JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for ARCHIVES-NRA Archives


ARCHIVES-NRA Archives

ARCHIVES-NRA Archives


ARCHIVES-NRA@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARCHIVES-NRA Home

ARCHIVES-NRA Home

ARCHIVES-NRA  2002

ARCHIVES-NRA 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: appraisal

From:

kate manning <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

kate manning <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 26 Nov 2002 19:10:38 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (254 lines)

Hello Tom,

If we accept that not everything is worth keeping then we must accept that 
some things are. It is therefore necessary to know how to identify what is 
worth keeping and be able to account for why we have so identified it. Rick 
has pointed out that "the appraisal job for governments, institutions and 
persons may all have the same goal, but may require quite different 
approaches, whether we are appraising on the importance of the person, 
system, function or "collection"." One of my concerns is that we need 
definable goals in appraisal and defendable methods in achieving these 
goals. In the arena of public records and indeed, institutional records, 
good governance and accountability are important issues addressed to some 
extent by records management (ensuring that the right records are kept to 
meet legal and regulatory requirements, including Data Protection and 
Freedom of Information). But as Bruce has pointed out, scheduling is 
different from appraisal. Scheduling will account for some of what comes 
into the archives but not all. Appraisal is a larger concern: it has been 
argued that it is less about what documents should be kept and more about 
what functions and activities should be documented--which opens up the 
broader questions and issues raised in the earlier quotations from Terry 
Cook and Terry Eastwood. And of course, how you identify these functions and 
activities (more of which anon). Bruce has also touched on the “defendable 
methods” aspect of my concerns, the adequate documentation of our appraisal 
decisions, which, I suggest, goes some way to addressing your 
acknowledgement that “this is a process which should be fraught with the 
realisation that we may be wrong, no matter how professional in our approach 
we are.” At least with adequate documentation of our appraisal decisions, we 
can show why we made the decisions we did.

I do think appraisal is the “overriding concern of the archivist” because 
the choices we--or others--make about what is kept affects everything we do, 
from arrangement and description to access and use. Electronic records are a 
good example here, the issue that started this discussion. We know the 
issues of concern with electronic records, we know that ensuring access over 
time to these records will be time- and resource-consuming. It is obvious 
therefore that the time and resources spent on these records, is spent on 
the “right” records. Identifying those “right” records IS appraisal. The 
process(es) we use to identify these records is another question and one I’m 
sure, many people have strong views on. I am feeling my way in this area, 
and have much to learn still, but for what it’s worth, I am very interested 
in the macroappraisal model, founded on the idea that societal values should 
be the basis of appraisal and that functional analysis (at the centre of 
macroappraisal) is the tool/process which enables the archivist to identify 
and reflect societal values in order to establish targets for documentation 
through records acquisition. It’s a very interesting and rigorous process, 
that I am still getting to grips with.

On your point about the justification of appraisal as serving the 
“continuing interests of citizens of a democracy”, determining our success 
in that (if, as you say, we accept this as a desirable goal, which I do) 
will partly depend on our “defendable methods” and on how much society in 
general understands (or cares) about what we do.

