Archivists Toolkit: Update, Demo, and Implementations Society of California Archivists Annual Meetin

1
Archivists ToolkitUpdate, Demo, and
ImplementationsSociety of California
ArchivistsAnnual Meeting, 3 May 2008
2
Archivists Toolkit

• Bradley Westbrook, AT Project Manager
• Arwen Hutt, Archives Analyst
• UC, San Diego

3
Domain Problems Targeted

• Serialized processing tools
• Expensive processing
• Increasing training costs
• Data produced with low interoperability
• Substantial, and growing, backlogs

4
Domain Solution

• Open source, relational database application to
  support management, processing, and description
  of archival resources and the production of
  access instruments
• Promote data standardization
• Based on DACS, ISARR (CPF)
• Exports EAD, MARCXML, METS, MODS, DC
• Promote efficiency
• Integrate range of archival functions
• Repurpose datamultiple outputs from data
  recorded
• Automate encoding and reporting
• Lower processing and training costs

5
Key Features

• Implementable as a stand-alone or networked
  application using either a MySQL, MS SQL Server,
  or Oracle database backend
• Record accession, description, and location
  information for archival resources, including
  digital versions
• Authority control for names and subjects
• Import legacy data in EAD, MARCXML, and for
  accessions, tab delimited or XML, with data clean
  up tools
• Export EAD 2002, MARCXML, METS (MODS / DC), and
  30 different administrative and descriptive
  default reports, such as acquisition statistics,
  accession records, shelf lists, subject guides,
  etc.
• Customizable interface with in-screen help
  information.

6
Proposed Features

• Revisions to name, subject, and digital object
  modules
• New modules to support appraisal, rights
  management, user registration, use tracking, work
  orders
• Sustainability model

7
AT User Community

• Application uptake
• Version 1.0, released Dec. 17, 2006 2520 unique
  downloads, 1722 registered users
• Version 1.1, released Jan. 16, 2008 1276 unique
  downloads, 754 registered users
• ATUG-l (Archivists Toolkit User Group)
• Nearly 800 members
• Subscribe http//mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinf
  o/atug-l
• Archives http//mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/atug-l
  /

8
Support Services

• Software Issues / Bug Management
• Issue list https//jira.nyu.edu8443/jira/secure
  /Dashboard.jspa
• User Assistance (FAQ, ATUG list and
  info_at_archiviststoolkit.org)
• Workshops and Onsite Training
• User Surveys

9

• DEMO

10
Architechture
networked server
DB
Personal computer
AT
DB
11
AT Project www.archiviststoolkit.orgStaff
Email address info_at_archiviststoolkit.org AT
Sandboxes http//www.archiviststoolkit.org/supp
ort/sandbox1.0.shtmlhttp//www.archiviststoolkit.
org/support/sandbox1.1.shtmlArchivists Toolkit
User GroupSubscription http//mailman.ucsd.edu/
mailman/listinfo/atug-lArchives
http//mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/atug-l/
12
Testing Archivists Toolkit at UCLA
Genie Guerard Manuscripts Librarian
13

• Need for integrated collections management
  system
• UCLA SC libraries ask Test out AT or build on
  existing home-grown tools?
• Formalized action plan
• SC librarians (YRL, Performing Arts, Biomed, UA)
  test individually
• Regular group meetings to air and resolve
  problems, share discoveries
• Make recommendation to Special Collections
  Advisory Group and admin

14

• UCLA AT Testers / Implementers
• Charles E. Young Research Library, Department of
  Special Collections
• Genie Guerard, Manuscripts Librarian
  gguerard_at_library.ucla.edu
• Kelley Wolfe Bachli, CFPRT Coordinator
  kbachli_at_library.ucla.edu
• Caroline Cube, Computer Resource Specialist
  pinky_at_library.ucla.edu
• Louise M. Darling Biomedical History and Special
  Collections for the Sciences
• Cherry Williams, Special Collections Librarian
  for the Sciences Archivist
• for the William H. Sweet, M.D., D.Sc.
  Collection cndw_at_library.ucla.edu
• Performing Arts Special Collections
• Julie Graham, Archival Collections Processing
  Librarian jgraham_at_library.ucla.edu
• UCLA University Archives
• Monique Leahey Sugimoto, University Archives
  Assistant mleaheys_at_library.ucla.edu

