Access in special collections and archives

Hidden treasure rooms: Improving access and challenging traditions through digitization and user inclusion

Annotations by Ana E. Corral

Introduction

Special collections libraries are becoming more accessible and collaborative, yet many remain isolated from the rest of the institutions they belong to and the users that they serve. Backlogs of materials are the norm but alternative methods of managing these hidden collections shifts attention back to where it belongs, on reuniting users with collections and increasing digital access and use. This cannot be possible without a user-centric strategy that embraces technology and emphasizes digitization as a means of increasing access, along with internal and external interoperability. Long-term use and access through the increase of digital materials and incorporating more technology does not have to be mutually exclusive with traditional preservation and archival work. Increasing access through digitization offers feasible and user-centric alternatives to traditional methods of dealing with special collections materials. Special collections and archives can increase usability of their materials with the implementation of a user-centric strategy that embraces technology and emphasizes digitization as a means of increasing access, along with internal and external interoperability.

Project definition

This annotated bibliography focuses on issues that stem from lack of digitization and user access in special collections and archives, without delving too much in the how, this bibliography seeks to identify why these issues are present in archival and special collections and how librarian and institutional methods and beliefs contribute to the problem. Articles were selected that explored potential solutions to issues of access and the lack of online presence held by many archival and special collections repositories. Studies were included from other countries to emphasize that concerns regarding digitization, access, and users are not specific to one country but are issues that affect the entire field of special collections and archives. Each article acknowledges the issues in the context of special collections libraries, especially in regard to the traditionally held beliefs surrounding preservation that incorporates digitization and technology as part of the solution.

Annotations

Girven, W. J. (2016). Special academic libraries and the millennial patron. Journal of Library Administration, 56(8), 1007–1017. doi:10.1080/01930826.2016.1231551

Keywords: special libraries, millennial users, digital access, digitization, technology, special collections, user needs

This article provides a broad overview of special libraries, their current users, and makes suggestions for modifying their services to adjust to the Millennial user needs and requests. The author notes that users have shifted how they choose to access and interact with information available to them and place higher emphasis on digital access. By increasing online visibility and being more inclusive of technology, special libraries increase their relevancy to the Millennial user. This author brings awareness to the glaring fact that not all special collections libraries are digitized or are interested in being digitized. By focusing on the fact that user needs have shifted alongside the growth of digitization and technology, the author states that archival and special collections staff need to educate themselves further on user needs and how they are linked with technology.

Guegen, G. (2010). Digitized special collections and multiple user groups. Journal of Archival Organization, 8(2), 96–109. doi:10.1080/15332748.2010.513324

Keywords: digitized special collections, user groups, online exhibits, preservation work, digital library, usability

Drawing upon previous usability research conducted in special collections and archives, the author seeks to find to the balance between digital online exhibits and physical exhibits without compromising traditional preservation work. A thorough literature review determined that there is a difference between the way an undergraduate student searches for information and interacts with archival content and the way a researcher does. Studying the creation of a digital library at East Carolina University, the author demonstrates that when the design properly reflects the intended audience, finding aids can include digitized material and not merely be archival guides. Focusing on creation of digital collections with broader themes and the opportunity for cross-searchability instead of contextual descriptions offers the potential to increase usability and reach multiple audiences.

Harris, V. (2010). How can I help you? Becoming user-centered in special collections. Archival Issues, 32(2), 71–97. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/41756680

Keywords: user-centered, special collections, archives, user needs, outreach, digitization, electronic resources

The author of this article surveyed 148 users of two special collections and archival departments to determine levels of satisfaction and is useful to the topic of this bibliography because it informs the reader of user needs within special collections, which are similar to regular collection users in that both need information, access to resources, and help searching for specific items. With this study, the author determined that the roles and responsibilities of special collection librarians are shifting to include teaching and outreach and can therefore reasonably be expected to include user observations and suggestions regarding their needs and desires within the special collections environment. As users are becoming more conscious of hidden materials that they have no access to or input regarding their storage or visibility, additional effort should be put forth on behalf of the institutions and librarians to foster a dialogue with users regarding their needs. Shifting attitudes among special collections and users reveal how users now want to be participants instead of mere spectators to special collections materials. User-centered strategies and services are recommended and increasing digitization of records is recommended as the primary way to include users and increase access.

Hirtle, P. B. (2002). The impact of digitization on special collections in libraries. Libraries & Culture, A Journal of Library History, 37(1), 42–52. Retrieved from https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/14206

Keywords: digitization, treasure rooms, special collections, archives, technology, user needs

This influential article about the impact of digitization on special collections is still being debated and referenced in the field of special collections and archives to this day. The author made bold claims regarding the effect that digitization and technology would have on special collections shortly after the Library of Congress began to advance digital preservation in 2002. Many of the fears listed in this article, especially that technology and electronic copies would replace physical copies and in-person attendance linger in many repositories and their staff. This author describes the ways in which he believes physical holdings will lose their value and the duties of special collections librarians will change and it is important to understand where these fears originate from, and why. Special collections and archives retain ambivalent views regarding their collections, access, users, and technology. Technology is regarded as an immutable force that is altering collections permanently with the power to shift values and responsibilities, threatening the sanctity of fragile, irreplaceable materials. Despite this, technology and electronic use and access are here to stay, and what was once viewed as a negative can instead be turned into positive.

Little, G. (2012). “A place of connection more than repository”: Using technology in special collections. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(3), 172–174. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.03.014

Keywords: technology, digital special collections, preservation, digitization, users

The author of this article gently reminds us that digital special collections have been around longer than the past few years, and the debate between digitization as a replacement for preservation is not a recent one. The author contends that digital surrogates will not replace original archival material, but instead should be viewed as an alternate way to access materials that were previously unavailable or hidden to users. Librarians and institutions should focus on what is gained by including and accepting technology both for special collections and archival material and patron use, and not what is perceived as being lost through digitization. Digital collections encourage new ways for librarians and users to interact with special collections materials, and also offer up the opportunity for new interactions between users and librarians.

