New Book: Librarians of Color

Thank you to Rebecca Hankins for the following post about the new book, Librarians of Color.

[note: per Rebecca’s request, some content was removed as they work through issues with the publisher]

We mentioned in the introduction the why we wrote the book, but for us, we felt there needs to be a corpus of research and writings on diversity and the experiences of people of color in librarianship and archives, similar to information literacy, collection development, and any other relevant subject in these two informational fields. When we first sent out the requests for abstracts we received a number of folks saying they had just read or written on this subject as if that should be the end of it. We challenged the responses to think of this as an ongoing dialogue with many different perspectives that should be explored, commented on, and argued. We need to be a part of the information studies canon like any other important issue in libraries and archives.

The how of writing the book consisted of us sending out a call for proposal abstracts. We received an overwhelming response with enough abstracts for all 3 books (first on academia, second was going to be on law librarians, and the 3rd was on the experiences of young and diverse librarians). Miguel and I individually and then together scored the abstracts in a spreadsheet, then we came together. If there were any disputed contributors we talked about them; I had one and he had one that we kept in the book. We provided deadlines for when they were to have their contributions to us. We did the first editing and review, gave them feedback, then set another deadline for the final chapters. We pulled the entire manuscript together with an introduction and contacted the noted scholar and former ALA president to write a preface, then sent it to the publisher for feedback. Received feedback (this is when we found out we were removed from being editors of the series) that we shared with the contributors and sent back to the publisher. We were told that the index was being created, the cover was being made (no input from us), the proof would be shared for any final errors (didn’t receive until after we noted some glaring errors), then published.

Book is done and I’m pleased with the book for the most part and that I’m done with the publisher and the book is out. The contributors wrote from the heart without censors so I’m pleased about that too.

New Article: Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies

Thanks to Lily for sending this to me!

The JCAS is pleased to announce the first article published in 2016: “Developing a Typology of Human Rights Records,” by Noah Geraci and Michelle Caswell, both of UCLA.

This article seeks to answer the following questions: What makes a record a “human rights record”? What types of records fall under this umbrella term? How and why might we develop a typology of such records? What is at stake—ethically, theoretically, and practically—in the ways in which and the reasons why we define and classify records as such? The piece includes a literature review exploring the history of conceptions of human rights records in archival studies, and the ongoing discussion in information studies more broadly about the politics of the organization of information. The paper outlines the chosen methodology of conceptual analysis and describe the ways such methodology will be employed to de/construct the term “human rights record,” and provides a typology of human rights records, positing that such records can be examined according to five interlocking vectors: who created them, why, and when, where they are currently stewarded, and how they are being put to use. The article also examines the ethical, political, and professional implications of the proposed typology and suggests ways in which this rubric can be used in the future.

Download a copy of this open access article at the JCAS site.

The JCAS is a peer-reviewed, online, open access journal sponsored by the Yale University Library and New England Archivists (NEA). Follow the JCAS on Twitter and Facebook!

Best,

Lily Troia, JCAS Social Media Consultant

New Issue: Information & Culture

reposted from the A&A listserv:
Information & Culture
Volume 51, Issue 1, Winter 2016
ARTICLES

Exhibiting Information: Developing the Information Age Gallery at the Science Museum
Tilly Blyth
Making Computers Boring: Some Thoughts on Historical Exhibition of Computing Technology from the Mass-Market Era
James Sumner
Self-Fulfilling History: How Narrative Shapes Preservation of the Online World
Marc Weber
Brains, Tortoises, and Octopuses: Postwar Interpretations of Mechanical Intelligence on the BBC
Allan Jones
Putting the Spooks Back In? The UK Secret State and the History of Computing
Jon Agar
Computing and the Big Picture: A Keynote Conversation
Jennifer S. Light

http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/journals/information-culture

Sheila Scoville
Journals Promotion Coordinator
University of Texas Press
P.O. Box 7819 | Austin, TX 78731-7819
P: (512) 232-7618 | F: (512) 232-7178
sscoville@utpress.utexas.edu

New Issue: Journal of Western Archives

from the A&A listserv:

The Journal of Western Archives is pleased to announce that Volume 7 Issue 1 has opened. The initial articles deal with mentoring and a case study on the Gregory Peck Papers. The issue also includes a review of Preserving our Heritage: Perspectives from Antiquity to the Digital Age. You can view the content at http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/westernarchives/. As a reminder the journal publishes articles on a rolling basis throughout the year. We invite you to follow the journal so that you can get notifications when new content is added.

Gordon Daines
Editor, Journal of Western Archives
_________________________
J. Gordon Daines III
Supervisor of Reference Services
Department Chair
L. Tom Perry Special Collections
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
801-422-5821
gordon_daines@byu.edu

Why I Resigned as Provenance Editor

After four wonderful years, I have resigned as Provenance Editor. I originally planned to finish out my second term (another 2 years). However, as I wrote about a couple weeks ago, I signed a contract to write a book. Over the past couple months as I tried to balance being an editor and writing a book, I discovered that something needed to give.

