On behalf of the Faculty of Documentation and Translation and the Association of Archivists of Castille and Leon, Luis Hernandez Olivera welcomed the Steering Committee of the ICA Section on Archival Education and Training to the 9th International Symposium on Archival Education in Salamanca.

The theme of the Symposium was continuing education and he hoped that it would help archival educators to understand the direction world archival education was taking. There would be 40 people attending from 20 different countries.

Luis thanked all those who had been involved in the organisation of the Symposium and all those who collaborated.

Theo Thomassen began by enumerating the Steering Committee's immediate goals: support to members of the Section (and relations with members was a key area for the Committee to improve); and support to other ICA bodies. This should be done as appropriate to the priorities in the medium term plan.

The meetings in Jerusalem and Seville are very important to the Steering Committee. The Bureau would be responsible for good co-ordination and direction during this time. At Seville the Committee should summarise the prospects of archival education in the future. the key issues already observed in the course of the work of the current Steering Committee were:

• he status of the discipline: that it is not an auxiliary science of history but an autonomous discipline in the fiend of information sciences.
• The relationship between archives and records management - the two are growing closer
• The major issues for archival educators - electronic records and descriptive standards and the requirements of the ICA committees dealing with the subjects

The position of SAE within ICA was very central - that all bodies working on specific items were looking to us to help implement their ideas in the field of education and training. The Committee should expect to collaborate with other ICA bodies, such as the Electronic Records Committee and the Descriptive Standards Committee, but also with the International Records Management Trust.

Laura Millar from the International Records Management Trust would report to the Committee on the Management of Public Sector Records program, a project involving co-operation between the Trust, the ICA and ARMA . The Section's role was to make the declaration of co-operation embodied in the 1997 Accord concrete. The Committee had to come up with a decision and an action proposal by the end of the meetings.

It was agreed that the Committee should aim to draw some conclusions about developments in archival education to share at the Seville meeting. Ann Pederson proposed that brief mission statement be developed on the aims and substance of archival education, because it continues to be unclear in the larger context of the archives profession. It was agreed that the Committee should try to initiate a discussion which would cover the whole archives field and articulating how record-keeping serves society, the risks of not having good record-keeping, the nature of the record-keeping discipline, and what it includes in its specialities. Theo said that the Jerusalem meeting could focus on this, always remembering that the Committee cannot dictate to archival educators, but it can reflect trends.

David Gracy gave a brief report, saying that he had received occasional enquiries about the work of the Section which he had answered.

Marie-Francoise Limon said that the Section had no funds at its disposal at present because the ICA policy was not to give Sections money unless the Steering Committee submitted a budget proposal. Other than membership subs, the only other source of income the Section has is from the sale of the teaching kits. The Section had approximately $2,700 from this and an estimated $12,000 in accrued subs over the past 4 years.

Theo proposed drafting a budget proposal for the Bibliography, and that the co-ordinators of the other sub-committees could draft similar proposals. These were projects for which budget proposals could be usefully drafted. Ann proposed the various databases the Committee was developing as further budget development areas, as this would enable Committee members to give the maintenance work to service providers.

David said that his school remained committed to funding the web-site and listserve, so this is not an area where funding is necessary.

Margaret Crockett reported that the membership stood at 60 category C members and 47 Category D members, which was an increase of 3 over the previous year.

She distributed the final draft of the leaflet and asked for last comments before distribution to Committee members and the Section members. It is available in hard copy and electronically, and would be put on the web-site. It would be translated into French and Spanish. It was agreed that the leaflet would also be sent to non-members on the Section's mailing list.

Finally Margaret commented that she communication among the Committee had improved much since the previous year. She thanked members for their efforts in this respect and expressed the hope that it would improve even more in the coming year.

See Appendix I for leaflet

Ann Pederson said that she just wanted to give a general overview of her project as she had already submitted a full written report. She is developing three electronic registers for archival research: researchers, activities and projects and writing and literature. She has managed to obtain funding for a student assistant for 6 weeks to work on her database and she urgently needs to know whether ICA has any requirements as to database standards. The Committee needs to find a solution to the problem of maintaining and updating the database that is not dependent on the good graces of the institutions of individual committee members. The Archives Authority of New South Wales and the national archives of Australia had both expressed an interest in hosting such a database. Ann said that she was hoping that all the information would be loaded by March and she would have a report for the meeting in Jerusalem.

Ann called the Committee's attention to a commercial company called InfoEd. They had a couple of databases called SMARTS and GENIUS which offered all of the information necessary for data-gathering on archival research for a subscription fee of $4000 per annum. Since they are very well established in all disciplines this open the possibility of inter-disciplinary research. Also they provide tailored information about funding agencies.

