CERTIFICATION IN AMERICA: THE ACA
EXAMPLE
Jim Byers, CA
THE BEGINNING
The concept of archival accreditation or certification of individuals or
institutions has been discussed within the archival community in the United
States for a number of years. In 1953, U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower
wanted to replace then Archivist of the United States Wayne C. Grover and
make the position a political appointment. Thankfully, the combined
efforts of the American Historical Association and the Society of American
Archivists (hereafter referred to as SAA) thwarted Eisenhower’s attempt to
push this position into a purely political arena. This effort fostered
considerable thought and some anxiety by a number of senior archivists about
the status and recognition of the profession within the United States.
Dolores C. Renze of the Colorado State Archives wrote to a number of senior
archival administrators suggesting that the SAA create a three tiered membership
system based upon a certification process. This process would be administered
by an “American Institute of Archivists”, created within SAA to offer examinations
each year. Membership categories would be Certified Professional Archivists,
Registered Archivists, and Associate Members. This recommendation was
not adopted as most SAA members did not want membership in SAA to be restrictive,
but there remained concerns about the recognition of archivists as professionals
and the need to establish standards for education and training.
As the SAA became more involved in education and training in the following
years, the discussion about archival certification continued. An article
written in 1977 by Frank B. Evans of the National Archives discussed archival
training following employment to maintain and enhance professional standards.
At that time, Dr. Evans commented on a very recent development within the
records management community. The newly established Institute for Certified
Records Managers had initiated a process for “professional certification”.
In 1977, there were two avenues to certification: the first was certification
by petition where a Board of Regents reviewed an applicant’s education and
experience, and the second was offering an examination to those who met specified
experience and education requirements. The first option was only for
a transitory period and expired in July, 1977. Later in his article,
Dr. Evans went on to suggest that “Should the certification-by-examination
program of our records management colleagues also prove successful, elements
of that program could very well be incorporated into the Society’s [Society
of American Archivists] program.” Certification was also discussed
at SAA conferences. The SAA, through its Committee on Education and Professional
Development (hereafter referred to as CEPD), considered accreditation of
educational programs and/or certification of individuals in the 1970’s, but
retreated from these proposals in 1981 due to a “negative climate” toward
them as well as potential cost concerns and possible litigation.
The subject did not go away. Continuing concerns about standards and
the quality of archival education, the fact that accreditation of educational
programs or institutions was not pursued, and the archivist’s self image
as a professional brought the certification issue forward again.
In the May, 1984 meeting of the SAA Council, the CEPD was asked to report
in the Spring, 1985 on individual certification for archivists.
An initial plan was put together and a SAA membership poll taken. The
results were inconclusive, with a slightly larger number (43.9% in favor
and 42.1% opposed from 941 responses) approving. At its winter meeting
(30 January-1 February, 1987) the SAA Council had a long discussion over
certification, with Francis X. Blouin and Trudy Huskamp Peterson discussing
the proposed plan, organizational structure and operation of the proposed
“Academy of Certified Archivists.” After discussion, the Council passed,
by a vote of 8-2, a resolution establishing an Interim Board for Certification.
This board would implement a program for the certification of archivists.
In implementing these plans, the Board was guided by the Council resolution
passed in May, 1984 and the revised certification plan published in the August
1986 SAA Newsletter, and as amended by Council on the basis of the Council
subcommittee report on certification of 23 January 1987. The Interim
Board submitted a budget and a detailed plan in December 1987 for Council’s
approval.
The Interim Board submitted its report and the Chair, Edie Hedlin, met with
the SAA council at its meeting on 26-27 February 1988. After discussion
and several changes, Council established a timetable with the 1988 SAA annual
meeting as the beginning of the petition process for certification (which
would last 12 months), and the 1989 SAA annual meeting as the beginning of
the examination process for certification.
The certification by petition process began on schedule. It was a success,
as incoming SAA President John Fleckner pointed out in his remarks at the
closing luncheon of the annual SAA conference in St. Louis, October 29, 1989.
He commented that “The headline story in the [American] archival profession
in 1988 is, of course, the overwhelming response to SAA’s new certification
program. Most immediately, the application by nearly 800 archivists
for certification by petition has assured the financial health of the certification
process”. This level of support was also a financial relief to the
SAA, who provided both organizational and monetary support for the new Academy
of Certified Archivists. SAA was paid back in full for their fiscal
expenditure.
