Print

Print


Thanks to those who have already responded with individual numbers.
Given my time constraints, if anyone can point me to previous survey(s)
that asked this question and have posted or published their tabulated
results, that would be very helpful.

FYI, in searching the list archives and online, I have found a few that
come close but none that specifically ask "What % of your finding aids
are currently in EAD?"  (and perhaps "What % do you anticipate will be
in EAD in 6 months?"). The recent Archivists Toolkit User Group survey
(http://www.archiviststoolkit.org/AT%20User%20Group%20SurveyResultsFD.pd
f ) asked about EAD finding aids, but not in terms of numbers or
percentages, just "most" "some" "a few" or "none" .  Beth Yakel's 2004
survey
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/34562/1/1450410149_ftp.p
df  looks at how many institutions have adopted EAD but doesn't delve
into how many FAs they actually have encoded.  Gina Minks' (U of Tulsa)
survey from 2002 (http://www.amigos.org/files/2002_blueprint.pdf) asked
what % of collections have MARC records and what % have FAs, but did not
ask what % are in EAD form.  

ARL's recent (Nov 2008) "Manuscript collections on the web" (
http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/spec307web.pdf ) surveyed ARL member
institutions and reported 80% were doing something with EAD but the
average number of manuscript collections with EAD-encoded FAs was 530,
roughly 1/3 the average number of manuscript collections that have MARC
records (1560).  By comparison, 94% have SOME kind of finding aids
online (HTML, PDF, Word, etc); the average number of collections
represented online is 830.

It appears that the % of FAs encoded in EAD across the board may be a
gap in our knowledge.  Food for thought :)
	
Thanks --

Michele

(be green - don't print this email!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michele Combs
Manuscripts Librarian
Special Collections Research Center
Syracuse University Libraries
222 Waverly Ave.
Syracuse, NY  13244
315-443-2081
[log in to unmask] 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~