Managing Electronic Materials for Fraternities and Sororities: Preserving Digital Records

1. Identifying, Preservingand Providing Access to Born-Digital RecordsNational Archives Conference for Fraternities and SororitiesJuly 17, 2010Urbana, Illinois Christopher J. Prom, PhD Assistant University Archivist and Associate Professor University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign prom@illinois.edu

2. Real World “[We] submitted a proposal for developing a plan, with guidelines, for managing [electronic] materials.  The need for this plan is becoming acute, as many member governance materials are created only electronically, distributed electronically and referenced electronically—except that they might be stored as documents on the  website, as documents in [an online membership portal], or on various people’s hard drives.  We will be losing our history if we don’t act now.” “The goal of the project is the plan—and we need your help.  First, we need your expertise to guide us toward appropriate archival principals and to point us to a process that will mesh with your capabilities; second, we need your input on a possible investigator to survey the need, describe best practice and suggest a plan.”  In May: “The amount is relatively small, so we’re hoping a graduate studentor recent graduate might be available. The time frameis from now until the end of August.”

3. Project Goals • Assess tools to appraise, process, preserve, provide access • Develop policy templates/ recommendations for ‘small’ archives • Assemble toolkit • http://e-records.chrisprom.com

4. KeyMessages • Digital preservation can be made as simple or complex as you like • Key element is building trust • Software is available, but people and commitment are the keys to success

5. Overview • A: Understanding threats • B: Mitigating the threats • C: Planning and Implement a program to identify, preserve, and provide access to electronic records • D: Selecting tools and services • Concluding Discussion: Sustaining the program

6. Provisos • I am new to the field • My method is based on research: • http://e-records.chrisprom.com • Not (yet) been tested in the field • Actively seeking partners • Is a work in progress • Many variables at play

7. A: Threats to Born-digital records • Format Obsolescence • Media Failure • Human neglect/disregard

8. Facebook/Twitter, etc. Google Docs Wikis Local hard drives and networks Email Systems The Cloud/Decontextualization

9. Lots of complex solutions to study (perceived complexity)

10. Scary OAIS Diagram

11. Plethora of Complex Project and Resources

12. Reality • You don’t need to understand it all • You don’t need to implement all of it at the same time • You are already doing it for print materials • Low-level parts of your computer already do much of the rest • The parts they don’t do can be taken up by new services/software that is emerging

13. The Problem* • The problem that needs to be addressed • Digital data is an asset with long term value. • Context needs to be preserved • Deployment depends on software, hardware and people. • Software, hardware and people change. • ...therefore... • Access is not guaranteed without (some) action • Value, opportunity, impact not guaranteed * Thanks to William Kilbride for some information on this slide

14. Making the Argument 1 • Relative cost is of digital preservation is low compared to preserving book, museum objects, archives, built environment

15. How much does a repository cost to setup and run Here’s two William Kibride prepared. Setup: Tens of thousands? Operating costs: 10 staff plus facilities Setup: Tens of millions? Operating costs: 450 staff plus facilities

16. Making the Argument 2 • Society needs to do this—and is doing it—to a point • Internet Archive • Library of Congress/Twitter • Projects in Large research libraries

17. Making the Argument 3 • Most services have no long-term legal commitment • It is not sufficient to leave things in hands of ‘producers’ or ‘service providers’ • Little up front planning for preservation • Records without custodian at risk of loss • Need for legal compliance

18. Making the Argument 4 Archivists Have: • Conceptual Tools • Provenance • Preservation of Context • Practical Method • Active, evolving custodianship for long-term • Expose for indexing • Focus on rich documentary sources • Correspondence, minutes, reports

19. The ‘Clincher’ • Archival expertise can enrich current systems of people and computers. With relatively small amount of resources, significant value can be added to any organization, in the form of managed and preserved electronic records. • BUT, you must demonstrate it!

20. B: Mitigating the Threats • Provide advice/assistance with current records • Participate in records management activities • Slowly build a program

21. Assistance within current record issues • Practical guidance documents • Email • http://e-records.chrisprom.com/?page_id=1301 • Desktop documents • Web resources • Salvage operations (floppy drive museum) • http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/you/index.html • Identify, decide, organize. . .

