Monday, February 22, 2016

Maine Memory Network: An Online Collaboration


The Maine Memory Network (MMN) is a collaborative online museum which “strives to help communities and schools learn about, celebrate, and share their local history.”[1] It was created by the Cultural Affairs Council of Maine, is overseen and maintained by the Maine Historical Society, and is in its second decade of successful operation.[2] The museum has elements of a top-down hierarchy, in that it was formed with a directive and vision from the Council, and elements of a bottom-up structure, in that collections are contributed to the site by  community organizations from across the state, as well as individuals.  
In the collaborative model used by the MMN, the contributing partners (CP) have autonomy: They choose which items from their collections to be uploaded to the site and they handle the scanning and cataloging of the items.[3] MMN staff performs quality checks on the material before it goes live on the site, but at the same time, recognizes local expertise and knowledge. In other words, they are checking for simple errors, not overriding the information provided by the local organization.
The museum boasts over 45,000 historical items which range from Abenaki baskets, to photographs of nineteenth century railroad workers, to letters from well-known and little-known inhabitants of Maine.[4] The site encourages interaction by its users, allowing them to comment on items, and even to identify individuals, places, and events in photographs when those are unknown by the contributor. Additionally, a page for educators, that includes lesson plans, actively fulfills their mission statement.    
As the site has grown, so has the depth of material: Many of the letters appear in their original form, and with a transcription that makes them more accessible to more people. A link from the homepage takes the user to a page entitled “Maine History Online.” From there, the user can access information by theme (“Living off the land and sea,” “Trade and Transport,” among others) or by time period. These pages contain photographs and primary source materials with scholarly historical essays that relate the particular episode in history, give context to the items, and link the state narrative to the larger national and global narratives.
The site boasts 270 contributing partners (historical societies, libraries, schools, etc) representing 159 towns (of 432) in Maine. In addition, there are 6 contributing partners out of the state, including the Boston Public Library, and the National Archives in Waltham.[5] A map showing the locations of the partners reveals the largest percentage in southern and coastal Maine, which are areas with the largest population centers. However, even in this area, not all towns are represented, which may indicate the challenges of bringing CPs on board. As much of my own family hails from the towns of Rockland, Warren, Union, and Thomaston, Maine on the south coast, I was disappointed to see very little involvement, if any, from these towns.
An article written in the early years of the MMN outlined some of the difficulties: The site has a volunteer training process in place and keeps it as simple as possible, but the challenge is that many libraries and historical societies are mainly volunteer operations, with few or no paid staff members. The upshot is that even if the process is simple, there is no one to carry out the work.[6] Again, personal experience bears this out: In my research I look for local historical societies and find, in many cases, that they are housed within the local library and are staffed by volunteers a few hours a week. Their web presence is minimal and seldom changes. Participation in the MMN might be a viable way for their collections to be preserved and accessed, but only if someone is available to do the work.
As with any new venture, there was a flurry of articles when the MMN went live on the Web in 2003, and since then, articles about the site have become more difficult to find. Although this is a natural progression (news is only news when it is new), I was concerned that the site was no longer attracting new partners and that it was becoming less dynamic. That does not appear to be the case. Although growth is slower, new organizations continue to join. In March of 2014 a historic house in Hallowell, Maine noted on its website that its staff had undergone the training provided by the MMN and would be working to upload the collections to the site.[7] The Hubbard Free Library of Hallowell is listed as a CP on the MMN website; perhaps personal connections between staff of the two organizations led to the Homestead joining or perhaps it was something else. It would behoove the MMN to investigate how and why organizations join in order to incorporate those practices into their outreach.
The MMN is considered a successful collaboration in the literature: A study carried out in 2013 by Ithaka S+R and the Association of Research Libraries on sustainability in digital collections chose the MMN as one of the 8 organizations in its final analysis, out of a field of 188.[8] While this article was not focused on collaboration, 6 of the 8 organizations chosen for the study involved collaboration between institutions. Clearly the pooling of resources between partner institutions enhances their ability to sustain their collections, and thus ensure greater access.
Local institutions, acting as partners to the MMN, also benefit from the collaboration as their collections are accessed by greater numbers of users. In at least one town, the local fire department submitted photographs to the MMN, adding to the historical knowledge of that town. How many residents would think of their fire department as a resource? Other organizations that have contributed to the MMN include the Maine Conservation Corps, Mt. Desert Island Hospital, L.L. Bean Corporate Archives, and Camp Winnebago, none of which might be commonly thought of as historical resources. The great benefit of a collaborative website, such as the MMN, is the ability to jump from one collection to another via links, or to have the collections of various organizations filtered through search terms into one place for viewing.
The MMN mission statement stresses the goal of education for the site and the active pursuit of this has also benefitted local schools as well as the site itself. Not only is the MMN a resource for teachers and students, in some cases students have become active partners by learning to scan and upload articles to the website. Some are involved in writing the descriptions and some are training older volunteers and workers in modern technology.[9] Who knows what budding historians, catalogers, and museum curators are included in the ranks of these high school students? Exposing students to the collaborative environment has the potential to guide them into previously unknown careers.
The MMN has now been operating for over 12 years and continues to be an important resource for Maine history. The challenge, as I see it, is to keep the site dynamic and growing in order to continue to attract new users and retain current users. If, each time the site is accessed, the material is the same, it will lose its appeal. In order for this to occur, outreach must be a priority for the MMN. They must continue to find creative ways to help local organizations find the staff to participate and become CPs, such as using high school students. Towns that are homes to colleges and universities can partner with local historical societies and libraries to offer internships to students. One solution might be to create a page on the MMN website where organizations can put out a call for student volunteers to assist them in digitizing and cataloging their collections. I daresay there are SLIS students who might enjoy such an opportunity over the course of a summer.  






