Well the bias will out.
It is true that the two disciplines are separate in many HE
institutions. This reality reflects a bias within the library community.
With a couple of archives courses under their belt, most MLIS graduates
believe they are fully qualifies to be Archivists. The idea is
reinforced in their community by requiring an MLIS degree to be an
Archivist. It is a chicken and egg thing. I don't believe that the
records community as a whole is well represented by this idea.
MLIS education is more closely related to manuscript and special
collections than Archives management. Librarians are most concerned with
secondary source materials. Archivists and Records Managers are directly
involved with primary source materials. This is never more evident than
when we address electronic records/
The immediacy of the medium requires a comprehensive understanding of
both disciplines. The more each understands the other, the better the
decision making process. Unless the RM can identify permanent records at
or near the point of creation, historical records will be lost. Unless
the Archivist can comprehend the processes that create a body of
historical records the information that makes an historical record may
be lost.
The unfortunate reality is that Archivists are indeed being relegated to
a secondary role in HE. The vacuum created is being filled, not by
Records Managers, but by IT folk. If the historical record is to be
preserved, with all the metadata required, then IMHO the Records
Managers will need to become much more adept at applying archival theory
and principles.
In larger HE organizations the RM program should seek out and develop
competencies in archival practices. If the tend towards moving
Archivists into special collections continues, then as RM professionals
we need to develop the ability to manage permanent records.
The ratio of interest between the Archivist and the Records Manager
should, and IMHO, be 100% across the board. Unless the Archivist can
ensure a high enough degree of record integrity for the permanent
records, they wil be essentially lost to history. I am not saying that
Archivists need to be CRMs. I not saying that CRMs need to get certified
as Archivists (I recommend it, but I am not saying it). They both need
to have a relative command and understanding of the others area of
responsibility.
Chris Flynn
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of J. Michael Pemberton
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 8:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: University RM Question
Knowing a bit about RIM and archives management in higher education
(HE), let me put in a point about these functions in that
environment. I agree that "collaboration is key," but in the larger
HE organizations the two related disciplines are often staffed by
different sorts of folks who also have different reporting lines. A
records manager is working from a set of assumptions different from
the archivist in that the former normally is focused on economic and
legal issues rather than research and cultural history. The latter
typically works from issues related to preservation, research,
long-term corporate memory, evidential needs (documenting the growth
of the institution, no the legal meaning of that term).
In larger HE organizations, the records manager will often have a
business/management background and education in that area and the
archivist a background in history. (Three of the last four records
managers at the University of Tennessee have been CRMs (not CAs).)
Archivists often work in and/or report to the dean of libraries. In
such cases, the archivist must often have an MLS or equivalent, not,
IMHO, because the archivist needs an LIS background or degree but
because *all* hires at the professional level in the library must
have such a degree.
When I worked as a records manager, we had good relationships with
the university archivist--it should be that way, and each should know
a bit about what the other does and why. In the end, the records
manager should be concerned with 100% of the records, and the
archivist focuses on the 3%-5% of the records that are archival in
quality. But the records manager should have the university archivist
review--and even sign off on--proposed retention schedules.
Mike
J. Michael Pemberton, Ph.D., CRM, FAI
Professor
The School of Information Sciences
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
1345 Circle Park Drive
Knoxville, TN 37996-0341
Phone: 865-974-6509
Fax: 865-974-4967
[log in to unmask]
http://www.sis.utk.edu/~pemberton/
Life: Information in Motion
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