All the best,

Kate

>From: "Townsend, Tom" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: "kate manning" <[log in to unmask]>,<[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: RE:appraisal
>Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 10:24:20 -0000
>
>Hello Kate
>
>Identifying the dross amongst the not-quite-dross is, in my opinion, the
>more normal experience of most archivists. Even this is a process which
>should be fraught with the realisation that we may be wrong, no matter
>how professional in our approach we are. Perhaps even the humble
>cheque-stub has its place in the many-roomed palace of archival heaven
>(though I doubt it!).
>To be honest, I don't think that you have yet made any case for
>appraisal as the overriding concern of the archivist other than arguing
>that somehow such a process will 'serve the continuing interests of
>citizens of a democracy'.
>How on earth are we to determine what will achieve that, even if we
>accept that that may be a desirable goal? Does not our everyday
>experience of regret for the lost documents of the past teach us that
>the exigencies and imperatives of the Now rarely take into account the
>needs (or even merely the desires) of the future? And that goes for
>archival imperatives too!
>Now, I'm not arguing that everything is worth keeping (15 years of
>dealing with business records have shown me that, if nothing else) but I
>am questioning just how it is we can be so sure that certain records
>reflect the function and nature of their creator and not others.
>Ultimately, isn't all that we are saying is that the dross reflects such
>a common and obvious part of their creator's nature that there is never
>any chance that we (Society) shall forget it?
>Tom Townsend
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: kate manning [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 25 November 2002 17:02
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: More on MyLifeBits - and something else
>
>Hi Steve,
>
>I think the "why" of appraisal is critical. Why do we do it and why do
>we
>choose what we choose? We have moved a long way from the Jenkinsonian
>view
>that archivists should not appraise and are moving away from the purely
>historical view that decisions about appraisal are justified as serving
>the
>needs of research into the past, to the view (at least in some places)
>that
>we are meeting some of the requirements of a modern, democratic society
>by
>carrying out appraisal. That is, we must clearly identify the records
>that
>are being created which document the functions and activities of the
>creator
>not only to help us understand the past but to meet accountability needs
>and
>more broadly to "document" our society (I am thinking here particularly
>of
>the macroappraisal model as practised in the National Archives of
>Canada).
>
>Appraisal is much more than keeping the records that were kept to meet
>legal
>and regulatory requirements (simply accepting the records at the end of
>the
>records management process). I heard Terry Eastwood give a paper
>('Archival
>appraisal in democratic societies') at a conference dedicated to
>appraisal
>in Salamanca, Spain last month where he said that one of the questions
>for
>archivists in a democracy is how to "orient ourselves to determine from
>among the vast volume of records produced in modern, technologically
>adept
>society those that will serve the continuing interests of citizens of a
>democracy." And at the same conference, Terry Cook ('Macroappraisal and
>Functional Analysis: The importance of Governance rather than
>Government')said that when we appraise "We are deciding what is
>remembered
>and what is forgotten, who in society is visible and who remains
>invisible,
>who has a voice and who does not. In this act of creation, we must
>remain
>extraordinarily sensitive to the political and philosophical nature of
>documents individually, of archives collectively, of archival functions,
>of
>archivists' personal bias, and most especially of archival appraisal,
>for
>that process defines the creators, functions, and activities to be
>included
>in archives, by defining, choosing, selecting which documents become
>archives, and thus enjoy all subsequent archival processes (description,
>
>conservation, exhibition, reference, etc.), and, as starkly, and with
>finality, which are destroyed, excluded from archives, forgotten from
>memory." I think you are absolutely right when you say "Archivists will
>find
>themselves swimming against a pretty powerful current if the only
>defence of
>the importance of appraisal that we can muster is that it is what we as
>archivists have always done!" But in order to do that, we have to
>understand
>ourselves why we appraise and what is our goal in appaisal.
>
>I think the not choosing is as important as the choosing. The argument
>for
>not choosing is not simply that you can't keep everything but that not
>everything is worth keeping! Nicholson Baker's book "Double Fold" is a
>prime
>example of libraries and archives not making it clear why some things
>are
>not worth keeping. It's finding the gold amongst the dross.
>
>Regards,
>
>Kate
>
> >Hi Kate,
> >
> >Some further thoughts in response to your email.
> >
> >are we not missing the point of what we do if we keep entire
> > > systems rather than appraise
> >
> >My point exactly!  As I said in my first email, I see appraisal as
> >*the* defining traditional core skill of the archive profession.  The
> >issue is that whereas until now that skill has had an appeal born of
> >necessity (ie we can't keep everything so what should we keep).  With
> >the advent of MyLifeBits and more importantly the theory that lies
> >behind it, that skill may nolonger be seen as being important.  The
> >whole point of MyLifeBits is that we *can* keep everything and moreover
> >that we *should* keep everything (please note I am merely explaining
> >this view not condoning it) so why bother appraising?
> >
> >  Maybe the question we need to consider, before we think about our
> >technical
> > > abilities, is how and why do we appraise?
> >
> >The 'why' is, I'm sure, open to debate.  At its most fundamental level
> >however it is hard to deny that it was originally born of necessity.
> >In the paper world you simply could not keep everything.  Firstly
> >because of the practical problems of storage and secondly because with
> >manual finding aids it would take an age to find what you did want.  So
> >we invented a methodology for weeding out the ephemera and identifying
> >and preserving historically valuable material(evidence of decision
> >making etc etc) which kept the volume manageable and avoided waste.  I
> >can see no theoretical argument against keeping everything, it simply
> >wasn't practically possible.  Now if you follow the MyLifeBits approach
> >the whole underlying assumption on which our approach to appraisal is
> >based has gone (or at least will go soon) ie  'we *can* keep everything
> >so why not and focus our collective efforts on improving *access* to
> >it'.  Archivists will find themselves swimming against a pretty
> >powerful current if the only defence of the importance of appraisal
> >that we can muster is that it is what we as archivists have
> >always done!  So is it time for us to learn new skills, and if so,
> >what??
> >
> >
> >Thoughts?
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 15:02:46 +0000 kate manning
> ><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > With regard to the developing discussion on the influence of
>technology
> >on
> > > appraisal, are we not missing the point of what we do if we keep
>entire
> > > systems rather than appraise (even if this is time- and
> >resource-consuming),
> > > i.e. select the records that properly reflect the functions and
> >activities
> > > of the creator (government, institution or person) whatever the
>format?
> > > Maybe the question we need to consider, before we think about our
> >technical
> > > abilities, is how and why do we appraise? When we know what we need
>to
> >keep,
> > > we can work towards the infrastructure necessary to keep it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Kate Manning
> > > Archives Department
> > > University College Dublin


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager