PROPOSAL TYPE
Roundtable
SEEKING
- Seeking General Feedback and Interest
- Seeking Additional Presenters
- Seeking Specific Expertise
RELATED TOPICS
- Archives
- Social Justice
- Memory
ABSTRACT
Often efforts to correct offensive terminology in archival and library materials are siloed and ad hoc – one person or a small group in one department undertake redescription efforts. Such efforts leave much to be desired as the main goal of accessibility is hindered by creating multiple different standards across digitized materials, archival finding aids, and library catalog records. The University of South Florida and the University of South Carolina both undertook projects to redescribe potentially harmful materials across collections and departments.
DESCRIPTION
At the University of South Florida, the Special Collections Department, Digital Initiatives Unit, and Collections and Discovery Department collaborated to amend records in a holistic review after a triple platform migration. This review allowed new standards for materials across departments and platforms to be described in culturally appropriate and respectful ways that both mitigated harm and increased access.
University of South Carolina Libraries formed a team of representatives from across library departments to develop a collective approach to conscious editing. Team members included employees in cataloging, Digital Research Services, Digital Collections, and multiple special collections units. The project incorporated guidance from institutions that had worked on similar projects and team members’ expertise in platforms like Alma/Primo, ArchivesSpace, and CONTENTdm to draft and share conscious editing recommendations that metadata editors can use when they both create new metadata and work on retrospective revision projects.
If you have a direct offer of assistance, sensitive criticism, or wish to pass along someone’s contact information confidentially, please get in contact directly: Ann Abney, [email protected]
ALL FEEDBACK AND OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED BY JULY 10, 2024. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.
This seems like a really important subject that will appeal to several NCPH Constituencies. I wonder if it might work better as a working group? Might it be possible to create some sort of white paper or collaborative essay to guide others? Collaboration, collective editing, and consensus seem like core values that could be the center of a kind of policy advising document.