User:Wmkalbach/sandbox: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
copied article summary from More Product, Less Process for editing |
Tags: Blanking Visual edit |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== More Product, Less Process Editing == |
|||
* Article summary overshadows influence/rest of article |
|||
* Remove or cut down on bullet lists |
|||
** not engaging and possibly not relevant |
|||
* Look for issues with neutrality |
|||
** citation of SAA presentations |
|||
** citation of disagreeing viewpoints? |
|||
** Make sure content is not plagiarized/close paraphrased |
|||
* Harris and Stine case study article (Week 12) |
|||
* Follow Peer Review (remove page numbers from footnotes) |
|||
== Article summary[edit] == |
|||
Greene and Meissner begin the article with a call to action, citing the recent British report ''Best Value and Local Authority Archives'', which claims that archival [[cataloging]], arrangement, and description are "not working". They further assert that growing backlogs present more than just a rising challenge, but are actually "weakening the archival profession". Greene and Meissner then note that they are beginning with the working hypothesis that "processing projects squander scarce resources", and that it is thus necessary to entirely reframe the discussion about processing instead of just simply suggesting a new processing technique. The authors' methodology included a [[literature review]], an overview of [[National Historical Publications and Records Commission]] (NHPRC) [[grants]], two [[Survey methodology|surveys]], and examination of other relevant studies. |
|||
Greene and Meissner then delve into a discussion of what they perceive to be problems with processing, citing a 1998 [[Association of Research Libraries]] (ARL) survey of [[special collections]] units that found that nearly a third of [[manuscript]] collections made up uncataloged backlogs. The authors propose a new set of guidelines for arrangement, preservation, and description: |
|||
# Expediting the availability of collections to users; |
|||
# Assuring ''adequate'' arrangement of materials for users' needs; |
|||
# Taking the ''minimum'' steps necessary for physically preserving collection materials; |
|||
# Describing materials ''sufficiently'' for use. |
|||
Greene and Meissner argue that arrangement at the ''item'' level is not necessary, citing for support an ''American Archivist'' article by Helen Slotkin and Karen Lynch, [[Northeastern University]]'s processing manual, the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]]'s processing manual, and the [[National Archives and Records Administration]]'s ''Technical Information Paper Number 6 (1990), Preservation of Archival Records: Holdings''. The authors then discuss the rate at which archivists are able to process collections, citing a 1982 study by Karen Temple Lynch and Thomas E. Lynch that put the figure at 12.7 hours per cubic foot. Further citing a study by the [[Billy Graham Center|Billy Graham Center Archives]] that found the cost of processing as high as 15.1 hours and $374 per foot, Greene and Meissner lamented that with regard to processing, archivists "have utterly failed to come to grips with a critical administrative reality, a reality that eats 90 percent of our direct program expenditures". |
|||
The authors propose five major findings from their research: |
|||
# Arrangement was still often at the item level; |
|||
# Only 51% of repositories were regularly putting [[Finding aid|finding aids]] online; |
|||
# While most repositories have some preservation considerations, very few do it consistently; |
|||
# Repositories were not responding to the challenges presented by backlogs; |
|||
# Many of the repositories store their collections in appropriate [[temperature]] and [[relative humidity]] conditions, but still feel the need to remove metal fasteners (which the authors argue is unnecessary). |
|||
Recognizing that tradeoffs must be made, Greene and Meissner argue that some preservation concerns must be given up for the sake of providing effective access to users of collections. They then present their "principles for change" as recommendations for archivists: |
|||
* The Golden Minimum (“the least we can do to get the job done in a way that is adequate to user needs, now and in the future”) |
|||
* Arrangement (“research is much more effectively enabled by performing arrangement work at the series level than it is by shuffling around items within folders, or even folders within a file”) |
|||
* Description (“the point of good description is to both reflect and explain the intellectual arrangements of the materials”) |
|||
* Preservation (archivists "will rely on our storage area environmental controls to carry the preservation burden”) |
|||
* Policies (“Unprocessed collections should be presumed open to researchers. Period.”) |
|||
* Metrics (“for every given unit of archival collection materials, arrangement, description, and conservation work should ''all'' occur at the same hierarchical level”) |
|||
