Graduate Studies Reports Access

Graduate Course Proposal Form Submission Detail - LIS6026
Tracking Number - 2593

Edit function not enabled for this course.

Current Status: Approved by SCNS - 2014-11-01
Campus: Tampa
Submission Type: New
Course Change Information (for course changes only):
Comments: Elective for LIS. Approved 5/2/14. to SCNS. LIS 6480 appd as LIS 6026 eff 11/1/14

Detail Information

  1. Date & Time Submitted: 2011-08-12
  2. Department: Library and Information Science
  3. College: AS
  4. Budget Account Number:
  5. Contact Person: Jinfang Niu
  6. Phone: 8139746837
  7. Email:
  8. Prefix: LIS
  9. Number: 6026
  10. Full Title: Introduction to Archives and Records Management
  11. Credit Hours: 3
  12. Section Type: C - Class Lecture (Primarily)
  13. Is the course title variable?: N
  14. Is a permit required for registration?: N
  15. Are the credit hours variable?: N
  16. Is this course repeatable?:
  17. If repeatable, how many times?: 0
  18. Abbreviated Title (30 characters maximum): Archives Management
  19. Course Online?: O - Online (100% online)
  20. Percentage Online: 0
  21. Grading Option: R - Regular
  22. Prerequisites: LIS 6711
  23. Corequisites: N/A
  24. Course Description: This introductory course teaches students the basic theories and methodologies of archives and records management. It serves as a foundation for other more advanced archival management courses, such as Web Archiving and Digital Curation.

  25. Please briefly explain why it is necessary and/or desirable to add this course: Needed for new program/concentration/certificate
  26. What is the need or demand for this course? (Indicate if this course is part of a required sequence in the major.) What other programs would this course service? The School of Information is planning an Archives and Records Management concentration. This is the foundation course for this concentration.
  27. Has this course been offered as Selected Topics/Experimental Topics course? If yes, how many times? Yes, 3 or more times
  28. What qualifications for training and/or experience are necessary to teach this course? (List minimum qualifications for the instructor.) The course requires either of following two types of qualifications to teach:

    1. a PhD degree in library and information science.

    2. a master degree in library and information science and at least 3 years work experiences on archives management.

  29. Objectives: Students will learn the basics of archives and records management and become prepared to taken more advanced archives management classes.
  30. Learning Outcomes: In this course, the students will learn:

     The history and current status of archives and records management discipline and profession

     How to create a records management program for an organization

     How to inventory, classify and schedule records

     How to appraise and identify records with permanent value

     How to arrange and describe archival records

     Become familiar with the major recordkeeping laws and archival ethical principles.

  31. Major Topics: records inventory, classification, scheduling, disposition, archival appraisal, arrangement, description, preservation
  32. Textbooks: Read-Smith, Judith, & Ginn, Mary Lea. (2011). Records management. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. ISBN: 0538731419 (pbk.) 9780538731416 (pbk.)

    Roe, Kathleen. (2006). Arranging & describing archives & manuscripts. Chicago: The Society of American Archivists. ASIN: B005E9Y2J2

    Yakel, Elizabeth. (1994). Starting an archives. Chicago: The Society of American Archivists. ISBN 978-0-8108-2864-3.

  33. Course Readings, Online Resources, and Other Purchases: WEEK 1 (August 24): Introduction


    Read & Ginn (2011). Chapter 1, 2, 6.

    Madsen, Siân. (2008). The Evolution of Recordkeeping at the Hudson’s Bay Company. Archivaria, 66(25), 25-56. Retrieved January 27, 2012, from

    WEEK 2 (Aug. 31): Paper records filing procedures and storage equipment


    Read & Ginn (2011). Chapter 3, 4.

    Mitchell, T. (Ed.) (1975). Records Disposal. In Norton on Archives: The Writings of Margaret Cross Norton on Archival and Records Management (pp. 231-265). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Government Of The Northwest Territories. (2005). Administrative Records Classification System (Records Retention and Disposition Schedule 1995-32). Retrieved from

    WEEK 3 (Sep. 7): Paper Records inventorying, scheduling and disposition


    Read & Ginn (2011). Chapter 8, 9, 10.