22. Provide Guidance for Current Records Issues • Records schedules MUST cover electronic materials • Help in planning/implementing new IT systems • Metadata

23. C: Planning A Digital Archives Program • http://e-records.chrisprom.com/?page_id=508 • Key elements of process: • Gradual, incremental change • Emphasis on consensus building • Learn as you go

24. Proviso: Should also include an assessment of institutional readiness

25. 2. Develop Electronic Records Program Statement • Preamble • Mandate • Partners • Documentary Scope • Guiding Values/Commitments • Pre-deposit services • Acquisition • Processing • Management • Access • http://e-records.chrisprom.com/?page_id=540 • Key points: • Customizable • Trust-building • Demonstrate basic competence • Sell your program

26. 3. Start Pilot Program • Sell Program to Admin—no cost basis. • Target a small number of individuals • Present them with vision of the program • Listen carefully • Identify IT partners and candidate technologies • Have a safe place to ‘park’ stuff temporarily • http://e-records.chrisprom.com/?p=1424

27. 4: Submission Policy Framework • Deposit Policy • Transfer Guidelines • Records Survey Form • Submission Agreement Form • What to keep • How to organize • Delivery

28. 5: Begin to Implement a TDR • Trusted Digital Repository • http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/dpm/dpm-eng/eng_index.html

29. “Archival Information Packet” Lavoie, Brian. The Open Archival Information System Reference Model: Introductory Guide. DPC Technology Watch Report 04-01. London: Digital Preservation Coalition, 2004.

31. DIY Repository Essentials (1) • Use document-based survey forms and submission agreements • Focus on ‘bit-presrevation’ and format monitoring • Don’t migrate unless format is threatened • Use whatever tools available for migration actions • Track actions at aggregate level in folder where actions are taken. • Original, processed, and logs folders.

32. DIY Repository Essentials (2) • Zip files for storage • Fixity information for entire AIP in top level folder (MD5 checksum) • File Identification • Use current catalog (such as Archon) to track descriptive information • Unique ID links Archival Packet and catalog info. • Storage via redundant local system or online backup

33. FITS Metadata for files (chained) On networked file system Local File/App Associations Package ID Checksums: “Karen’s Directory Printer/Jacksum Internal Rel’s: (keep original order) and External Relationships (described) Zip file and its Preservation Description Information Record in current catalog system ID Linking

34. 6. Develop Preservation Action Plans

35. Final Steps (work in progress) • http://e-records.chrisprom.com/?page_id=581 7. Develop processing, preservation, and storage workflows for submitted materials. 8. Implement the workflows using the Practical E-Records Workstation. 9. Develop an access system for resources ingested into your trustworthy storage environment (policies and technologies).

36. D: Select and Implement Tools and Services • http://e-records.chrisprom.com/?cat=3

37. Software Evaluation Criteria • Installation/configuration/supported platforms (20) • Functionality/Reliability (20) • Usability (10) • Scalability (10) • Documentation (10) • Interoperability/metadata support (10) • Flexibility/customizability (10) • License/Support/Sustainabilty/Community (10)

38. Some Very Useful Tools • Karen’s Directory Printer • DROID • FITS: File Information Toolset • Planets Testbed • Imagemagick • Open Office • Xena • Aid4Mail

39. Archivematica: proof of concept

40. Proposed Dashboard

41. Archivematica • Advantages: • Can use alongside existing hardware/software for migration options, storage, etc. • Allows for easy extension (via package manager or apt-get) • Potentially allows for flexibility in decision making • Excellent Development Model/Community involvement on wiki Google groups • Web dashboard coming • Targeted to ‘small’ archives • Range of partners supporting it.

42. Concluding Discussion • Sustaining the Program • Your questions/thoughts/comments.

43. Identifying, Preserving and Providing Access to Born-Digital RecordsNational Archives Conference for Fraternities and SororitiesJuly 17, 2010Urbana, Illinois Christopher J. Prom, PhD Assistant University Archivist and Associate Professor University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign prom@illinois.edu