Volume 8, Issue 1, 2014

[ARTICLE]

ANALYZING ARCHIVAL INTELLIGENCE

A collaboration between library instruction and archives

Merinda Kaye Hensley University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Benjamin P. Murphy Whitman College

Ellen D. Swain University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

ABSTRACT

Although recent archival scholarship promotes the use of primary sources for developing students’ analytical research skills, few studies focus on standards or protocols for teaching or assessing archival instruction. Librarians have designed and tested standards and learning assessment strategies for library instruction, and archivists would do well to collaborate with and learn from their experience. This study examines lessons learned from one such collaboration between an instructional services librarian and archivist to evaluate and enhance archival instruction in the University Archives’ Student Life and Culture Archival Program (SLC Archives) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library. Based on evaluative data from a student survey and in-depth interviews, the authors offer strategies for successfully meeting and exceeding learning outcomes for archival intelligence.

96 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

INTRODUCTION Archives “collects, preserves, and makes available materials documenting national The academy's strategic focus on high fraternity and sorority life and University of impact learning experiences combined with Illinois student involvement in fraternities, an increasing amount of digitized archival sororities, student government, religious materials boldly underlines the need for associations, publications, social events, collaboration between instruction librarians athletics, and other activities that contribute and archivists. Librarians, in recent years, to the total student experience in higher have joined archival colleagues in education.” From 2004 until 2012, class use embracing primary sources as an effective and archival instruction sessions in the and engaging resource for developing University Archives (including the SLC students’ critical thinking and analytical Archives) rose by 94%. Students using the abilities. Over the past decade, the ACRL archives to complete a class paper during Information Literacy Competency Standards the same time period rose by 674%. The for Higher Education (2000) have been largest increase of research instruction is adapted and incorporated across disciplines due to a general education requirement 2 (Association of College and Research through the Rhetoric Department. Students Libraries [ACRL], 2012). However, the taking the introductory rhetoric course use library literature has not adequately SLC archival materials (e.g., administrative addressed instructional strategies for files, student organization records, personal teaching the use of primary sources. While papers, photographs, and other items) to science, technology, engineering, and investigate a myriad of topics with mathematics (STEM) disciplines are well examples, including student protests in the versed in the pedagogical strategy of 1970s, current dress trends, dining hall undergraduate research techniques,1 the dynamics, and inter-racial and cultural social sciences and humanities are just relations. Perhaps most importantly, beginning to explore ways in which students learn to ground contemporary undergraduates can contribute to knowledge campus issues in the context of past campus in a discipline by asking original research happenings and experiences. Research questions, examining primary sources, and assignments typically require students to creating new content. This study provides a analyze three or four primary sources with model for how instructional services additional secondary sources on a topic librarians and archivists can share their related to the University of Illinois. The knowledge, skills, and expertise to facilitate program coordinators for the rhetoric and enable undergraduate research using program have worked with the archivist primary sources. over the past decade to heighten students’ experience and knowledge of forming At the University of Illinois at Urbana- original research questions, using primary Champaign, the focus on increasing and secondary sources effectively, and undergraduate research opportunities in the creating original content. humanities and social sciences has led to a steep increase in archival instruction in the While the relationship with the rhetoric University Archives’ Student Life and program has remained strong for over 10 Culture Archival Program (SLC Archives). years, an intentional collaboration between Founded in 1989 by an endowment from the instructional services librarian and the alumnus Stewart S. Howe, the SLC archivist emerged as the SLC Archives 97 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 began examining ways to improve archival instruction interviews regarding student user education on primary sources, perceptions of their archival instruction specifically elevating the undergraduate experience. Furthermore, it provides a students’ competency of archival literacy to model for collaboration between instruction the higher level of building archival librarians and archivists and for beginning intelligence as defined by Yakel and Torres: conversation about archival instruction assessment. The overarching goal of the A researcher’s knowledge of archival project is to implement Yakel and principles, practices, and institutions, Torres’ (2003) vision of user education: such as the reason underlying archival rules and procedures, the A movement away from a focus on means for developing search ‘how to do research here’ toward a strategies to explore research more conceptual understanding of questions, and an understanding of archives and search strategies may the relationship between primary provide users with more knowledge sources and their surrogates. (2003, and the ability to develop intellective p. 52) skills to navigate multiple repositories and better identify Yakel and Torres (2003) outlined three primary sources from afar. (p. 77) elements of archival intelligence: (a) archival theory, practice, and procedures; LITERATURE REVIEW (b) the ability to use strategies to reduce uncertainty; and (c) intellective skills. Each In recent years, the archival literature points of these dimensions is characterized by to an increase in using archival collections specific signifiers of knowledge. For the in information literacy instruction and purposes of this study, the researchers outreach to undergraduate students. First, in focused on the first dimension of archival a survey of archivists, Alison (2005) found intelligence, which is signified by a that 96% of her respondents participated in researcher’s (a) understanding of the use of instruction, most in the form of a one-shot language in archives; (b) internalization of session covering departmental guidelines, rules; and (c) a researcher’s awareness and use of primary sources, and often structured assessment of his or her own knowledge and around a specific assignment. The edited the knowledge of the archivist. Because the volume, Past or Portal? Enhancing vast majority of students receiving Undergraduate Learning through Special instruction in the archives were novice Collections and Archives (2012), takes this researchers, these most basic indicators of examination a step further by sharing nearly knowledge were often difficult for students 50 case studies on instructional practices to acquire, and instruction was specifically from colleges and universities all over the targeted to improve these essential United States. understandings of archival research. The archives community has offered several This study examines a joint effort between justifications for this increase in an archivist and an instruction librarian to instructional activity. By outlining the improve learning outcomes in students’ contribution of archivist as educator, Carini archival intelligence and discusses the (2009) emphasized archivists’ roles in results of an online survey and a set of post- sharing skills and experience to teach 98 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 document analysis and the research process. directly with teaching faculty in order to Robyns (2001) articulated the value of meet disciplinary curricular needs (Mazak primary sources in fostering critical thinking & Manista, 1999; Wosh, Bunde, Murphy & skills, and Schmeising and Hollis (2002) Blacker, 2007; Mazella & Grob, 2011). contended that using special collections Krause (2008) reported very low rates of provides opportunities for active or assessment among archivists who provide collaborative learning while appealing to instruction. Despite these examples, Bahde students’ diverse learning styles. and Smedberg (2012) noted that “while our Additionally, McCoy (2010) described colleagues in general library instruction and instruction that focuses on archives as a information literacy have been developing source of questions and found that using and integrating assessment techniques for primary sources fosters critical thinking years, those of us who teach in special skills, reduces plagiarism, and produces collections and archives settings have been higher quality student papers. In an effort to slower to adopt such approaches” (p. 