The American Archivist Reviews Portal maintains a list of books, software, digital projects, and other resources available for review. They are also open to suggestions – so if you have an idea that’s not on the list, send them an email. From personal experience, the Reviews Editors are very open to suggestions for reviews.
Read more: https://reviews.americanarchivist.org/technologies-resources/
ARLIS/NA Multimedia & Technology Reviews Co-editors seek volunteers to author reviews for the October 2026 issue. To volunteer, choose a resource from the list below and complete our Reviewer Interest form (https://forms.gle/viaCJvMwFUydCN9S8) by Wednesday, July 29th.
Initial draft submissions are due Monday, August 31st.
Contributing to ARLIS/NA Multimedia & Technology Reviews is a great opportunity to get involved with the Society, learn about interesting new resources, and help shape the publication. Please read
the complete review guidelines and direct comments and questions about the reviews to arlisna.mtr@gmail.com.
Know of a resource we should review? Submit ideas here.
Submitted by ARLIS/NA Multimedia & Technology Reviews Co-editors:
Matthew Garklavs
Bridget O’Keefe
Abigail Walker
Resources for Review:
We seek reviewers for the following resources. The snippets below are taken
from each resource’s web page and are not necessarily the opinions of the
M&T Reviews Co-Editors.
Americana
The John Carter Brown Library is at once a physical site and a digital space. Americana is the digital door to the library, named for the word chiseled in the limestone above the front door of the library’s 1904 building. The JCB’s collection of books, maps, prints and more, all focused on the early Americas, reside both in the building on George Street, at the corner of the campus green at Brown University, and in this digital location.
Aracne is a digital tool that facilitates the analysis of the canvases that artists used for their paintings. This software precisely and objectively characterises fabrics so that paintings can be compared and original formats and added layers studied.
Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals with Full Text
Produced in collaboration with the Avery Architectural & Fine Arts Library at Columbia University, Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals with Full Text contains full-text journal articles on architecture and design, covering subjects such as the history and practice of architecture, landscape architecture, city planning, historic preservation, and interior design. (MTR editors can arrange for temporary access to this subscription-based resource).
The Black Architects Archive traces the impact of Black creative, intellectual, and physical labor on shaping the built environment, and does so by revealing both the breadth and depth of Black spatial practice in the Americas. It includes the work of Black architects, builders, contractors, engineers, landscape designers, draftsmen and women, mapmakers, and other built environment practitioners working across the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The aim of the archive is to recover the historical impact that Black people have had on shaping the towns, cities, and landscapes of the Americas while also making this information publicly available as a resource for local history.
Design Card Decks for Ideation and Exploration
The Design Card Decks for Ideation and Exploration Web Archive is curated by librarians at the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton University, under the auspices of the Ivy Plus Libraries Confederation. Card decks are used in design fields as a game-based methodology for ideation and stakeholder participatory collaboration. The purposes of decks vary; some are used for brainstorming new products and services while others are scenario-based, prompting designers to consider how their products or services may be incorporated into different communities. They function both as a tool for design speculation and as a set of illustrations that visualize design thinking. This archive preserves websites associated with these decks; as design thinking becomes popular in many disciplines, from business to science, the potential user groups for these tools greatly expands outside traditional
design fields.
Digital Scriptorium (DS) is a growing consortium of North American institutions with collections of global premodern manuscripts. DS is dedicated to building an online national union catalog built on Linked Open Data technologies and practices for premodern manuscripts in US collections.
International (Digital) Dura-Europos Archive (IDEA)
IDEA is harnessing the power of Linked OpenData (LOD) to reassemble and re-contextualize archaeological informationrelated to Dura-Europos. Unique circumstances of preservation makeDura-Europos a rare archaeological resource. The city provides unparalleledglimpses into a multicultural religious life, the running of a militarygarrison, and domestic coexistence of different ethnic groups, and haspreserved hundreds of organic materials that survive in the archaeologicalrecord from few other places. But recognition as a singular resource forinformation about the ancient past has come at a price. Excavationsinvolving multiple institutional partners and well-intentioned efforts toshare-out access to physical objects from Dura has led to the dispersal ofthe site’s artifacts and other archival materials into collections acrossthe world. We’re using cutting-edge technology to power a new searchfeature for Dura-Europos archaeological data and archival content as ameans to mitigate this physical dispersal and improve access to informationacross disciplinary and linguistic silos for the (global) public good.
Odeuropa is a European research project which bundlesexpertise in sensory mining and olfactory heritage. We develop novelmethods to collect information about smell from (digital) text and imagecollections. Our goal is to show that critically engaging our sense ofsmell and our scent heritage is an important and a viable means forconnecting and promoting Europe’s tangible and intangible cultural heritage.
Reg-Arts : the register of enrolments at Beaux-Arts de Paris from 1813 to 1968
Created by threeinstitutions, the Beaux-Arts de Paris, the INHA and the CNRS, the Reg-Artsdatabase provides access to the Beaux-Arts de Paris enrolment registers of more than 12,000 student painters, sculptors and engravers between 1813 and1 968. Reg-Arts provides a central resource for art history, enabling researchers, descendants, museums and galleries to explore the data.
