Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Internship - Day 13.0
Quality Control
The task today was to begin executing on my quality control (QC) recommendations for unfinished collections started by student assistants. The student assistants are not expected to have a foundation of archival theory or experience. Mostly, they are instructed on how to perform repetitive tasks such as refoldering, labeling, and rehousing materials. So that's where I pick up on the first two of five such collections.
I'm pleased to find mostly tidy and neatly labeled materials, although I'm not sure if the students were instructed to maintain original order or how they made their refoldering choices. I'm guessing they maintained original order -- if only by default.
The first thing I did was compare the folders and their labels with what was input into Archivists' Toolkit (AT). Right off the bat I found the collection number was missing from all of the folder labels. Also, there was a date range mismatch between what was on the folder labels and what was input into AT. Some materials genres were misidentified, such as calling a pamphlet or report a booklet. There were no names or subjects selected for the collection nor were there any notes other than a Content and Scope note, and that probably migrated from the accession record. In one case, a too-large sized box was used for a thin stack of folders.
This all may sound a bit nit-picky, but the procedures and expectations for the quality of arrangement and description at UCI Special Collections and Archives is high. And the things I'm catching and fixing are really the realm of an archivist. It was heads down, intensive work, but this exercise was good practice and reinforcement for me.
The task today was to begin executing on my quality control (QC) recommendations for unfinished collections started by student assistants. The student assistants are not expected to have a foundation of archival theory or experience. Mostly, they are instructed on how to perform repetitive tasks such as refoldering, labeling, and rehousing materials. So that's where I pick up on the first two of five such collections.
I'm pleased to find mostly tidy and neatly labeled materials, although I'm not sure if the students were instructed to maintain original order or how they made their refoldering choices. I'm guessing they maintained original order -- if only by default.
The first thing I did was compare the folders and their labels with what was input into Archivists' Toolkit (AT). Right off the bat I found the collection number was missing from all of the folder labels. Also, there was a date range mismatch between what was on the folder labels and what was input into AT. Some materials genres were misidentified, such as calling a pamphlet or report a booklet. There were no names or subjects selected for the collection nor were there any notes other than a Content and Scope note, and that probably migrated from the accession record. In one case, a too-large sized box was used for a thin stack of folders.
This all may sound a bit nit-picky, but the procedures and expectations for the quality of arrangement and description at UCI Special Collections and Archives is high. And the things I'm catching and fixing are really the realm of an archivist. It was heads down, intensive work, but this exercise was good practice and reinforcement for me.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Internship - Day 12.0
Refinement
Much of today was spent heads down reviewing my first collections and applying corrections. The exercise of upgrading the processing level on the ECOC and FHCOC collections from minimal to moderate involved the application of new work by student assistants and by an intern (me). This of course had the effect of introducing new errors in the form of typos and unmet requirements.
As I compared physical file folder labels with the data input into Archivists' Toolkit, I found discrepancies that needed to be fixed between the two. Through a combination of the backspace, an eraser, and a pencil I brought the two sides back in alignment. As usual, my supervisor had some great feedback that only improved the quality of the finding aids for these two collections.
New Challenge
The rest of my day was spent working on a new challenge presented to me by my supervisor . Special Collections has a backlog of five collections previously processed by student assistants. They needed to have some quality control (QC) applied before they could be considered complete. My supervisor explained that as a future archivist who will be supervising non-archivists, I could benefit from checking the work of our student assistants. This will give me a chance to apply the learning I've gained over the previous three months.
The collection I picked to QC first was MS-R160 - Committee of 4000 records, a group of Irvine area homeowners who lived on land leased to them by the Irvine Ranch/Company and argued that their original lease terms were unrealistic in the 1970s climate of soaring Orange County real estate prices. By the end of the day I delivered my QC recommendations to my supervisor for review. Next week I'll tackle the other four collections.
Much of today was spent heads down reviewing my first collections and applying corrections. The exercise of upgrading the processing level on the ECOC and FHCOC collections from minimal to moderate involved the application of new work by student assistants and by an intern (me). This of course had the effect of introducing new errors in the form of typos and unmet requirements.
As I compared physical file folder labels with the data input into Archivists' Toolkit, I found discrepancies that needed to be fixed between the two. Through a combination of the backspace, an eraser, and a pencil I brought the two sides back in alignment. As usual, my supervisor had some great feedback that only improved the quality of the finding aids for these two collections.
New Challenge
The rest of my day was spent working on a new challenge presented to me by my supervisor . Special Collections has a backlog of five collections previously processed by student assistants. They needed to have some quality control (QC) applied before they could be considered complete. My supervisor explained that as a future archivist who will be supervising non-archivists, I could benefit from checking the work of our student assistants. This will give me a chance to apply the learning I've gained over the previous three months.
We agreed that I would pick one of the five student-processed collections and develop a list of recommendations for improvement. My supervisor would then QC my QC, provide feedback, and then have me apply the agreed upon changes.
 |
| Old days on the Irvine Ranch. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)