Archives academics

Three Thai archives educators – of only a few people teaching formally about archives in Thailand – were interviewed for this study. The subject is usually taught as a part of library science curricula. In some universities, archives are considered as a kind of resource or special collection in the library (Prudtikul). The interviews

reflected on attitudes regarding archives in Thai society and the ways archives

education is delivered. Educators in this subject in Thailand are not common;

however, their opinions are unique as they occupy an intermediate position between practitioners and users.

Attitudes towards archival awareness and education in Thailand

In the interviews with Thai educators, the situation on archives awareness and the educators’ roles to promote archives were discussed. Somsuang Prudtikul, a former educator at Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, argued that the definition of archives in Thailand for the public in general is that archives are historical and are used only by researchers. This limited definition of archives and failure to instil archives awareness in young people has led to breakdowns in the archival process such as the failures in records management and transferring records to the NAT. Her comment pointed to the failure in one main area: education. Students should learn to have historical consciousness and think critically, including understanding that

accessing archives is one way to find new knowledge. Similarly, Nenuphar Supavej, a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University, confirmed that the first thing archives educators can communicate about archival theories is to give understanding about what archives are. Therefore, to solve the problems stemming from a lack of archives awareness, which negatively affect recordkeeping, educators see that the key is education (both in general and in archival education) and that they play important roles in this. In

contrast, another educator maintains that archival use depends on information needs more than anything – so by extension, greater awareness and better education will not guarantee better recordkeeping or archival use. If people need to use archives, they have to come to the archives (Anonymous academic).

As for archival education, the Thai educators expressed views that teaching and giving academic service and training are the ways they can help to disseminate the values of archives. Supavej shared the teaching technique used in her course at Chulalongkorn University, where she starts from making students understand the value of archives (for example, watching the film National Treasure) and visiting archivists at the NAT who have high professional values in protecting archives (Supavej). Also, the final exam asks students to design an archives building plan, which requires the students to creatively use and integrate what they have learned

from the module into practice. However, Supavej’s approach is not common in Thai archival education. Prudtikul revealed that archives are usually presented as one type of material or collection in library. It is not common for the actual principles of archives and records management to be covered in Thai education (Prudtikul).

Having been a lecturer for long-distance modules, Prudtikul’s most prominent work is writing textbooks. These textbooks are considered the main Thai textbooks for

archives and records management in the situation where textbooks in this subject are rare in Thailand.

Prudtikul and Supavej’s interview responses also indicated that universally accepted records and archives management principles can sometimes be applicable to the Thai context, but they need to be communicated with the right approach. One of the ways of disseminating this knowledge on archives is through training. Prudtikul and

Supavej are both involved in training those working in organisations along with other practitioners, and they have witnessed some promising results. For example, Supavej led a workshop on records management for university staff. Then, they used their new knowledge from the workshop to implement new practices. Prudtikul gives talks to the public as well. In the interview, she also shared her experiences in guiding a young professional regarding archives.

It seems then that the traditional definition of archives is still dominant in education and that it can work harmoniously with modern principles of records and archives management. But the crucial element is having someone to talk about it. This suggests that the traditional meaning of Thai archives may need to be upheld in order for archives to retain their social relevance, but modern approaches might be inserted in ways that allow people to initiate and design things themselves. The art of connecting the old meaning to the new modern-day life is just one challenge for Thai archives educators.

Contrast with British academics

I interviewed three academics in the UK. All of them were teaching in higher education institutions. The UK universities have programs devoted specifically to

archives, and most archivists need a degree to apply for jobs. Academics thus have important roles in producing qualified personnel to work in archives.

Similar to Thailand, the British educators differentiated the awareness of archives in different groups of people. Archives educators have roles in spreading knowledge about archives in society. The ways people are involved with archives vary according to their needs, and it can be challenging to serve these different needs properly. The difficulty though is with those who have no understanding about archives at all (Shepherd).

British academics identify two main types of value in archives that people look for:

historical and evidential value. Historical value was the original value seen in archives in the nineteenth century. Attitudes on archives have developed from this use for historical purposes; archives were considered related to the concept of heritage.

However, in the twenty-first century, the trend of using archives for the human rights agenda is becoming increasingly important. Procter commented that archival use in history was considered more a luxury, while evidential value can make a stronger case for archives because it is essential, though it has not always been considered

important (Procter).

Throughout this research, the related question of how records management is valued often came up in interviews. Elizabeth Shepherd also offered the analysis that recordkeeping can become important when people are faced with difficult or bad situations (Shepherd). So the evidential value of archives that comes from the act of keeping records as evidence has this characteristic. Comparing to the Thai context, archival use in Thailand serves only the historical purpose of using archives. That would mean that the value of archives in Thailand is tied to the concept of being for luxury alone, which is even weaker under the condition in which historical

consciousness is not strong in the country. Some British academics think that

evidential value should be promoted more in their country as it can help to make the case that archives are more deserving of resource allocation (Procter). TNA itself attempted to change their work priority to correspond with where money is allocated by focusing more on the recordkeeping side of archives (Procter). This shows how archival systems are determined by what surrounds them.

As for the role of academics in promoting archives, apart from their work in education the British educators were generally of the opinion that archival theory does not help much in communicating about archives to the wider society. Archival theories are more for academics to think and talk about archives. Practitioners in the UK are said usually to not be interested in why they do things in particular ways but in how they do things (Shepherd). However, theories are still important as foundations for building practice – they just don’t have a very public role. Finally, another point Dr Shepherd suggested is that archives academics should work with other disciplines to broaden the reach and effectiveness of their activities (Shepherd).

Unlike academics in Thailand, British archives educators did not mutually point to one clear area that needs improvement. This is partly because those in the British archives sector have spent years working on improving main access tasks such as cataloguing and enabling people to search online. The academics suggested that another step of development is for the archives sector to be proactive in reaching out to people. It was noted that leadership is another point that is still lacking in the sector, and TNA has not fully taken on this role (Shepherd). Another challenge is the change to the digital age, which requires new skills from practitioners to understand the nature of digital records, from creation through to preservation. So, the need for development in TNA is on the level of building further on the important services that it has established already in order to respond to rapid changes in the society.

These significant changes, especially the ones encouraged by the digital age, affect what higher education institutions teach in ARM modules; in this way, the changing practice also affects archival education. Dr Shepherd stated that the archival field needs new skills and people with new interest in computers. Digital issues have important implications for both theory and practice. However, theory has its own place in the realm of changes. Procter said that knowledge in archival management, like the records continuum concept (which she views as a model rather than theory), has come to help the field while facing changes.

The British academics all consider that the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act is a good piece of legislation in encouraging openness and staying connected to the wider society. In contrast, the Public Records Act is seen as limited and outdated. Their opinions are similar to those expressed by Susan Healy, who expressed in her

interview that having separate archives legislation is not going to work (Healy). The same situation happens in the Thai context as well, where the Archives Act is practically unknown by non-professionals. Instead, the Official Information Act has become what the civil servants are interested in and comply with.

At the policy level, the academics were asked what challenges should inform policies on archival access and use in the future, and digital records were again the first issue on the academics’ lists. Electronic records need different management policies – for example, electronic records need to be taken care of from the creation phase onward.

The academics also pointed to the need to make the case for archives and their value and to encourage leadership in the archives sector.