    National Archives. (2000). Disposition of federal records: A records management handbook. Retrieved from

    National Archives of Australia. (2003). Overview of classification tools for records management. Retrieved from

    National Archives and Records Administration. (2004). Strategic directions: flexible scheduling. Retrieved from Accessed November 30, 2011

    Yeo, Geoffrey. (2011). Rising to the level of a record? Some thoughts on records and documents. Records Management Journal, 21(1), 8 - 27. doi : 10.1108/09565691111125071

    WEEK 4 (Sep. 14): Archives Management Overview and appraisal part 1


    Yakel (1994). Starting an Archives. Chapter 1, 2, 3, 4.

    Cook, T. (1997). What is Past is Prologue: A History of Archival Ideas Since 1898, and the Future Paradigm Shift. Archivaria, 43, 17-63. Retrieved from

    Schellenberg, T. R. (1999). The Appraisal of Modern Records. Bulletins of the National Archives, 8. Retrieved from

    Steinwall, Susan D. (1986). Appraisal and the FBI files case: For whom do archivists retain records?.American Archivist, 49(1). Retrieved from

    Kolish, E. (1994). Sampling Methodology and its Application: An Illustration of the Tension Between Theory and Practice. Archivaria, 38, 61-73.

    Kepley, David (Summer 1984). "Sampling in Archives: A Review," American Archivist 47, 237-242.

    WEEK 5 (Sep. 21): Appraisal part 2


    Cook, Terry. (1991). Many are called but few are chosen: Appraisal guidelines for sampling and selecting case files, Archivaria 32.

    Cook, Terry. (1992). Mind over matter: Towards a new theory of archival appraisal. In Barbara L. Craig (Ed.), The Archival Imagination: Essays in Honour of Hugh A. Taylor (pp. 38-70). Ottawa: Association of Canadian Archivists,

    Libraries and Archives Canada & Cook Terry. (2000). Appraisal methodology:Macro-appraisal and functional analysis. Part B: Guidelines for performing an archival appraisal on government records. Retrieved from

    Bailey, C. (1997). From the Top Down: The Practice of Macro-Appraisal. Archivaria, 1(43). Retrieved January 30, 2012, from

    Beaven, Brian P. N. (Fall 1999). Macro-Appraisal: From Theory to Practice. Archivaria 48. Retrieved from

    Hyry, T., Kaplan, D., &Weideman, C. (2002). Though this be madness, yet there is method in ‘t’’’: Assessing the value of faculty papers and defining a collecting policy. American Archivist, 65 (Spring/Summer), 56–69.

    Booms, H., Joldersma, H., & Klumpenhouwer, R. (1987). Society and the Formation of a Documentary Heritage: Issues in the Appraisal of Archival Sources. Archivaria, 1(24). Retrieved January 30, 2012 from

    UK National Archives. (n.d). The appraisal toolkit. Retrieved from

    Stapleton, Richard. (Winter 1983-1984). Jenkinson and Schellenberg: A comparison. Archivaria 17, 75-85.

    WEEK 6 (Sep. 28): Appraisal part 3


    Marshall J. (2006). Accounting for disposition: a comparative case study of appraisal documentation at the National Archives And Records Administration in the United States, Library And Archives Canada, and the National Archives Of Australia. PhD Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh. pp. 18-38; Chapter IV, V and VI.

    Robyns, Marcus C. & Woolman, Jason. (Spring/Summer 2011). Institutional functional analysis at Northern Michigan University: A new process of appraisal and arrangement of archival records. American Archivist 74(1) Retrieved from

    Green, Mark A. & Todd, J. Daniels-Howell. (1997). Documentation with an attitude: a pragmatist guide to the selection and acquisition of modern business records. In James O'Toole (Ed.), The Records of American business. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.

    Greene, Mark. (1998). "The Surest Proof:" A Utilitarian Approach to Appraisal. Archivaria, 1(45). Retrieved January 30, 2012, from

    ISO/TR 26122:2008: Information and documentation -- Work process analysis for records

    WEEK 7 (Oct. 5): Acquisition and the MPLP model


    Yakel (1994). Chapter 5.