15

• Decision to move from Sandbox to local db
• Earlier versions of AT available with ORACLE and
  MY SQL server
• MS SQL supported by UCLA IT
• Batch load functions
• Opportunity to test larger amounts of real
  data (vs. earlier spot testing of
  functionalities) and to save data locally

16

• AT listserv provides
• Online Help line from colleagues and AT
  developers
• Collective problem-solving with colleagues
• Direct line for communicating needs to AT
  developers as they are discovered

17
What we are looking for and what we think AT can
provide
UCLA has A good set of tools and support for
creating finding aids and catalog records UCLA
finding aids on the OAC YRL SC
1,423 Performing Arts 241 Biomed 36 UCLA
University Archives 194 Clark 13 Fowler
9 Grunwald 4 Chicano Studies Research
Library 56 Ethnomusicology 26
18
What we are looking for and what we think AT can
provide

• UCLA needs
• A system to support (workflow and products)
  needed for complete life cycle of archival and
  manuscript collections
• Accessions and Admin functions acc dates,
  extent, bioghist, DoGs acknowledgements, gifts
  paperwork, donor info, location info, rights and
  restrictions documentation
• Processing functions processing status,
  conservation, EAD and MARC, loans, managing
  exhibitions, digital projects

19
What we are looking for and what we think AT can
provide

• UCLA needs
• An integrated system to
• Allow each SC unit to bring collections data up
  to date
• Combine all of the units data into one space,
  facilitate cross-library searching

20
and why we think AT can provide what we need

• Its open source and user-driven
• We have confidence in developers technical
  expertise combined with knowledge of archives and
  experience with archives workflow in a university
  environment
• OAC supports its members use of AT to enhance
  finding aid/ digital assets workflow
• Once XML EAD uploaded, there is a basic record
  in AT, providing the foundation for accessions
  (facilitates our retrospectively adding
  collections data entry)
• Facilitates name and subject authority control
  in user-friendly environment

21
What weve learned and our current assessment

• Testing process is helping us more clearly
  define our needs
• We need to clean up our data house
• Reassessing and refining our workflow
• There is a learning curve ahead regarding the
  configuration of reports, but the cost-benefit
  analysis appears favorable

22
Future AT testing at UCLA

• More familiarity with EAD and Accessions
  functions
• Digital objects (METS) generation - digital
  assets management
• User-defined fields for Accessions,
  Conservation, Exhibition (Curatorial aspects and
  Loans)
• Reports configuration
• Accessions/donor documentation / statistical
  reports
• Print finding aid reports

23
UCLA AT Testers Goals

• Short-Term
• Formal recommendation to Special Collections
  Advisory Group
• Long-Term
• Fully implement AT
• Gain control of all collections management data
• Manage complete life cycle of collections
• Unify UCLA Special Collections libraries data
• Streamline manuscripts and archives workflow

24
(No Transcript)
25
Archivists Toolkit and the Solo Archivist

• Aimee Morgan
• May 3, 2008

26
Who I Am

• Currently I am Archives and Digital Collections
  Librarian, California Academy of Sciences
• From 2005-2007, I was Curator of Archives and
  Manuscripts, Pitts Theology Library, Emory
  University

27
Flashback Late 2006

• Existing collections management system _at_ Pitts
  Theology Library
• Accession records created in MS Word
• Accessions tracked from accessioning through
  processing via (many) Excel spreadsheets
• Finding aids created in MS Word, entered into
  HTML templates for Web presentation
• MARC catalog records in RLIN and local OPAC
• Monthly/yearly statistics kept in Excel
  spreadsheets
• Shelflists maintained as Excel spreadsheets

