Archival description captures and provides access to information about collections of historical records. The primary descriptive tools of archivists have been finding aids, which supply inventories of collections to help with discovering and using archival materials.
Archival description includes everything from repository guides to catalog cards detailing individual items. Inventories come in various formats but have become more systematic as archivists adopt standards such as MARC and EAD. They also increasingly tend to represent collections. Archives have moved away from the library practice of describing individual items to describing collections, their contents, and their context. When used with a robust archival collections management system (CMS), data standards offer archivists a powerful tool for consistent description.
The Creation of Standards
Librarians developed MARC as a descriptive tool for books in online public access catalogs (OPACs). Archivists, recognizing the possibilities and lacking an electronic descriptive standard of their own at that time, adopted MARC as a method for describing collections while maintaining finding aids as the primary descriptive tool. Archives commonly implemented MARC to gain representation in library catalogs to help with subject searching and access.
MARC has limitations for archives beyond the issues of granularity, extensibility, and technological obsolescence. One problem with MARC is that while it can manage collection-level description, it does not lend itself to the more detailed parts of archival description. It is possible in MARC to associate series level records with one another and with the collection-level record, but it can be cumbersome in practice.
Some repositories create both EAD-encoded finding aids and MARC records for uncatalogued collections. Though the archival community can question the need for continued MARC cataloging when finding aids are available online, others argue that the benefit of attracting users by including MARC records in local and union catalogs outweighed the added work involved in cataloging.
Data Standards for Finding Aids
Modern-day inventories usually have a combination of standard data elements and narrative notes. Typically, a finding aid consists of a main entry or title, dates covered in the materials, the cubic or linear feet of the collection, a biographical or historical note providing the user with background on the creating entity, a note describing the scope and contents of the collection, and a statement about arrangement. Other components may include a note on provenance, a list of series or subordinate parts (such as correspondence), descriptions of the series, and a container list detailing the contents of each box and folder.
XML-based Standards
The use of XML-based standards is an indisputable advantage for archivists. It is simple to convert from one XML DTD or schema to another, making the reuse of all or part of a finding aid easier. XML also creates an environment where it is easy to completely change the look and feel of finding aids by changing a stylesheet.
Despite archivists’ reticence to adopt standard methods for describing the materials in their care, best practices suggest the need for following standard data structures and regularizing the data put into these structures. The interoperability of XML has shown itself to help use the data created to fulfill the requirements of one standard, such as MARC, by reusing it in a new standard like EAD.
Standard Adherence
Archival repositories should capitalize on modern technologies and data standards, enabling the future needs for conversion and reuse of data that archivists have yet to foresee. The use of internationally supported data structure standards also allows archivists to benefit from others’ work by using rules, standards, and conversion tools.
Adherence to standards is necessary for complete machine-processed conversion, such as transferring data from a legacy system to an archival CMS. The consistent application of data standards makes data clean-up unnecessary or minimized. Using controlled vocabularies in establishing creator names and selecting subject headings saves time while creating EADs, for example, as archivists had already checked entries against authority files.
Standardization plays a key role in the ability to adapt to technological change. Traditionally archivists have been skeptical of using standards, in part because the unique nature of archival and manuscript materials requires a unique approach with each collection. This approach changed with the adoption of data structure and content standards. In an online environment, standards improve archival descriptions by new groups of users who may be inexperienced in archival research. The use of standards is also crucial for archival institutions to quickly respond to innovative technologies and user demands.
The blog was originally published on Lucidea's blog.
Get Started
Looking for archival advising, records management, and historical research services? Click below to speak with an expert consultant.
Well-resourced institutions have developed archival best practices, including comprehensive finding aids, climate-controlled storage, and digital preservation systems. For small or resource-constrained archives, these standards can feel out of reach. The danger is that the profession’s ideals may discourage institutions from taking action, leaving records vulnerable. The solution lies in paring down practices and procedures without abandoning principles.
Many archives exist within environments of chronic underfunding. Community archives, small historical societies, or lone arrangers may work with little more than donated materials, a handful of volunteers, and minimal budgets.
However, these institutions remain vital, safeguarding the histories of communities often absent from mainstream narratives. Scarcity shapes their reality, yet it can still allow meaningful work.
Humanity produces more digital content than at any other point in history. Every click, message, and post contributes to an expanding universe of data that represents the cultural memory of our time. At the center of this transformation stand archivists, the professionals uniquely trained to ensure that memories survive in the future. However, even as the scale of the challenge grows, their voices risk being sidelined in public conversations about digital preservation.
In recent years, the concept of “slow librarianship” has emerged as a thoughtful response to the accelerating pace and pressures placed upon library professionals. Drawing inspiration from the broader slow movement, it emphasizes care, reflection, ethics, and people-centered work over speed and efficiency.
The archival profession is characterized by dedication to public memory, cultural preservation, and service. However, beneath this noble mission lies a troubling reality: the increasing reliance on gig and contract labor.
Written documents have long occupied a privileged position in archives as the most authoritative memory source. However, this excludes vast repositories of knowledge that reside outside the written word, especially within Indigenous communities, where memory is often preserved and transmitted through oral traditions, performance, storytelling, ceremony, and embodied practices.
Archival description is often treated as a neutral or technical task: summarizing contents, assigning subject headings, and organizing metadata for retrieval. However, description is actually far from neutral. It shapes how users interpret records, which narratives are centered, and whose voices are made visible or erased.