These efforts by the SAA Council, the CEPD, and the Interim Board for Certification
brought about the Academy of Certified Archivists (hereafter referred to
as ACA) and a new archival certification process. To better understand
how ACA functions and the certification process is conducted, it is important
to look at the structure of the organization and the history of certification
in the archival community.
THE ACADEMY OF CERTIFIED ARCHIVISTS
The ACA is an independent, non-profit, certifying organization of professional
archivists.
The ACA is structured along traditional lines. The officers are President,
Vice-President, Secretary, and Treasurer. The President is the “principal
executive officer” of ACA and is responsible for the supervision and control
of the affairs of ACA. The President is chairperson and presides
at all business meetings of ACA, and serves as Chair of the Executive Committee,
composed of the four offices, and empowered to act on ACA issues between
meetings of the full Board. The Vice President serves in this capacity
in the absence of the President. The Vice President is a member of
the Executive Committee, presiding in the absence of the President, and is
also a member of the Examination Development Committee, and is the organization’s
Ombudsman.
When ACA came into existence in 1989, elections were held for both President
and Vice President with two year terms for each. In 1994 the election
and term process was changed for these two offices. Now, an election
is held each year for a Vice-President/President Elect, who serves one year
as Vice-President, one year as President, and one year as the Regent for
Nominations.
The Secretary, elected for a two year term, keeps the minutes of meetings
of the Board, provides notices in accordance with the ACA By-Laws,
and is responsible for the corporate records and archives. The Secretary
has periodically been the Newsletter Editor, and assumed other related duties.
The Treasurer, elected for a two year term, is responsible for the funds
and securities of ACA, receiving moneys due, paying obligations, maintaining
membership records, providing budget reports, and other related duties.
In the absence of the President and Vice-President, the Treasurer presides
at business meetings of ACA and at meetings of the Board.
The remaining members of the Board are all regents, most of whom are devoted
to the various aspects of certification. They are as follows:
a. The Regent for Examination Development is the Chair
of the Examination Development Committee, and responsible for examination
development. This person also serves as liaison to outside testing
organizations and others regarding examination development.
b. The Regent for Examination Administration is responsible
for examination administration and liaison to outside testing organizations
and others regarding examination administration.
c. The Regent for Certification Maintenance is responsible
for administering the certification maintenance program.
d. The Regent for Outreach is responsible for promoting
awareness of archival certification both within and outside the archival
community. This person serves as liaison to the Board on all outreach
issues and works with other members of the Academy in promoting outreach.
e. The Regent for Nominations is the immediate past President,
and works with the Nominating Committee in identifying candidates for upcoming
elections.
CERTIFICATION
In addition to establishing an organization to accredit or certify within
the archival community, the critical issue was how should this accreditation
or certification process be carried out. Certification of individual
archivists is one way to provide increased professionalism and structure
to the archival profession, and this was the way finally chosen by SAA.
There are others. In considering how to approach this issue, the SAA,
through its CEPD, considered various possibilities. Some accrediting
organizations accredit educational programs. For example, the American
Library Association accredits Library Schools. Other accrediting organizations
accredit practicing institutions. The American Association of Museums
accredits individual Museums.
In the late 1970's SAA’s CEPD initially discussed both individual certification
and the certification of programs in archival education. Archival education
programs were divided into two categories: “Type A for courses given for
academic credit as part of a program of academic training at the graduate
school level and leading to the award of a major or minor by the degree-granting
department; Type B for programs given in short courses, institutes, or formal
on-the-job training courses offered by archival institutions and requiring
evidence of practical work experience before the award of a certificate or
credential of completion” . Admission to either of these programs required
a Bachelor’s degree.
The discussion over how to approach accreditation continued, surfacing some
interesting issues and increasing the visibility and concept of the certification
of individual practitioners. At the SAA conference in 1976, the CEPD
carried this discussion forward, exploring a number of related issues and
questions. One question the CEPD explored was whether individuals with
degrees from “approved” university programs would have preferential
status as “approved” archivists and would the profession be granting “. .
.a special benefit- - which quite conceivably would mean a pay differential
- - on certain of its members.” The CEPD then asked that
“. . .if the most important ingredient of the profession is the practicing
individual and if self policing is a distinguishing mark of a profession,
how do we as archivists establish and maintain the performance standards
of practitioners?” There are a number of routes to
becoming a competent archivist. Consequently, training and education
to maintain competency had to be broadly available to the entire profession.
With these considerations, the CEPD proposed the following:
“. . . first developing standards for archival education programs, then considering
the difficulties in ensuring that the standards are met and resolving that
question in favor of certifying archival education programs and finally considering
the question of individual certification.”
The next meeting of the CEPD was in March, 1977. By then, the Council
on Postsecondary Education had advised CEPD that it “would not be wise to
seek to accredit programs formally, at least during an initial phase, but
[CEPD] should instead concentrate on a less formal approval of [a] program
before seeking an accreditation procedure.” At this meeting,
CEPD discussed, adopted, and sent to the SAA Council the proposal of a “Program
for Archival Certification”. There were three avenues to certification:
successful completion of a certified archival training program; successfully
completing an archival certification examination; and by experience (the
“grandfather” clause).. The SAA Council printed this proposal
in the July, 1977 SAA Newsletter, asking for reactions from the membership.
Much discussion ensued in the SAA Newsletters, at the 1977, 1978 SAA annual
meetings, and other venues. At the SAA annual meeting in Nashville
in October, 1978, following an open forum discussion on procedures to approve
graduate education programs, SAA Council asked the CEPD to present a feasibility
study on every aspect of educational program approval, but did not pursue
individual archival certification, “Ydespite certain meritsY”.
Approximately six months later in the April, 1979 American Archivist, SAA
President Hugh Taylor pointed out his opinion that “. . . if the approval
of educational programs is not found to be viable (at this stage we simply
do not know), then individual certification would probably be brought forward
again as the only other alternative…”. In November, 1979, a final
draft procedure for the approval of archival education programs by a board
was submitted. After suggestions from SAA Council, a redraft was submitted
in early 1980.
With agreement between CEPD and SAA Council, a self study questionnaire was
sent to 42 universities, with anticipated visits to 2-3 tentatively approved
for the fall of 1981. By April, 1981, 24 responses had been received,
with only about half of those containing enough documentation to plan a site
visit to evaluate an archival education program. It was clear that
there was insufficient support from educational institutions for an accreditation
program of archival education. SAA Council did not pick up a further
suggestion by CEPD to have a meeting with the American Library Association
to discuss accreditation processes. After some discussion at CEPD meetings
and the tabling of the approval process for educational
institutions, the issue of raising individual certification was discussed.
The CEPD decided that it should not raise individual certification again,
but included both individual certification and educational program accreditation
in its report to SAA Council.
The certification issue, along with the perceived need for better defining
the archival profession and its standards, continued to be actively discussed
and debated. In January, 1984, the SAA Newsletter published “Archivist:
A Definition”. In the first paragraph of this “definition”, its authors,
the Study Group on the Definition of an Archivist, pointed out that “Some
archivists are calling for revival of the concept of certification of individual
archivists or accreditation of educational programs and/or archival institutions”.
There was a lively discussion in the next SAA Newsletter with continued commentary
on professionalism and standards.
Shortly thereafter, the SAA Council narrowed the certification issue to individuals
when, at its May 1984 meeting, it asked the CEPD “. . .to study and report
on a program of certification for individual archivists which would require
qualifications in three major areas of education/other competencies, experience,
and written examination, and which would, in addition, include periodic recertification.”
. The assumptions of this study were:
1. The purpose of the program would be to establish standards
for archivists and increase incentive for individual archivists to maintain
and improve their professional competency.
2. The program would require qualifications in three major areas:
education, experience, and written examination.
3. Persons with specified education and experience would be “grandfathered”-
- i.e., certified without examination.
4. Periodic recertification would be required.
5. The program would be post-employment.
Views from the SAA membership on this program were actively solicited.
A working group of the CEPD drafted a plan for the certification of individual
archivists, which was presented to the SAA Council in June, 1985.
This plan presented specific requirements for initial certification by petition,
certification by examination, and recertification.
The debate and discussion on certification continued. A survey
was taken in summer 1985 by Frederick Stielow, University of Maryland,
regarding views of certification The overall percentage favored certification
by a large margin (70.1% - 27.2%). Some believed that the need for
such a “venture” was dubious, while others in the survey “noted certification
was a topic whose time had come.” In February, 1986 the then
President of SAA, Shonnie Finnegan, appointed a subcommittee of SAA Council
to work with regional archival organizations to gather information and views
about certification. The following June, as a result of the recommendations
and criticism, a revised certification draft was published as a basis for
discussion at the 1986 SAA annual meeting in Chicago and for an advisory
poll of the entire membership in the fall. In February,
1987, approval was given by SAA Council to move forward with a certification
plan for archivists.