153). see student learning through the archivist lens, Krause (2010) published the results of While there is a gap in standards for interviews documenting archivists’ own instruction in archives and special perceptions of the value of using primary collections, the literature also does not show sources in the classroom. a great deal of collaboration between archivists and instruction librarians who are Given the increased focus on library more familiar with instructional pedagogies instruction, the perfunctory mention of such as active learning strategies and primary sources in the ACRL Information student learning outcomes. Sutton and Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Knight (2006) offered one example of a Education does not sufficiently address how special collections librarian collaborating they could be used as a pedagogical tool for with an instruction librarian to focus information literacy instruction in the instruction on the relationship between archives or special collections environment. primary and secondary sources, and However, Stripling (2009) proposed a specifically on how they are related in the pedagogical strategy through a model of production of scholarly literature and inquiry using primary sources that disciplinary knowledge. Yet, there are no “empowers students to develop deep published reports of archivists and librarians understandings of academic content and a collaborating, though Alison (2005) called portfolio of thinking strategies and skills for this several years ago. As Westbrock and that are essential for lifelong learning” (p. Fabian (2010) pointed out, librarians have 4). Carini (2009) as well as Yakel (2004), been thinking about teaching competencies Yakel and Torres (2003), and a recent panel for several decades, while archivists are just that participated at the 2013 ACRL beginning to consider these issues. Conference (Smedberg, Dupont, Badhe, Carini & Carter, 2013) have called for the HISTORY AND CONTENT OF CLASS development of information literacy SESSIONS standards for primary sources. The lack of standards has arguably contributed to a Each semester, the archivist teaches corresponding lack of assessment models approximately 200 students as part of the for archival instruction. Some archivists undergraduate rhetoric general education have compensated for this by collaborating curriculum, a subset of the larger rhetoric 99 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 program. In these courses, students ask letters, photographs, guidebooks, student original research questions and use primary produced publications, and ephemera. While and secondary sources to engage in an presenting these examples, the archivist intensive, research-based, academic writing emphasizes the difference between library exercise. The archivist begins the instruction and archival research both in terms of type session by drawing upon the pedagogical of materials as well as organization, rules, strategy of flipping the classroom by policies, and procedures. The final portion strongly encouraging course instructors to of the session addresses how to search the assign students an online primary source archives database, Archon,3 as well as to tutorial, Primary Source Virtual Information utilize finding aids and research guides on Literacy Learning and Growing the SLC Archives website.4 Finally, the Environment (VILLAGE) (University of archivist leads the class through a database Illinois, 2006), before they attend the in- search and describes the relationship person session held at the SLC Archives. between the online finding aid and the The Primary Source VILLAGE was “created physical box and/or folder by accessing a using materials from [the SLC Archives] finding aid on screen and physically holdings, defines a primary source, provides showing the students the relevant box it information about using the Archives’ represents at the table. The class concludes online database, and walks the student with a discussion of individual student’s through an exercise on analyzing a primary paper topics and further exploration of source” (Swain, 2013, p. 154). In addition, highlighted materials. the course instructor receives an optional lesson plan designed to engage students in METHODOLOGY the reading and interpretation of primary source documents in a classroom setting, The following study examines the students’ including four sets of primary source perceptions of their library instruction documents, question sets for each set of experience. Specifically, this research study documents, and material related to the measures how students learn as part of historical context of the documents. archival instruction while identifying instructional weaknesses and provides a The archivist has taught the in-person model for assessment. In order to session following the same format for accomplish these objectives, the authors several semesters. First, the archivist surveyed all students who participated in provides a brief description of the archives’ class instruction sessions in the SLC purpose and founding, an overview of the Archives during the fall 2012 semester. types of materials held by the archives, and Students who indicated use of the SLC a short discussion of the job responsibilities Archives materials in their research were and activities carried out by the archivist contacted for a more extensive interview (including a plea to students to become part about their research process. of the university’s history by depositing their organizational records and personal After receiving approval from the materials). Next, to illustrate the myriad university’s Institutional Review Board types of primary sources available, the (IRB), the authors applied for and received archivist shows examples of student funding from the University Library’s administrative and organizational records Library Research and Publications and personal papers, including scrapbooks, Committee (RPC). The RPC awarded funds 100 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 to hire a graduate assistant to complete results. Participation in the interviews, interviews and transcribe and compile again, was voluntary. For the initial survey, interview data. Additionally, funds were the authors ran an online random number provided to purchase $30 Amazon.com gift generator to choose one student for a $30 cards as incentives for student participation Amazon.com gift card. Based on survey in the survey and the follow-up interviews. responses, the authors contacted the eight qualifying students6 via email to invite them Eleven classes (approximately 220 students to participate in a 30-minute interview. total) from the undergraduate rhetoric program visited the SLC Archives for an For the second part of the study, researchers instruction session taught by the archivist in conducted post-instruction interviews in fall 2012. The authors contacted six order to gain insight into the students’ instructors (some instructors were impression of the impact of library responsible for multiple sections) in early instruction on their research process using October to explain the study objectives and the SLC Archives. Four of the eight students request participation. Classes included nine identified agreed to participate in the Rhetoric 105 classes, one Rhetoric 103 interviews. From January to March 2013, class, and one Ethnography of the the instructional services librarian and the University Initiative5 history class. In early graduate assistant met with each interviewee December, the authors emailed the in a public conference room in the instructors again and included a link to the University Library. Since the archivist online survey. The student invitation taught the instructional sessions, she did not described the purpose of the survey, the participate in the interview process so that length of time to complete the survey her presence would not influence the (approximately 10 minutes), and the time students’ responses. Interviews were period when students would be contacted to scheduled for 30 minutes, but most were participate in the follow-up interviews. All completed within 15 to 20 minutes. The instructors indicated they had forwarded the authors recorded interviews using a digital email to their students and encouraged them recording device, and all data were to take the survey. Students were given two transcribed and kept on a secure library weeks to complete the survey. Authors sent server. The investigators manually coded all one reminder at the end of the first week. identifying participant data to ensure Participation was voluntary, and all confidentiality. Care was taken to verify that participating students signed an online coded themes accurately reflected the consent form. statements of the interviewees. Students chosen to participate in the interview Twenty-four students completed the online process each received a $30 Amazon.com survey for a completion rate of 11.4%. The gift card at the end of the interview process. authors collected identifying participant data The students represented a variety of majors in order to recruit participants for the (see Table 2), and all were first-year interview process. The students who students taking the required rhetoric course. indicated use of the SLC Archives in their research project were identified, and this information was deleted from the survey

