Certification in America: The ACA Example
By 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, “despite certain merits”. 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.
“Bylaws of the Academy of Certified Archivists,” Article VI, Sections 6 and 7, Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained on January 23, 2006.
“Guidelines for Recertifying by Petition,” Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained on February 6, 2006.
“The 2003 Role Delineation Statement Revision,” Introduction, Preamble, and Role Delineation, Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained on January 23, 2006.
Williams, Kevin J., “How the Archival Certification Examination is Developed and Evaluated,” Academy of Certified Archivists Website, information obtained on January 20, 2006.
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.