The first phase of the certification process was certification by petition.
This enabled the new Academy to acquire a sufficient level of membership
to begin the operation of the Academy and staff the positions needed to carry
out its business. This process followed examples of other organizations,
such as the Institute for Certified Records Managers. The initial petition
was implemented at the 1988 SAA annual meeting in Atlanta, Georgia.
The petition was open for a one year period, from October 1, 1988 through
September 30, 1989.
To meet the qualifications for petition involved both education and experience.
The requirement for petition was stipulated as:
A. Master’s degree including graduate study of archives administration
and a minimum of 5 years qualifying professional archival experience; or
B. Master’s degree and 6 years qualifying professional
archival experience; or
C. Bachelor’s degree and 7 years qualifying professional
archival experience.
Qualifying education had to be documented with a diploma conferred by an
accredited institution of higher education and, as appropriate, university
transcripts from an accredited institution or other evidence demonstrating
successful completion of a course in archives administration. The study
of archives administration could be considered under the first option, above,
if the graduate study included a minimum of 9 semester hours or the equivalent
credit is in the field of archives administration as described by the 1987
Guidelines for Graduate Education approved by the Society of American Archivists.
Qualifying experience, whether full or part-time, must be at the professional
level as designated by the employing institution, and must involve exercising
responsibilities in one or more of the following areas: acquisition,
preservation, management, reference, and control of archival materials.
A qualified professional is expected to have “a comprehensive understanding
of basic archival principles and the ability to apply or implement these
principles while performing the above listed functions in an official capacity”.
Management is considered professional qualifying experience if the position
requires “substantial knowledge of archival principles and practices.”
All petitions received went through a review process with each petition reviewed
by a subcommittee of the Interim Board for Certification. Additional
information was requested for any incomplete petitions. Any petition
rejected could be appealed for review. After the deadline (September
30, 1989), the petition process closed and anyone desiring membership to
the Academy must take the examination. Once a petition had been approved
certification was valid for 8 years, renewal depending upon a petition or
successfully completing the certification examination.
During the petition process another subcommittee of the Interim Board for
Certification was working with a credentialing consultant and an independent
testing organization to create the first ACA archival certification examination.
Creating this examination involved an intensive process of very specific
steps, outlined below.
The first challenge was to identify, in short, what a professional archivist
does. To do this, “task statements” were developed describing the tasks
that archivists typically perform, such as appraisal, arrangement, description,
reference services, and outreach. Information was solicited from a
broad range of archivists and archival organizations nationwide that would
help identify archival “tasks”. Documents used for this process ranged
from organizational mission statements to individual position descriptions-
anything that could be used to develop task statements. Once in draft
form these task statements were reviewed by a nine person panel
that was representative of the major groupings within the archival profession,
including archival educators and practicing archivists who are authorities
in major areas of the profession. The final product was the basis for
future examination development. The independent testing company
also reviewed this work and, in consultation with the examination subcommittee,
made further changes.
Once the task statements were developed, a separate panel working from these
statements identified what an archivist must know to perform a given
task; what knowledge is needed to perform a given task, skills that
must be applied, and attitudes (KSA’s) necessary to successful task performance.
These first two steps provided the basis for the third step, the creation
of questions to be included in the certification examination. These
questions are multiple choice questions, each with four possible answers.
In using a multiple choice examination, ACA is follows a generally accepted
practice within the United States for licensing and certifying examinations.
This level of use and history has provided a good basis of research into
how to write and score these examinations. When constructed properly
this examination will test a range of knowledge and abilities as well as
the facts, and it allows a wide range of questions covering all seven domains.
The certification examination is a half day exam, and required between
100 and 250 questions. The independent testing company assisted the
examination subcommittee in creating item (examination question) development
workshops, which are one day exercises and open to any member of the archival
profession. These workshops were held in conjunction with other archival
meetings, such as those of regional archival organizations. Once the
requisite number of questions were in place, all questions were subjected
to a review process by a panel, similar in composition to the task statement
development panel.