101 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

FINDINGS FOR ONLINE SURVEY searching tools they used to complete the assignment.7 More than one-third of the AND POST-INSTRUCTION students who participated in library INTERVIEWS instruction at the SLC Archives (38%) returned to use the primary sources in The online survey asked students three person. Although the instruction session questions in order to gauge the impact of the familiarized students with the research archival instruction session on their procedures of the SLC Archives, 54% (and assigned semester course work. possibly the 8% who chose not to answer the question) did not return to use the SLC It is not surprising that a high number of Archives. The researchers speculated that students use online searching tools to find one reason why students may have chosen materials for their research. Developed at not to return to the SLC Archives for the University of Illinois Archives, Archon research materials was because the location is an internationally utilized software that is one mile from the main campus. The enables archives and special collections to number of students who did use resources publish holding descriptions and to link to from the SLC Archives in their final papers, electronic records on the web in searchable online, and hard copy materials was evenly database form. After the in-person session split among the survey population at 50%. during which the Archon database was (See Table 1) introduced, a high percentage (83%) of students used it to locate research materials The survey also asked a single open-ended for their assigned project. However, even question, “Can you briefly describe the with detailed instruction on how to use the difference between doing library research Archon database 17% of students chose not and archival work?” Students showed vast to use it as a research tool. In addition to or variance in their understanding of the instead of Archon, it is likely that students archives. The responses reflected Yakel and used library databases they were already Torres’ (2003) first element of archival familiar with and Google, but the survey did intelligence, albeit on a beginner’s level: not specifically ask them which other online knowledge of archival theory, practice, and

TABLE 1—ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS

Prefer not to Question n=24 Yes No answer

Did you use the Archives online database Archon (see: http://archives.library.illinois.edu/ 83% 17% n/a archon/) to search for research materials?

Did you return to the SLC Archives after your 38% 54% 8% library instruction session?

Did you use any materials from the SLC 50% 50% n/a Archives in your final paper?

102 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 procedures. This element contains three students understand the language that indicators: use of language, internalization archivists use in organizing primary sources, of rules, and awareness of knowledge. which will, in turn, increase their understanding of the differences between USE OF LANGUAGE archival and library research.