In conclusion, Greene and Meissner argue that because greater funding and resources are not forthcoming, the only solution for archivists is to "change the way we process so that we can, with our existing resources, roughly triple the speed with which we process".Recognizing that the needed changes will not be easy, the authors take heart in the fact that [[Librarian|librarians]] will also be facing similar issues and that innovative work in processing was being done at institutions as diverse as [[Arizona State University]], [[Yale University]], [[Marquette University]], the [[University of Central Florida]], the [[University of Montana]], and the [[Wisconsin Historical Society]]. |
|||
== Influence == |
|||
The minimal processing approach advocated by "More Product, Less Process" has been implemented by many archives and [[Library|libraries]], including the [[Library of Congress]], the [[University of North Carolina]]'s Wilson Library, and the Academic Health Center Archives at the [[University of Minnesota]].<ref name="Owens2">{{Cite web|url=http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/2012/08/more-product-less-process-for-born-digital-collections-reflections-on-curatecamp-processing/|title=More Product, Less Process for Born-Digital Collections: Reflections on CurateCamp Processing|last=Owens|first=Trevor|date=August 22, 2012|website=The Signal: Digital Preservation|publisher=[[Library of Congress]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="Bromley2">{{Cite web|url=http://amongotheritems.org/2009/11/more-product-less-process/|title=More Product, Less Process|last=Bromley|first=Ben|date=November 1, 2009|website=Among Other Items|publisher=[[WordPress]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="Moore2">{{Cite web|url=http://blog.lib.umn.edu/moore144/ahcarchives/2006/10/more_product_less_process.html|title=More product, less process|last=Moore|first=Erik|date=October 16, 2006|website=Academic Health Center History Project|publisher=[[University of Minnesota]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref> Greene and Meissner's article has been highly influential within the archival community, and it has inspired a whole series of presentations, seminars, workshops, and webinars on minimal processing.<ref name="SAA15542">{{Cite web|url=http://saa.archivists.org/events/implementing-more-product-less-process-1554/554/|title=Implementing "More Product, Less Process" #1554|last=|first=|date=|website=archivists.org|publisher=[[Society of American Archivists]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="TR2">{{Cite web|url=http://www2.archivists.org/prof-education/course-catalog/tr-implementing-%E2%80%9Cmore-product-less-process%E2%80%9D|title=[TR] Implementing “More Product, Less Process”|last=|first=|date=|website=archivists.org|publisher=[[Society of American Archivists]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="Rutgers2">{{Cite web|url=http://march.rutgers.edu/2012/03/workshop-more-product-less-process/|title=Workshop: More Product, Less Process|last=Magnuson-Hung|first=Mandi|date=March 1, 2012|website=Mid-Atlantic Regional Center for the Humanities|publisher=[[Rutgers University]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="PowerPoint2">{{Cite web|url=http://www.powershow.com/view2b/460ec0-YmIxM/More_Product_Less_Process_powerpoint_ppt_presentation|title=More Product, Less Process: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation|last=Greene|first=Mark A.|last2=Meissner|first2=Dennis|date=|website=PowerShow.com|publisher=CrystalGraphics, Inc.|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="ALCTS2">{{Cite web|url=http://www.ala.org/alcts/confevents/upcoming/webinar/041112|title=More Product, Less Process: Why It Matters to Archivists, Librarians, and Researchers|last=Meissner|first=Dennis|date=|website=[[Association for Library Collections and Technical Services]]|publisher=[[American Library Association]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref><ref name="ALAConnect2">{{Cite web|url=http://connect.ala.org/node/163943|title=ALCTS webinar: "More Product, Less Process": Why It Matters to Archivists, Librarians, and Researchers|last=Spidal|first=Debra|date=December 23, 2011|website=ALA Connect|publisher=[[American Library Association]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref> The article has also inspired the name of "More Podcast, Less Process", an archives-related [[podcast]] hosted by Jefferson Bailey of the [[Metropolitan New York Library Council]] and Joshua Ranger of AudioVisual Preservation Solutions.<ref name="Podcast2">{{Cite web|url=http://keepingcollections.org/more-podcast-less-process/|title=More Podcast, Less Process|last=|first=|date=|website=Keeping Collections|publisher=[[WordPress]]|accessdate=August 26, 2014}}</ref> |
|||
Greene and Meissner have continued to expand their original thesis, notably in a 2010 ''Journal of Archival Organization'' article that amplifies their resource allocation argument and directly rebuts a variety of critics.<ref name="jao2">{{cite journal|author=Meissner, Deniis and Mark A. Greene|year=2010|title=More Application while Less Appreciation: The Adopters and Antagonists of MPLP|url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15332748.2010.554069|journal=Journal of Archival Organization|volume=8|pages=174–226|doi=10.1080/15332748.2010.554069}}</ref> |
|||
== References == |
|||
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org sandbox}} |
|||
<references responsive="0" /> |
|||