With test questions in place, the next step was to create a “criterion referenced
cut score,” using an established testing method. Again, a panel of
subject matter experts, usually archivists, was created to estimate the percentage
of minimally competent archivists who can answer each item. With the
first examination, the estimates were averaged for each question and then
across questions to reach a pass-fail score. This step is now done
by the psychometrician who enters all of these estimated numbers into a computer
to statistically produce the pass-fail mark. This process is one of
the checks and balances of the examination. It is important to note
that this is an examination where the archivists are not competing with each
other, as in a “curve” grading system, but are competing against an exam
which is itself being rated.
The basic process described above was used for the first examination, given
at the 1989 SAA annual meeting in St. Louis, Missouri.
This first exercise provided a good basis for the first examination and provided
for the development of what is known as Role Delineation. Role Delineation
describes the major responsibilities of professional archivists and what
skills and knowledge are necessary to carry out those responsibilities.
Role delineation is critical to providing a viable and legally defensible
certification examination. It provides the fundamental basis of the archival
certification examination.
The original Role Delineation Statement was written by panels of archivists
and archival educators with the guidance of test development professionals.
It is reviewed regularly with the last revision done by a panel in 2003.
This process included a broad based Role Delineation survey of the profession
to determine the continued relevance and accuracy of the Role Delineation
Statement. There are seven major domains of archival practice.
They are:
1. Selection, Appraisal, and Acquisition
2. Arrangement and Description
3. Reference Services and Access
4. Preservation and Protection
5. Outreach, Advocacy, and Promotion
6. Managing Archival Programs
7. Professional, Ethical, and Legal Responsibilities
Listed within each domain is a series of tasks and related knowledge statements.
This delineation encompasses the “. . . commonly accepted duties and
responsibilities that professional archivists perform in the course
of their work.”
The certification examination is newly constructed every two years (even
years) and revised in between each new construction (odd years). This
is an extensive process carried out by the Examination Development Committee
in conjunction with the ACA Psychometrician. It begins by doing both
an item level and overall analysis of the examination just taken to ensure
that the test was fair and valid. New questions are constructed through
question writing workshops, as described earlier, and by members of
the Examination Development Committee. After review and any needed
revision these new questions become a part of a “question bank.”
The “question bank” itself is constantly reviewed and updated as new literature
is published. The Examination Development Committee makes a selection
of questions from the question bank to be used in the next examination.
The archival certification examination is offered once each year during the
SAA Conference. It is administered at the conference location, and
four additional sites chosen by ACA. In 2006, in addition to the SAA
conference location in Washington, DC, the exam is offered in Albany,
New York; Tampa, Florida; Indianapolis, Indiana; and Seattle, Washington.
ACA also has a “You Pick Your Site” option. Using this provision, ACA
is able to bring the examination closer to the examinees, providing an opportunity
to save on travel costs. The “You Pick Your Site” option
is available if five or more exam takers want to hold the exam at a new site,
and all of those applications are submitted to ACA by May 15 of the exam
year.
RECERTIFICATION
The issue of archival recertification was discussed and agreed upon early
in the formative stages of establishing archival certification. The
CEPD working group for archival certification used as one of its assumptions
that “Periodic recertification would be required”.
A more detailed description of recertification was offered in the June, 1985
CEPD report on Certification, sent to SAA Council. A five year period
was offered before recertification would be required, and a point system
of 80-100 points would be required for recertification. Areas where
points would be awarded included continuing education, archival experience,
activities in professional organizations including leadership positions,
publications and conference presentations.
Because of the need to create the certification petition in 1988, followed
by the first certification examination at the SAA annual meeting in 1989,
the petition for recertification was taken up in earnest with the creation
of ACA, and in the September, 1990 ACA Newsletter Maygene Daniels (the second
ACA President) reported on the progress of the recertification plan.
Because the first archivists certified by petition did not have to recertify
for eight years, the first recertification would be 1997. This eight
year period was changed to five years by ACA Board action at its April, 1991
meeting. The Board believed that “In view of the rapidly changing nature
of the profession, eight years was felt to be too long. . ..”
The Certification Maintenance Program was printed in the July, 1994 ACA Newsletter.
There are two options to recertification. First, a certified archivist
may take the certification examination. ACA encourages this option
“. . . as the simplest and most meaningful demonstration of continued professional
competence.”