Yakel and Torres’ (2003) first indicator of INTERNALIZATION OF RULES knowledge of archival theory, practice, and procedures is understanding archival The second basic indicator of knowledge of language. Language can be a significant archival theory, practices, and procedures, barrier for students encountering the as explained by Yakel and Torres (2003) is archives for the first time; “Language becoming oriented with the rules of the indicates an ability to distinguish between archives: libraries and archives and to grasp differences in the access tools and Rules directly affected the ability to information sources each provides” (p. 64). do research and often disrupted long- Two students surveyed showed initial established research patterns and understandings for how language differs in routines. Archival rules created the an archive from performing library research. need to develop new research For example, one student said, “Library strategies and eliminated the ability to research basically focuses on words browse, a major strategy in libraries searching, which is limited in a way. The and on the Internet. (p. 66) archive work provides not only words but also pictures, interviews and even the real Qualitative data from the survey indicated objects left by people before.” Another that the students demonstrated an student expressed an understanding for elementary understanding of the operational accurately developing his research question: procedures of the archives. For example, “For archival research, you need to have a one student understood the fragility and site- pretty good idea of what you want to find.” only use of archival materials. “You have to One student expressed a lack of sufficient be much more careful with the archives, you materials, suggesting an inability to must keep the archives in the proper order, construct a successful search strategy for they are arranged by number, you can only materials in the archives: “I used the look at an archive [sic] in the Center, you archives mainly for photo’s [sic] there was CANNOT ‘check’ it out.” While several not much I could find on my topic.” One students see library research as something student was able to grasp the difference done primarily online, a few understood the between primary and secondary sources distinction that the archives provide unique when stating, “Archival work is more hands-on resources as well as serendipitous looking at primary sources while library finds: research looks more at secondary sources.” Another student shared awareness that a I feel that when doing library mediator was necessary in order to research, I am mostly using online successfully locate materials in the archives; databases and very rarely would I “Archival research requires an expert to ever get my hands on the actual help find the proper data and then you have material itself. Obviously, this is not to sift through it.” Instruction can help necessarily a bad thing since there is 103 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

a lot more information online content that is curated by the archives; “The nowadays than there was 5 years library can’t give me student-created ago. However, reading books and content that was necessary for my research doing research straight from books topic. I needed to collect information on does have it advantages like the fact what students were doing 20 years ago, but I that you may come across some needed specific student examples, which the information that you may not have library cannot provide.” Disintermediation intended to. Online sources are often between librarians and undergraduate extremely specific to what you want students due to online content may have to find. Archival work is similar in also had an impact on how students see the sense that you can find a lot of archivists. One student, who has worked things that you may not have been independently in the past without help from necessarily looking for. a librarian, understood the importance of working with an archivist to complete her research; “I think library research was easier Instruction that explains what to expect in than archival because I'm able to do terms of services as well as expectations in everything by myself at the library, and the archives can go a long way in helping when I went to the archives I needed students surmount the anxiety of doing someone to get the information for me.” research in a new environment. And finally, two students expressed an AWARENESS OF KNOWLEDGE interest in archival versus library research, one stating, “I found archival work to be Navigating the archives is a complex more interesting than library research. It process, one that archivists are highly seem [sic] as if one object led to another, I trained to do. Yakel and Torres’ (2003) third wanted to keep finding more. I felt like a indicator of knowledge of archival theory, detective trying to find clues.” Another practice, and procedures is an “awareness of student demonstrated an understanding that the limits of one’s own archival intelligence primary sources allow researchers to and the ability to identify the limits of develop their own opinions. Perhaps most knowledge in others, particularly reference interestingly, one student hinted at the archivists” (p. 67). Archival instruction by impact instruction had on her understanding itself will not bridge the divide between the of performing archival research. “The only archivist and the neophyte researcher. difference is that library research is more However, exposure to the archives does aid convenient. Archival work would surely be in improving the communication skills just as informative and probably more necessary to facilitate a successful research interesting. I'm just used to library research experience. One student described his so that's what I've been sticking to.” While perception of the difference in experiences: students may have gained limited library “A lot of it isn’t electronic, so it’s a lot of research skills in high school, few indicated sitting down and sorting through all of the experience with primary source research. extra stuff to find the right one.” Clearly, exposure to the archives fostered an awareness of the complexity of archival Another student understood the unique research in the students interviewed.

104 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

POST-INSTRUCTION INTERVIEWS explained how their courses in STEM disciplines do not rely on library research. The post-instruction interviews were For example, one student reported that “til intended to provide context to the survey, [sic] now we have not had to do a research allowing the researchers to ask more in- paper.” Another stated, “I haven’t done depth questions regarding students’ much research yet.” As a result, their understanding of their instructional responses clearly indicated confusion experience in the archives. (See Appendix between the types of material the archives for interview questions.) The four students house and the types of material that can be who participated were enrolled in the found in the library. In trying to explain general education rhetoric course and how library research was different from represented a variety of STEM majors. (See searching the archives, one student Table 2.) compared searching databases to performing scientific proofs: The transcripts of the interviews were analyzed for recurring themes, with So, I never really used a database for particular attention to identifying weakness anything. So, it was like, um, it was in the students’ learning experiences while good because all the articles that I thinking about what could be improved in searched for were peer-reviewed, archival instruction. Six themes emerged and also you didn’t have to care from the interviews. about if they’re legit, because that’s like a guarantee when you filter it Theme 1: Confusion between archives out to having peer-reviewed articles. and the library Because, that’s something – that’s a proof. (Student #1) One particular focus of the lesson plan was to highlight the difference between an Still others had trouble expressing how the archives and the library. Several students archive was organized:

TABLE 2—STUDENT TOPICS AND ARCHIVAL SOURCES USED

Student Student Major Paper Topic Sources Used

School newspaper article Campus history of 1 Electrical engineering (digital), photograph, and teaching assistants personal interview Molecular and cellular 2 UIUC diversity issues School newspaper (print) biology Oral histories, school UIUC sorority women 3 Electrical engineering newspaper (digital), and during WWII photographs Personal letters and Campus memorials and 4 General engineering journals, school the Morrow Plots newspaper (print) 105 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

I think it’s, um, organized by type of content, rather than just having the materials. Like newspapers, I-books word ‘TAs’ [teaching assistant] in it. [student calendar and appointment Because the newspaper article talks books produced by the YMCA prior about how, um, at that time, having – to the 1950s] and whatnot. And then there were only graduate TAs. They within each of those, like, categories, didn’t even have undergraduate TAs you have like separate time frames at that time. So how some people and other topics. Um, so I think that looked at it – that’s what the article that’s the main organization system. said – that the university is I don’t think I saw anything different compromising on the academic other than that. (Student #2) standards by having students teach. (Student #1) Um, I don’t really know how they are organized. I just typed in. I know One student was able to express the that they’re boxes, is what they came difference between doing archival research in, with different categories. So I’m using the complexities of her discipline, assuming, I would say the boxes are molecular and cellular biology, as her frame categorized by whatever they’re of reference: about, and then those are categorized in some way. (Student #4) Whereas in science, it’s much more like one thing. Like, this is correct A significant omission here was that none of and that’s not. That’s usually it. So, the students mentioned or even came close you have to read a lot of different to approximating the concept of provenance. viewpoints to gather what you are One way to address this misconception trying to like – to help you form would be to add an active learning exercise what your viewpoint is. Whereas in that would more rigorously demonstrate science, I feel that you’re just trying how materials are organized by the person to find evidence for your one – for or organization that created them (e.g., that one viewpoint that there is. And provenance). often times, there’s a lot of evidence for that one viewpoint. (Student #2) Theme 2: Analyzing argument/ perspective of documents Another student expanded on this idea by One of the more complex competencies to expressing recognition that the past can teach in a brief instructional session is the bring perspective to the humanities while ability to analyze the argument or science is based on the most up-to-date perspective put forth in a specific archival research: document. Determining historical context is one of the most useful skills an archivist can Archives are mainly the past. It share with a researcher. One student contains the materials than have demonstrated critical thinking skills by happened, and you’re looking articulating how her topic was perceived at through it, and then discussing our a time in history: point of view. In engineering we look through different – the recent I read through the whole thing. And, research that is happening, the it was more like – it was more the updated technology. So we mainly 106 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

look through the present, or like the easier than in the past due to the increasing future. And try to go into the future. number of documents being scanned and (Student #3) indexed online. Yet, students are still waiting for the day when everything is Seeing history through primary sources searchable and viewable online. One student engages students from all disciplines in understood that materials are not inquiry-based learning. One student ubiquitously available online. “Sometimes I recounted an experience using personal just wish we had much more available letters and speeches: online.” (Student #1) Another student mentioned the mediation of the archivist I would look through them and see from the instruction session and recognized who wrote them because if it was a the work that goes into putting primary journal entry from Gregory,8 I would materials online: see that, to see his thoughts. And if it was letters about him, he had some And she [the archivist] said also – of his speeches that he had given, she showed us and walked through and I knew they would be really with us the research process, looking related to my research. So I kind of for stuff. And that was really looked to see who wrote them, and if streamlined, and thought that was they had a title of some sort to see really helpful, putting all the physical what they were. And from there I archives and all of that into a digital would just skim over them to see if I format was really helpful for all the found any words that popped out that students. (Student #2) I knew I needed. And after that, I would kind of look further into each Yet another student recognized the role of article. (Student #4) the archivist in the SLC Archive and her expertise in finding the materials as they Overall, students demonstrated a basic were indexed in the database: understanding of the importance of critically examining the perspective of archival Well, the online resources were quite documents, though they did so at a basic organized because if you type in level. This suggests that fostering critical certain topics, and, um, search thinking, which is ultimately relevant to all words, then you get specific disciplines, is an area to which archival documents that are related to that. instruction can contribute. One way to And even she [the archivist] improve the lesson plan could be to include explained that the documents that modeling this process for students through a were present over there, like those document analysis exercise or to go through old transcripts and all that were quite the steps as outlined in the Primary Source preserved and if you asked them, VILLAGE tutorial, module 3, together in they would help you get to all the class using a sample document reproduced documents. (Student #3) and distributed to each student. While students understand that not Theme 3: Availability of digital everything is online, they prefer to use what primary sources is most easily available. Attention should be Research using primary materials is now paid to the kinds of collections available 107 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 online locally, but it is also worth use) while also illustrating the importance of considering introducing students to online proper care by showing material damaged repositories found elsewhere. by use.

