Graduate Studies Reports Access

Graduate Course Proposal Form Submission Detail - LIS6773
Tracking Number - 2594

Edit function not enabled for this course.

Current Status: Approved by SCNS - 2013-02-17
Campus: Tampa
Submission Type: New
Course Change Information (for course changes only):
Comments: GC 12/3/12. supports LIS program. Elective GC appd 12/4/12. to SYS 12/4/12. to SCNS 12/12/12. PENDING Conf of Pre-reqs (LIS6481 listed as pre-req for itself). Updtd title from Elec. Records to Digital. Curation 1/9/13. Nbr 6481 apprd as 6773 eff 3/1/13

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: 6773
  10. Full Title: Digital Curation
  11. Credit Hours: 3
  12. Section Type: C - Class Lecture (Primarily)
  13. Is the course title variable?: Y
  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): Digital Curation
  19. Course Online?: O - Online (100% online)
  20. Percentage Online: 0
  21. Grading Option: -
  22. Prerequisites: LIS6711, LIS5937
  23. Corequisites:
  24. Course Description: Covers the management of current and archival electronic records, including the creation and implementation of electronic record-keeping systems, the appraisal, processing and preservation of electronic records.

  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? This course was offered in Fall 2011. 22 master students were enrolled in this class.
  27. Has this course been offered as Selected Topics/Experimental Topics course? If yes, how many times? Yes, 1 time
  28. What qualifications for training and/or experience are necessary to teach this course? (List minimum qualifications for the instructor.) A PhD degree in archives and records management is required to teach this course.
  29. Objectives: Prepare students to meet the challenges brought by electronic records.
  30. Learning Outcomes: Through this course, students will become familiar with following knowledge and skills:

    How to inventory, classify and schedule electronic records

    How to decide the recordkeeping requirements for an organization

    How to evaluate and select recordkeeping software for an organization

    Electronic records management standards and best practices

    How to appraise, acquire, describe, and preserve electronic records

    Open Archival Information Systems, Trusted Digital repositories

    Various digital preservation strategies, XML, METS and preservation metadata

    Practical guidance and case studies of digital archiving

    Various software tools for digital curation

  31. Major Topics: Challenges brought by electronic records

    electronic record keeping system: requirements, evaluation and integration with the information infrastructure of an organization

    archival management of electronic records: appraisal, arrangement and description, preservation

  32. Textbooks: Students have weekly readings from various online resources. The weekly readings include chapters from the following book and readings from various other sources: Saffady, William. (2009). Managing electronic records. Lenexa, Kan: ARMA International. ISBN-10: 155570686X; ISBN-13: 978-1555706869. 246 pages.
  33. Course Readings, Online Resources, and Other Purchases: Week 1: Introduction

    Required Readings:

    Bantin, Philip. (2002). Electronic records management: A review of the work of a decade and a reflection of future directions. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science 71(Supplement 34), 47-81. Retrieved from (under Philip Bantin’s papers)

    ICA. (1997). Guide for managing electronic records from an archival perspective.

    Suderman, J. (2002). Defining Electronic Series: A Study. Archivaria, 1(53). Retrieved January 30, 2012, from

    Garfinkel, S. & Cox, D. (2009, February 10). Finding and Archiving the Internet Footprint. Paper presented at the First Digital Lives Research Conference: Personal Digital Archives for the 21st Century, London, England, 9-11 February 2009. Retrieved March 16, 2009 from

    WEEK 2 (August 23): The inventory, classification, scheduling and disposition of electronic records

    Required Readings:

    Saffady. (2009). Chapter 1, 4, 5

    Galloway, Patricia (2008). Big buckets or big ideas: Classification vs innovation on the Enterprise 2.0 Desktop. ARMA International Educational Foundation. Available at:

    UK National Archives. (n.d.). Guidance for an inventory of electronic record collections: A toolkit. Retrieved from

    UK National Archives. (2010). Managing Digital Records Without an Electronic Record Management System. Retrieved from

    DAVID & Boudrez, Filip. (2001). The digital recordkeeping system: inventory, information layers, and decision-making model as point of departure. Retrieved from

    WEEK 3 (Aug. 30): Electronic Recordkeeping systems

    Required Readings:

    National Archives of Australia. (2012). Designing and implementing recordkeeping systems (DIRKS) manual. Step B: analysis of business activity. Retrieved from

    Cunningham, Adrian. (Spring 2011). Good digital records don’t just “happen”: Embedding digital recordkeeping as an organic component of business processes and systems. Archivaria, 71, 21–34. Retrieved from

    Ekweozor, Ugonwa and Theodoulidis, Babis. (2004). Review of Retention Management Software Systems. Records Management Journal, 14 (2), 65-77.

    Sprehe, J. Timothy. (Nov/Dec 2004). A framework for EDMS/ERMS integration. Information Management Journal 38(6), 54-61.

    Patterson, Giovanna and Sprehe, J. Timothy. (2002). Principal challenges facing electronic records management in federal agencies today. Government Information Quarterly 19(3), 307–315.

