From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work.

This month we are featuring Indigenous archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with Karen Ng, former Archivist & Librarian for the Squamish Nation.

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path? 

Karen: I double majored in English and Medieval Studies at the University of British Columbia (UBC) and I was particularly interested in histories of the book. I worked a few student jobs at various units at UBC Library, and I was encouraged to apply for the dual Master of Library and Information Studies and Master of Archival Studies at the UBC iSchool. I pursued the First Nations Curriculum Concentration, and throughout my graduate studies I tried to take advantage of as many experiential learning and professional opportunities as possible. I think that was really helpful to me, but it was still really challenging graduating in spring 2020 into the pandemic. I’m grateful for the Young Canada Works program because it allowed me to move to Victoria again where I did my co-op during school, and then eventually I was able to come home to the Lower Mainland when the job with the Squamish Nation opened up.

Q: What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice? 

Karen: Anxiety about what to do with a Bachelor of Arts.  

I like being organized, researching, and thinking about how things can be categorized and grouped together—and of course I like books and paper. To be honest, I didn’t really know very much about archival studies at all until graduate school. I was partially aware of what archives were when I took a class about medieval record-keeping and when I worked as a student at UBC Rare Books and Special Collections during my undergrad.

Q: What does an average day look like working with Indigenous archives? 

Karen: I was the first full-time Archivist for the Squamish Nation. Every day was different. I spent my first season moving boxes and getting to know the community, and then the next season trying to establish procedures and infrastructure for a functioning archives that worked best for the Nation. There was a summer that I spent writing multiple grants that had nothing to do with archives directly. Some days I would be at community events or out on the water or land if there was a spot for me. Other days I would find office rooms, shipping containers, or dilapidated sheds full of records that I had to figure out how to take care of. There were days when I was invited into community members’ homes to talk about the work they had done for their Nation and how they wanted their records preserved. 

Q: What is your favourite thing about working with Indigenous archives? What are some of the challenges that are unique to Indigenous archives? 

Karen: The people are really special to me. I’ve never experienced such belly-rumbling laughter at work. 

Unfortunately, colonial trauma was the most challenging aspect of the work, and it wasn’t surprising, but it was still difficult. 

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about Indigenous archives? What do you wish other archivists understood about Indigenous archives?  

Karen: Relationships take time. 

Q: Can you tell us about a project that you worked on? 

Karen: I’m proud of the CollectiveAccess database I implemented with the Cultural Collections Manager. I still think it’s a work in progress, but I think it was good enough for where we left off in terms of proceeding to use it to figure out how else it could be improved. I’m excited for more records to be processed and organized into the database. 

I’m also proud of the grant the linguist and I worked on for the Language Nest. The Squamish Nation’s Archives is part of the Language and Cultural Affairs Department, which also has a Squamish language immersion program for babies and their caregivers. Somehow I ended up on this project to apply for a grant that would continue to fund the Nest and the teachers. It was an incredible amount of work to understand the functions of the Nest and to translate it into a way that would convince the grant funders that we needed this. Even though it meant I took a big pause on my regular work with the archives, I think it’s still related in many ways to memory-making and memory-keeping.  

By June Chow, Jennifer Douglas, Rebecka Sheffield 

In this post, we report participant contributions to a workshop we led at the 2024 ACA conference. The workshop engaged the conference’s theme of “future-proofing” by focusing on “archival debt,” a term coined to name the “problematic legacy issues” existing in archival institutions due to “past practices, policies, and strategies that prioritized the protection and validation of institutions over democratic access and responsible stewardship” (Cuellar 2023). Archival debt asks us to consider what resources are owed to records and people who have received less attention and care than they are due and how to pay down this debt. Building off Sheffield’s work on different sustainability models for community archives and Chow and Douglas’ research on archival consciousness in Vancouver’s Chinatown, the workshop explored the roles and responsibilities of mainstream archival institutions in the long-term viability of archives they have historically marginalized and neglected.  

A significant portion of the workshop engaged participants in a process of envisioning an equitable archival space where mainstream archives not only acknowledge past harms, but also work toward actively benefiting historically marginalized communities and their archives. Participants worked in breakout groups to reflect on a series of prompts and questions we provided with the aim of starting a “future-proofing” conversation about the ways mainstream archives bear responsibility for sustaining community archives and possibilities for providing support in a non-oppressive, non-extractive, and reciprocal manner. The prompts first asked participants to think about “where they are at,” reflecting on the concept of archival debt and how it resonates in relation to their experiences as archivists in and outside of institutions. Next, we engaged participants in a road mapping exercise, asking groups to identify actionable steps toward more equitable relationships and practices that could be taken immediately and in the longer term.  

Participants recorded their breakout room discussions in anonymous Google docs; their contributions are collated and summarized here by June Chow. We are grateful to workshop participants for sharing with us and with each other. We hope the ideas expressed below encourage further conversation and deeper reflection across the archival profession and contribute to significant and lasting change in institutional priorities and policies; with this in mind, we particularly hope this post is shared with and read by those in leadership positions and holding institutional and professional power.  

Where folks are at 

“How do we work toward slow processing when we face neoliberal austerity measures?” (Workshop participant)

How does the concept of “archival debt” resonate with you and your practices? 

Workshop participants experience archival debt through lack of documentation in decision-making and in lack of knowledge around holdings of community records through inadequate description work. Short-term and contract-based jobs make it difficult to be embedded in a community and in an institution. Top-down decision-making based on statistics and deliverables is not seen as being conducive to care work. Issues around ownership and access to community records are layered and complex, and require different considerations and processes. 

The processing archivist seems to bear the bulk of the burden of archival debt. Few individuals with archival training are hired into institutions; they find themselves unable to keep up with the policy side of archival work within their organizations. Participants want to help others understand and acknowledge archival debt as an active concept in order to effect change, for example, by linking the concept with archival silences/silencing, social responsibility, stewardship, accountability, and even litigation.  

What do equitable, non-extractive models/practices of community engagement and support (debt repayment) look like? What should they look like? 

Repayment of archival debt involves slowing down, planning and building for the longer-term, and being supported to spend time with/in community to build ongoing relationships. In such relationships, we explore people’s comfort level and openness for discussion, field diverse opinions, and enter into discussions with an open mindset, recognizing that there is no single solution to the problem, and instead commit to ongoing discussion. We ask appropriate questions of people who are historically under-represented or maliciously represented; we are open to participatory description, and report back to the community when their records are processed and made available. Smaller, community-based archives are recognized as having expertise and better-established relationships, but few resources to support others. Fair compensation can take the form of honoraria, payment (including for records instead of expecting donation of records from communities), and employment to ensure the representation and power of the community of interest within an institution and its staff.  