28
The Issues

• Information duplicated across many spreadsheets
  more work for staff, increased chance for error
• Compiling statistics was laborious
• Name authority work done only at time of MARC
  records creation
• Links between original accessions and processed
  collections not consistently preserved
• Wanted a relational collections management
  database, but no time to create my own

29
Why Archivists Toolkit?

• Most pressing need management for back-of-house
  functions (accessioning, location management,
  statistics)
• Open source project freely available, potential
  for customization
• Focus on standards compliance
• Support for long-term goal of EAD implementation

30
Implementation Prep Work

• Spent some time playing in the AT sandbox
• Shared plans with library director
• Installed Toolkit/MySQL server on local machine
  for further testing
• Got IT staff to install MySQL server on our
  network

31
Implementation The Process

• Imported accession records from Excel files
  (about 1600 records)
• Cleaned up accession records, did name authority
  work (about 750 name records created)
• Created skeleton resource records, linked them
  to accessions (about 400 records)
• Linked accession and resource records to
  locations

32
End result at Pitts

• Database fully functional for accession
  management, name authority work
• Database fully functional for managing locations
  -- used by library assistant at the reference
  desk
• Database used to generate monthly and yearly
  statistics

33
AT Implementation 2.0 California Academy of
Sciences

• Same process, more work
• Collection info more scattered, less consistent
• Many semi-processed collections
• Backlog of unaccessioned material
• Future directions
• DACS-compliant MARC and EAD
• Learn to produce custom reports

34
UCI evaluates the AT

• Michelle Light, Archivist
• UCI Special Collections and Archives
• michelle.light_at_uci.edu
• Society of California Archivists - May 3, 2008

35
Current context

• 7 FTE in SCA, 3 FTE accessioning and processing
• Approximately 4,000 linear feet
• Management of University Archives and manuscript
  collections recently combined.
• Accessioning controlled with spreadsheet (Excel),
  individual worksheets (Word), and legacy database
  (Access).
• Processing managed with multiple Excel
  spreadsheets.
• EAD finding aids created in Word for print and
  the OAC. Tagging done automatically with macros.
• Locations managed in database (SQL and web).
• Cataloger does MARC records and indexing and in
  local ILS and OCLC.

36
Evaluating the AT

• Can the AT produce the reports we need?
• Is it easier and/or better to accession materials
  with the AT than with our current methods?
• Is it easier and/or better to create and edit
  finding aids for OAC and our Reading Room with
  the AT than with our current methods?
• Can the AT help me manage processing?
• How much work is required to make our data
  minimally usable in the AT?
• Does the AT make sense in UCIs technological
  environment?

37
EAD OAC

• Our finding aids did not successfully make the
  round trip from OAC to AT to OAC. Issues
• Schema vs. DTD
• Alternate filing title mandatory
• Stripped out labels
• Did not preserve the order of elements
• Stripped some headings necessary for navigation
• Long names were truncated
• Major need
• OAC to modify style sheets

38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
Managing processing

• How do I manage and represent processed
  collections?
• Track extent and create reports?
• Keep track of cataloging, finding aid, and
  preservation needs?
• How do I calculate our total holdings?
• AT
• Accession module for accessions and collection
  management?
• Resource module for processed collections and
  description management?
• UCI
• Accession information (active for unprocessed,
  inactive for processed)
• Processed collection information
• Finding aids for processed and unprocessed
  collections
• Solutions?
• Use resource module to manage collections? No.
• Create collection records in the accession
  module? Hopeful.
• Ask the AT to add more collection management
  features to the resource module

41
Managing processing (cont.)
42
Whats next for UCI?

• Pursuing accession module for now
• More experimentation with creatively mapping data
• More experimentation with creating own reports
• Cleaning up data
• More discussions with IT to ensure responsive
  support
• Encouraging other parts of UCIs Library to
  investigate ATs METS capabilities