Option two is that a certified archivist may petition for recertification
by demonstrating that he or she has earned a sufficient number of credits
in five defined areas of professional activity during the five years immediately
preceding certification expiration. The five defined areas and number
of credits possible in each are as follows:
1. Employment – 40 credits
2. Education – 60 credits
3. Professional Participation – 45 credits
4. Professional Service – 30 credits
5. Writing, Publishing, Editing – 25 credits
Each defined area is explained in detail, providing examples of what experience
meets the qualifications for credits.
One hundred points within five categories of activity is required for recertification.
The petition forms are reviewed by a committee chaired by the Regent for
Certification Maintenance. This path to recertification provides for
reward and recognition for the archival education, training, and experience
necessary to keep oneself current in the profession.
WHAT VALUE IS CERTIFICATION?
Prior to the founding of ACA there was much discussion and some level of
discord about the value of certification and any organization offering
certification. SAA’s decision to move ahead with certification was
not unanimous. However, during the past 17 years since the founding
of the Academy of Certified Archivists this level of questioning and doubt
has dimmed. For those who consider what ACA has done, its value is
significant and critical to the well being and progress of the archival profession.
There are two primary areas to note here.
Anyone who has taken and passed the ACA certification examination has demonstrated
that they possess the knowledge to practice as a professional archivist.
Certification is a benchmark of professional capability. This is being
recognized by those business, government, or other organizations, some of
whom are beginning to require certification, either at the time of employment
or an agreed upon post employment date. There are still others who
regard certification as a plus when considering applicants for employment.
Beyond this, I have been told by some who have taken and passed the examination
that this is a reward of accomplishment in and of itself.
An equally broad based value to the archival community is the development
of Role Delineation. Though originally done to provide a solid base
for the certification examination, Role Delineation also provides a thorough
description and definition of the archival profession. Nothing this
complete has been done before, and Role Delineation’s value extends to the
entire archival profession. It is reviewed and updated regularly and
provides definitive information for a broad range of purposes, ranging from
the ACA certification examination to the establishment of a new archival
position in a beginning business or other organization. With Role Delineation
there is a clear and concise explanation of the breadth and depth of the
archival profession.
ACA has overcome the initial negative doubts, discussions, and disputes
over the need for certification, and is a well established, growing organization.
It is financially solvent, and applications to take the certification examination
have been steadily increasing. ACA membership is currently 856, primarily
the United States with Canadian members as well. ACA is a North American
organization, but there is a small membership number, currently 13, from
other areas of the world. During the past five years, the number of
exam takers has risen from 67 in 2000 to 133 in 2005. From the first
year in 1989 when the exam was offered only at the SAA conference site, it
is now offered at five ACA selected locations, plus any additional locations
where the “You Pick Your Site” option requirements have been met. In
2005, the certification examination was offered in 13 locations.
The system established to ensure an objective examination has been consistently
successful. Annual examination reviews, coupled with the work of the
ACA Psychometrician provide a refined system of checks and balances.
The ACA examination and the recertification process have never been legally
or administratively challenged The ACA is an established and growing
organization, and its certification and recertification programs work very
effectively.
The ACA is looking forward to a positive, bright future.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Because there is not a large body of literature about the Academy of Certified
Archivists, this bibliography concentrates on information published by the
two organizations most involved in the founding and growth of ACA and
the certification of archivists: the Society of American Archivists
as the founder of the Academy of Certified Archivists; and the Academy itself.
Research was done in the American Archivist, the SAA Newsletter, the Academy
of American Archivists Newsletter, the Academy of American Archivists Website
( www.certifiedarchivists.org ), and minutes of Academy of American Archivists
board meetings. Entries for this research are all listed below.
The American Archivist
Evans, Frank B., “Postappointment Archival Training: A Proposed Solution
for a Basic Problem,” The American Archivist, 40 (No. 1, January, 1977),
70, 74.
Fleckner, John A., “Luncheon Remarks by Incoming SAA President John A. Fleckner,”
The American Archivist, 53 (Winter, 1990), 165.
Goggin, Jacqueline, “That We Shall Truly Deserve the Title of Profession,”
The American Archivist, 47 (No. 3, Summer, 1984), 251.
Gracy, David B., “The Call from the Grassroots: Rise and Shine,” The
President’s Page, The American Archivist, 47 (No. 3, Summer, 1984), 341-342.
Maher, William J., “Contexts for Understanding Professional Certification:
Opening Pandora’s Box?,” The American Archivist, 51 (No. 4, Fall, 1988),
424.
