The 100 year old active record – challenges in museum records management
Jane Callahan, Arch and RM at Harvard art museum.
The 100 year old active record – challenges in museum records management:
Vital records that are aging yet still used on a regular basis.
HUAM actually 3 museums together at Harvard. Harvard has central records schedule – there is a special supplement for museums. Recommends long term retention for many things. What happens when these aging permanently active, scattered records are more than 100 years old.
The majority of these records are in charge of curators and collections managers. 3 ring binders, index cards, accession records, ledgers, deeds of gifts, correspondence with donors, treatment reports in conservation. We started acquiring objects in 1895, and the records go back to then. They are used regularly by a number of people.
Condition reports are done for each item received or sent in and out of the museum. These are freely available by users in a number of depts. Including archives. I use them for reference requests. For example, an institution may see loan stickers and want to know why a work was loaned to us in the past. The value of these records and the need to retain them permanently is undisputed, but issue is storage and use.
At what point do these records turn into objects with their own intrinsic value. Most obvisou solution would be to create use copies. If we digitized or entered into existing collections mgmt system, that would work. Now only a small portion have been digitized or Xeroxed. But inconsistent, and has not stopped use – originals used for convenience purpose.
Only acquisitions data is entered into system TMS – so there is much not captured. Visual aspects (even whose handwriting) are often key aspects.
Photocopies are cheaper – hut high quality color would be necessary for some things eg drawings by conservation staff. And this doesn’t answer the issue of distant and simultaneous access.
Ideally we would digitize, prioritizing most important. These could go into digital repository and be centrally mangeed in repository, then linked to collections mgmt system. Originals would go to archives and be rehoused. But time and money are not the only obstacles…
Collections management staff are leery of putting sensitive info like donor info into repository because of confidentiality concerns. This should be possible, but people distrust.
There are also obstacles in reformatting due to nature of records. First starting to learn as much as we can about these permanently active records. There is much to do in terms of records surveys.
Our recent move to a temporary location has helped. While doing records surveys formally and informally, we are learning more and are helping keep track of “rogue” reformatting efforts. (Without proper guidance, these projects are often ineffective. For example, a department photocopied reports, but sent copies to archives and kept originals because “copies not good enough to read.” And they were planning to scan again.)
Ikon is Harvard’s preferred vendor for scanning. If someone contacts them, they contact archivist before proceeding. Harvard also has internal imaging staff.
We are educating staff about Ikon and DRS as we go. Unfortunately most projects are on hold until museum move is complete. We are also negotiating with central records management to make ssure our needs are addressed in general records schedule.
As the records schedule now exists, the archives is unlikely to ever receive a number of records. But we need to think about when the records become artifacts in their own right. We are considering a 50 year cutoff. If we can get this into the central records schedule, that will help show support from the university as a whole. We will also pursue reformatting projects, etc.
The 100 year old active record – challenges in museum records management:
Vital records that are aging yet still used on a regular basis.
HUAM actually 3 museums together at Harvard. Harvard has central records schedule – there is a special supplement for museums. Recommends long term retention for many things. What happens when these aging permanently active, scattered records are more than 100 years old.
The majority of these records are in charge of curators and collections managers. 3 ring binders, index cards, accession records, ledgers, deeds of gifts, correspondence with donors, treatment reports in conservation. We started acquiring objects in 1895, and the records go back to then. They are used regularly by a number of people.
Condition reports are done for each item received or sent in and out of the museum. These are freely available by users in a number of depts. Including archives. I use them for reference requests. For example, an institution may see loan stickers and want to know why a work was loaned to us in the past. The value of these records and the need to retain them permanently is undisputed, but issue is storage and use.
At what point do these records turn into objects with their own intrinsic value. Most obvisou solution would be to create use copies. If we digitized or entered into existing collections mgmt system, that would work. Now only a small portion have been digitized or Xeroxed. But inconsistent, and has not stopped use – originals used for convenience purpose.
Only acquisitions data is entered into system TMS – so there is much not captured. Visual aspects (even whose handwriting) are often key aspects.
Photocopies are cheaper – hut high quality color would be necessary for some things eg drawings by conservation staff. And this doesn’t answer the issue of distant and simultaneous access.
Ideally we would digitize, prioritizing most important. These could go into digital repository and be centrally mangeed in repository, then linked to collections mgmt system. Originals would go to archives and be rehoused. But time and money are not the only obstacles…
Collections management staff are leery of putting sensitive info like donor info into repository because of confidentiality concerns. This should be possible, but people distrust.
There are also obstacles in reformatting due to nature of records. First starting to learn as much as we can about these permanently active records. There is much to do in terms of records surveys.
Our recent move to a temporary location has helped. While doing records surveys formally and informally, we are learning more and are helping keep track of “rogue” reformatting efforts. (Without proper guidance, these projects are often ineffective. For example, a department photocopied reports, but sent copies to archives and kept originals because “copies not good enough to read.” And they were planning to scan again.)
Ikon is Harvard’s preferred vendor for scanning. If someone contacts them, they contact archivist before proceeding. Harvard also has internal imaging staff.
We are educating staff about Ikon and DRS as we go. Unfortunately most projects are on hold until museum move is complete. We are also negotiating with central records management to make ssure our needs are addressed in general records schedule.
As the records schedule now exists, the archives is unlikely to ever receive a number of records. But we need to think about when the records become artifacts in their own right. We are considering a 50 year cutoff. If we can get this into the central records schedule, that will help show support from the university as a whole. We will also pursue reformatting projects, etc.
posted by David at
7:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home