Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s.
History of alternative programs and schools
Alternative programs and schools in Cincinnati Public Schools existed prior to the Bronson v. Board of Education lawsuit and continued to grow in numbers as the case proceeded. These programs were designed to give students more opportunities in the classroom compared to the standard taught subjects. These were voluntary programs and open to students of all ages.
Field research is an exciting time, filled with travel, discoveries, and hope of breaking new ground. I recently traveled southwest Michigan, visiting four repositories in four days to research an event known as the Kentucky Raid, an attempt in 1847 by slavecatchers to kidnap African Americans residing in Cass County, Michigan thwarted by nonviolent resistance. This was a successful effort thanks to strong preparation and planning that allowed for thorough research of many resources.
First off, what was the Kentucky Raid? It remains little known or documented outside of Cass County. Kentucky plantation owners and bounty hunters sought to kidnap escaped slaves residing in a county that was also a hotbed of the Underground Railroad. However, the alarm was raised, free African Americans and whites confronted the slavecatchers and forced them through a hurried court trial to release the victims.
To start, I determined what I was going to research: not what happened but how memories and histories have shaped perspectives of the raid. This may appear simple, but it determined what repositories to visit, what collections to research, and what information to look for. This made for a more efficient effort on limited time.
This was especially important as records relating to the raid are scattered across southwest Michigan. Establishing the research goal allowed me to narrow the search to four repositories: the Cass District Library Local History Branch, the James E. Bonine House, the Lemmen Library & Archives at Grand Valley State University, and the Regional History Collections at Western Michigan University.
Before visiting any repositories came several steps. The first was presenting the goal and receiving supervisor permission. These helped secure funding for travel, meals, and living arrangements. Once they were approved and funded, I developed a schedule to ensure I used my limited time efficiently. As I was traveling every day between sites, I selected a hotel with a location central to them and a rental car for travel. One last step prior to visiting was contacting each repository a month in advance to give staff sufficient time to search collections for the necessary records.
The volumes of records yielded in these searches varied among the repositories. Which was why I had to decide on whether I had time to research them or make copies to research later. Two repositories had fewer records than the other two, giving me time to research them. The volume of records at the other two forced me to focus less on research and more on looking for records that could be worth researching and marking them for reproduction.
All these efforts served to make this a successful research trip in hope of showing how perspectives have changed of the Kentucky Raid over time. Yet all this would not have been possible without setting that goal, doing proper preparation, and determining where to visit and what to research.
Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s.
Image from Cincinnati Enquirer, November 14, 1978
The struggle of busing
During the legal proceedings of the Bronson case, one of the examples of discrimination within Cincinnati schools cited by the NAACP was the policy of busing students to school further away rather than allowing them to attend a much closer school in order to prevent integration at particular schools.
Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s.
Archival records from organizations may contain an array of documents and an incredible amount of those documents, such as correspondence, meeting minutes and case files. When this occurs, archivists may arrange the material into series and subseries in order to assist researchers in accessing the collection. The NAACP Bronson v. Board records is an example of this practice. Due to the extensive material within the collection, it is vital to note the different types of documents and what they mean in the context of the case. This includes files created and kept by the school districts and documents that originated in the court. For both document types, ARB has consulted with the Office of General Counsel to determine if any records need to be restricted or redacted.
Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s.
Map of Hamilton County School Districts provided by Metropolitan Association Religious Coalition of Cincinnati, undated
Theda Bara, born Theodosia Burr Goodman on July 29, 1885 to a local Jewish family, attended the University of Cincinnati from 1906-1908 before leaving to pursue an acting career. Bara became one of the biggest stars of the silent film era making 40 films between 1914 and 1926. Her femme fatale roles earned her the nickname “The Vamp.”
This weekend’s episode of CET and ThinkTV’s “The Art Show” will feature Theda Bara and the manuscript in Archives and Rare Books. View it Saturday, May 17 at 6pm on CET or Sunday, May 18 at 5:30pm on Dayton’s ThinkTV. It will also appear on the PBS App and is currently viewable on YouTube.