As I explained to a colleague, being an editor and author use the same part of my brain that requires a lot of concentration, focus, and thought. Spending time editing/reviewing articles and then trying to research and write is quite taxing on both my brain and my motivation.

Many of us have the challenge of taking on too much and becoming stressed or burned out. And many of us have a hard time saying “no.” I’ve been practicing saying “no” over the past few years and am getting better. Often, we are afraid people will judge us for quitting. However, I believe that instead it’s more important to recognize our limitations. By doing so, it will be better all around. If I continued to be an editor and an author, likely both projects would suffer. And both are too important to me to let that happen. Instead, my resignation means that both will be successful – me being able to focus on the book and my successor as Editor will take Provenance to new heights.

When I took over, the previous editor encouraged me to do whatever I wanted with the journal. While it took time to learn the ropes, I definitely made it my own. Under my leadership, all the back issues are online, we moved to an online submission system, we are receiving more submissions than in the past, and there’s greater awareness of the journal. We have two special issues (one on advocacy and one with SNAP), with a third in the works.

I’ve learned more than I can possibly explain being an editor. Not only did I learn about publishing, but communication, needs of the profession, how to work with authors, practices and theories used by colleagues, and challenges of scholarship. I had great support from SGA and the Provenance Board. Most of all, the role cemented my passion about publishing as a focus for my professional activities. I dedicated what feels like countless hours to the journal over the past four years. While I will miss it, I am also relieved to know I can focus on one major project.

I am handing the reins over to Heather Oswald at Emory University. I told her what I was told, that she should take it and make it her own. As I’ve worked with her on the Provenance Board and as Associated Editor over the last couple years, I know she will continue to build upon what I’ve done as well as create new directions and initiatives. I’m excited to see what the future brings.

This decision has no impact on this blog. I am dedicated to continuing this as a platform to share ideas and practices about scholarly publishing in the profession. I’ll continue to use my experience as an editor and now as an author. There’s much to be said about publishing and I hope others continue to suggest ideas and contribute posts.

New Issue: Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies

reposted from the A&A listserv:

The Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies is pleased to announce publication of Volume 2, Issue 5:

“Quidditch, Zombies, and the Cheese Club: A Case Study in Archiving Web Presence of Student Groups at New York University” by Aleksandr Gelfand.

Student organizations are a unique feature of university life whose records merit preservation. Since the mid-to-late 1990s, these records have been increasingly transitioning from analog format to a digital, web-based platform; a pattern that has only picked-up in the 2000s. This paper looks at a case study of the New York University Archives and its attempt to archive student organizations using the Archive-It service.

Download a copy of this open access article at the JCAS site.

The JCAS is a peer-reviewed, online, open access journal sponsored by the Yale University Library and New England Archivists (NEA). Follow the JCAS on Twitter and Facebook!

Lily Cristina Troia
Dean’s Fellow for Digital Media Outreach
MLIS Candidate ’16
Simmons School of Library and Information Science
612.516.6060
lily.troia@simmons.edu

Creating an Outline

As I mentioned last post, I am writing the third edition of AFS Reference and Access for Archives and Manuscripts. The first task was to create an outline. In general, I’ve always struggled with outlines. I like the idea – creating a coherent organization of content and research. In practice, it’s not my strength.

However, with this project it (so far) is working well. What helped tremendously is that I did not have to start from scratch. I began with the structure that Mary Jo Pugh used for the second edition. I knew I would not, nor should not, keep it exactly the same. My outline is definitely different, but using hers as a reference ensured that I did not miss any major topics.

Although I can’t share (sorry) the actual outline, it is organized into three major sections, chapters within each section, and topics within each chapter. When I reviewed it recently, I already see how I might reorganize a few parts, but I’m going to wait until I get to those chapters.

For the first time, I’m using an outline as guidance for writing. Especially, knowing exactly where to start when I sit down to write, as opposed to spending time thinking “hm, what should I write about today?” Granted, I’m not very far yet but psychologically, it gives me a good grounding. As I research and write, I have ideas not related to what I’m writing about. With the outline, it’s easy to look and identify where those ideas fit and make notes accordingly.

Lastly, it was a great way to create a schedule and deadlines. I can’t guarantee that I’ll meet them all (but am motivated to try!). Knowing that, for example, I plan to take one month to write a certain chapter, if I’m 2 weeks from the deadline but only have a few pages, I then know I need to either write more or refocus how I’m writing.

I know the outline will change and evolve as the project develops. I’m glad that I started this way. That’s not to say that creating an outline is the best for everyone or every project, but I’m grateful it was a requirement for this one.