[1] “Maine’s Statewide Digital Museum, Archive, and Educational Resource,” Maine Memory Network, https://www.mainememory.net/aboutus/index.shtml Accessed 21 February, 2016.
[2] “Project History,” Maine Memory Network, accessed 17 February, 2016, https://www.mainememory.net/aboutus/aboutus_history.shtml
[3] Ellen Dyer, “Maine Memory Network: The Challenges of Collaboration,” NEA Newsletter, vol. 30, 4, October 2003, p 22-25. http://www.newenglandarchivists.org/Resources/Documents/Newsletter/NEA_Newsletter_October2003.pdf Accessed 20 February. 2016.
[4] “Maine’s Statewide Digital Museum,” Maine Memory Network, https://www.mainememory.net/aboutus/index.shtml
[5] “Search by Contributing Partner,” Maine Memory Network, https://www.mainememory.net/search/cp/ Accessed 21 February, 2016.
[6] Ellen Dyer, “Maine Memory Network: The Challenges of Collaboration,” NEA Newsletter, vol. 30, 4, October 2003, p 22-25. http://www.newenglandarchivists.org/Resources/Documents/Newsletter/NEA_Newsletter_October2003.pdf Accessed 20 February. 2016.
[7] “Maine Memory Network Volunteer Training a Success,” Vaughn Woods & Historic Homestead, http://vaughanhomestead.org/maine-memory-network-training-march-1/ Accessed 22 February, 2016.
[8] Nancy L. Maron, Sarah Pickle, “Searching for Sustainability: Strategies from Eights Digitized Special Collections,” A report from Ithaka S+R and the Association of Research Libraries, http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/searching-for-sustainability-report-nov2013.pdf Accessed 18 February, 2016.
[9] Stephen Bromage, "The Maine Memory Network: Re-Imagining the Dynamics and Potential of Local History," Maine Policy Review 24.1, (2015) : 138 -140, http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mpr/vol24/iss1/37 Accessed 18 February, 2016.

Sunday, February 21, 2016

Madison Story Project


The Madison Story Project was a 2015 collaboration between the Madison Public Library system and the Madison Children’s Museum. Both institutions had noticed a dearth of historical firsthand accounts of childhood created while the children were still young. Most documents on the subject were written by adults reminiscing about their childhoods, rather than children who were still experiencing their childhoods. This gap created difficulties for both institutions, as it made it harder for both collections and exhibitions to give a clear picture of what it was like to be a child in past eras. To prevent this problem from plaguing future librarians, they decided to work together to elicit stories from the children in their community, facilitating the creation of new documents describing contemporary childhood in Madison from the child’s perspective. They then shared these stories with the community and archived them for the future.


