I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the quality of service I offer researchers who come to use the materials in our Special Collections Department. As the Historical Manuscripts Librarian, most of the patrons I work with are from outside the university. However, more and more, undergraduates and graduate students are becoming involved in experiential projects that bring them into the department. I have begun to shift my energies and time to developing relationships with these students and their faculty.
I find as a new professional there are many benefits to working with students. Both students and archivists can learn about the collections together. The scope of a student’s project is most likely narrower than a professional scholar (or at least the paper is shorter) and thereby requires the student to consult fewer resources. Wading into collections, especially those outside of my area of expertise, is refreshing and a bit daunting. I certainly don’t want to mislead any researcher or direct them down the wrong path. While I hope that the student’s experience doing research in the collections encourages him or her to continue that kind of work in subsequent semesters, I often don’t see these students again.
I am constantly amazed when I read emails written by researchers who began using the collections ten, twenty or thirty years ago and the strong connection they feel, not only to the materials, but more interestingly, to the staff. I’ve only been in the profession for two years and I certainly know that building relationships with researchers takes time. When these relationships began several decades ago, it wasn’t uncommon for a Special Collections Department to be closed to undergraduate students. Outreach to this user group simply wouldn’t have been a part of an archivist’s portfolio.
In addition to the changing user base, the very nature of our relationships with patrons has evolved with changing technologies. We all know that researchers- near and far- want answers to their questions instantly in the age of email and chat reference. Long gone are the days when a researcher wrote us a letter and waited for a written response. Obviously, there were no alternatives to shorten the response time. Perhaps letter writing encouraged lengthier replies, whereas emails seem to encourage pith and speed. I would rather ask a researcher a series of clarifying questions over the course of a few hours, and then look for what they’ve asked for, than dive in to the research first, and perhaps incorrectly. Unlike students, professional scholars may continue researching a topic for years, thus giving an archivist more time to learn about their collections, find additional materials or further develop those collections.
I’d love to hear how other archivists are juggling their different user groups. Will these long standing relationships develop with this new generation of archivists, considering the uncertainty of the job market, the persistence of grant funded or short term positions and the natural turn over of an organization? Or is my generation of archivists better suited to developing relationships with students, who are “term limited” and will graduate in four years?