Theme 4: Understanding of archival Theme 5: Transferrable skills use policies The students from this study all came from Arguably the largest hurdle in convincing STEM disciplines; and, therefore, this undergraduate students to use archival course was their first exposure to using materials for research is dismantling the archival materials. In building lifelong misconceptions that using materials on-site learning skills, students should have an is a difficult process. One student explained understanding about how to find all types of her understanding of the SLC Archive use research materials, regardless of where they policy: are housed or how they are organized. Exposure to the SLC Archives had an I think, she [the archivist] said, like impact on one student who said, “Once you all the resources are there for us to know you have access to so much, like, you use. And, but they are fragile so you can actually see the importance of that have to take care of it. But she said resource once you’ve used it” (Student #1). most of everything was really available, so if you wanted Another student described how this new something, you can ask for it and experience contributed to her overall you’ll get it. It was really accessible. research skill set: (Student #2) I think any research you do in any Another student articulated his successful field, you can always use techniques experience with searching and working with you learned. Um, like, it helps me the archivist: feel – it helps me, like, want to see, like, what exactly I’m looking for, You typed in what you needed, and like, every time you do research, you then you got it. So I thought it was learn something. Like, this will help fairly simple, and then the archives me look for the specifics. (Student workers knew what they were doing, #2) so if you needed help, I would be able to say, “I need this.” And they Continuing to demonstrate to students how were able to find it for me. So at the ability to navigate information systems least [sic] give me ideas of where to and evaluate the information they find is look and what to look for. (Student another area to which archival instruction #4) can contribute. The lesson plan should look for further ways to demonstrate how critical Overall, students came away with the thinking and writing skills are applicable to impression that the archives’ staff was all disciplines, including STEM. approachable and knowledgeable and that restrictions on access and use were minimal. Theme 6: Genuine interest in history The lesson plan could be improved by Working with archival materials brings aligning the use policies and their context to the student experience. Students justifications (e.g., preservation for future reflected on their experience in the SLC 108 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

Archives, which awakened an interest in represent science-related fields. Second, doing research in new ways: there were constraints on the instruction offered, including a short-time commitment So I liked the kind of argument that for sessions (60–90 minutes). Third, many the article had, depending on that instructors requested that sessions be kept to time, like the argument that probably a basic introduction to the SLC Archives. though right now is not about the Fourth, while instructors say they have economic benefits of the university, covered primary sources during class time, but rather how much the students the archivist is not in the room to understand benefit it terms of qualities and exactly how this material was taught. For things like that. So it was nice to see future sessions, this instructor involvement like what it was then, and what it is could be capitalized upon, providing the now. (Student #1) archivist with an opportunity to collaborate with the instructor on curriculum And that’s where having something development. Improving student learning like an archive might help because if outcomes will require a more intentional you want to go back and see how partnership between the archivist and the much we’ve progressed, it helps in instructor, one that may benefit greatly by that. (Student #1) including the instructional services librarian.

But I do remember taking some However, while the pool of interviewees articles from the 60s. They were was small, the emerging themes provide a really interesting. They were about, starting point for instruction librarians and just, the African American population archivists to find common ground in the on(or at?) the university, and different classroom around Yakel and Torres’ model programs for international students. of archival intelligence. There were several (Student #2) problematic areas identified by the students that the instructional services librarian and Because the majority of students are the archivist could address with a thoughtful intrigued when they encounter the stuff in re-consideration of the lesson plan. The archives, archivists should continue to students provided reaffirmation that cultivate relationships with undergraduate improving skills around archival instructors in a wide variety of disciplinary intelligence is a hurdle that is beginning to departments in order to expose more be addressed by instructional efforts in the students to the unique materials found in SLC Archives but that new opportunities archives. emerge by the very nature of student disciplines and the increasing frequency of DISCUSSION online primary resources.

The purpose of the survey in this study was The ongoing issue of misunderstandings to identify a pool of students who used the regarding the difference between archives SLC Archives for in-depth interviews and to and libraries exacerbated students’ begin to identify themes related to archival understanding of Yakel and Torres’ first intelligence. There are limitations to the element of archival intelligence. In other scope of this study. First, there was a small words, students lacked sufficient archival pool of interviewees, and all four students language skills; they were only beginning to 109 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 understand the use policies in place in the students, especially those in a STEM archives, and they were in the elementary discipline, this is their first time in a stages of negotiating a relationship with the research situation using archival materials. archivist. A concrete example of how deep By teaching students how to search the this misunderstanding runs was the fact that Archon database, the archivist was able to all of the students who participated in the explain how to find materials in the SLC interview process failed to correctly answer Archives and how materials are arranged how archives are organized (e.g., by and described in relation to who or what provenance, the person/organization that body created them. The archivist could look created the documents) and instead thought for opportunities to increase students’ materials were organized by format or ability to better structure research questions subject matter. They did not use the proper through the searching process. The skills language to describe archival organization, related to refining search tactics and asking but most were able to recognize the role of questions is key to improving archival the archivist in this process. This suggests intelligence. that describing archival organization to students in a lecture format might not be the Third, the intricacy of archival problems most appropriate way to convey and using primary sources to answer organizational information, nor may one complex research questions can be interaction be enough to explain the illustrated through Yakel and Torres’ (2003) complexity of archives. Though the focus of third element of archival intelligence, this study was on improving students’ grasp development of intellective skills, “the of the first element of archival intelligence, ability to understand the connection some of the results suggest how the between representations of documents, elements of archival intelligence are activities, and processes and the actual interrelated and might need to be considered object or process being represented” (p. 73). holistically in designing future instruction. One way the archivist currently approaches this problem is by showing students how Second, students came to the SLC Archives record series are organized by creator and with only the beginning of a research aligning that specific record with the question. In fact, archivists are faced with corresponding item. The lesson plan could the reality that students usually “Google it further develop active learning strategies in up,” as one student mentioned, when facing order to teach students the ways in which a research problem. The process of surrogates represent primary sources so structuring ill-structured problems is part of students can more effectively find what they the undergraduate experience of taking a are searching for. Furthermore, at this stage required general education course. Yakel of the undergraduate learning process, one and Torres (2003) explained this as the should expect students coming to the second element of archival intelligence: archives to have only the beginning strategies for reducing uncertainty and questions of a research topic ready. They ambiguity in archives. They stated, “This is will not be able to anticipate what they may true in archives because the existence of or may not find. Students are limited by evidence is often unknown, the access their inability to ask the right questions systems are complex, and/or much of the because the SLC Archives is so complex. evidence requires interpretation and itself Also, students’ reliance on keyword may be ambiguous” (p. 69). For many searching suggests that they lack an