“Minutes: SAA Council Meeting,” 19-21 May 1984, The American Archivist,
47 (No. 4, Fall, 1984), 472.
“Minutes: SAA Council Meeting,” 30 January – 1 February 1987, The American
Archivist, 50 (No. 3, Summer, 1987) 443-445.
“Minutes: SAA Council Meeting,” 26-27 February 1988, The American Archivist,
51 (No. 3, Summer, 1988), 398-400.
Taylor, Hugh A., “The President’s Page,” ed. Anne Morgan Campbell, “The Society
of American Archivists,” The American Archivist, 42 (No. 2, April, 1979),
260.
Newsletters
“Archivist: A Definition,” SAA Newsletter (January, 1984), 2.
“Background of the Certification Movement,” SAA Newsletter (August, 1986),
5-9.
“Certification,” SAA Newsletter(November, 1984), 2.
“Certification,” SAA Newsletter (July, 1985),7-10.
“Certification Maintenance Program,” Academy of Certified Archivists Newsletter
(July, 1994), 3-6.
“Certification Update,” SAA Newsletter (November, 1988), 6-7.
“The Certification of Archivists: An Early Opinion Survey,” SAA Newsletter
(November-December, 1985), 4.
“Commentary on Archivist: A Definition,” SAA Newsletter (March, 1984),
3,4.
Daniels, Maygene, “Certification and Recertification, Academy of Certified
Archivists Newsletter (September, 1990), 3.
“Education Committee Submits Summary Report,” SAA Newsletter (March, 1982),
10-12.
“Report of the Interim Board for Certification,” SAA Newsletter ( January,
1988), 10-15.
Pugh, Mary J., “Recertification,” Academy of Certified Archivists Newsletter
(July, 1991, 2-3.
“Speak Out on Certification.” SAA Newsletter (November, 1984), 2.
“What Council Did,” SAA Newsletter (July, 1984), 2.
The Academy of Certified Archivists Website – www.certifiedarchivists.org
“Applications,” Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained
on January 25, 2006. The ACA Website address for this information is
http://www.certifiedarchivists.org/html/tempapp.html .
“Bylaws of the Academy of Certified Archivists,” Article VI, Sections
6 and 7, Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained on
January 23, 2006. The ACA Website address for this information is http://www.certifiedarchivists.org/html/bylaws.html
.
“Guidelines for Recertifying by Petition,” Academy of Certified Archivists
Website, information obtained on February 6, 2006. The ACA Website
address for this information is http://www.certifiedarchivists.org/html/recertgd.html
.
“The 2003 Role Delineation Statement Revision,” Introduction, Preamble, and
Role Delineation, Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained
on January 23, 2006. The ACA Website address for this information is
http://www.certifiedarchivists.org/html/RoleDelineation.html .
Williams, Kevin J., “How the Archival Certification Examination is Developed
and Evaluated,” Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained
on January 20, 2006. The ACA Website address for this information is
http://www.certifiedarchivists.org/html/newsltr/julexam.html .
Other
“Certified Archivist Petition,” Interim Board for Certification, Society
of American Archivists, 1988.
“Report of Regent for Examination Development,” Minutes of the Academy of
Certified Archivists Board of Regents Meeting, August 20, 2003, 5.
I consulted with the ACA Secretariat for recent ACA statistics, such as membership
numbers and test center locations and numbers. The ACA Secretariat
is located in Albany, New York. Steve Grandin is the Secretariat and
Mr. Grandin can be contacted at telephone number 518-463-8644.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank the Academy of Certified Archivists for giving me the
opportunity to explore the history of the ACA founding and growth.
I am also thankful to the Library staff of the National Archives and Records
Administration for assisting me with my research, particularly in locating
issues of the Society of American Archivists Newsletter, where so much of
the founding and history of the ACA is described.
I am grateful to several individuals who have provided invaluable assistance
and information. Michael Holland, 2006 ACA President; Cindy Smolovik,
2006 ACA Vice President/President Elect; and Thomas Brown, 2006 Regent for
Examination Development have all read a draft of this paper and made valuable
suggestions. Trudy H. Peterson and Edie Hedlin were both involved in
the founding and formative years of ACA and have provided important background
information that was not available elsewhere. Steve Grandin, the ACA
Secretariat, provided a wealth of information regarding the Academy, its
membership, and its activities, and has consistently provided statistical
background for those activities.
Any errors of fact, interpretation, or judgment are mine alone.