    Greene, Mark A (Spring/Summer 2010). MPLP: It's not just for processing anymore. American Archivist, 73(1). Retrieved from

    Weideman, Christine (Fall-Winter 2006). Accessioning as processing. American Archivist 69( 2). Retrieved from

    Ericson, T.L. (1997). To approximate June Pasture: The documentation strategy in the real world. Archival Issues 22(1), 5–20.

    Boles, Frank. (1994). Just a bunch of bigots: a case study in the acquisition of controversial materials. Archival issues,19(1).

    Millar, Laura. (Fall 1998). Discharging our debt: The evolution of the total archives concept in English Canada. Archivaria 46. Retrieved from

    Week 8: Arrangement and Description Part 1


    Yakel (1994). Chapter 6.

    Roe. Arranging & Describing Archives & Manuscripts. (2006). Chapter 1- 2.

    Holmes, Oliver W. (1964). Archival Arrangement -- Five different operations at five different levels. Retrieved from

    Schellenberg, Theodore R. (January 1961). Archival Principles of Arrangement. The American Archivist 24, 11-24.

    Bartlett, N. (1991). Respect des fonds: The origins of the modern archival principle of provenance. Primary Sources & Original Works, 1(1/2), 107-115.

    Holmes, Donna. (2006). Passive keepers or active shapers: a comparative case study of four archival practitioners at the end of the nineteenth century. Arch Sci, 6, 285–298

    Desnovers, Megan Floyd. (1982). When is a Collection Processed?. The Midwestern Archivist 7(1). Retrieved from

    Week 9: Arrangement and Description Part 2


    Roe. Arranging & Describing Archives & Manuscripts. (2006). Chapter 3-4.

    SAA. (2004). Describing Archives: a Content Standard. pp. v-xxi, 3-11, Chapter 11.

    Pitti, Daniel V. (1999). Encoded Archival Description: An Introduction and Overview. D-Lib Magazine.

    Fox, Michael J. (2000). EAD cookbook. Retrieved from

    Riley, Jenn & Shepherd, Kelcy. (Spring/Summer 2009). A Brave new world: Archivists and shareable descriptive metadata. American Archivist 72(1). Retrieved from

    Yeo, Geoffrey. (2010). Debates about description. In Terry Eastwood and Heather MacNeil (Eds.), Currents of Archival Thinking, pp. 89-114. Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited.

    Cunningham, Adrian. (2007). Harnessing the power of provenance in archival description: An australian perspective on the development of the second edition of ISAAR(CPF). Journal of Archival Organization, 5(1/2), 15-31.

    Week 10: Arrangement and Description Part 3


    Meehan, Jennifer. (Fall 2010). Rethinking original order and personal records. Archivaria, 70, 27-44.

    MacNeil, Heather. (Fall 2008). Archivalterity: Rethinking original order. Archivaria, 66, 1-24.

    Yakel, Elizabeth. (2003). Archival representation. Archival Science, 3,1-25.

    Bearman, D.A., & Lytle, R.H. (1985). The power of the principle of provenance. Archivaria, 21, 14-27. Retrieved from

    Sweeney, Shelley. (2008). The ambiguous origins of the archival principle of ‘provenance’. Libraries & the Cultural Record 43(2),193-213.

    Scott, Peter. (October 1966). The record group concept: A case for abandonment. The American Archivist 29(4),493-504.

    Smith, Clive. (Fall 1995). The Australian series system. Archivaria 40, 86-93.

    Hyrax, Tom & Light, Michelle. (2002). Colophons and annotations: New directions for the finding aid. American archivist 65(2).

    Yakel, Beth and Reynolds, Polly. (June 2006). The next generation finding aid..." In Case study from New Skills for a Digital Era workshop, pp. 87-94. Retrieved from

    Duranti, Luciana. (1997). The archival bond. Archives and Museum Informatics 11, 213–218.

    WEEK 11 (Nov. 2): Access and References


    Yakel (1994). Chapter 7.

    Pugh, Mary Jo. (Winter 1982). The Illusion of omniscience: Subject access and the reference archivist. The American Archivist 45(1), 33-44.