110 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 adequate understanding of the CONCLUSION representational relationship between finding aids and archival documents This study’s findings, a first assessment of described. For example, several of the the SLC Archives’ instructional program, students interviewed resorted to newspaper indicate that the archivist needs to develop articles, resources in a format that they new techniques for engaging students with understand instead of delving deeper into SLC archival materials enabling a better the collection of many other primary understanding of the policies, procedures, sources in the SLC Archives. Clearly, more and theories that govern their arrangement, needs to be done to encourage students to access, and use. Although the archivist’s move from a general topic to a well-formed instruction sessions covered the issues of research question. archival theory, practice, and procedure, survey and interview results showed that Finally, there may be more opportunities for students need more assistance in obtaining flipping the classroom in the instructional the necessary level of understanding of situation by allowing class time to be archival arrangement and research. devoted to exercises that increasingly develop the working relationship between The results of this study indicate that the student and the archivist. For example, developing an information literacy program orientation to access tools and repository around archives will take more than a one- rules could be covered online in the same shot visit by undergraduate students. While manner that the course instructors prepare our focus was on the first element of students to visit the archives by taking the archival intelligence—knowledge of Primary Source VILLAGE. Currently archival theory, practice, and procedures— instruction in the SLC Archives goes one Yakel and Torres (2003) discussed two step beyond user orientation but not far additional elements for consideration: enough to claim user education for archival strategies for reducing uncertainty and intelligence skills. We posit that the basis intellective skills. Students in this study for improving students’ experience in the struggled to grasp the first element of archives as well as their archival archival intelligence, and, consequently, intelligence relies on improving their there is evidence that more needs to be done working relationship with the archivist. to incorporate all three dimensions of Whether correct in their assumptions or not, archival intelligence into instruction. That students often assume they are proficient in is, these three elements are not necessarily library research. According to one student, hierarchical, but are interrelated “Library research is easy to do and can be understandings that students acquire done by one’s self.” However, as noted by gradually. Therefore, there are several Yakel and Torres, serendipitous searching is opportunities for archivists who teach: (1) necessarily mediated by the archivist. more aggressively borrow pedagogical Students cannot browse an archival strategies from colleagues in library collection in the same way they can in a instruction and incorporate more active library or online; however, “Once the rules learning exercises into instruction; (2) are learned, a researcher can devote more partner closely with course instructors in mental resources to thinking about the developing and team-teaching curriculum; research problem and to developing specific (3) further develop online learning archival research strategies” (2003, p. 67). opportunities in order to better prepare 111 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014 students before they visit the SLC Archives; Undergraduate Library provides instruction and (4) consider alternatives for how concerning library databases and other instruction can more accurately model the resources. The two library units’ instruction archival research process for undergraduate programs operate separately. students. As the academy continues to explore and create high-impact learning 3. http://archives.library.illinois.edu experiences, undergraduate research opportunities in the social sciences and the 4. http://archives.library.illinois.edu/slc/ humanities may provide the structure for archivists to move beyond primary source 5. For information about the Ethnography of orientation to a comprehensive information the University Initiative (EUI), see: http:// literacy strategy for archival literacy. www.eui.illinois.edu/

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 6. Students who used the SLC Archives as part of their research after they participated The authors wish to acknowledge the in the in-class library instruction session. Research and Publication Committee of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 7. The survey was used primarily to gauge Library, which provided support for the understanding the difference between completion of this research. library and archival research and as a tool to identify interview participants. ENDNOTES 8. University of Illinois’s first Regent 1. Undergraduate research is defined by the Milton Gregory (1867–1880). Council on Undergraduate Research as “an inquiry or investigation conducted by an REFERENCES undergraduate student that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution Allison, A. E. (2005). Connecting to the discipline.” undergraduates with primary sources: A study of undergraduate instruction in 2. All freshman are required to fulfill a archives, manuscripts, and special composition requirement as part of the collections. Unpublished manuscript, General Education curriculum. Students are School of Information and Library Science placed into a Composition 1 course based of the University of North Carolina at on their ACT scores, major, and Chapel Hill. Retrieved from Carolina international status. Twenty per cent test Digital Repository: https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/ out of the requirement; others take an ESL, communications, or rhetoric class. In fall Association for College and Research 2009, the Undergraduate Rhetoric Program Libraries. (2000). Information literacy developed an e-textbook, which includes competency standards for higher education. primary source and secondary source units. Retrieved May 8, 2013, from http:// Although only new instructors are required www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ to use the e-text curriculum, almost all informationliteracycompetency section instructors choose to use it. The Archives provides instruction concerning Association for College and Research the use of primary sources and the Libraries Instruction Section. (2012). 112 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