Rink, K. (2017). Displaying special collections online. The Serials Librarian, 73(2), 170–178. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2017.1291462

Keywords: digitization, online collections, open source software, social media, special collections, online platform

In response to Peter B. Hirtle’s 2000 article, “The impact of digitization on special collections in libraries”, the author rebuts the claims made regarding the alleged harmful impact digitization will have upon archival and special collections material. This article provides steps for libraries to digitize their special collections and establish and maintain an online presence. The author emphasizes that there are different options and strategies to digitizing a collection and that each institution needs to weigh the positives and negatives about the different options available, including budget-conscious and customizable options. Digitization strategies are subjective and thorough evaluation is required before implementation can begin. Digitization or lack of can have different consequences for different institutions and budgets, staffing, and ambiance will factor into those decisions. That there are so many diverse strategies for digitization exposes the stark reality that while digitizing a collection encourages new research, reaches a larger audience, and increases access, it is nonetheless contingent upon each individual institution (Rink, 2017). Not every institution is going to focus on digitization of their materials and they cannot and should not be forced to, but the author shows us that there are compromises available.

Şentürk, B. (2014). Online access in archives as a challenge for archives, archivists and archival material: An evaluation of viewpoint a group of archivists. Türk Kütüphaneciliği (Turkish Librarianship), 28(4), 496–509. Retrieved from https://www.tk.org.tr/index/TK/article/download/2487/2496

Keywords: online access, digitization, archives, archivists, archival material, users, digital archives

This author performed a survey-study of 53 archivists to determine the effects of providing online access will have on archival materials. The majority of the archivists that have been working over 20 years in the field reinforced previously held stereotypes that providing online access and digitization of materials does not affect their roles or archival field, but instead affects only the materials themselves (Şentürk, 2014). This disconnect between archivists and the digitizing process pits digital online access against traditional preservation, of which the archivist majority felt that traditional preservation should always take precedence. The irrefutable challenges that come along with digitization such as security or copyright issues were acknowledged by archivists as large obstacles to overcome during the digitization process, despite the fact that electronic access is now a part of 21st century life and has many advantages, especially to archivists and users. Archivists and archival institutions need to weight the benefits of digitization of archival material against the reality that their primary concerns are and should be preservation of material and thus should plan the digitization process accordingly.

Sutton, S. C. (2012). Balancing boutique-level quality and large-scale production: The impact of “more product, less process” on digitization in archives and special collections. RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Cultural Heritage, 13(1), 50–63. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5860/rbm.13.1.369

Keywords: digitization, archives, special collections, more product, less process (MPLP), user access, metadata

The author discusses Mark A. Greene’s and Dennis Meissner’s 2005 article “More product, less process: Revamping traditional archival processing”, and the new set of access-focused guidelines of More Product, Less Process (MPLP). MPLP calls for a shift from traditional detailed descriptions and content to minimal processing as a way to increase use and access. Using the digitization of the John Muir papers from the University of the Pacific as an example, this article demonstrates how special collections and archival libraries can successfully implement an MPLP approach to digitization and preservation without compromising archival materials. MPLP provides a way for institutions to shift resources to prioritize users and making their access a priority while taking into consideration budgeting. The author ends with the suggestion of removing the practice of ‘boutique collections’ and instead focus on digitizing all of the collection as quickly as possible. The level of metadata and descriptions for item will switch to collection-level and the amount of detail should be contingent upon each individual institution and the rest of their collection needs.

Tam, M. (2017). Improving access and “unhiding” the special collections. The Serials Librarian, 73(2), 179–185. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2017.1329178

Keywords: treasure rooms, hidden collections, special collections, online access, digital access, user-centric strategy

This article details the common stereotypes of archives and special collections libraries as cold and unwelcoming treasure rooms where the staff is aloof and unhelpful to patrons and offers potential solutions to these cold, unreachable rooms. The unilateral nature of special collections with their lack of funding and staffing, pockets of hidden collections are largely inaccessible to users or researchers, reinforcing the secretive treasure room stereotype. The author suggests increasing access and not just physical, but digital and online access as well. Instead of focusing on traditional methods, libraries can digitize information without cataloging or providing minimal acquisition information because providing access should take precedence over formal, traditional cataloging procedures. Users today expect more access, and the matter of backlogged material is a very real one to most, if not all, special collections. Instead of waiting and managing collections in the same conventional way, shifting the view of access to a user-centric one opens up digitizing and handling these collections in an innovative way.

Yakel, E. (2002). Encoded archival description: Are finding aids boundary spanners or barriers for users? Journal of Archival Organization, 2(1-2), 63–77. doi: 10.1300/J201v02n01_06

Keywords: encoded archival description (EAD), archives, archival management, usability testing, digital finding aids, users

The author of this article conducted a usability test of an Encoded Archival Description (EAD) interface from the Historic Pittsburg Project with the University of Pittsburg. Six subjects were asked to perform four separate tasks that required navigation and use of the finding aids available, none of which were met with successful results. Through this study and literature review, the author determined that users without a research or academic background have difficulties understanding archival terminology and lack the ability to properly search primary source material and successfully understand and navigate traditional archival finding aids. EAD finding aids are meant to serve as both a meeting ground for users and archival content but have instead become barriers. Interfaces should be more accessible and open to users of all different levels of experience. More research needs to be performed but in the area of usability, especially given that EAD finding aid collections are still in flux, reminding us that now is the perfect time to focus on users and usability testing.