    Boudrez, Filip. (2006). Filing and archiving e-mail. Retrieved from

    Records Management. (July 2006). Electronic records management systems versus document management systems. Records Management Bulletin (50). Retrieved from

    WEEK 4 (Sep. 20): Electronic Records Management standards and best practices

    Required Readings:

    Cornwell Management Consultants. (n.d.). Model requirements for the management of electronic records (MoReq). Retrieved from

    Duff, W.M. (1998). Harnessing the Power of Warrant. The American Archivist, 61(1), 88-105.

    Retrieved from

    Pember, Margaret. (2006). Sorting Out the Standards: What Every Records and Information Professional Should Know. Records Management Journal, 16 (1): 21-33.

    United States Department of Defense Standard. (2009). DoD 5015.02-STD. Retrieved from

    National Archives of Australia. (2008). Australian government recordkeeping metadata standard. Retrieved from

    Cumming, K. (2005). Metadata matters. In J. McLeod and C. Hare (Eds.), Managing Electronic Records, (pp.34-49). London: Facet Publishing.

    Center for Information Policy. (December 15, 2005). Best practices in electronic records management. Retrieved from

    U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. (June 2006). Recommended practice: Analysis of lessons learned for enterprise-wide ERM projects. Retrieved from

    WEEK 5 (Oct. 4): The appraisal, acquisition and custody of electronic records

    Required Readings:

    Deromedi, Nancy. (October 25, 2006). Case 1: Accessing, processing, and making available a born-digital personal records collection at the University of Michigan. Retrieved on January 27, 2012 from

    Blythe, John A. (July 2009). Digital dixie: Processing born digital materials in the Southern Historical Collection. Retrieved from

    Duranti, Luciana. (2010). Structural and formal analysis: The contribution of diplomatics to archival appraisal in the digital environment. In Jennie Hill (Ed.), The Future of Archives and Recordkeeping: A Reader, (pp.65-88). London: Facet.

    Interpares. (May 30, 2000). Appraisal of electronic records: A review of the literature in English. Retrieved from

    Atherton, Jay. (Winter 1985-1986). From life cycle to continuum: Some thoughts on the records management-archives relationship. Archivaria 21, 43-51. Retrieved from

    Upward, Frank. (1996). Structuring the records continuum. Part One, Post-custodial principles and properties.Archives and Manucscripts, 24 (2). Retrieved from

    Monks-Leeson, Emily. (Spring/Summer 2011). Archives on the internet: Representing contexts and provenance from repository to website. American Archivist, 74(1). Retrieved from

    Paquet, Lucie. (2000). Appraisal, acquisition and control of personal electronic records: from myths to reality. Archives and Manuscripts, 28(2), 71-91.

    Henry, Linda J. (Fall 1998). Schellenberg in cyberspace. American Archivist, 61, 309–27.

    Cook, Terry. (November 1994). Electronic records, paper minds: The revolution in information management and archives in the post-custodial and post-modernist era. Archives and Manuscripts, 22, 300–328.

    Miller, Michael L. (1991). Is the past prologue? Appraisal and the new technologies. In Archival Management of Electronic Records, Archives and Museum Informatics Technical Report No. 13, part II (pp. 39-40). Pittsburgh: Archives and Museum Informatics.

    Shepherd, Elizabeth & Smith, Charlotte. (April 2000). The application of ISAD(G) to the description of archival datasets. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 21(1), 55-86.

    WEEK 6 (Oct. 11): Preservation strategies

    Required Readings:

    Lavoie, B., & Dempsey, L. (2004). Thirteen ways of looking preservation. D-Lib Magazine, 10(78). Retrieved from

    Ross, S. (2007). Digital preservation, archival science and methodological foundations for digital libraries. Keynote Address at the 11th European Conference on Digital Libraries (ECDL). Retrieved from

    Knight, G. (2008, February 14). Framework for the definition of significant properties. JISC. Retrieved January 7, 2010, from

    Cook, Terry. (April 2004). Byte-ing off what you can chew: Electronic records strategies for small archival institutions. Retrieved from

    Novak, Audrey. (2006). Fixity checks: Checksums, message digests and digital signatures. Retrieved from [can create slides from this paper.]

    Green, Marlan., Soy, Sue., Gunn, Stan., & Galloway, Patricia. (September 2002). Coming to TERM: Designing the Texas e-mail repository model. D-Lib, 8(9).

    ERPANET. (2003). The long-term preservation of databases. ERPA Workshop. Retrieved from

    Elford, D., Del Pozo, N., Mihajlovic, S., Pearson, D., Clifton, G., & Webb, C. (2008). Media matters: Developing processes for preserving digital objects on physical carriers at the National Library of Australia. Presented at World Library and Information Congress: 74th annual IFLA General Conference and Council, Quebec City, Canada. Retrieved October 2, 2009 from

    WEEK 7 (Oct. 18): OAIS and digital curation

    Required Readings:

    Lavoie, B. (2004). Open archival information system: Introductory guide. Retrieved from

    CCSDS. (2002). Reference model for an open archival information system (OAIS). Retrieved from

    CCSDS. (2004). Producer-archive interface methodology abstract standard. Retrieved from

    Beedham, Hilary, et. al. (2005). Assessment of UKDA and TNA compliance with OAIS and METS standards. UK Data Archive.. Retrieved from

    Holdsworth, David & Sergeant, Derek M. (1999).'A blueprint for representation information in the OAIS model. Cedars Project. Retrieved from

    Yakel, Elizabeth. (2007). Digital curation. OCLC Systems & Services, 23(4), 335-40.