The project was initiated by the Madison Children’s Museum in 2014, but when the Madison Public Library got involved in early 2015, it really took off. All documentation of the project on the web dates from after the Library got involved. The Museum had collected hundreds of stories from local children in 2014, but none of these stories were uploaded to the internet in a form that persists today. It seems that the Library was much more effective at making the results of the project accessible online and keeping them online. Brenda Baker, director of exhibits at the Museum, put it this way: "The library has a lot of expertise in digital media, we have a lot of expertise in younger kids and local culture. We felt like we had a lot of synergy with the library."


Partnering with the Library allowed the Museum to reach deeper into the community, into spaces that the Museum did not have easy access to. The library hosted events at its many branches, in local elementary and middle schools, and at community centers. At these events, they solicited stories from the youngest residents of Madison. These stories could take any number of forms: text, captioned photos, drawings, video, audio, or any other creative medium. Not only did the Project accept any kind of story, they also taught kids how to tell their stories. They held workshops where they showed kids how to create videos and visual art about their lives. 


The Library also helped the project reach new demographics. The Museum had not originally sought stories from teenagers, but the Library was able to reach out to that demographic more easily. In 2013 the Madison Public Library launched the Bubbler, a major arts program that launched several initiatives throughout the library’s branches. Its Teen Bubbler programs were very successful, and the Library was able to incorporate the Madison Story Project into them. First, they offered a two-day workshop on telling a personal narrative using stop-motion animation. Teens told stories about their current and past experiences, and created simple animations depicting them. The videos they created are pretty remarkable windows into their lives, and surprisingly stylish. The success of this workshop led the Library to host a follow-up 3-day project where teenage patrons created stop-motion animated trailers for books they’d been reading.


The Madison Story Project’s website is very well put-together. It provides a concise description of the project, along with a toolkit containing ideas and tutorials to help children get started with storytelling. The site also provides a means of sharing these stories: it links to a set of social media accounts set up for the project, along with the hashtag #madisonstoryproject. 


Unfortunately, their language regarding sharing the stories is rather confusing. At the bottom of the Toolkit page it says “Ready to go? Submit your story here” and links to the Share page. The Share page, however, does not describe a submission process or use the word “submit” at all. Instead it instructs the viewer to put their story up on “your favorite social media site” using their hashtag. They claim that “we’ll approve it for upload as soon as we’ve had a chance to view it.” There’s no explanation of what they mean by “upload,” and I can only assume they mean they’ll add it to their archive of stories. They should make this clearer, especially since they’re working with material that is made by children and may contain private, identifying information about those children. Additionally, the act of posting a story on social media with their hashtag does not at all guarantee that the Project members will actually see it. Not every social media service uses hashtags, and not all of the ones that do allow one to easily see all posts associated with a hashtag. Even some of the social media sites they specifically name do not operate this way. YouTube barely uses hashtags, and any story posted on a Facebook account with regular privacy settings would not be visible to the Project organizers. They should have put a lot more thought into their instructions here, and they probably missed out on a lot of stories because of this.


In May 2015, the Madison Story Project hosted a major event called “A Day in a Kid’s Life”. This event generated a huge amount of social media posts and online content. However, even days after that event, all social media activity relating to the Madison Story Project completely ceased. There are no uses of its hashtag on Twitter since May 22, 2015 and the Facebook page for the project hasn’t been updated since a November 6, 2015 post announcing an exhibit about the project at the Madison Children’s Museum. It seems that the majority of the Project’s stories were generated and collected at in-person events, rather than online. This lack of internet submissions is likely linked to the failure of the website to properly explain the submission process. The scarcity of official updates from project organizers can probably be attributed to a lack of time for such matters when librarians in both institutions have so many other duties to carry out day-to-day.


It seems to me that the Madison Story Project absolutely benefited from institutional collaboration. Without the Museum the project would have never began and would have a less stable venue for preservation and display. Without the Library, the project would have received far fewer stories and reached far fewer children and likely no teens at all. The Library was also essential in getting the website running, even if it had issues with submissions. For me, the main takeaway here is that the Library’s deep ties to the community and far reach allowed the Museum to carry out a larger scale community-based project outside of its own walls. Though the project had its issues, I would call it a success.

