Archiving 2.0: Problems, Possibilities, and the Expanding Role of LibrariansAuthor(s): Sue MaberrySource: Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America, Vol. 28,No. 1 (Spring 2009), pp. 40-42Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Art Libraries Society of NorthAmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27949508 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 18:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press and Art Libraries Society of North America are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of NorthAmerica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.28 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:18:30 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Archiving 2.0: "Problems, Possibilities, and the Expanding Role of Librarians_ Sue Maberry

As is true at many colleges and universities, the Otis College of Art and Design faculty and staff are actively exploring Web 2.0

technologies, resulting in an explosion of new digital content?learning objects, video demonstrations, interviews, audio podcasts, as well as portfolios, blogs, and wikis. Although the Otis Library owns digital asset management software, it has been a chal

lenge to routinely archive this digital content. A range of issues is explored in this case study of how one library is confronting its

changing role in relation to the educational activities of the College. Questions are also raised about the role that librarians play in

archiving born-digital content.

[The following article is based on a paper presented at the "Digital Asset Management in Transition" session at the ARLIS/NA Annual

Conference held in Denver, Colorado, in May 2008.]

Introduction

For the Otis College of Art and Design Library,1 our adven ture began with a spirit of curiosity coupled with a series of

serendipitous events. In 2001, the library was awarded a grant from the Getty Electronic Cataloging Initiative to catalog and

digitize the library's collection of 2,000 artists' books. Those funds enabled the library to hire a consultant, who fortunately turned out to be an eager young computer genius. Coincidentally, a new visual resources librarian with significant technology skills was hired fresh out of library school. These factors worked together to propel the library down a new path, one that resulted in its

being perceived as one of the most technologically savvy depart ments on campus. From that point on, the library began to play a

key role in technology leadership at the college. Coincidentally with the planning stage of the Getty grant,

James Madison University released Madison Digital Image Database (MDID) software for presenting digital slideshows for art history classes. Otis was first in line to download and install it. In 2002, a pilot project began with one enthusiastic professor and a scanner. MDID proved to be the perfect teaching applica tion. With the support of the director of art history, the library's Visual Resources Center (VRC) was able to discontinue creating analog slides entirely and managed to move the entire art history faculty from slides to digital images in a surprisingly short

period of time.

Although MDID is a great tool for creating slide shows and classroom projections, it is not a digital asset management system. For the artists' books collections, CONTENTdm, a

system used by many libraries and now owned by OCLC, was

finally chosen. One potential value of this software is its ability to manage many collections, an appealing prospect for the Otis librarians. Before long, many additional projects appropriate for CONTENTdm suggested themselves.

CONTENTdm and DIGIcation The first of these projects was an effort to handle the Otis

College archives which were completely unorganized, uncata

loged, and scattered throughout various offices. Although there was no official Otis archivist, librarians, by nature, seem always to have visions of tackling institutional archives. Another pilot project was created with the hope that the administration would see value in funding a new archivist position. About 150 items,

many with multiple pages, were scanned, eventually adding approximately 1,000 images to the library's online collections in CONTENTdm. The Otis community liked having this resource, but funding to hire an archivist was not forthcoming. In fact, it was becoming quite obvious what the institutional priorities should be.

By 2004, Web-based tools were exploding and higher educa tion was changing in relation to the new technologies. Demand

was growing at Otis as well. The faculty specifically requested e-portfoho software so that the students could easily display their

work, and they clamored for Web sites for themselves and their courses. Because of the library's past successes with Web-based

software systems, we were asked to recommend a software

package to meet these needs. Software was tested, most of which

proved inadequate or far too expensive. Luckily, we discovered an e-portfolio system, DIGIcation, developed by faculty at the Rhode Island School of Design, which was being launched for use by other schools. It included a learning management system along with e-portfolios. Otis immediately licensed the system, which we called O-Space, and the library assumed its manage ment. As our role shifted to include more in-depth technology training of faculty and students, it was clear that the library was

taking on greater responsibility for instructional technology, and the need for additional staffing was obvious.

The Teaching Learning Center In 2005, the library applied for and received a substantial

three-year grant for the purpose of creating a Teaching learning Center (TLC), sited within the library, so that faculty could learn and experiment with new technologies and discover ways in

40 Art Documentation ? Volume 28, Number 1 ? 2009

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.28 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:18:30 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

which technology might be used to improve student learning. This funding enabled us to create a new position dedicated to

faculty development. Additionally, funds were made available to provide small incentives so faculty could more fully explore new technologies in their own projects.

The TLC funding excited everyone. Faculty and students created and used e-portfolios. Some began experimenting with wikis in their courses. Blogging was embraced by several of the English professors. Flash learning objects were created.

