attempt to provide access, arrange, and preserve information resources of many different types. However, archivists have always processed and arranged their materials very differently from librarians. Reference and access also have traditionally been done in a different manner as well. Currently, there is a great deal of convergence in the profession, but there are still some very important professional differences including:

--Archivists are trained differently. While I took a couple of library related courses, I took coursework directly related to archives and had internships working in archives (I also worked in a library, but generally it is unusual for librarians to work in archives for internships--no stats to back this up, so I could be wrong).

-- Archivists often participate in the professional organizations of librarians including ACRL and ALA, but archivists also have their own national organization, the Society of American Archivists, that serves as an advocacy group and helps set archival standards. There are also many regional and topical organizations; for example, I'm active in the Midwest Archives Conference.

--As archival material often is unique, archivists have a different take on issues of security and access. Providing access to patrons and researcher is of the utmost importance, but the nature of the material requires different policies than in a library, such as not allowing primary documents outside the reading room and vigilance about security.

--Archival arrangement currently follows a standard called Describing Archives: a Content Standard (DACS). Archivists also have traditionally created finding aids for their collections, in comparison to traditional library cataloging. Of course, all of these descriptive means are in an upheaval right now as information professionals navigate new technology and increasingly digitize items.

--Archivists also appraise original materials, make decisions about what to keep and what to weed, must take care to preserve the materials long term, and now are dealing with digital born material and how providing access and preserving these items presents new challenges (As are librarians).

--Many traditional archives practices are under review right now, especially the degree of processing a collection may receive. Archivists also are engaging usability studies, metrics, and focusing on how to better serve their researchers and patrons. Traditionally, archivists have viewed themselves as guardians, but while preserving history is still very important, being more open about access has fortunately become just as important.

Those were just thoughts I had this morning, in part sparked by a discussion at a staff meeting about the hours of Earlham's archives. I think we have very accessible hours compared to many archives: M-F 9-12, 1-4, 7-9, and Sat/Sun 1-4. And we rely on student workers to cover some of those hours. I've done my best to remind my students when they work, sending emails reminding them of their scheduled weekend hours and asking them to let me know about conflicts in advance--I have found this simple effort at communication makes a big difference. So far, they have been great--I'm very fortunate in my student workers. In the past, there have been students who have missed their shifts, and reference librarians have let people into the archives. Now, I certainly would be upset a student missed their shift, but I also am very conflicted about a reference librarian letting a student or researcher into our collections, even if the door is locked behind them. I think we reached the agreement this morning in the meeting that if someone wants in and we are closed per our scheduled hours, the researcher will not be let in.

The dilemma is that we have circulating books in our Special Collections, as we have all books related to Quakerism in the archives open shelves, a decision that makes a lot of sense in that it creates a unified collection and helps maintain Earlham's Quaker history and identity (manuscripts, original Quaker records, rare books, and the college archives are locked and researchers not allowed in). But it does cause problems with students who expect to have access to a circulating book. I think our hours are posted prominently, though I'm going to work on making them even more transparent. Many special libraries within a larger library have fewer open hours and students adjust. Then again, perhaps the circulating books should someday be moved to a different part of the library so students can access them at all times the library is open. I have my doubts about whether that would work. But what is more important, providing instant access or keeping items important to the heritage of the school together? These are all issues we likely should consider for the future.