    Higgins, S. (2008). The DCC curation lifecycle model. International Journal of Digital Curation 3(1),134–140. Retrieved from

    Boudrez, Filip. (2005). Digital containers for shipment into the future. Retrieved from

    WEEK 8 (Sep. 6): Trusted Digital repository

    Required Readings:

    Research Libraries Group. (2002). Trusted digital repositories: Attributes and responsibilities. Retrieved from

    OCLC & CRL. (2007). TRAC: Trustworthy repositories audit & certification: Criteria and checklist. Retrieved from

    Schmidt, Lisa M. (Spring/Summer 2011). Preserving the H-Net email lists: A case study in trusted digital repository assessment. American Archivist, 74 (1), 257-296.

    Bak, Greg & Armstrong, Pam. (2008). Points of convergence: seamless long-term accessto digital publications and archival records at library and archives Canada. Archival Science, 8, 279–293. DOI 10.1007/s10502-009-9091-4

    WEEK 9 (Sep. 27): XML, METS and Preservation metadata

    Required Readings:

    W3 Schools. (2012). Introduction to XML. Retrieved from

    Library of Congress. (2011). METS: An overview & tutorial. Retrieved from

    Lavoie, Brian & Gartner, Richard. (September 2005). Preservation metadata. DPC Technology Watch Report, (05-01).Retrieved from

    Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office. (2009). Understanding PREMIS. Retrieved from

    OCLC & RLG. (2005). Data dictionary for preservation metadata: Final report of the PREMIS working group. Retrieved from

    WEEK 10 (Oct. 12): Practical guidance

    Required Readings:

    The PARADIGM Project. (2008). Workbook on digital private papers. Retrieved from

    Digital Preservation Coalition. (2008). Preservation management of digital materials: The handbook. Retrieved from

    International Council on Archives (2005). Electronic records: A workbook for archivists. Chapter 3 and 4. Retrieved from

    InterPARES. (2008). InterPARES 2: Experiential, Interactive and Dynamic Records

    APPENDIX 20: CREATOR GUIDELINES Making and Maintaining Digital Materials: Guidelines for Individuals. Retrieved from

    InterPARES. (2008). InterPARES 2 book. APPENDIX 21: PRESERVER GUIDELINES Preserving Digital Records: Guidelines for Organizations. Retrieved from

    WEEK 11 (Nov. 1): Case studies

    Required Readings:

    Stollar, Catherine & Kiehne, Thomas. (n.d.). Guarding the guards: Archiving the electronic records of hypertext author Michael Joyce. Retrieved from

    Pearce-Moses, Richard & Davis, Susan E. (2006). New Skills for a Digital Era: Proceedings of a Colloquium Sponsored by the National Archives and Records Administration, Society of American Archivists and Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. Appendix 2. Case studies. Page 41-122. Retrieved from

    Zhang, J. (2011). The principle of original order & the organization and representation of digital archives. Chapter 4, 5 & 6. Retrieved from

    Brett, Jeremy. (2002). A case study of the web-site appraisal process as applied to state overnment agency web sites in Wisconsin. Archival Issues, 27(2), 99-110.

    Forstrom, Michael. (Fall/Winter 2009). Managing electronic records in manuscript collections: A case study from the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library. American Archivist, 72(2). Retrieved from

    NARA. (2009). NARA’s Electronic Records Archives. Retrieved from

    McLeod, J., & Hare, C. (Eds.). (2005). Case Studies. In Managing Electronic Records (pp. 149-185).

    Bantin, Philip. (Fall 1998). Developing a strategy for managing electronic records- the findings of the Indiana University Electronic Records Project. The American Archivist, 61(1), 328-364.

    Bantin, P. (1999). The Indiana University Electronic Records Project revisited. The American Archivist, 62(1), 153-163.

    Bantin, Philip. (January 2001).The Indiana University Electronic Records Project: Lessons learned. The Information Management Journal, 35(1), 16-24. Retrieved from (under Philip Bantin’s papers)

  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 six assignments (each 15%) and a final presentation (10%)
  35. Assignments, Exams and Tests: This course covers electronic recordkeeping and the archival management of electronic records. It talks about the differences between electronic recordkeeping systems and other information systems, the requirements of an electronic recordkeeping systems, how to develop and implement an electronic recordkeeping systems, the appraisal, acquisition and description of electronic records by archival institutions.

    There will be 14 online meetings through Elluminate. During the first 11 meetings, the instructor will lecture for 90 minutes, followed by 15 minutes break and 45 minutes student discussion and exercises. During the last three online meetings, students will present their assignments.

  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 and Information Science
  39. Course Concurrence Information:

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