Words are very important.  Years ago I worked for a hospital that used the
term 'discards' for records that were to be returned to permanent file.  You
can probably guess the rest.  All it took was one
only-been-on-the-job-for-a-week janitor and everyone was headed out to the
dump to retrieve what had been thrown away.

Liz Allan, RHIA
San Jose, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Charis Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 2:58 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Nitpicky Terminology Question

I'm posting this after a colleague and I recently had a discussion
regarding the appropriate terminology for retention schedule.

It has been proposed by this colleague's organization that they rename
their retention schedule and call it disposition schedule.  My argument is
that ultimately the purpose of the schedule is to tell the organization how
long to RETAIN records, hence it should be called a retention schedule.  As
I see it, any disposition instructions within the schedule are a secondary
function only.

I checked the glossary for the Society of American Archivists and for the
term disposition schedule it says, "see retention schedule."

I'm also concerned that by calling it disposition schedule non-records
management people may focus on the root word of "dispose" and think records
are disposable and therefore not that important.

I know it's probably a nitpicky semantic argument at best, but in the words
of the philosopher Herbert Spencer, "How often misused words generate
misleading thoughts."

Charis

P.S. Yes, I was an English major!!

____________________
Charis Wilson, MLS, CRM
Records Manager / FOIA Officer
National Park Service - DSC
Technical Information Center
PO Box 25287, Denver, CO   80225-0287
303-969-2959

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