The Florence Nightingale Digitization Project

ALS to John Croft, 1900/05/31, "FN makes plans to see Croft and expresses joy at the "news that the war is over."
The Florence Nightingale Digitization Project (2014) is an international digital collaborative of digitized written correspondence by Florence Nightingale. Known for leading the first team of British female nurses sent to the Crimea war and establishing nursing as a viable profession for women, Nightingale’s life events are documented through her correspondence addressing various subjects from concerns such as the Crimean war, reforming nursing practice, Indian sanitation and the use of medical statistics, to personal and family matters.[1] Through collaboration between the Florence Nightingale Museum in London, England, the Boston University Howard Gotlieb Archival Research Center, the Royal College of Nursing, and the Wellcome Library (University College London), the project permitted the accessibility to a collection across institutions and the Atlantic Ocean, with other institutions still encouraged to collaborate. Currently, the database contains over 2,000 digitized letters and is freely accessible to the public through a web portal hosted by Boston University, which links to the partners' websites.[2]

The digitization project successfully serves as a resource for students, scholars, researchers, nurses, and those fascinated with Florence Nightingale. The project operates through Boston University’s custom-made open-source technical infrastructure coined Archive Manager, a web-based “content management system which allows archivists to enter descriptive metadata during the cataloguing process, manage digital objects, and create online searchable finding aids.”[3] Archive Manager enables connectivity through substantial Library of Congress authority files and standardized subject terms. Searching the database, researchers are offered “suggested subject terms,” but can also search by personal entities, corporate entities, subjects, collections, language, or keyword searching. The database is interactive with zoom, slideshow, and thumbnail capabilities, paired with appropriate metadata. The website is functional with working links to the involved constituents’ digitized materials, making the database highly recommended across various institutes of scholarship and research. Found in library guides and listed among other digitized collections of letters and diaries, the University of Washington acknowledges that “letters and diaries provide a personal angle on history,” therefore the collaborative digitization of Florence Nightingale’s letters provide a wholesome primary source collection of a historical life.[4]

The documentation of the project, featured on the website of the Florence Nightingale Museum, elaborated on the complexities and possible barriers encountered. Published documents including a draft plan and reports from April 2012 to February 2013 reveal project progress updates, issues, suggested strategies, and decisions.[5] The draft plan addressed project preparation for digitization suggesting the following: a basic option with scanned images, full text transcription, fully catalogued letters, a foundational option with additional functionality of authorial changes, or an enhanced option which would also include high level technical functionality and interlinking between letters and digitized collections.[6] Due to funding and feedback from contacted institutions, the basic option was selected as the foundational level. Aims of the project hoped “to form and improve relationships with current and future museum stakeholders and partners; to improve access to the letters to a wider audience; to ensure the sustainability of the project; and to provide impetus for other holders of Nightingale’s correspondence to undertake their own digitisation projects so that we may form a linked, searchable series of collections that are accessible globally.”[7]

Issues of concern were constantly addressed in various project reports. Heavily cited concerns include copyright, transcription workflow, and technical difficulties. For the letters of Florence Nightingale owned by the Florence Nightingale Museum and partially held by the London Metropolitan Archives, the museum had to seek permission from the Henry Bonham-Carter Will Trust to digitize the materials.[8] After receiving copyright permission, the project was warned that the Henry Bonham-Carter Will Trust does not hold copyright for all materials involved. However, it was advised to not continue to seek copyright permission due to the expected lack of challenges when reproducing Nightingale’s letters.
*A number of letters that were written by Nightingale but have had replies written over the same pages; since copyright in cases such as these was not clear, these letters have not been made available but will be added in the future when we have clarified the legal situation to reproduce these letters online.[9]
Transcription of the letters done prior to 2012 required updates and reformatting as transcriptions were in MS Word documents and XML, which complicated the migration into TMS (The Museum System) requiring HTML formatting. Some letters in particular also needed to be translated. Technical difficulties included issues of reformatting, an updated content management system (TMS 2012) and establish an extensive platform for contextualization that would surpass the changes of the foreseeable digital future. The project also had severe time restraints with a set end date. There was substantial risk that the project would not be sufficiently complete according to the planned time frame. In order to prevent risks, extensive training and training manuals were provided to incoming collections assistants regarding technical upkeep and addition digitization internships were offered to Museum Studies or Librarianship students.[10] Across institutional boundaries, these issues surely prompted possible setbacks; but due to the effective communication, clear documentation, quality assurance and consultation as outlined in the project plan, the Florence Nightingale Digitization Project is a successful enterprise.[11]