    Rockenbach, Barbara. (Spring/Summer 2011). Archives, undergraduates, and inquiry-based learning: Case studies from Yale University Library. American Archivist 74(1), 297-311. Retrieved from

    Yaco, Sonia. (Fall/ Winter 2010). Balancing privacy and access in school desegregation collections: A case study. American Archivist7 3, 637–668. Retrieved from

    Daniels, Morgan G. & Yakel, Elizabeth. (Fall/Winter 2010). Seek and you may find: Successful search in online finding aid systems. American Archivist 73(2), 535-568. Retrieved from

    WEEK 12 (Nov. 9): Preservation and Conservation


    Yakel (1994). Chapter 9.

    NARA. (n.d.). Preservation programs at the National Archives. Retrieved from

    NARA. (n.d.). Holdings maintenance. Retrieved from

    NARA. (n.d.). Storage. Retrieved from

    NARA. (n.d.). Emergency preparedness. Retrieved from

    NARA. (n.d.). Conservation. Retrieved from

    Required Videos:

    • Slow fire on the preservation of the human records

    • NDIIPP Briefing: A Public Interest in Private Records (about business records).

  34. Student Expectations/Requirements and Grading Policy: Students are expected to read all the required readings, attend all online lectures and turn in all assignments on time. There are seven assignments plus a final presentation. Below is the grade distribution of all the assignments:

    assignment 1: 15%

    assignment 2: 15%

    assignment 3: 15%

    assignment 4: 15%

    assignment 5: 15%

    assignment 6: 15%

    final presentation: 10%

  35. Assignments, Exams and Tests: This course covers records inventory, classification, scheduling, disposition, archival appraisal, arrangement, description and preservation. There will be 14 online meetings. During the first 11 online meetings, the instructor will lecture for 90 minutes. During the last three online meetings, students will present their assignments to the class.
  36. Attendance Policy: Course Attendance at First Class Meeting – Policy for Graduate Students: For structured courses, 6000 and above, the College/Campus Dean will set the first-day class attendance requirement. Check with the College for specific information. This policy is not applicable to courses in the following categories: Educational Outreach, Open University (TV), FEEDS Program, Community Experiential Learning (CEL), Cooperative Education Training, and courses that do not have regularly scheduled meeting days/times (such as, directed reading/research or study, individual research, thesis, dissertation, internship, practica, etc.). Students are responsible for dropping undesired courses in these categories by the 5th day of classes to avoid fee liability and academic penalty. (See USF Regulation – Registration - 4.0101,

    Attendance Policy for the Observance of Religious Days by Students: In accordance with Sections 1006.53 and 1001.74(10)(g) Florida Statutes and Board of Governors Regulation 6C-6.0115, the University of South Florida (University/USF) has established the following policy regarding religious observances: (

    In the event of an emergency, it may be necessary for USF to suspend normal operations. During this time, USF may opt to continue delivery of instruction through methods that include but are not limited to: Blackboard, Elluminate, Skype, and email messaging and/or an alternate schedule. It’s the responsibility of the student to monitor Blackboard site for each class for course specific communication, and the main USF, College, and department websites, emails, and MoBull messages for important general information.

  37. Policy on Make-up Work: Assignment Due Date

    To facilitate timely grading, all assignments must be submitted by the due date. A 5% grade penalty on the assignment will be deducted for each day an assignment is late. An exception can be made if the student absolutely cannot meet the deadline and notifies the instructor in advance. A grade of 0 will be recorded for the missed assignment.


    A grade of incomplete (I) will be given only for a justifiable. The student is responsible for contacting the instructor to request an incomplete and discuss requirements for completing the course.

    Academic dishonesty and plagiarism

    The University of South Florida has an account with an automated plagiarism detection service which allows instructors and students to submit student assignments to be checked for plagiarism. I reserve the right to 1) request that assignments be submitted as electronic files and 2) electronically submit assignments to SafeAssignment, or 3) ask students to submit their assignments to SafeAssignment through myUSF. Assignments are compared automatically with a database of journal articles, web articles, and previously submitted papers. The instructor receives a report showing exactly how a student’s paper was plagiarized. For more information about SafeAssignment and plagiarism, go to Click on Plagiarism Resources. For information about plagiarism in USF’s Student Handbook go to

  38. Program This Course Supports: Library science
  39. Course Concurrence Information:

- if you have questions about any of these fields, please contact or