Remodeled Getty Provenance Index and Tracing Art interactive
https://www.getty.edu/research/provenance/https://www.getty.edu/tracingart/
Arches is a Getty-supported, open-source database platform hosting Getty Provenance Index records that have been transformed into linked open data resources. By treating Provenance Index records as a structured web of related resources, Arches enhances accessibility and discoverability, surfaces existing connections within Getty Provenance Index resources, enables linkages with other cultural heritage datasets, and provides powerful federated search and data visualization tools. These enhancements
make provenance research more efficient and adaptable to evolving scholarly needs.
The Trois Crayons Museum Forum is aninnovative, free-to-use digital platform dedicated to deepening theunderstanding of pre-modern drawings in public collections. Join a globalnetwork of art historians, curators, and enthusiasts to collaborativelyexchange ideas, discuss, and re-examine both familiar works and overlookedsheets – shedding new light on old questions and bringing lesser-seendrawings into focus.
VisColl is a system for building models of the physical collation of manuscripts, and then visualizing them in various ways. The core of VisColl is the data model, which defines the structure of individual manuscripts and which can be built and visualized by different tools.
The Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies (JCAS) is looking for book reviewers for the following titles. Please note that some are digital only and you must have a way to access e-books. If you’re interested, please email us at email.jcas@gmail.com by April 3. In your email, please include 1) a brief description of your professional interests 2) which title you’d like to review and why 3) your preferred mailing address for review copies. Please also include [Book Reviews] in the subject line. You can find the reviewer guidelines at our website: elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/bookreview.html
Are you interested in new technologies and digital projects and want to explore their use for archives and archivists? Are you interested in reviewing the latest archives resources and technologies for your colleagues? The American Archivist Reviews Portal seeks reviews of digital collections, exhibits, as well as software, platforms, and other technologies that archivists both create and use everyday. We encourage authors from communities traditionally underrepresented in publishing.
Reviews of software, websites, or digital tools and resources should be 600 to 850 words. Microreviews of monographs, journal articles, blogs or apps should be 100 to 200 words. Guidelines for writing reviews are available on the Reviews Portal. Reviewers can suggest a resource or work with the reviews portal coordinator to choose a resource from our list of review ideas. Our editors are available to help new and seasoned writers throughout the entire review process.
Here are a few resources that we would love to publish and share reviews about:
We are also interested in reviews that assess machine learning, natural language processing, and other data science technologies for archives.
If you are interested in writing a review, have a resource you’d like to suggest for review, or have any questions, please contact us: https://reviews.americanarchivist.org/contact/
Paul Silvia, How to Write a Lot, Second Edition (American Psychological Association, Washington DC: 2019)
For anyone looking for a short, easy-to-read book with basic tips about writing, this is a good one. Silvia’s writing is friendly and practical at the same time. The book is a broad overview of all aspects of writing, from starting a project through submitting an article or finding a book publisher.
As a psychologist, he spends time dispelling the myths that haunt many writers. In particular, I was intrigued by his dissection of “writer’s block.” He proposes that it doesn’t exist; that it’s a fallacy to explain why writing doesn’t happen. Basically, the only way through it is to write.
Much of his advice is similar to other books about writing, but he writes it without adding fluff or extensive explanations. He integrates examples and distills his advice in ways that make you think “of course I can do that!”
Unique to his book is a chapter about writing grants. Because he comes from academia, this focuses more on getting grants to bring in funding research projects. However, archivists can glean some good advice by thinking of grants as writing projects. Grants are ways to practice writing good context, being concise, and refining language.
This is a great book for new and early writers. It breaks down the writing process in a way that archivists likely did not learn in graduate school. Its simple and practical approach will coach writers through the obstacles and make the process achievable.
One of my goals for this blog going forward is to offer more resources about writing and research. I’ve posted a few here and there, but plan to be more consistent in offering suggestions.
I periodically read blogs and articles about books about writing. It is easy to be overwhelmed with the seemingly unending resources out there. I’ve started reading books about writing both to see if I can get tips for my own writing, but to also discern what are actually good resources and ones that are less helpful.
One that I like a lot is The Chronicle Productivity Guide to Writing & Publishing by The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Though geared towards academics, anyone can find it helpful. What I like about it is that it is short essays from a variety of people. Though there is a cohesiveness, one need not read it in order nor cover to cover to find useful assistance.
This 84-page book distills the most common questions about and challenges to writing that probably everyone can relate to. It is divided into 5 sections:
Within each section is realistic, practical advice. For archivists, I think sections 1, 3, and 4 are the most relevant. Two interesting essays in the first section jumped out at me. One discussed doing a reverse day planner, where you document everything you do to see how you spend your time. While I like this idea greatly, I haven’t yet done it. But it can help see how to carve out time to write.
The second one was about energy levels. The author breaks energy up into A, B, and C, and assigns writing to A. It is also about finding the time when your energy is at a peak, to designate that as your writing time. Some people are good early in the morning, others late at night. But identifying that can help be more productive.
The third section about inner obstacles has essays that every writer can relate to. Avoidance, doubts, organization, and many other aspects are the obstacles described. Then, there are some practical and unique ideas on how to move past those obstacles.
The fourth section about writing is also very helpful. I’m amused that one essay is called “7 Tips to Write Less Badly,” which is a good indication of how helpful the tips are. Some of the tips in these essays advise to think less about the amount of time spent on writing and more on the quantity of output, various ways to formulate and organize a strong argument, and how to find your voice.
This is not a cheap book, but is truly one of the best ones I’ve looked at if you are looking for some quick and insightful guidance on improving your writing and writing habits.
Applications and nominations are invited for the position of Reviews Editor for ACRL’s peer-reviewed journal in special collections librarianship, RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Cultural Heritage. The Reviews Editor has charge of the reviews published in the journal’s biennial issues, to ensure the journal provides qualified opinions of new publications and other scholarly resources relevant to academic librarians and archivists specifically involved in rare books, manuscripts, and cultural heritage.
Responsibilities include receiving and soliciting material for review, making assignments to qualified reviewers, and collating reviews to meet production schedules.
The Reviews Editor is a voting member of the RBM Editorial Board. They work closely with the journal editor, members of the Editorial Board, and ACRL production staff. The appointment as Review Editor is a three-year term; applicants must be a member of ALA and ACRL.
A nominal honorarium may be available for this position, pending final review of the RBM editorial budget.
Desired qualifications include:
Applications and nominations must include a statement of qualifications addressing the areas noted above and include a current CV. Application documents should be sent to RBM Editor Dr. Richard Saunders at rsaunders@suu.edu. The deadline for applications is November 30, 2019.
Finalists will be interviewed by conference call during December 2019. The appointment is made by the ACRL Publications Coordinating Committee (PCC) upon the recommendation of the RBM Editorial Board. The Reviews Editor will begin training and working with the incumbent immediately upon appointment by PCC prior to their three-year term of appointment beginning in July 2020.
(reposted from RAO listserv)
SAA colleagues,
I’m posting this to the RAO section, since this is an area of interest for section members, but also to the SAA Leaders list. Those of you who are leaders of other sections, if you feel that your membership might be interested in volunteering to review case study submissions on the topic of teaching with primary sources, please forward this to your section’s discussion list.
With the recent approval by Council of the Guidelines for Primary Source Literacy as an SAA standard (watch for publicity soon in your favorite SAA information outlets), and several additional case studies in various stages of the submission and review pipeline, I am seeking additional volunteers who would be willing to review case study submissions and provide feedback to me, as editor of this epubs series, and the author(s). This isn’t a massive time commitment, and the review process is explained in more detail here (see the section labelled “Review Process”): www2.archivists.org/publications/epubs/…
If you’re interested in volunteering to be a reviewer for this SAA case studies epubs series, or if you have questions about reviewing, please don’t hesitate to drop me a line at bill.landis@yale.edu. I’ll also be at the annual meeting in D.C. in August if anyone would like to chat about either reviewing or ideas for submitting a case study, I’d be happy to.
Cheers!
Bill
——————————
Bill Landis
Head of Public Services, Manuscripts and Archives
Yale University Library
New Haven CT
——————————
By Nancy MacKay, Book Review Editor
Did you know that the Oral History Review, the journal of the Oral History Association, publishes 30-40 book reviews in every issue?
And that each book reviewed first must be identified as relevant to oral history; then read, analyzed and written about by volunteer scholars in the OHA community?
And that once the review is submitted to the journal, it undergoes a rigorous review and editing process before emerging in print in the form you see when you sit down with your copy of Oral History Review?
I did not know the extent or the scholarly rigor of this process until I assumed the role as book review editor in January. As a reviewer I had taken all these steps for granted. Now I understand the effort that goes into scanning new publications for potential review books and matching a book to a volunteer reviewer. And each of those reviewers does serious work in reading and analyzing each book for fellow OHA members.
I now know that the quality of the book review section is maintained through wide community participation. I’m calling out to potential reviewers, seasoned reviewers and authors to get involved by suggesting book titles for review and participating as a reviewer. Reviewers can select books of interest to review and their desired level of activity through a form. Anyone can recommend a title for review. To get started, please contact me at ohrbookreviews@gmail.com.
Multimedia & Technology Reviews still needs you! We are seeking reviewers for the following resources:
Umbra Search
https://www.umbrasearch.org
Please see below for reviewer guidelines and full details on the above resources.
Please fill out the reviewer interest form (https://goo.gl/forms/Y2T9HPNinHznHFeK2) by Monday, January 29.
Thank you!
Submitted by ARLIS/NA Multimedia & Technology Reviews Co-editors:
Melanie Emerson
Gabriella Karl-Johnson
Alexandra Provo