Debt repayment can also involve resource sharing; resources that institutions can share with communities include database access, interlibrary loans, copies of records acquired without consent, digitization and digital preservation, and access to records while returning originals. Institutions are encouraged to dissolve institutional barriers and to learn from those outside archives who are doing things well. Ultimately, debt repayment must be part of the ethos of the institution and not just paid occasionally.  

What stops archivists/institutions from doing better? 

Archivists are being asked to take on more than is possible for a profession to do. Care work in the archives involves emotional labour and a high level of responsibility. In addition to resource limitations in funding, staff, and time, archivists also lack training. They are unsure of where to start, worry about not doing it right, and are overwhelmed by trying to do it all (or to do it at all). They are not sure how to balance care work against so many different areas of their work, which can quickly make for an unmanageable workload if room isn’t made by taking some things away. 

Conversations are happening between peers, but it’s not where decisions are made. Within big institutions, individuals find it hard to have a say or to make things actionable. Institutions are governed by mandates, set priorities based on research and reference requests, and give buy-in to tangible projects and deliverables over processes that may have longer or undefined timelines. The ability to do better is limited by the lack of will on the part of the institution, political issues/barriers, neoliberalism, and access restrictions. 

While both individuals and institutions are limited by capacity, it is cautioned that capacity is sometimes a valid concern, but sometimes used as an excuse to cover over things that can actually be done. Capacity can be created to fix errors/issues, for example, by taking capacity away from mundane or unimportant tasks. 

Roadmap  

“How can professionals with more/the most privilege/institutional power be encouraged to take on this work?” (Workshop participant) 

Responsibilities 

Institutions have a responsibility to recognize that this work is important and connected to institutional EDI mandates. This helps institutions hold themselves publicly accountable, and accountable to community records. There must be buy-in from senior management but also managers at various levels to grant staff the liberties to do this work. Transparent decision-making processes and inclusion of this work in overarching, long-term plans are needed. 

Shared goals for addressing archival debt, increasing access, and fostering inclusivity will look different in one another’s work and approaches––from records management in local government to public archives and working with the public––given different responsibilities, tasks and priorities. Different institutions may be better at different things; your archive isn’t necessarily the right one to jump into a space to meet a community’s needs. We may be calling for the dissolution of “total archives” and the redrawing of lines of responsibility.

Everyone has a responsibility to bring awareness to some of the issues that need addressing. Archivists are responsible for advocating for budget and support for current and future archivists. There is always some social capital or institutional influence that can be leveraged. For example, pilot projects and their impacts can be leveraged to advocate for larger budget allocation. Every interaction in the reading room is about relationship building.  

As professionals and as human beings, we work in front-facing roles with substantial power, and have access to valuable professional networks. An acquisition declined at your institution does not preclude you from using your networks to re-direct it to another home so that it gets preserved. We are responsible for engaging critically with our own work and processes, being invested on a personal/community level, and educating and advocating with our supervisors so that they can bring the issues forward to their supervisors. 

Resources 

Institutional resources require reprioritizing and reallocating. Long-term, stable funding beyond pilot projects is needed: for example, allocating funding from operating budgets within higher education. Redistribution of wealth and skills towards community archives is needed overall, with learning from other sectors and their funding models. Even with budgetary constraints, very small actions with communities can have potentially big ROI. 

Among archivists as information professionals, information was identified as the easiest resource to share. There is value in demystifying archives for communities by going into communities and also inviting them into the archives. This includes articulating the value and benefits of archives, and ensuring a welcoming and accessible space through our word choices (e.g. “researcher”, “research facilities”) as well as architecture. 

Small community archives often don’t have the means to be part of professional associations to gain access to their networks and to be included in conversations. Sharing resource lists, tips, and success stories can offer a starting point. In particular, institutions have infrastructure to offer in support of digital preservation and access. Regardless of the type of resource, however, both institutions and individuals need to be comfortable in providing work and support to the community without receiving or claiming credit. Both pros and cons were seen in a workplace's offering of professional credits for community archives work. 

People 

Community archives must be included as active participants in larger conversations that involve them. Different relationships with communities beyond collecting must be explored, pursued and codified within trust agreements. In particular, communities want to be empowered and have the agency to “build their own tables” by defining success on their own terms and creating their own opportunities. It is, however, difficult to know how to avoid overuse and over-reliance on consultation with communities, particularly Indigenous communities. The time it takes to build relationships and to step outside of the archives to do this work is challenging to carve out, quantify in year-end reports, and justify to a manager. However, this may be the only way an archives is accessible to remote communities. Employees who are part of the community must be part of the work, to make sure that the community in question is getting just as much if not more than the archives out of the interaction. 

Many community records are being processed by contract workers, often with skill and cultural gaps, with little effort to recruit from the community. Contract, temporary, project-based, student and volunteer positions are the norm in the profession which undermines the sustainability required in care work. Relationships are personal; the burden of rebuilding relationships when staff move on falls disproportionately on communities. Possible solutions involve leaning more on paraprofessionals as colleagues versus assistants. Better off-boarding procedures for contractors can help with staff transitions, particularly through documentation as procedures vary across archival institutions. If we don’t document what we’re doing, it can be challenging to advocate for more resources and to bridge the work. 

Hiring practices are a huge issue in archival institutions in Canada, and symptoms of larger systemic problems of investment in the archives sector. Hiring equitably to create a diverse, representative staff in the archival field must move beyond tokenism to support and give voice to marginalized employees. 

Paying (y)our debt 

“GLAM can be a monster that yum-yum-yum will eat up all your joy and enthusiasm for the work and call it ‘good for you.’ So boundaries, boundaries, boundaries will ensure we can keep doing good work.” (Workshop participant) 

Tomorrow: 

Do some documentation, examine our daily procedures for what we are doing already that is working and has values alignment, and make the case for additional resources by aligning with emerging frameworks. 

Start using and give credit to the “archival debt” term, and talk about and share this bundle of issues. Recognize that we have this debt and have done harm. Admit past mistakes. Be more transparent about the work we do and don’t do, and the communities we haven’t documented. Fill descriptive gaps; add a title note to provide context to a user. 

Share and discuss with colleagues, share skills in the workplace, and identify potential community partners to begin relationship building. There may be value in looking back to see what relationships have been lost due to funding/staffing gaps. 