The Florence Nightingale Museum, the Boston University Howard Gotlieb Archival Research Center, the Royal College of Nursing, and the Wellcome Library, among other unmentioned cooperative institutions, gained a functional, extensive, digitized product of Florence Nightingale’s letters, an enduring valuable resource to scholars and researchers, a prime example of outreach, and acknowledgment of collaboration across various cultural and institutional boundaries. The digitization project appears highly successfully with functional interoperability across institutional websites featuring quality high-resolution digitized material. The project continues to be inclusive and welcomes repositories holding additional letters to contribute their materials.[12] Boston University Howard Gotlieb Archival Research Center Director, Vito Paladino, is caretaker to 300 of Nightingale’s letters, explains how “archives shouldn’t be competing, that you should pool your resources and put your subject out there the best you can.”[13] This international digital collaborative aspires to emphasize that exact concept of collaboration. Individual institutions and their repositories have a right to maintain the original physical documents, but if applicable, it is highly encouraged to unite information sources and provide access to valuable information. The project itself offers a prime example of outreach. Paladino comments on the accessibility, “How many people would be able to come here from hospitals all over the world and look at them? For me, this brings the letters into the light and makes her work and theories more accessible.”[14] Since digitization, the letters of Florence Nightingale are now fully accessible online which eliminates previous obstacles of distance between institutions.

Future possibilities for the Florence Nightingale Digitization Project are dependent on the enhancement of digital asset management and further funding. As it stands now, the site is fully functional and high quality. However, as years pass and technology improves, it is uncertain to believe that the technical infrastructure will remain operative or even accessible. It will be necessary to practice routine maintenance checks, back-up significant data, and continue collaboration between the four main institutions and other collaborating constituents.


Reflection:

Researching collaborative projects across multiple LAMs institutions proved to be slightly challenging. Many of the IMLS grants are awarded for specific requests at libraries, archives, or museums for detailed individual projects. When searching past awards on the IMLS database, a search feature of “museum-library collaboration” grants did not provide an extensive amount of examples. It was easier to discover interesting projects through an institution’s website, which is how I discovered (and remembered) the Florence Nightingale Digitization project. It seems the classic silo effect is alive and well, which I noted later within the research of this digitization project. Each institution that collaborated in digitizing the letters of Florence Nightingale has an individual perspective on spearheading the project. For example, Boston University claims to have spearheaded the project because of Archive Manager, but The Florence Nightingale Museum only acknowledges institutions in the UK on their website.

It seems that digitization projects are collaborative projects with standardized method that can cross over the institutional and cultural boundaries. But, is it simple for an institution to digitize their individual holdings and just link them to a collaborative space? Is this digitization project simply four silos placed into a bigger silo?

This project is still successful in my opinion because of the quality of the product, its outreach to users, and cross-collaboration—which mainly included the compilation of grant funding. As we progress into the future of our technologically advanced libraries, archives, and museums, digital collaborations seem to be an innovative and rewarding way of promoting our collections.



[1] http://blog.wellcomelibrary.org/2014/04/florence-nightingale-letters-available-online/
[2] http://hgar-srv3.bu.edu/web/florence-nightingale/about
[3] Ibid.
[4] http://guides.lib.uw.edu/c.php?g=341342&p=2303516
[5] http://www.florence-nightingale.co.uk/the-collection/digitisation-project.html
[6] http://www.florence-nightingale.co.uk/images/documents/digitisation_project/draft_project_plan_and_decision_summary_cover_sheet.pdf
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] http://www.florence-nightingale.co.uk/images/documents/digitisation_project/Letters_Digitisation_Project-Update_February_2013.pdf
[10] http://www.florence-nightingale.co.uk/images/documents/digitisation_project/draft_project_plan_and_decision_summary_cover_sheet.pdf
[11] Ibid.
[12] http://hgar-srv3.bu.edu/web/florence-nightingale/about
[13] http://www.bu.edu/today/2016/making-the-work-of-florence-nightingale-available/
[14] Ibid.