Information literacy in the disciplines. Seiden & S. Taraba (Eds.). Past or portal? Retrieved May 8, 2013, from http:// Enhancing undergraduate learning through wikis.ala.org/acrl/index.php/ special collections and archives (pp. 195– Information_literacy_in_the_disciplines 199). Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries. Bahde, A., & Smedberg, H. (2012). Measuring the magic: Assessment in the Krause, M. G. (2010a). Undergraduates in special collections and archives the archives: Using an assessment rubric to classroom. RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, measure learning. The American Archivist, Manuscripts, & Cultural Heritage, 73(2), 507–534. 13(2), 152–174. Krause, M. G. (2010b). Undergraduate Baudot, L., & Hyman, W. (2012). Building research and academic archives: a book studies program at a liberal arts Instruction, learning and assessment. college. In E. Mitchell, P. Seiden & S. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Taraba (Eds.), Past or portal? Enhancing Michigan, 2010). Retrieved from Proquest undergraduate learning through special Digital Dissertations (276426375). collections and archives (pp. 206–211). Chicago: Association of College and Krause, M. G. (2010c). It makes history Research Libraries. alive for them: The role of archivists and special collections librarians in instructing Berger, S., Meltzer, E., & Jones, L. (2012). undergraduates. Journal of Academic ‘The links in the chain’: Connecting Librarianship, 36(5), 401–411. undergraduates with primary source materials at the University of California. In Mazak, J. & Manista, F. (1999). E. Mitchell, P. Seiden & S. Taraba (Eds.), Collaborative learning: University archives Past or portal? Enhancing undergraduate and freshman composition. Reference learning through special collections and Librarian, 67–68, 225–242. archives (pp. 212–218). Chicago: Association of College and Research Mazella, D., & Grob, J. (2011). Libraries. Collaborations between fatuity and special collections librarians in inquiry-driven Carini, P. (2009). Archivists as educators: classes. Portal: Libraries & the Academy, Integrating primary sources into the 11(1), 467–487. curriculum. Journal of Archival Organization, 7(1), 41–50. McCoy, M. (2010). The manuscript as doi:10.1080/15332740902892619 question: Teaching primary sources in the archives—the China missions project. Duff, W. M., & Cherry, J. M. (2008). College & Research Libraries, 71(1), 49– Archival orientation for undergraduate 62. students: An exploratory study of impact. The American Archivist, 71(2), 499–529. Mitchell, E., Seiden, P., & Taraba, S. (Eds.). (2012). Past or portal? Enhancing Horowitz, S. M., & Nelson, J. L. (2012). undergraduate learning through special Faculty buy-in: Encouraging student use collections and archives. Chicago: through faculty stipends. In E. Mitchell, P. Association of College and Research

113 Hensley, Murphy & Swain, Analyzing Archival Intelligence Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014

Libraries. for archival researcher education. OCLC Systems & Services, 20(2), 61–64. Robyns, M. C. (2001). The archivist as doi:10.1108/10650750410539059 educator: Integrating critical thinking skills into historical research methods instruction. Yakel, E., & Torres, D. A. (2003). AI: The American Archivist, 64(2), 363–384. Archival intelligence and user expertise. The American Archivist, 66(1), 51–78. Schmiesing, A. & Hollis, D. R. (2002). The role of special collections departments in APPENDIX humanities undergraduate and graduate teaching: A case study. Portal: Libraries & Interview Questions the Academy, 2(3), 465–480. 1. Can you describe your instructional Stripling, B. (Summer 2009). Teaching experience from the class session at the inquiry with primary sources. TPS Journal,2 Student Life and Culture Archives? (3): 2–4. 2. Is there anything that you still find Sutton, S. & Knight, L. (2006). confusing about doing research in archives? PERSPECTIVES ON…Beyond the reading room: Integrating primary and secondary 3. Please describe how you understand the sources in the library classroom. Journal of archives to be organized. Academic Librarianship, 32(3), 320–325. 4. Please describe your process of finding Swain, E. D. (2012). Making it personal: documents in the archives and how you Engaging students with their university. In E. Mitchell, P. Seiden & S. Taraba (Eds.), used them in your research. Past or portal? Enhancing undergraduate 5. What criteria did you use to evaluate the learning through special collections and archives (pp. 151–155). Chicago: documents you found in the archives? Association of College and Research 6. What was the most interesting document Libraries. you encountered in the archives? What did University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. you find interesting about this item and did (2006). Primary Source VILLAGE. you include it in your final research paper? Retrieved May 8, 2013, from http:// www.library.illinois.edu/village/ 7. How was using the archives different primarysource/. from work in other courses you have taken, or from conducting research in a library? Wosh, P. J., Bunde, J., Murphy, K., & Blacker, C. (2007). University archives and 8. Could you see yourself returning to the educational partnerships: Three archives for another course or assignment in perspectives. Archival Issues, 31(1), 83– the future? 103.

Yakel, E. (2004). Information literacy for primary sources: Creating a new paradigm

114