Ann was working with Carol Couture so that the SAE project and his project could be mutually complementary, and not duplicate each other's work.

Theo said that the members and archival educators address database should be linked in and Margaret should co-ordinate. David, Ann and Marie-Francoise (who had already done a great job on the membership database) would form the communications sub-committee with Margaret as co-ordinator.

Ann needed to know what the Committee thought about: the Committee not having physical control of the research database; asking for the funding for the annual subscription with a commercial enterprise; our database lodging with a larger outside institution. It was agreed that she would submit a report to the Bureau and the Bureau was given leave to make the decision by the Committee.

See Appendix II for Ann Pederson's report

Masahito Ando had submitted a written report on the Bibliography project. He had received interesting new information from Thailand but entries were generally substandard, except China. The number of publications in original languages is small, much of the material is from the West.

Silvia Schenkolowski-Kroll had also submitted a written project plan for her proposal to gather bibliography information for Europe which was approved.

Irena Mamczak-Gadkowska reported that she had sent a questionnaire to the countries in the region (Eastern and Central Europe and the former Soviet Union), especially those that were not represented in the first edition of the Bibliography. Only about 50% of universities in the region are on email. She hoped to still receive some responses, although the new post-Soviet countries do not yet have much experience in the archival education field and it was not reasonable to expect too much too soon. Irena added that she hopes to be able to present a paper in Jerusalem on the status of archival education in her region.

It was agreed that Theo would send correspondence and information he received in the Hague to the relevant Bibliography team member.

There was some discussion of how schools could be given incentives to reply to the bibliography questionnaire. It was agreed that respondees would be promised a free copy of the bibliography and that those from Eastern and Central Europe could receive a free copy of the seals teaching aid.

It was agreed that the object was to get institutions to classify their own literature. themselves. The most difficult task would be the selecting, and focusing on literature that was relevant to several countries. It was also agreed that he project should now focus on making sure the data gathered was as good as possible.

Since Feng Huiling had found so many Chinese entries, it was suggested that the Committee would welcome a proposal from Feng Huiling to produce a Chinese bibliography which would be separate from the Chinese section of the Asian Bibliography.

See Appendix III for Masahito Ando's report

See Appendix IV for Silvia Schenkolowski-Kroll's report

Theo reported that this project should be taken off the medium term plan as it was not likely to go anywhere. There are many initiatives in the European Union concerned with audio-visual materials. It was agreed to take the project off the medium term plan and that Ann, who has knowledge of the Australian distance learning audio-visual modules, would work with Theo to write a report on the various initiatives.

Torbjörn Kjölstad began by saying that the paper he would be giving at the symposium was essentially the one he was submitting for the Committee too (see Appendix IX for paper). He said that it was important to find a methodology for evaluation that would lead to a system for quality management. It is not useful to make an evaluation to establish facts, but it is a question of professional competence, which is hard to quantify. These are some of the factors that need to be examined and assessed:

• professional competence, education mode and costs and values
• specific contents
• facilities, equipment etc
• what makes up validity and consistency of education
• job market analysis as an indicator of success
• long-term analysis
• self-evaluation of staff and/or school, student evaluation, external evaluation
• how to measure reputation
• feedback leading to a cycle of improvement and new documentation

Torbjörn proposed that he present a paper at Seville which outlines the framework necessary for a good quality archival education program and argues that the framework is essential. Theo said that the report had to explain for the benefit of Section members, why the project was important. He re-iterated that it is not the role of the Committee to say whether a program was OK or not, but to provide an assessment based on our own collective understanding of the system. It was not reasonable to think there could be a standard curriculum for the whole world.

Torbjörn suggested that we start to build up a bank of case studies to support the theoretical approach. Theo agreed and suggested that there also be a group of people (on the Committee and outside the Committee) on whom Torbjörn could call for assistance if a request for evaluation came in. Torbjörn said that it would be really useful to make an analysis of some of the great schools - Marburg and UBC for example - because they are the products of specific traditions and have a great effect on other education providers. He could provide the theoretical framework. It was agreed that the project would focus on developing an evaluation framework and on meeting requests already received for evaluations, rather than actively seeking new evaluation projects.

David Gracy submitted a report on his evaluation of the Sri Lanka curriculum in the form of a letter to Theo Thomassen. It recommended that the documentation was not appropriate as a model for the archival education.

It was agreed that, since a straight geographical division (agreed at the Torun meeting) was not the best way to share the work of this project, David was going to focus on curricula and the development of archival science, whilst Torbjörn would focus on the electronic and automated aspects. Theo reminded the Committee that this was purely for convenience and they remained two sides of the same coin with close links between the two.

