Preserving Oral Histories: A Glance at Best Practices

Ideally, my research would be executed within a cultural institution such as the AGO or National Gallery of Canada. Since my purpose is to aid in the development of Knowledge Management protocols for capturing and preserving tacit knowledge of art librarians and archivists using the methods of oral history, I would assume that whatever documents and interview recordings I create will housed and maintained by that institution. This subject is slightly more complex since KM practices for knowledge retention, talent acquisition and succession planning typically falls under the responsibility of Human Resources. So establishing a partnership with HR for producing, using, and maintaining the results of my research would be beneficial.

With regards to the types of records my project will generate, these would namely be in the form of a variety of documents and recordings: my prior research, observation notes, interview transcripts, interview voice/video recordings, data analysis documents and final protocols/procedures developed from the research. This is a lot of information to organize and preserve. Of course, the Library and Archives might only want the interview-related materials while HR might wish to keep only information pertinent to policy development. Regardless, the data I collect would be stored both digitally and physically. Data can begin to be coded and categorized from the point of the literature search even prior to conducting any interviews (Knight, 2002, p. 189). Using software such as f4/f5transkript or NVivo would also be valuable for the analysis and storage aspects of the project.

In North America, there is not one particular prescribed Best Practice for conducting, representing and preserving oral histories online, since there are currently many varying approaches to these practices within the field. For the interview process, the Oral History Association (OHA) outlines post-interview Best Practices for archivists. One stipulation is that any information deemed relevant for use by future users including photographs, documents and other records, should be collected. The relationship of these supplementary materials to the existing interviews should be clearly stated and made available (“Principles for Oral History and Best Practices for Oral History”). In this case then, I would ensure that all of the materials gathered for my research would be available within the institution.

With regards to the digital media component of oral history recordings, the Oral History Association stresses the importance of storing, processing, refreshing and accessing the media according to the archival standards of the chosen format. Where possible, media formats should be cross platform and non-proprietary (“Principles for Oral History”). Obsolescence must also be a considered factor when storing and preserving the chosen media. Simply because a format is popular on the market does not mean it is immune to the challenges of obsolescence and modification. We know this all too well. In addition, institutions should continue to monitor these best practices for future migration and preservation procedures. By placing large amounts of data on hard drives or in a networked environment, users will be able to batch convert media formats. Alternatively, automated format migration is also becoming increasingly more affordable when dealing with large quantities of data (Boyd, 2010). The Collaborative Digitization Program Digital Audio Working Group (CDP) highly recommends that organizations maintain multiple copies in separate locations as a fail-safe strategy for the failure or destruction of the digital media. This may include hard drives, optical disk, magnetic data tapes or cloud computing. Proactive migration to new media as it becomes available is essential for sustainability purposes. It is suggested that this migration take place at a minimum of five-year intervals (Digital Audio Best Practices: Version 2.1).

While it is great that there are endless resources on best practices for preserving, migrating, storing and hosting oral history projects, the act of preservation largely depends upon those responsible for this. A possible option might be make these oral histories available online by creating a website to host the content such as the Toronto-based projects including Harbord Village Oral History Project, General Eclectic, and [murmur] Toronto. This would involve an entirely separate preservation plan, but would be in keeping with the best practices referred to above. In my case, I might not be in a position to control the preservation of my materials within the institution, digital or otherwise. Eventually, my methods and the information I collected might also become obsolete as the knowledge ecology of the library changes. Though I do believe it would be representative of a library’s history, regardless of its initial intent for knowledge capture and succession planning.

References:

Boyd, Douglas. “Achieving The Promise Of Oral History In A Digital Age.” In The Oxford Handbook Of Oral History, n.p. Donald A. Ritchie. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195339550.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195339550-e-21.

Collaborative Digitization Program Digital Audio Working Group. Digital Audio Best Practices: Version 2.1. Minneapolis: Collaborative Digitization Program, 2006. http://sustainableheritagenetwork.org/content/digital-audio-best-practices-version-            21.

Knight, P.T. (2002). Small Scale Research: Pragmatic Inquiry in Social Science and the Caring Professions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Oral History Association. “Principles for Oral History and Best Practices for Oral History,” 2009. http://www.oralhistory.org/about/principles-and-practices/#best.