A few weeks ago, I was busy filling out my Annual Faculty Evaluation for 2007. Because it runs with the calendar year, and as of December I’d only been at my current institution for five months, there were understandably some gaps. Since I’m not teaching, the areas that I needed to fill were those of “professional performance,” “scholarship and professional service,” and “individual/community service.” Instead of seeing those white spaces on the page as “failings,” however, I see them as opportunities for growth. The question that I’ve been mulling over: is the growth good for the institution or for me?
In a lot of ways those things are not mutually exclusive; however, there are some ways in which I think that those particular areas are at odds. For example: my current portfolio includes a lot of processing and supervision of processing, as well as reference work and records-related office visits. In particular, the thorough and careful processing of collections is a boon to the university and to many people: researchers, local and distant faculty members, genealogists, and others that can then use those collections. In other words, my judgment and selection of various collections for processing, when based upon a careful study of what researchers or others might find to be useful, can yield lots of good results for lots of people. Encoding the finding aids in XML/EAD and posting them to both our website and other regional and topically relevant sites makes our collections both visible and somewhat more accessible. An active plan to gather and process collections relevant to our scope and institutional mission is an essential piece of the pie, and the judicious application of that plan is important for the continued growth and prosperity of the institution.
However, there are other expectations that must be met as I travel towards tenure which force me to take time away from processing as described above. Conference attendance, sitting on various committees, publication, preservation duties, and other things all interfere with processing time. While arguably processing is the most important part of my job from the perspective of the researcher; from the perspective of the archival profession and of the best interests of the entire collection, there are many other things at play. Creating and maintaining an ideal preservation environment, an updated/current disaster plan, a viable records management plan, and a comprehensive collections management database are at the top of my wish list this year. All of these things are important to the long-term survival, access, and use of our collections– but much like Rome, will not be built in a single day or by a single person.
Incremental steps and much collaboration are characteristics of my job that can be different from those seeking tenure in a traditional manner, as a member of the teaching faculty. In a lot of ways, I’ve found that balancing the needs of the collection and the university, the needs of researchers, the obligations of the profession, and the demands of the tenure-track process is a lot like walking a tightrope while carrying the unabridged OED. What else can I say? Most days I love it.