Signing a Book Contract

For a more personal post, I signed my first book contract last week. It’s both thrilling and scary at the same time. Last year, I was invited to write the third edition of the Archival Fundamental Series Providing Reference and Access Services for Archives and Manuscripts. I was honored to be asked and am very excited to work with series editor Peter Wosh and Publications Editor Chris Prom.

While in library school, and even in my history PhD program, the idea of writing a book seemed to be what other people did. It wasn’t necessarily in my plans. After I finished my dissertation, there was a glimmer of that possibility. Having more or less finished a book in dissertation format, it seemed achievable. And now I have the chance!

I have to explain the thrilling and scary parts of this. It is thrilling because in the past few years, I realize how much I enjoy writing. Archival scholarship is interesting to me and I’m constantly impressed by books and articles I read. Authors dedicate an incredible amount of time to share their insights and practices. I was excited when Archivaria published my article a couple years ago. This will be much different than writing a dissertation, as I’m writing about what I know and do nearly every day and exploring published scholarship to add to my knowledge and ensure comprehensiveness. I love the archives world and am grateful I can contribute to scholarship.

The project is scary as well. I have a schedule and deadlines, and 300 pages to write. I have an outline and a good starting point, but it’s a bit overwhelming as well. I want to make sure that this is a usable manual for archivists at any level, any type of institution. I want it to be helpful. Plus, people will read it and use it. I had no delusions while writing my dissertation that few people other than my committee and my dear English professor friend (who corrected grammar and such) would read it. The AFS book has much more at stake. I have great support, both from SAA and colleagues.

This project is a welcome challenge, and I look forward to the process. And I will post more as I progress to share the difficulties, accomplishments, and any other thoughts. Writing is hard, but I’m up to the challenge!

New Issue: Practical Technology for Archives

Reposted from the A&A listserv:

We are pleased to announce the publication of Issue no.5 of Practical Technology for Archives.

http://practicaltechnologyforarchives.org

In this issue we have four excellent articles, one on using SwipeBox to present digitized materials, one about an alternative to 3D scanning, an article on CollectiveAccess, and another on low-budget large-scale digitization, which we hope you will find useful.

I you have an idea or proposal for Issue no.6, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

All the Best,

Randall Miles,
Managing Editor
Cornell University

 

 

Guest Post: Reviews Portal for The American Archivist

Thanks to Alexandra for this great information about The American Archivist‘s Reviews Portal!

Alexandra A. A. Orchard, CA
Technical and Metadata Archivist, Reuther Library, Wayne State University
Reviews Portal Coordinator

The SAA Reviews Portal (RP) houses The American Archivist Reviews and primarily focuses on providing reviews of new technologies and projects related to archives. The RP has additional features, including “Reviewed in The American Archivist” which provides access to reviews in previous issues of the journal as well as early access to reviews in the upcoming issue. “Written by Our Members” aims to provide a comprehensive list of monographs, articles, and reviews written by SAA members. Submissions are ongoing and can be made via the submission form. Additionally, the RP occasionally hosts special projects, such as the “What’s Your Favorite “American Archivist” Article?” in celebration of SAA’s seventy-fifth anniversary.

The RP began several years ago with the intent of expanding the reviews section of the journal to the web. Thus enabling the publication of more reviews, often focused on the intersection of archives and technology, the web, and increasingly mobile, but still ensuring peer-reviewed, professional content found in The American Archivist. Publishing reviews to the web enables a quicker turnaround time than those in the print journal, resulting in reviews posted as soon as they complete the peer review process. During the last three and a half years, over 30 reviews have been posted in the RP.

The submission process is straightforward, interested potential reviewers email the Reviews Portal Coordinator, who sends a response outlining the writing and review process. The reviewer then selects a deadline and an item for review, either a non-reviewed item from the “Archival Technologies and Resources” page or an off list suggestion for consideration. Once the draft is received, the Reviews Portal Coordinator and Reviews Editor peer-review the piece, and if necessary return the review to the author for changes. The editing phase typically lasts several weeks or longer, depending on time of year, the revisions needed, and the number of other reviews in progress.

After the final review is submitted, it is posted on the “Reviews” page and the item receives a “Reviewed” link on the “Archival Technologies and Resources” page. This page not only serves as a list of potential review topics, but as a curated list of tools and resources of use to archivists as well as (predominantly digital) projects using archival materials, and those with accompanying reviews have an additional layer of vetting and therefore usefulness to archivists. Finally the Reviews Portal Coordinator and SAA publicize the review.

Writing a review for the RP is valuable experience particularly for those new to the archival profession, including students, new professionals, archivists as well as those in related fields looking to start writing and publishing. The RP is also an excellent venue for more seasoned authors who are interested in learning and writing about newer technologies and those digital archives, projects, and exhibits making use of them. The “Archival Technologies and Resources” page is consistently updated, and will soon include new types of content for review. New voices are encouraged and welcome, so if you have ideas for content, are interested in reviewing a tool or resource, or both, please contact the Reviews Portal Coordinator!