Freedmen's Bureau Project

The Freedmen's Bureau Project is a cultural heritage partnership with an ambitious goal and, although that goal is not yet officially met, I feel this collaboration has already succeeded enough to be included among those "completed in the last 5 years." The Freedmen's Bureau Project is a partnership among the National Archives and Records Administration, the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, the Afro­American Historical and Genealogical Society, the California African American Museum, and the non-profit organization FamilySearch.  It kicked off June 19, 2015, with an anticipated conclusion of June 19, 2016.  In one year's time, their goal is to have indexed, arbitrated, and made available online over 1.5 million handwritten records from the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, commonly known as the Freedmen's Bureau.  The records are held and preserved by NARA and "constitute the richest and most extensive documentary source available for investigating the African American experience in the post-Civil War and Reconstruction eras."[1]  The selection of the dates was intentional, as June 19, 2015, was the 150th anniversary of "Juneteenth," or Emancipation Day, the much celebrated date on which Texas announced the abolition of slavery.

The Freedmen's Bureau Records - A Bit of Background
The Freedmen's Bureau Records are widely considered a keystone in African American genealogical records.  After the Civil War, the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands (the Freedmen's Bureau) offered assistance to many thousands of former slaves and poor whites in the Southern States and District of Columbia. With nearly four million slaves suddenly liberated, many cities, towns, and areas of plantation-based economy were left in tatters. Former slaves and many whites were dislocated from their homes, faced starvation, and owned nothing more than the clothes on their backs. "The challenge of establishing a new social order, founded on freedom and racial equality, was enormous. The Bureau was established in the War Department in 1865 to undertake the relief effort and the unprecedented social reconstruction that would bring freedpeople to full citizenship. It issued food and clothing, operated hospitals and temporary camps, helped locate family members, promoted education, helped freedmen legalize marriages, provided employment, supervised labor contracts, provided legal representation, investigated racial confrontations, settled freedmen on abandoned or confiscated lands, and worked with African American soldiers and sailors and their heirs to secure back pay, bounty payments, and pensions."[1]  In short, nothing surpasses this collection of records for those searching for African American genealogical material.

Key Players
The National Archives and Records Administration, a federal agency and in their own words "our nation's record keeper", is home to the over 1.5 million original Freedmen’s Bureau records.  It began microfilming the collection in the 1970s and completed the work, after a two-stage, multi-step process, in 2006.[2]  It has provided those microfilm copies for use with the indexing project.

The non-profit organization, FamilySearch, which collects genealogical materials around the world from individuals, government agencies, and institutions, had already worked with NARA on the Freedmen's Bureau records by digitizing the nearly 2000 reels of microfilm. They host the genealogical websites www.familysearch.org (where the non-indexed images are currently browsable) and www.discoverfreedmen.org where where the indexing project is managed.

The Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, the Afro­American Historical and Genealogical Society, and the California African American Museum are both stakeholders and supporters of the project.  Each organization will offer access to the completed indexes for their own constituents when the project is completed.  While the project is underway, each has proven their commitment of making the records available to wider audiences via their own websites and media resources and, most importantly, they have helped provide the workforce by recruiting and training volunteer indexers, providing access to the files on their websites, and promoting indexing events in their regions.  For example, SNMAAHC  made an initial pledge to recruit 2,016 volunteers for the project.[3]


The project
Optical Character Recognition (OCR), while handy for reading text in PDFs, still struggles with handwritten records.  While wonderful for providing access to previously hidden materials, the digitizing of microfilm, as FamilySearch had already done with the over 1800 reels of Freedmen's Bureau records, only provides a browsing opportunity for researchers.  To quickly and pointedly search for information within even digitized handwritten materials, the records must be indexed. Entering information from historical records into an online, searchable database provides that index -- and requires diligent reading, sense-making, and transcribing of every variety of handwriting.

Grassroots volunteers had already completed the name indexes for the Virginia records in 2009.  Since that time, they have been available for searching and browsing at the FamilySearch website, familysearch.org, as the collection “Virginia, Freedmen’s Bureau Field Office Records, 1865-1872.” FamilySearch had also already indexed the Bank Records collection in 2001. However, those records only represent about 10% of the entire NARA collection and took over 10 years to index.

