Child pages
  • 2019-01-16
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

When: Wednesday, January 16, 10 am-4 pm

In-Person meeting in Oakland:

Franklin Building/UCOP
1111 Franklin St, Oakland, CA 94607
Room 9405

Attendees:

Discussion items

Time

Item

Who

Notes


Campus-Level Core Administrative Revision (Appendix I)
  • What is the definition of "Core Records"- Things left out because they have not been core. Appendix I is not meant to be finite.
  • Administrative section has nod to student government. Publications, university publications, non-textual items.
  • How to best reflect web archiving? A lot of the things on this list can be collected through web archiving. Added A/V materials.
  • Similar to faculty CVs – captured by web archiving? Yes, decided that this is where that information is predominantly presented and easily captured as needed.
  • Kathi – Original purpose of the document was to establish a minimum collecting baseline.
  • Should we add chancellors' calendars to list of items we request? – Can request, with embargoes.
  • Which Registrar records should be included in Archives? The majority of campuses don't collect or hold vital records (transcripts, applications, etc.). Annual reports should be collected.
  • Due to the large number of student organizations, collecting should focus on groups demonstrating substantial impact.

Faculty Paper Policy Revision (Appendix II)
  • Should these policies be internal or public? Determined to be ok to make public.
  • Faculty Papers vs. Faculty Archives – should we change the label to reflect digital? Will require future discussion.
  • Should faculty papers collections be split up between campuses? More important for collections to be housed all together than necessarily at their home campus. As a matter of professional courtesy though, we should contact each other to find out what home campus's plans were.
  • Condition of papers? Left in the criteria as it could influence a borderline decision.

Records Management/Document Management Systems

Tabled for future meeting.


Joint Meeting

Primary discussion topics: 1) joint outreach effort from university archivist and campus records manager, 2) handling email.

Outreach Efforts

  • UCSB – Records demonstration well-attended, has generated interest in archiving, and have received inquiries.
  • UCSF – Have provided courses to departments, satellite campus in Fresno
  • UCOP – Provided examples, looking for new ways to brand themselves, mascot. Hosted a staff contest to see who had the oldest documents and objects in their possession to help uncover materials that perhaps belong in the archives (also part of sesquicentennial preparation activities). Odyssey blog (is this the sesquicentennial website?). UCOP is consolidating from four buildings to two buildings in the coming year. Central filing locations will not be part of new space plans. Records will be held in individuals' areas. Will need to send some materials to Berkeley. Berkeley is close to filling up allocation at NRLF. Laurie Sletten and Kathi will discuss further.

Email

  • The discussion focused on the difficulty of getting offices comfortable with handing over email. Concerned about how personal message and confidential information is treated/handled, keeping too much email (not managing email).
  • The NARA method of email collection (CAPSTONE) was discussed as an option for collecting email from specific offices. Some private institutions have collected this way, but embargo the records for an established period of time (40-70 years). As a public institution, we couldn't put records under routine embargo.
  • Laurie showed ARMA webinar video on LDS Recordkeeping as examples of effective training records videos. Fun, short, to the point. Discussed the idea of developing a records training video from systemwide (like cyber security, sexual harassment training videos). Could highlight the costs involved in hunting for missing or destroyed documents, legal actions, etc.
  • UCSD – Records Office is developing training based on checklists provided to departments to measure how well they managing documents. The department is ranked gold, bronze, silver based on how well they comply. Department/Office managers often eager to comply.
  • Archiving with Records Retention Schedule in hand, talking about UCOP mandate can be more effective than approaching as library employee. Need to develop UC email guidelines.

CLIR Email Report Discussion (Sections 1-3)Matthew Stahl

Tabled to next meeting


Develop Email Statement from UCAC based on CLIR Email ReportMatthew Stahl

Tabled to next meeting


Additional topics/discussions
  • Kevin – Member of DOC appointed group looking at best practices for digital preservation. HOSC search still going on. (what does this refer to?)
  • Matt – Hired two new LA-4's.
  • Drafts of revised UCAC documents must be sent to HOSC for review, then on to DOC for approval. When approved, revisions will be made on UCAC Policy page.

Set agenda for remainder of year
  • Papers from those accused of Sexual harassment, how to handle
  • Review CLIR Email Report and develop an email statement from UCAC
  • Discussion of campus electronic records management systems and university archives
  • Access to digital (how to provide access to born-digital content?)
  • Upcoming meetings – Since UCAC met in December and January, meetings will be rescheduled:
    • late February
    • April at SCA (in-person)
    • June
  • No labels