We acquired land in Second Life and began building. Students

designed virtual art exhibitions. One sculpture instructor even

figured out how to build objects in Second Life and output the

designs into real-life 3D objects using the college's rapid proto typing equipment.

Art historians and social scientists experimented with audio and enhanced podcasts which have proved particularly helpful for non-native English speakers and students with learning issues. When Apple announced that it was expanding iTunesU,

Otis jumped at the chance to be involved. In fact, Apple featured our site, among others, in its press releases, which resulted in a

great deal of publicity for Otis. Needless to say, the administra tion was thrilled.

Many faculty members became interested in making video

'Teaming objects" for their courses, but it quickly became clear that most had neither the time nor the skills to create them on their own. By reallocating some funds, we began another pilot project. The TLC produced videos for and with the faculty which included how-to skill-based videos, interviews, and profiles of

faculty, information literacy tutorials, and lectures by visiting artists and designers. When YouTube announced its expanded collaboration with higher education, Otis created a channel. Not

surprisingly, the production initiative became very popular. In

2007, Otis sent fourteen people to the New Media Consortium Conference where we accepted a Centers of Excellence Award for our service to faculty through the TLC.

The buzz about Web 2.0 has continued to grow at Otis, as has the use of a range of new technologies. Experiments abound. The dean of admissions was encouraged to create a Facebook

page, and he got hundreds of fans in just a few days?with abso

lutely no advertising. Library staff members were swept up in a

frenzy of activity that was thoroughly enjoyable.

Archiving Digital Content However, as with most good things, funding ended. A

large number of digital assets of all kinds had been created over the period of a few years. What was the plan for archiving all of this rich content? Like the rest of the institution's archives, it remained unorganized, uncataloged, and scattered throughout various offices. The librarians' desire for an organized Otis archive surfaced again.

The archives of the Ben Maitz Gallery proved to be another

example of what can happen when archiving is not a priority. For decades, the campus gallery staff had collected slides, press releases, catalogs, and now videos of the exhibitions they had curated. Their first thought was to make simple Web pages to document their history. Librarians convinced them to maximize their effectiveness by using CONTENTdm to hold artifacts that could be archived and repurposed over time. We added sample images for them. We created Web space for the gallery. With their

input, we created the cataloging format and metadata scheme,

yet little was accomplished?though not for lack of will. There is just never enough time. The problem remains: How does one archive without an archivist?

Throughout the rest of the college, documenting projects is now often built into the consciousness of the faculty and event

organizers. Staff and faculty take photographs, load them onto their computers, and sometimes even upload them to Flickr. But there is little recognition of the need to take the process one step further and to collect and organize those assets in a way that will best serve the institution over time. The reality is that for most

people, it is more fun to create the projects than to archive them. It is likely that most museums and large universities have

long since recognized the need for archiving their institutional records and creative/learning objects and have people in place

who are responsible for that work. But this certainly is not the case for many smaller institutions. Although we are actively looking for workable solutions, we are instead finding more and more institutions questioning how to manage this explosion of digital content. It is a situation that seems to be spiraling out of control.

For instance, academic departments at Otis have been

collecting theses and student final projects for decades. Sometimes

they give them to the library for safekeeping. Sometimes they file them in boxes in their departments. Some keep everything. Some

only keep selected projects. In the past, these were hard copies. There is an emerging idea that in the near future these theses will

morph into electronic portfolios. Portfolios have been a standard practice for artists and

designers, but e-portfolios now appeal to a greater number of educational departments because of their potential for use in assessment. As Otis finished its accreditation process last year, the proposal that students create reflective learning e-portfolios throughout their four years was seen as a tool with enormous

potential. A pilot project was recently launched for the purpose of providing content useful for a capstone experience in the senior year. It worked well, and there are plans to roll it out

beginning in fall 2009.

The Role of the Librarian As evidence of the changing role of librarians at Otis, the

faculty are asking the library for assistance with this initiative. A task force has been convened to consider the options and make a plan. The two software packages already owned by Otis were considered first. With DIGIcation, students can create their own

e-portfolios. However, the school does not currently archive or control that content, which means students can take down their work at any time. Also, the images are small and cannot be easily repurposed. DIGIcation handles multiple formats of digital content and is very easy to learn. The e-portfolios can be exported and saved, but how and when should that be done? And where and how would entire portfolios be stored and cataloged? Although the library archives student work in

CONTENTdm, it is impractical to have students upload their work themselves. Yet culling items and information from the

portfolios would place an undue burden upon library staff. The

library or the departments would have to enter and catalog the content and completely manage that process. What kind of addi tional work load would this place on library staff? One of the

Volume 28, Number 1 ? 2009 ? Art Documentation 41

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.28 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:18:30 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

major roles as librarians in this project must be to ensure that the

archiving issue is considered from the beginning. Yet in a climate of tightening budgets, what will persuade administration that

staffing such an archiving project is a necessary and indeed valu able investment?