It was agreed that the Sri Lanka report would not be included at the Seville meeting. The Steering Committee was asked to support the project as much as they could. There would a curriculum evaluation sub-committee which would consist of Torbjörn, David and Angelika.

See Appendix V for David Gracy's letter

Ann Pederson began by mentioning the Accord of 1997 which committed the ICA to supporting the infrastructure, including educational tools, that is being developed by the International Records Management Trust in the arena of public sector records, particularly in African countries. At a meeting in Malta last November the interested parties articulated a desire to see the training modules distributed. IRMT has signed over the intellectual property rights to the ICA. They are at present primarily useful for anglophone countries, since they are in English, but they should be equally relevant to developed and developing countries.

Laura Millar, general editor of the modules, explained that the project was envisioned as a way to empower developing countries in the field of information management. The products were to be in print and disk form, with a view to making them available on the web eventually. The electronic version was in a simple wp format to make it as accessible as possible. There were also associated tools such as manuals, case studies and a professional kit on how to use the materials.

The primary audience was public sector commonwealth countries, although there had been interest from corporations in those countries and from developed countries. The materials are intended for those without resources or access to libraries. They can be used in many ways: self-study, face-to-face teaching, as resource materials. The primary use was believed to be distance learning, either by correspondence or technology.

The idea was to develop a generic set and then to go to individual universities to work with them on adapting them to suit the individual needs of countries and institutions. The Trust wants to have one co-operative project in a given region so that they can be the contact point there. They try to have someone with archival knowledge and understanding to teach and a distance learning expert so that they could work together. The Trust already has formal partnerships with Kenya, Jamaica, Ghana, Botswana etc.

There is a project underway to convert the material into French and Spanish. This is not a straight translation because the material has to take into account different archives traditions and approaches to archival education. Conversion would not go ahead until the English version was finished. The deadline for completion of the materials is June 1999.

ARMA, a signatory of the accord, has agreed to distribute the materials. They are particularly interested because they have an audience within their membership of people who are in jobs that cannot take time out to get training and education. ARMA would charge for the modules in North America, they would be free to developing countries. The money made form the materials would be used to fund the service to developing countries.

Laura said that the Trust wanted a shared vision with ICA/SAE on this project. It wanted input from the Section - specifically about the training materials, are they what is needed, do they work, how can they be expanded. It was felt that the time was long past for the Section to be involved and for the membership to be informed about these developments.

David suggested a link to the Trust's web-site from that of the Section. Laura said she would speak to Piers Cain about the web-site. Ann suggested that there be some kind of one-stop form available electronically form several web-sites for ease of ordering. David also invited the Trust to use the Section's listserve to send a message about the project and the materials.

Ann suggested that other areas where the Committee's endorsement would the use and dissemination of the modules were: building up networks; train the trainer workshops; tracking distance learning educators; short courses; distribution and receipt of materials; generation of case studies. Also any promotion of the modules would also advertise the Section and could lead to recruitment of new members.

Theo said that the Section could assist in evaluation. Torbjörn suggested that the trick would be to persuade the educational operators to adopt the material and to use them and to evaluate them. Laura said that the Section's intellectual input was important - the material should not go out into the community without the Section seeing them and having a chance to comment. Margaret said that she would provide the Trust with a list of which modules to send which Steering Committee members and address labels.

It was agreed that a smaller group consisting of Theo, Ann, Laura, Margaret and Silvia would meet later in the week to run through the Section's medium term plan and highlight the projects where the Trust and the Section could co-operate in the context of the Accord, since it was not possible for the Section to take on additional projects at this stage.

Theo said that since George McKenzie had written to him emphasising that the Steering Committee could not agree to anything with the Trust without the sanction of the ICA Executive. He would write to George asking for sanction for the following proposals:

• The Steering Committee is enthusiastic about what the Trust has done so far
• It agrees with the general outline of the resolutions of the Accord
• As a Section the Committee is happy to endorse and support the teaching materials - and the Trust should use the ICA/SAE name on the publications
• The Section will promote them in its activities, on its web-site and in its programs

See Appendix VI for copies of the MPSR Accord documentation

This project was concluded with the symposium in Salamanca. There would be a report in Seville about the symposium on continuing education and distance teaching.

Marie-Francoise reported that she had integrated the teaching aids and teaching methods projects into one project in accordance with the quasi-bureau meeting in Paris in April.

