AUC Virtual Meeting, November 2019

The members of the AUC who participated either as partners in the Archon Update Project or expressed strong interest in the continuing work of the AUC met virtually on November 21, 2019. We present these notes for the benefit of all Archon users.

Archon Users Collaborative Leaders Virtual Meeting

November 21, 2019

Present: Anne Salsich, Ken Grossi, Michael McFarlin (Oberlin College); Tom Steman (St. Cloud U.); Nat Wilson (Carleton College); Cliff Hight (Kansas State U.); Scott Schwartz (U. of Illinois); Sasha Griffin (Denison U.); Matt Gorzalski (Southern Illinois U. Carbondale). Observing from Oberlin: Crystal Willer and Riza Miklowski.

Anne Salsich, Oberlin (AS) - Opened the meeting. Invited round-robin updates, starting with those who have made changes to Archon, have adopted new finding aid delivery systems, or are developing a new product.

Matt Gorzalski, Southern Illinois University Carbondale (MG) - Considered AtoM but would have needed more expertise for migration. They are in the process of moving to ArchivEra, software as a service/vended by Lucidea (who also does CuadraStar and Eloquent). ArchivEra looks/feels a lot like Archon. Highly customizable, self-explanatory, attractive. They paid Lucidea to migrate their data for them. Initial cost was around $20k for migration, customization and training.  Annual costs subscription, based on FTE user accounts. Theirs was 7K annual. Price was cut by 50%. 5-year contract. More expensive than ArchivesSpace (5K annually), but worth it. 

Nat Wilson, Carleton College (NW) - Carleton is exploring new options, but not near a decision point. They are specifically looking at CollectiveAccess and Cortex (?). CollectiveAccess is very expensive, but St. Olaf down the road is using it and there is the possibility of cost sharing. Cortex is customizable and batchable (like CollectiveAccess) and comes with the added features of full-text searching inside digital content and automated audio/video transcriptions. Cost is comparable to ArchivEra. Considered Access to Memory (AtoM), but it seemed like a lateral move even if it was more affordable. Nothing is as cheap/cost-effective as Archon. CollectiveAccess is open-source, but the software as a service option is very expensive. 

MG - Agreed with Nat re: AtoM, which is open source. They considered it, but the cost to migrate was double what Lucidea offered. About 8K for initial startup and about 40K to migrate our data for us. However, there was no annual subscription cost. We feel that ArchivEra is much better for what we get in return.

Cliff Hight, Kansas State University (CH) - They recently moved to AtoM. They did their own migration, using their own developer who customized the template from AtoM and his own scripts. It will be (if not already) on GitHub. They also host it themselves. Considers AtoM to be functional and working. It’s not horrible, but it isn’t quite as user-friendly. AtoM Foundation is a membership group that will be working to develop a version 3. AtoM is international (Canadian) so there are some pros and cons. He talked about it at SAA, and will be presenting at MAC.

Scott Schwartz, UIUC Sousa Archives (SS) - No official forward movement as an institution on a new tool. He is independently researching some changes and user needs to create an augmented prototype of something that might work for UIUC’s Sousa Archives with his own programmer. Testing options in the Cloud. Looking to build a simpler database structure for content. Focusing development to be in a language that will be well used 5 years from now to ensure longevity, but a little risky. Wants it to be built on archival standards and best practices, much like Archon. Archon as it is continues to be a viable current option. 

Sasha Griffin, Denison University (SG) - Focusing their work on finishing up inventories, which began 5 years ago for the first time in the Denison Archives. Goal is to get it all in Archon so that it can at least be migratable from a structured information source. Operating as if Archon is good and steady - will consider changing/migrating if pushed to do so. Until then, Denison Archives is focusing on other work that has taken priority.

AS - We are working on addressing unprocessed collections and writing finding aids for them. Currently, we have about 400-500 finding aids, most of them produced over the last twenty years. 

SG - Unlikely that Denison would be able/interested in investing more than $1k/year (off the cuff estimate) for something when already paying for multiple other software for Archives department.

MG - Made the case that since Archon had been so cheap for so long, now everything just costs more. He compared it to ongoing costs that are equally as pricey but are not considered to be expensive like databases and other library software. And the argument worked! Current shop has approximately 2-3 faculty/staff members.

SS - Focusing his research to fit the needs “of the nun” - folks with no IT, no money, etc. Wants to get feedback on user needs, starting with this conversation. What are the principles? What do you need? What is important? Digital content/library?

SG - Denison already pays so much money into digital asset/content management. Currently, we are using Preservica and Archive-It. The library is also using Digital Commons, contentDM, and DuraCloud, so we are good for digital content platforms. The most important thing for Denison Archives would be to have a true collection management tool with an emphasis on intuitive public access and user friendly enough for student workers (no archives experience staff) to be able to pick it up and start using it.

AS - Likes that Archon can hold URLs to link to Oberlin digital exhibits/collections. Would like a new public access interface that is not so dated and is more user friendly/intuitive, but does not want to invest money in customizing if Archon will go away soon. 

CH - Made decision from the beginning to not use Archon’s digital library feature. As time went on, digital preservation needs and options became more readily available and they ended up moving and managing content there. He would like to see an emphasis on a product linking with other tools.

SS - What about reports? Are those important?

CH - Would be nice to have reporting features that were in line with SAA standards.

SG - No need for reports. There is no pressure to produce them and there aren’t situations where she feels like she would need them.

MG - No need for reports either. They use a spreadsheet for what collections are used and their library requires them to also use Ref Tracker software library-wide.

CH - A lot of us are small shops who don’t see investing in the creation and analysis of reports to be worth their time.

Ken Grossi, Oberlin (KG) - Instruction and reference metrics seem to be the most important for the library. Has no need for reports otherwise.

SS - Aeon is used at Illinois to track how collections are used.

AS - Considered getting emails with box lists and pull requests to be very difficult and inefficient. Would rather talk to the patron in order to get a fuller understanding of what they’re looking for, not just what came up in their search.

KG - Agreed. Would prefer communication and conversation via email or in person is even better.

SG - Worth noting that while this group considers ourselves to be small shops, there are many Archon users who are even smaller. Important to recognize and remember that when considering user needs. She likes the idea of a research cart, but it doesn’t always work, so many times it’s just copied and pasted into an email request anyway.

NW - The digital library is a critical component for Carleton. Their emphasis is on more powerful search tools (filtering, sorting, etc.) and visual/digital content -- this is how folks find and access information now.

SS - In 2006, it was important to the Archon project to be able to export as EAD. Is this still needed? Do users need EAD to migrate?

NW - It’s important to have a solid standardized export option. It should be in a more powerful database structure.

CH - There is a program called Lighting the Way at Stanford. They are looking at the way archives are discovered and accessed - Will future generations be approaching archival discovery/access differently? Travel grants and stipends available, so perhaps would be good for those small shops that have limited budgets. Someone from our group might consider participating.

Tom Steman, St. Cloud State University (TS) - Wanted to jump in and add that Archon is still working there. They’re using the latest version.

SG - Have you tried to run it on PHP 7? Are you self hosting?

TS - Yes, self hosting. They had a library tech person that Nat worked with to help get it running, but that person has retired. MNPals (in Mankato) will host. 

NW - They just got theirs up and running on PHP7. They have added their Carleton customizations. So far, no problems. One potential problem has been identified, and it may be a problem for others, but they are working on a local fix customized to their college to get it to work.

SS - They have Carleton’s newest version up and running.

Meeting concluded.