Mid-/Long-term: 

Start a network of like-minded archivists to provide support and share skills. Identify pilot projects. Start making community connections, spending time to support people where they’re at, and respect what they want and need instead of what we want and need. 

Build out a plan for how to engage and work with identified communities over time, including defining what engagement means and how you’ll measure success. 

Share skills back with communities through volunteering, talking about the work you do as an archivist. If you have job security, ask if you can use work hours to do work that benefits the community and aligns with the institution’s strategic plan. 

Call to action 

The concept of archival debt provides a useful lens for reflecting on the responsibilities mainstream archival institutions and the profession have toward individuals and communities they have historically ignored and/or excluded. The discussions we had during the ACA workshop suggest possibilities for providing support in a non-oppressive, non-extractive, and reciprocal manner, but only through further conversation and deeper reflection across the archival profession can we contribute to significant and lasting change in institutional priorities and policies. As these conversations and reflections take place, it is especially important to remember the role that institutional and professional power plays in the archival debt economy. Power is unevenly held, and for too long the field has relied on those with little professional or institutional power to bring change. It’s time now for those in leadership positions, with the influence that is needed to effect long-term change, to join in these conversations––to look at the debt our institutions and profession hold and begin the work to pay it down.  

Citation: Cuellar, Jillian; Eagle Yun, Audra; Meehan, Jennifer; and Tai, Jessica (2023) “Defining Archival Debt: Building New Futures for Archives,” Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies: Vol. 10, Article 8. Available at: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/vol10/iss1/8 

Author bios

June Chow is an archivist (Vancouver/Toronto) with an award-winning practice in Chinese Canadian heritage. 

Jennifer Douglas is associate professor at the School of Information at the University of British Columbia, on the traditional, ancestral and unceded territory of the Musqueam people.  

Rebecka Sheffield is the Head of Special Collections & Archives at the University of Waterloo Library. 

From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work.

This month we are featuring government and provincial archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with Ariane Gauthier, Reference Archivist at Library and Archives Canada.  

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path?

Ariane: I signed up for a master’s program in history with the University of Ottawa in 2019 and simultaneously began working as a hostess for the Canadian History Museum and the Canadian War Museum. I had the opportunity to present my major research paper on Canadian nurses during the First World War at the Wilfrid Laurier Military History Colloquium. During the pandemic, I began work with the City of Ottawa on a municipal commemoration policy project that was recently adopted by the city council and permitted to enter its implementation phase. I also had the opportunity to work with the Juno Beach Centre in France for about 6 months during which time I served as a historical interpreter of Canadian military history.

Q: What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice? 

Ariane: Down the line, my academic and professional paths repeatedly led me to Library and Archives Canada. With my main field of interest relating to the First and Second World Wars, I found myself consulting archival documents. While other smaller archival and heritage institutions had relevant material as part of their collection, the bulk of it was located at Library and Archives Canada. 

Q: What does an average day look like in government archives? 

Ariane: The average day is more exciting than it might seem at first glance, though this is entirely conditional on how interested you might be in research. As someone who is invigorated by this work, my days are comprised of exciting rabbit holes seeking questions to answers I might never have thought to have on my own. I scour our vast collection for information that might support researchers who come to our institution, and on select days I have the opportunity to flip through hundred-year-old documents that may be of use to them. 

[Kapuskasing internment camp photograph] Original Title: Detention Camps, Guards and Prisoners 

Reference: Library and Archives Canada, e011196906 

Q: What is your favourite thing about working at Library and Archives Canada? What are some of the challenges that are unique to federal archives? 

Ariane: As a historian by trade, my favourite thing is the opportunity to directly interact with historical documents. It’s one thing to read about or to see in documentaries or historical dramas an event that was pivotal; it’s another entirely to touch and see with your own eyes the correspondence, photos, or whatever else that recorded the moment as it happened. Unfortunately, these documents are not as easy to find as one may think and so the opportunity of working with history comes with the caveat of first having to locate a particular record. Additionally, the sorting system used by one institution is not necessarily the same as the one used by another, nor are the naming conventions of records. 

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about federal archives? What do you wish other archivists understood about federal archives?  

Ariane: An important thing for the public to keep in mind is how recent, all things considered, archival ethics actually are. A standardization of best practices in the maintenance of archival documents can be traced back to the last 20 or 30 years. However, the documents most people are interested in are much older. This inevitably means that they existed, for a time, in a sort of Wild West period that impacted not only the way they were catalogued, but also whether they were ever deemed worth preserving. More records than we would like to imagine were thrown away under the erroneous assumption that no one would ever find them useful. As an unfortunate result, not all of our questions will be given satisfactory or direct answers. 

Q: Can you tell us about a project you’ve been working on lately? 

Ariane: I have had the pleasure of working on a research guide that will help to shed light on the internment camps (for prisoners of war and civilians) that existed in Canada during the periods of the First and Second World Wars. Few people are aware that this ever happened in Canada and fewer still have any idea where to begin such research. The guide will serve as a starting point for what Library and Archives Canada has as part of its collection and will be available on our website soon. 

[Fort Henry being used as an internment camp]

Reference: Library and Archives Canada/PA-046178 

by Scott Jones 

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly becoming an integral part of the archival field, offering new and different ways to manage, preserve, and provide access to historical documents. In Ontario, the crossroads of AI and archives is being explored through various initiatives and frameworks aimed at employing the potential of AI while ensuring ethical use and trustworthiness. 

An Introduction to AI in Ontario Archives  

The Ontario government has been working on creating an AI Framework to guide the safe and responsible use of AI across its various services. This framework is designed to be transparent, responsible, and accountable, aligning with democratic principles and rights. It emphasizes the importance of AI being used transparently, ensuring that AI serves all people in Ontario, and maintaining trust in AI applications. 

Consultations have been held to collect public input on the development of this framework, showing the government's commitment to an open and inclusive process. These consultations have highlighted the public's concerns about privacy, the desire for transparency in AI, and the need for definitions and plain language explanations. In the context of archives, AI can be a significant factor in enhancing the accuracy and accessibility of archival materials. The Archives of Ontario maintains an extensive collection of government and private documents, photographs, maps, and other historical records that could benefit from AI technologies for better management and user access. The Archives of Ontario, as part of the Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery, provides leadership in recordkeeping, access, and privacy, which are areas where AI can contribute significantly to efficiency and effectiveness. 

The integration of AI into archival practices in Ontario is not only about improving archival management, but also about fostering a digital economy powered by trustworthy AI. This involves balancing the innovative potential of AI with ethical considerations and the protection of individual rights. 