As the archival profession reckons with the legacies of colonialism, more institutions and practitioners are turning toward Indigenous and decolonial approaches that reframe traditional archival practice. Central to this shift is recognizing cultural protocols and community-defined rules governing how knowledge is created, shared, accessed, and preserved. Cultural protocols are foundational to ethical, respectful, and reciprocal relationships between archives and Indigenous communities.
In recent decades, Indigenous communities and archivists have challenged the dominant frameworks that have long shaped archival practice. Traditionally, Western archival models have prioritized state authority, institutional control, and the presumption of neutrality. These models often fail to reflect Indigenous worldviews, community needs, or the rights of Indigenous peoples over their records and heritage.
As archival practice shifts to meet the challenges of the digital age, the ethical use of born-digital materials has become one of the most pressing concerns for archivists. These materials—emails, websites, text messages, digital photographs, spreadsheets, social media posts, and more—are created and stored digitally from their inception.
The fundamental principles of archival preservation focus on the agents of deterioration, preventive conservation, and essential preservation strategies applied in archival settings.
The monetary appraisal of archives and manuscripts is a critical yet underexplored intersection of library science and financial valuation. This article addresses the persistent knowledge gap between archival assessment and fiscal valuation and provides an overview of the monetary appraisal process in the United States. It focuses on concluding the fair market value (FMV) of noncash charitable contributions, a process governed by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). By documenting practices and terminology, the article serves as a resource for archivists navigating the complexities of donor relations and institutional stewardship. It advocates for increased fiscal literacy within the archival profession, suggesting that an integrated understanding of market dynamics and stewardship costs is essential for the care and financial substantiation of collections.
Proper archival storage is one of the most critical aspects of archival preservation. In addition to housing collections in a dedicated archival storage room, using suitable storage materials and enclosures helps protect archival collections from environmental damage, physical wear, and chemical deterioration.
One of the core challenges archivists face is determining the appropriate description level for materials in their collections. From broad collection-level overviews to granular item-level details, descriptive hierarchies play a crucial role in conveying the context and structure of archival materials.
Description is a cornerstone of archival practice, providing the means for users and archivists to understand, access, and interpret materials.
Mixed-media archives, which contain physical and digital records, present unique challenges for archival arrangement. These collections require archivists to develop strategies that address the different needs of physical and digital materials while maintaining the collection’s coherence and accessibility.
Digital records have introduced new challenges to traditional archival arrangement practices. While the principles of original order and provenance remain relevant, the nature of digital materials requires archivists to adapt these principles to new formats and technologies.
Archival arrangement organizes and structures archival materials to ensure efficient management, access, and preservation.
Redaction in archival work—obscuring or removing sensitive information from records—has become a central concern in contemporary archival ethics. As archives increasingly acquire born-digital records and digitize historical collections for online access, archivists must grapple with data privacy, access, transparency, and potential harm.
Archives have traditionally focused on preserving historical records, ensuring access, and maintaining the integrity of collections. However, in the digital age, the moral responsibilities of archivists have grown more complex.
Archives have long been viewed as bastions of memory, preservation, and historical accountability. However, archivists must confront ethical questions in an era of digital surveillance, data harvesting, and global information flows.
As archival institutions evolve from custodians of information to facilitators of memory and meaning-making, emotional engagement has become a vital, though often overlooked, dimension of archival design.
Archival reading rooms have long been the centerpiece of public access to collections. They are where researchers engage with historical documents, where discovery becomes tangible, and where the institutional identity of an archives is most visibly embodied.
Archival discovery tools, such as catalogs, finding aids, search interfaces, and digital repositories, are often the first point of contact between users and collections. These tools serve as maps and compasses, guiding users through vast and often complex holdings.
Design thinking has become a widely adopted approach in fields ranging from technology to education, prized for emphasizing empathy, experimentation, and iterative problem-solving. For archives, traditionally shaped around internal workflows and professional conventions, design thinking presents an opportunity to reimagine outreach and engagement strategies from users’ perspectives.
As the archival profession embraces a broader commitment to accessibility and equity, it must consider how design choices affect neurodivergent archives users.
Transcription is a powerful tool in the effort to make archives more accessible. It transforms handwritten, printed, and audiovisual materials into searchable, readable, and usable text, extending the reach of archival collections to users who might otherwise face barriers to access.
As archives increasingly move into the digital realm, ensuring online accessibility has become a fundamental responsibility. For users who are blind, have low vision, or experience cognitive or motor disabilities, screen readers serve as a vital gateway to digital content. These tools translate onscreen text and interface elements into synthesized speech or Braille, allowing users to navigate websites, databases, and catalogs without relying on visual cues. However, for screen readers to function effectively, digital environments must be designed with intentionality and care. In archival settings, this may be overlooked.
Archives embody the principles of access, stewardship, and service. However, for some users, physical and digital archives remain challenging to navigate, use, or even enter. Barriers to archival access are often unintentional, stemming from outdated facilities, inaccessible technologies, or limited awareness of diverse user needs.
No archives is an island. Especially in resource-constrained environments, collaboration through shared infrastructure provides a lifeline. Consortia models turn scarcity into opportunity by spreading costs and expertise across multiple archives. By pooling resources, institutions achieve more than they could alone.