There is also the issue of an exploding amount of new audio-visual content being created for the Otis Web site such as streaming videos and the scores of audio podcasts currently available, with a lot more on the way. It is so easy to add items to YouTube and iTunesU that anyone can do it, and almost everyone does. The content becomes readily accessible. However, videos should be saved in higher resolution. What about that source

footage? If readily accessible, it could be valuable content avail able for repurposing by others. To save files of moving footage on servers seems impractical. File sizes are huge, capture takes

a lot of time, and there are format issues with which to contend. It is quite clear that we have outgrown the system we have now, which is "Ask Kathleen in the TLC; sheTl remember." But she simply can't remember any more. A summer

project was

planned to create a simple searchable log of each source tape and a storage system for the tapes so that, as we go forward, access to potential digital assets can be found. This plan will require that the creation process stops long enough to handle the access

issue, but that never seems to become the top priority. There is a related project which could potentially provide

an important service to the college: collecting and archiving photographs that reflect the life of the college. Whenever staff in the Publications Department are asked how they are archiving images and publications, they say, "Oh, it's on my hard drive."

As librarians, we see the value in managing digital assets,

making images that represent the college and work by students and faculty available to others. But the exploding current mass of digital assets could easily overwhelm, and it is obvious that the longer the we wait, the more out of control the situation becomes. At present, Otis has no established methodology for

capturing the most important college assets and loading them into CONTENTdm.

Then along came Flickr, further complicating the archival issues regarding photographs. Many college staff and faculty are eagerly using it to document not only college activities, but student and course activities as well. The Otis Admissions

Department currently has hundreds, maybe thousands of

images on Flickr. It is so ridiculously easy to use; how will it ever be possible for a complicated library database or digital asset

management system to compete? Even when we trained staff to use CONTENTdm and asked them to selectively upload some of their images, are they really inclined to find time to take on such a task?

Finally, what about Web sites? From time to time, Otis has wanted to trace the history of its Web site. For that, staff has had to rely on the Wayback Machine, which has proven less than

adequate. For instance, none of the Flash files are available. It is one thing to put up content on the Web, but it is something else

altogether to actually archive that content for the institution. Otis

recently launched a brand new Web site and migrated most of the content. But what about the old site? Is it important to archive it? Much of the old Web site was created as HTML pages. Would it be enough to simply create a PDF of the old pages and save those? The new site is created within a Content Management

System which is quite different from simple HTML. Otis is a

college without a well organized institutional archive of print materials, now faced with an exponentially increasing number of born-digital assets. What are the priorities? This question has become progressively more difficult to answer.

In the face of an already full workload, tough decisions must be made. Librarians are familiar with the issues of selectivity. At Otis, we are asking ourselves: Is everything valuable? Is it all worth archiving? In this era of exploding digital assets, how will we decide and how will all the necessary archiving work ever

get done?

Conclusion

With all of the new Web 2.0 technologies, everyone is now a creator and a potential publisher of content. What is the role of librarians is this world? Is it important to archive all Web 2.0

projects, including course blogs and wikis? Are representative samples enough? Many Web 2.0 technologies are meant to be informal and ephemeral; can (or should) we try to archive them in a formal manner? Also, what does it even mean to "archive" a

wiki? Or a blog? Or an object in Second Life? In what way would that be possible and useful?

There are many admirable models of digital archiving proj ects found in libraries. However, the enthusiasm for creating content and making it public seems greater than the enthusiasm for archiving, at least in many places. As librarians, our expertise and our role may alter somewhat with the changes in technology, but our commitment to access and preservation remains a core

value. As we work more closely with faculty and the materials

they help generate, we help our institutions grow in visibility. It is incumbent upon us to find a way to provide the necessary leadership so that our contributions are recognized and these

Web 2.0 cultural artifacts are not lost to history.

Acknowledgments The preparation of this article was greatly enhanced by

contributions from Otis colleagues Heather Cleary, digital projects and metadata librarian, and Cathy Chambers, catalog librarian.

Notes 1. Otis College of Art and Design was established in

1918. The school currently enrolls approximately 1,200 under

graduates and offers degrees in Fine Arts, Digital Media, Communication Arts, Fashion Design, Product Design, Architecture/Landscapes/Interiors, and Toy Design. General education courses comprise a third of the undergraduate curriculum. The Millard Sheets Library has a specialized collec tion of 45,000 volumes focused primarily, but not exclusively, on art and design. Among the holdings is a special collection of 2,000 artists' books. As with most professional art and design colleges, the Visual Resources Department is part of the library. The full-time staff of three professional librarians and three

paraprofessionals is supplemented by two part-time circulation

employees and various work/study positions.

42 Art Documentation ? Volume 28, Number 1 ? 2009

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.28 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:18:30 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions