The history of instructing users on how to use archivial collections seems to be a mixed bag of orienation sessions, session focused on proper document handling and the endless discusion of the parts of the finding aid. In many respects this does our users a disservice and reflects the mantra of collection first users behind that. What’s indicative of the instruction session as it stands now and as it was represented in days past is that an archivist would essentially orient a user to the collections that they most worked with. Drinling into these users that standards, policies and procedures that were utlisted locally, but this doesn’t help a user understand the greater value of the archives as a whole. What it does is help the most ardent researchers understand local practices, while turning off new and less hardcore users. The history of instruction has shown us the following
Oreintat user towards collection. This emphasiszed the collection first mentality. It also blinds users to the idea that other collections may exist (is this really true)
Oreint users to archivial theory. While some is helpful, much isnt really necessary for their use and could be accomplished be elsewhere
History shows much discussion and not much action.
Show lack of understanding what users are gaining from research and using archives. Demonstrates that archivist might be paying lipservice to educating users. what really are the educational needs of users.
How has history understood the needs of ours users in terms of their education. What educational aims have we sought to discover through working with our users in an archivial setting. These many questions seem to be un answered by our discussions of instructiong.
what are the primary aspects of archivial instruction that were important. are these still important. how does the issues of customer service play into this. Or should we think less about service and more about user needs whether spoke or unspoke more along the lines of educating our users in a more global sense. focusings our repositories from collection first to users first. Inherentyly this brings together many aspects of the archivial contintuim,, appriasal, descritption, and acces, but in this sense, we should think more of access and advocay. think how our interanction with users impacts their persception of archives. how do these interactions help us make the case for our records, how do they inspire use, how do they movivate for repeat visits. much is the reason to advocate for a new paradign of moveing forward with user focssied collecitons
how has the provessffi imbraced users. how have we still focused on collections? are there major reason s for this embrace or lack of embrace? are their circumstancews where we cannot embrace the users
on the idea of instruction
What wre the origins of instriction in archives
what dtoghs did we have int beging. Sems that msot began with publishing then exhibits folowed by orineation sessions
How has the practice of engaging the community worked out
how has pedagogy played a part of archivial instruction
Have i been over thinking the issue that doesn’t bear as much relevance to the profession as i think. I’m seeing a pattern that it maybe student focused work is popular else whree, but is it more so here or is everybody doing it. I believe a major servuy of the profession is warrented to discover how to handle whats really goin on here. I find it curious that people are interested in thesame types of activities, but labeling has not occured for these activitie. the major issue maybe labeling of new insturction activities to give it a concrete termonoligy to utlize for promotion and assessment purposes. What is vastly important is that we do something as a profession to ensure the educaiton of our users.
User focused seems present in the lit through books like archives power, and the one i jjust reviewed. whats doubly important is to tease out theveiws in the lit becasue archivist are using the same pedagogical language as teachign faculty and edcuatios.