As AI continues to evolve, it will be essential for archival institutions like the Archives of Ontario to stay abreast of technological advancements, ensuring that they leverage AI in ways that enhance their services while upholding ethical standards and public trust. The ongoing development of Ontario's Trustworthy AI Framework and the active engagement with experts and the public are positive steps toward achieving these goals. 

AI in Academic Archives in Ontario 

In Ontario, academic institutions are exploring the use of AI to process and interpret large volumes of archival data. For instance, the Vector Institute for Artificial Intelligence, an independent, not-for-profit corporation dedicated to advancing AI through research and applications, is a key player in Ontario's AI ecosystem. The institute focuses on deep learning and machine learning, crucial technologies for analyzing complex archival data. 

Moreover, the Association of Canadian Archivists has spotlighted the work of archivists like Siham Alaoui, who are at the forefront of integrating digital technologies into archival practices. Alaoui's work at Université Laval in Québec, which includes updating archival teaching programs to incorporate digital transformation, reflects a broader trend in academic archives across Canada, including Ontario (Alaoui, 2024). 

Digital archives in Ontario are also becoming more accessible thanks to AI. The Archives of Ontario, for example, offers a searchable database of government and private documents, photographs, and other materials, which can be enhanced by AI to provide more precise search results and content analysis (Archives of Ontario). 

Furthermore, the application of AI in archives raises important considerations regarding trust and collaboration. As AI technologies evolve, they offer the potential to make archives more accessible, but they also require careful management to ensure the integrity and authenticity of archival materials (Colavizza, 2022). At Conestoga College, AI in the archives has yet to be explored; Conestoga College is offering a program in Applied Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning starting September 2024. This program is designed to equip students with the skills needed to design technology stacks for emerging industry challenges, and could be useful to archival students and those interested in applying AI to their archival institution.  

 
AI in Local Archives in Ontario 

Local archives in Ontario, such as those accessible through the Archives of Ontario, provide a wealth of resources including government and private documents, photographs, maps, and more. These collections are invaluable for research, education, and preserving the cultural heritage of Ontario. Digital Archive Ontario also offers an advanced search for various collections, highlighting the integration of digital technologies in archiving practices. 

AI in Corporate Archives in Ontario 

For corporate archives, AI can offer advanced methods for managing and analyzing large volumes of data. AI technologies like machine learning and natural language processing can help in organizing, categorizing, and retrieving archival materials more efficiently. This not only enhances the accessibility of historical records but also supports better decision-making by providing insights derived from archival data. 

Conclusion 

AI is playing a huge role in the archival landscape of Ontario, enhancing the management and accessibility of historical records. The province's commitment to ethical AI use and the ongoing growth of AI in academia and the AI ecosystem position Ontario as a leader in the intersection of technology and heritage preservation. Archives, supported by digital advancements and AI applications, continue to safeguard culturally significant records about Ontario for future generations. 
 
Works Cited 

Alaoui, S. (2024). L’intelligence artificielle et la gestion documentaire : quels apports ? Quels enjeux ? Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 46(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjils-rcsib.v46i2.16695 

Archives of Ontario. Index. Retrieved July 25, 2024, from https://aims.archives.gov.on.ca/ 

Colavizza, G., Blanke, T., Jeurgens, C., & Noordegraaf, J. (2022). Archives and AI: An Overview of Current Debates and Future Perspectives. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 15(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479010 

Conestoga College. Applied Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning | Description. (n.d.). https://www.conestogac.on.ca/fulltime/applied-artificial-intelligence-machine-learning 

 Mooradian, N. (2019, November 12). AI, Records, and Accountability. ARMA Magazine. https://magazine.arma.org/2019/11/ai-records-and-accountability/ 

Ontario. Ontario’s Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) Framework (2023, September 14). https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontarios-trustworthy-artificial-intelligence-ai-framework 

Author bio: Scott Jones 

I am currently working at Conestoga College – Doon campus in Kitchener, ON. I work as a Library services technician, and work the information desk as well as in the archives on various projects. A secondary portfolio I hold is with Academic Integrity at Conestoga as part of the takedown team. In the past I have worked as a Library CEO/Chief librarian at a small public library in Laurentian Hills. I helped develop programing and worked to build a community driven library by making connections with local schools, archives, museums, and genealogical groups. I have worked in school libraries as well as university libraries. For a term during my graduate program, I worked at the Map and Data Centre and Pride Library at Western University. I hold a master’s degree from Western University in Library and Information Sciences. I am also a graduate of Kings University College in London, Ontario with a Bachelor, honours specialization, in History. I have a deep appreciation for libraries and their role in the community, having worked in various related positions from bookstore clerk to library CEO. 

From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work

This month we are featuring museum archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with Ashlynn Prasad, the former Librarian & Archivist at the Vancouver Maritime Museum.

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path? What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice?

Ashlynn: I actually started my archival career as an undergraduate student working in the Special Collections & Archives department of my university, the University of California, Santa Cruz. I worked there for all four years of my undergrad and I had really excellent mentors and supervisors who encouraged me to take on as much responsibility as I had an appetite for, which ended up being quite a lot. They gave me a thorough grounding in all aspects of archival work, and from there I was building on a really solid foundation. At first I was on the fence about pursuing archives as a career because I wasn’t sure I wanted to complete another degree, but by the time I was nearing the end of my bachelor’s degrees, I knew I wanted to keep doing this work and keep advancing in the field. I was also double majoring in History and Literature, which tied in perfectly with the start of my career; I like to say I was the last person to know I was going to become an archivist. I went almost directly into graduate school at the University of British Columbia, where I completed the Master’s of Archival Studies and the Master’s of Library and Information Studies, at the same time working the entire time almost entirely in academic archives. It wasn’t until after graduate school that I pivoted to museum archives, and by that time I had seven years of experience behind me.

Q: What does an average day look like in museum archives?

Ashlynn: When I worked at the Vancouver Maritime Museum, I was the only full-time permanent employee in the Archives department, so there was a lot to do and I’m not sure any two days were ever the same! For the most part, the work was similar to archival work in any context: reference requests, running the reading room, donor relations, appraisal and acquisition, arrangement and description whenever I had time for it, managing small teams of graduate students, and anything else I could do to try to increase the efficiency of my department, since there was so much to do with such limited resources. The day-to-day aspects that were specific to a museum archives included meeting regularly with the curators to discuss long-term preservation and storage plans for all our collections, as well as finding ways in which archival materials could best be represented in exhibitions and programs.

Q: What is your favourite thing about working in a museum archives? What are some of the challenges that are unique to museum archives?

Ashlynn: It was a relatively small organization, and because of that, everything was usually an all-hands-on-deck situation (pun absolutely intended). For me, part of the joy of working in a museum archives was that I got to be involved in museum goings-on beyond the archives department, including working very closely with all the other department heads to organize events, work on grants, support marketing, help out with exhibitions, and plan the future of the museum as a whole. It was exciting to be involved in the life of the museum on a larger scale, and to advocate for the archives within that. Having come to the museum from a background of mostly academic archives, I really enjoyed working in an archives that in many ways felt like it was closer to a broader swath of the community.

Advocating for the archives within the institution presented a unique challenge as well. As we all know, archival work can be expensive, and it was often a struggle to get non-archives peoples in an organization that wasn’t archives-centric to see why something like an expensive storage solution should be prioritized above, for example, something that would get more visitors through the doors. A related challenge was learning how to talk about archives and archival work as the only person in the building who was an archives professional. There’s a certain degree of translation involved: finding ways to limit jargon and say things differently than I would around archival colleagues was necessary to represent the archives well and help everyone see why they should care about them.

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about museum archives?

Ashlynn: One thing that I didn’t realize before I worked in museum archives was that the collections are split between archives and objects: while I managed the archives, the curatorial department managed the object collections. That was actually a relief to me when I first started, because I had never really worked with objects before, and obviously they have their own needs in terms of preservation, description, and access. It was great to work alongside professionals who had the skills and knowledge to handle these objects in their own separate cataloguing system. That was something that I wished was more broadly known, because I was constantly getting donation offers and reference requests for the object collections and the curators were constantly getting the same for archival collections. In an environment where time was such a limited resource that every moment counted, it felt like we were spending too much time forwarding emails back and forth to each other.

Another thing that I wish the public understood better is that museums have collecting mandates, donation procedures, and limited space—sometimes extremely limited—so we’re not necessarily interested in every donation offer. I think people tend to imagine the warehouse scene from Indiana Jones when they think of museum archives in particular, and the reality was often more like one or two open shelves in my unprocessed area and a nonexistent quarantine area. We often had people offering donations or sometimes just dropping things off at the front door overnight, who were then confused and even offended when we followed up to let them know their donation didn’t fall within our collecting mandate (Pacific and Arctic, but not Atlantic) or we needed them to sign our donor paperwork.

Q: Can you tell us about a project you worked on during your time in museum archives? 

Ashlynn: The projects I was most excited about were the ones that opened up access to communities, especially marginalized communities. Because the museum’s collecting mandate included the Arctic, Inuit materials were one of the focuses of our collections. One project I worked on at the beginning of my tenure there was the creation of an Oral History Program, which included a step-by-step manual, resources, checklists, and more. I incorporated a flexible release form designed specifically for oral history interviews with Indigenous individuals: this basically stated that the museum would conduct the interview, but any and all rights to the story and the interview would remain with the interviewee and their kin, and the museum had to seek their permission any time they wanted to use the oral history. I designed the terms of the form to be flexible on a case-by-case basis; interviewees could choose to adjust the release form so that the museum could have usage rights to the audio, but it wasn’t something that we wanted to lobby for or even suggest. I didn’t want it to feel like there were conditions to participating in the interview; I wanted it to feel more like a free service that the museum offered to anyone who wanted to tell their story. Before I left, I was able to oversee the interview of an Inuit elder, who lived in the Arctic and was interviewed in Inuktitut by his great-niece, who sat on our Board of Trustees. Their story was closely connected to the museum because his brother and mother had helped the St. Roch navigate through the Northwest Passage in the early 20^th century; the St. Roch is the ship that the museum is essentially built around, and the primary exhibition. They chose to allow the museum to use the interview, and by the time I left, we were working on getting it translated into English so that we could use the audio with subtitles in exhibitions.

by Jill K. Sadler

Digital technology has greatly changed preservation management in the archival field, presenting both opportunities and challenges. There has been a significant amount of research in the last five years investigating how artificial intelligence (AI) and its sub-fields, machine learning (ML) and natural language processing (NLP), can assist archivists in their workflow by addressing privacy concerns and improving access. This article is not about ChatGPT—that’s another conversation for another (very imminent) time—but it is about examining how archivists can ethically steward records using emerging technologies. Ultimately, AI methods are helpful, but archivists are necessary to help provide context and supervision.  

Discussions of efficient and meaningful archival processing have been ongoing for decades. The discussions of archival backlog continue, especially as technology progresses and digitized and born-digital records are amassed, surpassing what human archivists are capable of addressing. Digital records don’t need a warehouse for storage. Millions of email records can be stored on a USB flash drive or on cloud servers distal from a physical archival institution. The vulnerability of this unprocessed data is compounded by technology obsolescence. Without ethical stewardship of these records, there are privacy and access concerns and there is substantial risk to records’ creators, records’ subjects, and institutional trust. 

AI methods such as machine learning and natural language processing can be used to process records and text at a scale that surpasses human capability and can potentially address the archival backlog. A machine learning algorithm builds a model based on training data, not based on direct programming by a human. Natural language processing describes a computer’s ability to process text and speech similar to the way humans can. Both of these methods, in combination with ever-increasing computing power, can help archivists analyze and describe records; however, there is still the matter of a computer’s ability to infer context. When considering AI solutions, one should continually ask the question, Can a computer understand contextual nuance and value as well as a human can? It is important to critically assess how AI tools work and the opportunities and challenges these new tools present to the archival field. One way to do this is to examine AI tools against the archival framework of radical empathy. Michelle Caswell and Marika Cifor’s “Human Rights to Feminist Empathy: Radical Empathy in the Archives” examines archivists’ responsibilities in their relationships with records’ creators, records’ subjects, records’ users, and larger communities. A radical empathy approach considers positions of power and, more specifically, notes how the archival tradition of preserving records for legal reasons ignores oppression and is not a radical empathy approach to recordkeeping.  

In “Balancing Care and Authenticity in Digital Collections: A Radical Empathy Approach to Working with Disk Images,” Monique Lassere and Jess M. Whyte provide a balanced perspective on archival processing with AI tools. They specifically place disk image preservation issues within a radical empathy framework, outlining how preserving disk images may harm records’ subjects, donors, and other stakeholders due to privacy concerns. Preserving disk images provides an authentic record with clear provenance and authority; however, this approach considers the disk image from a sociolegal viewpoint. There is also institutional risk associated with preserving a disk image containing sensitive data that may or may not be processed in a timely fashion and with not treating the data with care. The question is one of balancing privacy with access and assessing the risk of jeopardizing one or both. AI tools can help redact sensitive data on disk images, thus protecting the records’ subjects and lowering institutional risk. Once sensitive data has been redacted, the records can potentially be made available to the public per the archival institution’s mission. 

Lassere and Whyte make a number of recommendations for archivists who want to use AI tools in their workflow. From a technical standpoint, these tools need to showcase transparency in how they work: there needs to be clear documentation and reporting of the tools’ functionality and usage, clear evidence of content deletion, and ease of adoption and use. However, the authors clearly underscore that radical empathy doesn’t mesh well with automation. Tools can help archivists, but archivists still need training and time to perform acceptable acquisition and oversee the use of these tools. In other words, in a radical empathy framework, archival processes need humans to work alongside technology to ensure decisions can be made slowly given their subjective, contextual, and shifting nature. Most importantly, archivists need to collaborate with IT departments, the institution’s administration, records’ subjects, donors, and researchers with the primary goal of mitigating risk for all parties. Perhaps archivists need to acknowledge their acceptable risk and collect less: if you can’t ethically steward without risk, don’t acquire it. 

In “After the Digital Revolution: Working With Emails and Born-digital Records in Literary and Publishers’ Archives,” Lise Jaillant draws similar conclusions when considering dark digital archives that are intended to be public but are locked away due to their sensitive nature. Regarding access, Jaillant recommends collaborating with donors, advocating for open data and improved text mining tools, and improving graduate student training in digital curation and AI. Engaging donors fits into a radical empathy approach: not only is this collaborative and builds relationships with archivists and records creators/subjects, but it also gives the donor agency in determining their own balance between privacy and risk. Jaillant also advocates for involving researchers to work with archivists instead of waiting for archivists to process records and make them available. This requires a code of ethics on the part of the researcher and requires that the researcher understands the research context. 

In “Unlocking Digital Archives: Cross‐disciplinary Perspectives on AI and Born‐digital Data,” Lise Jaillant and Annalina Caputo continue to explore how archival institutions prioritize closed archives over access because of a risk-averse perspective and wanting to avoid legal challenges. This approach of limiting access to archives, especially using a rights-based argument, doesn’t easily align with a radical empathy framework as it potentially obscures the oppressed and marginalized voices that may be present in the archives. It potentially limits the power of voices in the archives, limits the experiences of the archival user, and may negatively impact the larger community. The authors advocate for working alongside AI tools as “human scrutiny is not replaced by their algorithmic counterpart, but boosted… [there is] value of digital assisted sensitivity review on both speed and quantity” (2022). Jaillant and Caputo underscore that “archivists do not have to be proficient in technical aspects of AI… but they need to actively participate in this process of ‘assisted review’ of archival documents” (2022). They call for close examination of AI and machine learning tools because the exact ways in which these tools and their respective algorithms are created and function are typically obscured.  

Jaillant and Caputo’s analysis segues nicely into an analysis made by Stephanie Decker et al. in “Finding Light in Dark Archives: Using AI to Connect Context and Content in Email.” Having humans work alongside machines to help provide context is key, especially with complex email archives, which seem to be particularly troublesome due to their inherently risky privacy issues, networked nature, the ease at which information can be decontextualized, and the volume of data.  

Decker et al. provide a comprehensive, technical description of how AI methods can be applied to email archives to aid in searching, contextualization, and, ultimately, access but note that their success depends on how the archives have been rendered so that they are machine-readable. Lassere and Whyte also emphasize how important it is to use knowledge domain-specific AI tools, especially ones designed for archives, as the tool may be less effective if it cannot properly contextualize or assist with the data it is meant to be analyzing. Decker et al. emphasize the need for researchers to help provide access to records, and for cross-disciplinary collaboration to improve or provide meaningful access. This is yet another reason why interdisciplinary collaboration between archivists and AI scientists is so crucial. Already, just in this article, one can see that scholars who are interested in this intersection of AI and archives come from varied backgrounds: Caputo is a computer scientist, Decker is a business scholar, Jaillant is a digital humanist, Lassere is a digital archivist, and Whyte is a digital assets librarian. Given the multidisciplinary nature of the AI field, one can expect to see more collaborations from experts in the fields of history, anthropology, linguistics, business, computer science, archives, and more. 

Recent scholarship shows how artificial intelligence methods can be applied in digital preservation workflow and provides a perspective on ethical stewardship of records while using emerging technologies. Jaillant and Caputo expertly summarize what a radical empathy approach to using AI tools in archives looks like: “a framework of AI governance informed by well-developed language and procedures of consent, power, inclusivity, transparency… cross-disciplinary collaborations, [and] close attention to ethical principles” (2022). With intentional and patient management and supervision, implementing AI methods in digital preservation workflows can help connect archivists with records’ creators, subjects, and users, as well as larger communities, in a responsible manner. 

References

Caswell, M. & Cifor, M. (2016) From Human Rights to Feminist Ethics: Radical Empathy in the Archives. Archivaria 81, 23-43. https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/687705 

Decker, S., Kirsch, D.A., Kuppili Venkata, S. et al. (2022). Finding Light inDark Archives: Using AI to Connect Context and Content in Email. AI & Soc 37, 859–872. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01369-9  

Jaillant L. (2019). After the Digital Revolution: Working with Emails and Born-digital Records in Literary and Publishers’ Archives. Archives & Manuscripts, 47(3), 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2019.1640555 

Jaillant, L. & Caputo, A. (2022). Unlocking Digital Archives: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives on AI and Born-digital Data. AI & Soc 37, 823–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01367-x 

Lassere, M. & Whyte, J. M. (2021). Balancing Care and Authenticity in Digital Collections: A Radical Empathy Approach to Working with Disk Images. Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies 3, 1-25.  

From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work.

This month we are featuring university archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with Siham Alaoui, a PhD candidate in archival and communication studies and a sessional lecturer in records management programs (undergraduate and graduate) at Université Laval, Québec. 

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path? 

Siham: I hold a master’s degree in information science obtained in 2015 from the École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information (EBSI) at the Université de Montréal. I also have a bachelor’s degree in information science from the School of Information Sciences (Rabat, Morocco) in 2013. Before starting a PhD in archival science and public communication in 2018 at Université Laval, I worked as head of the library and archives department of a higher institute in translation studies in Rabat, Morocco. I also accumulated professional experience through internships during my undergraduate and graduate studies. This experience helped me specialize in records management, particularly in the current context of digital transformation of higher education institutions.  