Success?
According to FamilySearch International, by December 2015 they had reached over 15 percent of the records were searchable online and over 440,000 records were indexed, thanks to the efforts of 10,000 volunteers.[4]  Now, only two months later, nearly 16,000 volunteers have indexed over 1 million records and over 51 percent of the entire collection has been arbitrated.[5]  They currently state that they expect to everything to be completed in time to coincide with the opening of the new Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture facility in September 2016.   Although that date is three months later than the stated Juneteenth goal, I assume that it implies that all indexing will be completed by June and that arbitration, review, and general cleaning up of that indexing will then follow, allowing the debut in September.  In my mind, the milestones they have already announced constitute success.

By combining their respective resources across the country, these agencies have recruited nearly 16,000 volunteers in eight months -- a feat in itself, but all the more remarkable in its level of active engagement.  When the program began last June FamilySearch acknowledged the grandeur of the project's goal, noting that it took 11 years to index the first 10 percent of the full collection and that they aimed to complete the final 90 percent in just one year.[6]  If their claims are true, these agencies have already earned remarkable success in this venture -- although, in comparison to the indexing of the 1940 Census (another NARA, FamilySearch, and multiple organization collaboration) it may fall somewhat short, as that project involved only a little over twice as many images but lured ten times as many volunteers and was completed in only 4 months.[7]  Still, I smell success.

That said, however, what are some of the issues that could otherwise complicate matters?  The publicity on this project keeps most of the cards hidden.  FamilySearch has been the only player issuing press releases since the initial launch.  It is my estimation that volunteer recruitment has gone relatively well, but the fact that the project is still calling for volunteers indicates that it could have been farther along by now and that there is a rush to meet deadline.  That said, red flags raise my concern regarding quality of workmanship.  Relying on volunteers can be tricky -- and relying on volunteers recruited by multiple agencies (online!) may be trickier still.  Over the years of my own genealogical research using indexed, digitized images of handwritten records I have encountered countless mistakes in transcription.  I fear that projects of expedited indexing speed and reliance upon untold numbers of volunteers may sacrifice quality over quantity and, certainly, time will tell for this project.  I only hope that time will also prove this to be a project that has learned from previous mistakes.  Having read that initial efforts to index the Lincoln Papers with crowdsourced volunteers resulted in a project that took more time to re-do (due to horrific workmanship) than it ever would have taken to do by professionals in the first place has scared me straight (for now).[8]  This project seems to have, hopefully, avoided such an issue by the concerted effort to both recruit and train volunteers through proscribed methods.  I, myself, in my research was already tempted to join the recruitment effort, but (for lack of time, as yet) have not completed the training modules required.  I believe this bodes well for the project as a whole.


[1] The Freedmen's Bureau, 1865-1872. The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. URL: http://www.archives.gov/research/african-americans/freedmens-bureau/
[2] Microfilming the Freedmen's Bureau Records. The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. URL: http://www.archives.gov/research/african-americans/freedmens-bureau/microfilm-project.html

[3] Freedmen’s Bureau Project.  Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture.  URL: http://nmaahc.si.edu/GetInvolved/FreedmensBureau
[4] Nauta, Paul G. "Milestones Reached in Freedmen’s Bureau Project." FamilySearch Blog (December 1, 2015). URL: https://familysearch.org/blog/en/milestones-reached-freedmens-bureau-project/
[5] Nauta, Paul G. " Much Anticipated Historic Freedmen’s Bureau Project Reaches Halfway Point with More Than One Million Records Transcribed and More Online Volunteers Needed to Hit Juneteenth Goal." FamilySearch Blog (February 18, 2016).  URL: https://familysearch.org/blog/en/anticipated-historic-freedmens-bureau-project-reaches-halfway-point-million-records-transcribed-online-volunteers-needed-hit-juneteenth-goal/
[6] The Freedmen's Bureau Project At-A-Glance. URL: https://edge.fscdn.org/assets/img/downloads/pdfs/freedmens_infographic-1403c48fd9fc92257c09581fa20fbecd.pdf
[7] "Genealogy Volunteers Index 1940 U.S. Census in Record Time." Morman Newsroom (September 7, 2012). URL: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/genealogy-volunteers-index-mammouth-1940-census-in-record-time
[8] Cohen, Patricia. "Scholars Recruit Public for Project." New York Times (December 27, 2010). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/28/books/28transcribe.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2