Archive for the 'Elizabeth Nielsen's Postings' Category

2008 SAA Annual Conference San Francisco — Nielsen Highlights

Friday, September 5th, 2008

Following are the highlights and major “take-aways” for me from the SAA conference last week in San Francisco. I also have detailed notes from the sessions and meetings I attended. If you would like to see them, please contact me directly at elizabeth.nielsen@oregonstate.edu.

First, my thanks to Academic Affairs for providing monetary support from Professional Faculty Development Funds as a match for Libraries’ funding. This was an excellent opportunity to learn about new initiatives in the profession, projects and programs at other repositories, and connect (or re-connect) with archival colleagues from across the U.S. West Coast and Northwest repositories were well-represented. The attendance of 1719 was the 3rd largest ever and the largest for a west coast meeting.

There were 10 concurrent sessions offered during most of the conference – so it’s necessary to “pick and choose”. I focused my attention on sessions that addressed the areas for which I have major responsibility here in the OSU Archives: arrangement and description (i.e. processing and preparing finding aids for collections) and the curation of moving image materials (films and videotapes).

Common topics were the application of minimal-level processing; user studies (of everything); evolution of standards; incorporating social networking/web 2.0 technologies; mass digitization of archival materials, and electronic records. When I attended SAA in 2001, there was still a fair amount of skepticism about EAD both in presentations and in the hallway conversations. By this meeting in 2008, EAD is clearly widely accepted and adopted (as is DACS as the content standard); the application of minimal-level processing is widespread; user studies are all the rage; and mass digitization of archival materials is on the horizon.

Themes, highlights, and take-aways
• Archivists’ Toolkit has been broadly adopted (>1300 implementors) and is here to stay. AT is an open-source archival collection-management sytem with modules for accessioning, physical control, and description. I will be preparing a recommendation that we (OSU Archives) adopt it.
• The OSU Archives is on par or ahead of other repositories in many areas (IR, adoption of MPLP, EAD/MARC, digital collections) – go Beavs! … and everyone is struggling with electronic records. I was disappointed that several presentations reported on projects/sites that are not (yet) publicly available.
• As a profession, we are grappling with the importance of “contextual” information and hierarchical arrangement of materials in an environment in which our users report they want a specific document and we are increasingly delivering individual items as digital objects.
• Mass digitization of archival materials is being tested in some repositories and will be necessary in order to provide the digital content that our users seek. Is this microfilming for the 21st century?
• Atlas Systems (of ILLiad fame) has developed a patron request software application that allows users to request boxes from within an EAD finding aid. This may be something that will be useful to NWDA.
• The next major archival standard will be Encoded Archival Context (EAC) – which will consist of EAC-CPF (for corporate bodies, persons, and families) and EAC-F (functions). This will allow for more robust authority records for archival collections creators. EAC-CPF will be out in the next 6-12 months.
• We will also see more focus on resource discovery and access — building on the strong standards base of DACS, EAD, and EAC.
• Providing moving images in short “clips” on-line (streaming) makes them more useful to K-12 teachers and also provides access for review to film producers (who are frequently on short deadlines).
• And … the two major vendors of archival supplies (Metal Edge and Hollinger) have merged – [actually, Metal Edge bought Hollinger].

Many, many thanks to Archivist Karl for holding down the fort here while the rest of us travelled to SAA.

Northwest Archivists 2008 in Anchorage

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

Northwest Archivists 2008 Annual Conference
New Frontiers in Archives and Records Management
Anchorage, Alaska

Following are summaries for two of the sessions that I attended:

Session 1: The Integrated Digital Special Collections (INDI)
This session introduced the Integrated Digital Special Coillections (INDI), an open-source archival management application developed at Brigham Young University. INDI is a web-based system designed with an emphasis on archival workflow and distributed processing activities. The session included an introduction to the project and demonstrations of the functional application modules and the INDI sandbox, and discussion of future directions for INDI development. Presenters were Brad Westwood, Cory Nimer, and Gordon Daines.

The website for INDI: http://www.lib.byu.edu/indi/

This application has some of the same goals as other open-source archival management applications, such as Archon and the Archivist’s Toolkit — but with a stronger emphasis on workflow and project management. The application currently has no public interface and is intended for staff use (BYU special collections has a permanent staff of ~15+ and employs about 40 student assistants).

Modules that were described or demonstrated:
** Contact management system is used to to track donors and creators; using a single tool for both creator management (authority control) and donor/contact management has been problematic.
** Help feature has been useful to staff; includes both “application assistance” (how to do something) and “data entry assistance” (what information and in what format is appropriate for a given field). Usability testing showed that staff use latter more than former.
** Desktop search tool; have been retrospectively entering accessioning data, so this can serve as “one stop searching” tool.
** Project management (with e-mail feature that allows e-mail discussions that are preserved within the system, linked to the project/collection); this is one of the most robust areas of the application.
** Appraisal; breaks down appraisal of potential purchases/donations into detailed tasks. Probably most useful for a repository with an active acquisitions program in many areas.
** Accessioning; this has been useful because many of the accessioning steps are actually done by student assistants.

The project team has experienced issues because several different programmers have worked on the project which have had different approaches to documentation and varying programming styles. The BYU Library is currently evaluating how to proceed with the project — whether to continue to invest in programming or to migrate to another system. They are especially interested in a system being developed by/for the ICA (International Council on Archives).

Session 7: New Modes of Access: Challenges and Opportunities for Archival Collections
This session focused on the development/implementation of WorldCat Local at University of Washington Libraries. Presenters were Nicole Bouche (UW Special Collections); Jennifer Ward (Head of Web Services for UW Libraries) and Mela Kircher (OCLC).

The session especially focussed on the impact of WorldCat Local on archives/special collections. Several issues that were raised are:

* “duplicate” titles — “split” collections at different repositories that the WorldCat Local algorithm considers as different editions ..
** duplicate records for a record in WorldCat submitted by a repository and a record for the same collection submitted by NUCMC (which were previously only in RLIN … but are being migrated to WorldCat).
** WorldCat local does not serve as a collection-management system … does work well as a “discovery” tool
** very limited notes displayed

Future enhancements to WorldCat Local will be:
** more articles metadata
** branch scoping (driven off 4-character location codes)
** simple language facets
** additional fields displayed (this is especially important for notes fields in archival MARC records)
** federated search (may be able to search NWDA finding aids database)
** reviews
** FRBR/editions display improvements
** improved WorldCat account authentication
** tagging
** improved reports

Elizabeth Nielsen
OSU Archives

2008 Online Northwest Conference — 22 Feb 2008

Sunday, February 24th, 2008

This was an excellent conference with a dynamic keynote speaker and very good individual sessions.

A full summary of the program is available at:
http://www.ous.edu/onlinenw/2008/2008OnlineNorthwestProgramSummaries.doc
Take-aways (for me) from keynote and sessions I attended:

KEYNOTE — Jared Spool
Why Good Content Must Suck: Designing for the Scent of Information

** content emits scents; users follow scent of content
** content “sucks”/”draws” the user toward it
** scent communication through trigger words (can determine important trigger words by looking at terms used for searching in search engine logs)
** users don’t mind “clicking” if with every click, they get closer to content (scent gets stronger)
** when good designs work, we don’t notice them
** things that prevent scent
– search engines
– information/content “below the fold” especially if there is a horizontal line suggesting bottom of scrreen page
– navigation panels are “scentless”; often include jargon; often mirror admin organization or “silos”
– short links don’t emit scent
– 7-12 words in link — is optimal for success of user; links need trigger words
– short pages reduce scent and horizontal rule stops scrolling
** site map = the page where we hide all the scent
** on A-Z list, scent arranged ‘”randomly”
** traditional approach to design is to start with home page; should start with “content” and put links in all the places where someone might look for that “content”

Session 1 — Worldcat.org: Platform for a New Kind of Library Catalog?
Amy Crawford, OCLC Western

This session would have benefited by having a “user” of worldcat.org or worldcat local.
Presenter described new model for library catalogs:
synthesize ==> specialize ==> mobillize

Session 2 - Facebook 101: What Librarians Need to Know
Laurie Bridges, OSU Libraries

Great introduction to facebook —

** “fan pages” allow you to “push” content/announcements to your “fans”; “groups” are more static
** users spend more time (20 min/day — is this right?) on Facebook than any other website (which avg less than 5 min/day)
** advertising may be a cost effective way to reach students and young adults (priced per click or per “thousand views”)

Session 3 - Navaigating User Understanding of the OPAC Interface: Case Study from OHSU’s Web Usability Testing
Laura Zeigen, OHSU

Laura provided some background on usability testing; results of the testing of the OPAC interface; and the changes they made at OHSU.

Her powerpoint is available here:
http://www.ohsu.edu/library/staff/zeigenl/onlinenw2008/20080222_onlinenw_v03.pdf

And a list of resources:
http://www.ohsu.edu/library/staff/zeigenl/onlinenw2008/20080221_onlinenwresourcelist.pdf

She referred to this site in her presentation — it would be useful to have similar compilation for “archives” terminology.
http://www.jkup.net/terms.html

Elizabeth Nielsen