Q: What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice? 

Siham: I’ve always wanted to pursue an educational program that combines management, culture, and technology. This ambition naturally led me to choose the Bachelor of Information Sciences, with a specialization in archival science, asa major during my undergraduate studies. My final year project focused on the implementation of a workflow management technology to stimulate collaboration between organizational actors to manage their business records. Since then, my interest in collaboration and horizontality has grown. It developed further during my graduate studies, as well as my work experience in both a library and archives environment. This enabled me to project a cross-sectional view of the two professions, which manage the information object indifferent ways. Actually, this is the subject of my doctoral research thesis.  

Q: Can you explain how digital technologies have changed your teaching experience in recent years? 

Siham: In recent years, particularly with the changes caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, it has become essential to review the archival teaching programs at Université Laval. As a specialist, a researcher and a lecturer in records management, I thought it was necessary to update my courses to incorporate the remote workaspect and all the emerging information management practices associated with it. Also, with the craze for artificial intelligence and its link to the phenomenon of information datafication, it was necessary to make students aware of the need to review their practices to take full advantage of the potential of automation, while respecting the ethical and professional standards recognized by the archival community.  

Q: What is your favourite thing about working as a lecturer of archival science curricula? 

Siham: First and foremost, it is the ongoing dialogue between theory and practice. This enables me to update the content of the undergraduate and graduate courses I teach. There is also the flexibility to adapt to students’ needs. This is particularly the case for graduate students who come with their own professional experiences. The interactions are very interesting because they enable us to reflect on certain things that are still little explored in practice, or aspects that emerge from practice but remain scientifically under-explored. 

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about university archives? What do you wish other archivists understood about university archives?  

Siham: University records and archives are diverse, because in the university’s environment, there is more than one activity: teaching, research, community service, administration, and community involvement. All these aspects are reflected in the records and archives acquired by university archivists. Some are described as institutional, others as non-institutional or private. To ensure a better representation of the university, its achievements, its influence, and its history, the archivist needs to get involved with an array of university actors (e.g. professors, lecturers, students, administrative staff, etc.) to build up the archival memory.  

Furthermore, in the age of information datafication and the development of open research data disclosure, which can be considered as records of the research activities of professors, students, postdoctoral fellows and research professionals, it is necessary to develop activities on the part of archivists. This seems challenging, since the latter's interventions are often limited to long-term preservation and archiving, whereas their expertise could very well be put to good use in contextualizing these data. To this end, a dialogue should be established between archivists and researchers to improve open research data governance. 

Q: Can you tell us about a project you’ve been working on lately?  

Siham: In fact, it is not a project per se. It is a research interest that my teaching experience has enabled me to explore. It is about research into the intersections between artificial intelligence (AI) and records management. Everyone is talking about AI these days. The results of my implication in various projects related to AI and my experience as a doctoral researcher have been an inspiration to publish my article entitled “Artificial intelligence and records management: What gains? What stakes?” in the Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science in 2023. In this theoretical article, my aim was to explore the benefits and the challenges of integrating AI into records management practices. I also wanted to highlight the new roles that records managers would play in the automation era.  

From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work.

This month we are featuringuniversity archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with John Moran, Digital Archivist at the University of British Columbia. 

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path? 

John: I studied History back home at the University of Galway, Ireland and spent some time as an intern in the James Hardiman Library. When the archivists in James Hardiman heard that I was going to work in Canada they told me to consider studying archives there, as Canadian archivists have a world-wide reputation. I was fortunate to be accepted into the iSchool at UBC. 

Q: What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice? 

John: When I was an intern, I worked specifically on a Library project. Still, I became fascinated with what the archivists did with their boxes and how they arranged the textual records. They put such time and thought into the process. It was something that grabbed my interest, and I couldn’t let it go until I learned what, at that time, were these strange archival rituals. 

John Moran, University Archives. Photo by Phoebe Chan of UBC Library Communications. 

Q: What does an average day look like in university archives? 

John: Busy! In my current position, I am a Digital Archivist. I report to the University Archivist. I also work with colleagues in the Records Management Office, Rare Books and Special Collections, and with Digital Programs and Services within UBC Library. I am lucky to have so many great colleagues to learn from and to work with. My average day combines meetings, working on backlogs, working with students on projects, meeting with donors, and assisting researchers. 

Q: What is your favourite thing about working in university archives? What are some of the challenges that are unique to university archives? 

John: One of my favourite aspects is the opportunity to engage with donors and listen to their stories. Whether they're sharing tales from their own lives or recounting the legacies of their loved ones, being a part of these conversations is truly meaningful. It connects you directly with the human behind the records.  

University libraries across Canada are facing significant budget challenges. I think that one of the most commendable characteristics of our profession is that we do so much with so little, however, the current situation raises concerns about sustainability. With our broadening responsibilities at the university, we face an ever-challenging workload. 

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about university archives?  What do you wish other archivists understood about university archives?  

I think that the potential for research in university archives is sometimes underestimated. When you are looking at the records of a department you are getting an up-close look at not just a university unit’s struggles and triumphs within a larger institution but you get to know about all the people that passed through, the personalities, the dramas, the intrigues, their successes that shaped the unit over time. One university unit can be so different from the other. They are like family members, all differentin their own right, sometimes engaged in conflicts, but ultimately part of a larger academic family. I think other archivists might be surprised how many amazing stories are buried within university archives. 

Department of Athletics and Recreation fonds, Glenn Bailey UBC Gymnastics, 1982-83 – UBC 4.1/451. Photo by Phoebe Chan, UBC Library Communications. 

Q: Can you tell us about a project you’ve been working on lately?  

I am sure many people reading will be aware of the InterPARESresearch project on the preservation of electronic records which began in 1999 at what was then the School of Library, Archival and Information Studies at UBC. It is still led by Professor Luciana Duranti and in its current iteration is InterPares Trust AI. We are excited to be acquiring InterPares’ records from the last 25 years and looking forward to making them available to researchers from around the world. 

From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work.

This month we are featuring university archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with Curtis Frederick, University Records Archivist at the University of Calgary. 

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path? 

Curtis: I graduated with a Bachelor of Arts with majors in history and religious studies from the University of British Columbia. I then enrolled at the University of Toronto and completed both a Master of Information and a Master of Museum Studies in 2017. After graduating, I worked a number of small contracts in Toronto and also had the opportunity to do an internship with Salzburg Global Seminar in Salzburg, Austria. I then worked for nearly two years as a project archivist at the corporate archives of CIBC in Toronto. I started my current position at the University of Calgary in March 2020. I was in the office for less than a week before we were sent home due to the pandemic, which was an interesting way to start a new job!

Q: What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice?

Curtis: As a kid I always had a strong interest in history and in museums. During my undergrad, I worked at a couple of museums during the summers as a tour guide.  This also introduced me to the world of archives. I was drawn to the University of Toronto by the opportunity to complete a degree in both museums and archives.   

Glenbow Western Research Centre – the reading room at the University of Calgary Archives. CU12240905. By Brown, David H. Courtesy of University Archives Collection, Libraries and Cultural Resources Digital Collections, University of Calgary.

Q: What does an average day look like in university archives? 

Curtis: There really isn’t a typical average day, but more a variety of tasks that can happen on any given day. A lot of the work I do involves cultivating donor relations, both with external donors, but also with the various faculties, departments, and operating units within the university. I also do a lot of reference work, which can take the form of classroom teaching, individual consultations with researchers, staffing the reference desk in the reading room, or answering questions via phone and email.  I am also in charge of the records management and shredding programs, which involves a lot of day-to-day work in advising on retention periods, scheduling destruction of records, and providing advice on records management practices. A day may also involve arrangement and description work, working on policies, planning for large projects and sitting on a variety of library or university committees amongst many others. 

Q: What is your favourite thing about working in university archives?  What are some of the challenges that are unique to university archives? 

Curtis: My favourite thing about working in university archives is that no day is ever the same. I enjoy the variety of the tasks I do and responding to changing needs and priorities as they arise. I also really enjoy being able to work with a wide range of researchers from students to faculty and to community members. Each researcher brings a different project and a different perspective to the records. 

University archives face many of the same challenges that other archives face in terms of promoting our collections and services and raising awareness of the need for strong records management practices. One thing that can be particularly challenging is ensuring the relevancy of collections for students and classes. We can’t simply go out and acquire a collection based on every interest. This means we must get creativetomake sure we highlight our relevant collections, and we need to work with students and professors to demonstrate how our collections can be used in ways they may not have thought of before. 

High bay archival storage at the High Density Library. CU2125214. By Brown, David H. Courtesy of University Archives Collection, Libraries and Cultural Resources Digital Collections, University of Calgary.

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about university archives?  What do you wish other archivists understood about university archives?  

Curtis: The public often has a misunderstanding that university archives are for students and staff only. We are open to all researchers and enjoy helping all researchers in any way we can.

Q: Can you tell us about a project you’ve been working on lately?  

Curtis: We are always working on several projects. In 2019 the University of Calgary acquired the library and archives of the Glenbow Museum in Calgary. This added more than 5kms of material to our holdings in a very quick period. We continue to work on integrating this material into our databases and in making more of the material accessible digitally. We continue to work on prioritizing records for digitization and creating an overarching digitization plan. A couple of recent projects include the complete digitization of our legacy theses collection, the digitization of parts of our oral history collection,the digitization of the complete Winnifred Eaton Reeve fonds, and our recently launched H. G. Wells exhibit.

From municipal and federal government to universities, from religious congregations to community organizations, archivists work in a variety of settings. This year, the ACA blog, In the Field, is setting out to talk to archivists across Canada about the unique joys and challenges of their work environments. We will feature a different type of archives each month, with the objective of showcasing the rich spectrum of archival work.

This month we are featuring academic archives. In today’s post, the In the Field blog chats with Sarah Lake, Digital Preservation Librarian at Concordia University Library. 

Q: Can you briefly tell us about your academic and professional path? 

Sarah: For my undergraduate studies, I did a Bachelor of Fine Arts with a major in film production at Concordia University. When I graduated, I wasn’t interested in working in the film industry and was looking for a new direction. It was around that time that I heard about library school and thought it aligned with a lot of my interests. I completed a Master of Information Studies at McGill University in 2019, and then I did a couple of short-term grant-funded contracts as a processing archivist and junior digital archivist at Concordia’s Records Management and Archives. I then got a one-year contract as special collections archivist at Concordia Library before transitioning into my current tenure-track role.

Q: What brought you to the field of archival studies and practice? 

Sarah: I have always been fascinated by memory, and it’s a theme that has been central to my artistic practice. When I was studying filmmaking, I chose the documentary stream and became really interested in found footage and archival materials. When I realized that I could make a career out of preservation, it seemed like the perfect path for me. 

Q: What does an average day look like in university archives? 

Sarah: Since I’m not an archivist, my role doesn’t really involve typical activities like processing or reference. My day to day is more about project management, workflow and policy development, technical administration, and providing support to special collections and repository staff who are processing materials. Since my role is also more tech-focused, my average day also usually includes some kind of troubleshooting/problem-solving. 

Q: What is your favourite thing about working in universityarchives? What are some of the challenges that are unique to university archives? 

Sarah: Universities are in a position of privilege: we often have more resources than the individuals and organizations who are donating their archives to us. As such, we have a responsibility to build trust and keep active ties with the communities who are entrusting us with their memory. My colleague Alex Mills co-authored a great article about the archives as a community-engaged classroom and the importance of the ongoing relationship between communities and the archives that they produce.  

Q: What do you wish the public understood better about university archives?  What do you wish other archivists understood about university archives?  

Sarah: I think the use of new technology in academia, especially in digital humanities, is currently outpacing archivists’ ability to develop and implement standards, tools and procedures to preserve scholarly research. With new and emerging forms of scholarship, preserving scholarly output is becoming increasingly complex: it’s currently a lot easier to preserve and provide access to a thesis in PDF form than an interactive VR installation. I wish that more researchers and funding agencies were conscious of the importance of embedding preservability into research from the start, and perhaps even inviting archivists to participate in the planning stages of large research projects, rather than preservation being an afterthought. 

Q: Can you tell us about a project you’ve been working on lately?  

Sarah: Recently I’ve been working with a few colleagues on a project to preserve web-based student journals using web archiving tools like Archive-It. These publications are so ephemeral that we have already seen quite a few of them disappear from the web in just the short amount of time that we’ve been doing this. When these websites vanish, a record of student life and scholarship at the university is lost forever, so we feel that it’s important to preserve them while we can. It’s still a work in progress, but we hope to keep building the collection and to find new ways to collaborate with students on this project.