The Buildings teaching aid kit had sold out, and there were 79 copies of the one on seals left. Paola Carruci had written a report to Theo in 1995 stating that she wanted to develop a kit on audio-visual records. Marie-Francoise had written to Paola expressing her willingness to support such a project, but as there had been no response Marie-Francoise considered the project to be a non-starter. She said that she feels that her role, as the Committee's, is to evaluate rather than produce and that is why she has been concentrating on developing the Section's mailing database. It was agreed that the Committeee's role was not to produce teaching material per se.

Marie-Francoise expressed concern about the deterioration of the slides that form part of the teaching kits. Ann suggested that the slides could be scanned and digitised so that they could be mounted onto the Section's web-site. Theo proposed that we postpone a decision on disposing of the remaining kits until the Jerusalem meeting.

David said that we needed to find a way to stimulate traffic on the listserve (which now has about 250 people subscribed) as well as to gather information and communicate. He proposed that the co-ordinators of the recently constituted subcommittees use the listserve to put out reports on a regular basis. It was hoped that this would put members in a position to comment and get involved in the work of the Section. The President could also put out a regular communication. David would establish a schedule which would give copy deadlines, as well as tell contributors what the preferred format for web items was.

David proposed that discussion could be stimulated by identifying topics, such as "full-time educators versus practitioners", that might provoke debate. A member of the Section could put out a brief paper and thereafter moderate discussion until the set time limit had been reached. This was agreed to as a pilot project, to gauge response. Ann agreed to help with this project.

David also proposed that flagship presentations and course modules could be solicited to mount on the web-site. He would invite educators through the listserve to contribute such information.

Theo was concerned about the sheer volume of work in managing the listserve and the web-site. It was agreed that David should try to find collaboration partners, rather than attempt to do all the work himself.

Theo outlined recent correspondence he had had with George Nicholls on the subject of the ICA constitution and in particular the 3 issues of whether Category A members should be allowed to become members of sections; whether members should be allowed to be members of more than one section; and the constitution of the SAE generally. He said that he had responded to George's request for feedback in a hurry before the CITRA meeting, but that discussion had been postponed pending the new Secretary General's ability to focus on the matter. Theo said that the issue of the Section's structure should be put on the agenda of the Jerusalem meeting. The Section really still worked as a multi-item committee, and not as a section.

See Appendix VII for copies of the correspondence.

Silvia said that her institution would be happy to welcome the steering committee to Jerusalem in 1999. She proposed the following timetable:

• day and half-day for meetings of the bureau, Steering committee and subcommittees
• half-day meeting with students, professors and archivists
• day of sight-seeing

Silvia proposed that Masahito, Ann, David and Theo make presentations to the meeting with Israeli archivists as they represent Asian, Australian, American and European archival education traditions. The sight-seeing would be in Jerusalem with the collaboration of the Jerusalem City Archivist and there was a possibility that there would be a visit to the Dead Sea.

The dates were agreed to be November 15th to 18th. Hotel places were already reserved and the hosts could provide 3 nights accommodation. Lunch would be at the university.

Theo said that it sounded like a good, well-organised program. He was concerned because he did not think that the Netherlands was very representative of Europe. Torbjörn said that he would be happy to collaborate with Theo on the European paper.

Margaret had submitted a brief outline of how this would work, and she requested the Committee's agreement that this could go forward as an ICA/SAE supported event. Irena was to be the Course Director. The Committee agreed, and Margaret said she would be getting back to them for contributions to the content and structure.

Irena said that it would be good to ask educators in the region for comments and suggestions. She thought it would be especially valuable to begin the course with a session where everyone introduced themselves and made a short presentation on their schools and curricula. She pointed out is was a good opportunity to gather information, which the Section had been lacking - and also an opportunity to promote the Section.

See Appendix VIII for project outline

Theo began by saying that the Committee is very enthusiastic about the case studies manual, but it is not clear what the SAE role should be. Laura said that it had been Anne Thurston's project when she was on the Committee and she had delegated it to Laura as part of the MPSR project. She said that she thought the Trust would be very happy to produce and disseminate the manual as part of the professional development kit of the MPSR project. She said that the project planned to gather 30 case studies. It was agreed that the project would now be removed from the medium term plan.

Theo said that so far he had not heard much from the ICA Executive on this matter. He proposed that the Bureau and Luis should be the program committee, and this was agreed to. There would be a draft program in Jerusalem. Theo was going to discuss it with the ICA Secretary General. He thought there should be a pre-congress seminar for the Section.

Luis said that he had asked the Spanish National Archives for more comments and ideas, but had not received a reply. All the information he had was on the web-site of the Ministry of Culture and the professional reviews. He had told the Ministry that if they did not respond he would be forced to go to the ICA Executive. He hoped that the new Director General (of the Spanish Archives) would respond soon.