Included in the episode, Chris Harter, university archivist and head of the Archives and Rare Books Library, talks about the 450-page typewritten manuscript that documents Bara’s life. It was intended to be a memoir ghostwritten in collaboration with Bara, but was never published. Holly Prochaska, preservation librarian and head of the Preservation Lab, talks about how they worked to ensure that the manuscript and letters between Bara and Harré are protected and will remain available for study and research long into the future, thus cementing Theda Bara’s legacy.
Librarians, archivists, and records managers can say “record” to one another and know it means document, catalog record, three-dimensional object, or digital file. But this wide net can confuse those who create and manage records but do not consider them central to their jobs. Ask and they may reply “What’s a record?”
At the University of Cincinnati, a record, whether it’s created, received, or managed by university employees represents an action taken to complete a task. Many documents, paper or digital, can be considered records. But not all for various reasons. Records exist in many places, from filing cabinets to the cloud. Email is a curious case, being both a record and a means for transmitting them.
Record is a ubiquitous term that casts a wide net. Any confusion is understandable. But at UC, a record can be any document, device, or item, physical or digital, regardless of its purpose. Whatever its form or the purpose it was created for or received by UC, a record serves to document the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, and other activities at UC.
At the same time, not every document, device, or item constitutes a record. Examples include rough notes, drafts, or copies kept for reference which do not contain information requiring preservation or duplicate information found in documents deemed official records. Because they are not considered records, they may be discarded whenever the creator or user deems it appropriate.
Those that are records can be found in many locations. Physical ones include boxes, filing cabinets, and folders. Digital locations include computers, shared drives, databases, the cloud, and email servers.
But email as both a record and a location? The answer is yes. Those considered records contain information that falls under the campus-wide General Records and Retention Schedule (GRS), which determines how long records are retained. This does not mean that all emails constitute records. These typically include meeting reminders, courtesy copies, listserv notices, drafts, or a means to transmit documents (e.g. attachments or OneDrive links). They may be deleted.
The definition of a record at UC means that it documents an activity. Not all documents and items, physical or digital, are considered records. Those deemed records can be found in many places from filing cabinets to Teams. Emails serve as both records and means for transmitting them. With this knowledge, UC faculty and staff can exercise greater confidence in knowing what records are and are not and their uses.
Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s.
Before and during Bronson v. Board, there were several local organizations working towards education desegregation. These groups included committees, religious groups and nonprofits. The Cincinnati NAACP’s records related to the lawsuit include many examples of the different ways in which these organizations worked towards desegregation as seen in Community Notices, Exhibits, Research Materials and Attorney’s Work Files series housed within the Bronson v. Board records. Listed below are some of the different organizations and their impact.
The Archives & Rare Books Library is pleased to serve the University of Cincinnati with instruction in records management. With a student population of 53,000 and 12,000 employees, lots of records are created, received, managed, and destroyed or transferred at UC every day. The instruction gives employees the skills and knowledge to confidently manage records under their oversight. But what can they expect from instruction?
It starts with defining what a record is: any document, device, or item – physical or digital – that’s created by or received by UC to perform an action. That’s a broad definition but necessary with the many kinds of records on campus. At the same time, it’s just as important to know what is not a record: rough notes or drafts of official documents.
With these definitions, employees can better understand their responsibilities, starting with the four reasons for records management at UC: 1. Minimizing legal risk; 2. Reducing physical and digital storage costs; 3. Increasing administrative efficiency; 4. Preserving UC history. These help employees learn to create or receive records only as necessary to do their jobs and help others. But what about keeping or discarding records?
That involves the records retention schedules. They are a huge part of records management, determining how long records are kept. Most records at UC fall under the General Records Schedule. The GRS governs common business, administrative, and education records. Most areas of UC use the GRS. Yet some units have highly specialized records and therefore use unique retention schedules. Training helps employees understand and navigate both.
With staff understanding what records are, their responsibilities, and the retention schedules, they are ready to learn about destruction and transfer of records. Some records lose their usefulness with time and require destruction. But any destruction is documented on a form. Other records retain their usefulness and are transferred to University Archives.
To learn more about records management at UC, please contact the Records Manager to schedule a training for your unit (kirkwojp@ucmail.uc.edu or 513-556-1958. Training typically lasts one hour with a presentation and Q&A after. Specialized topics require more notice and preparation.
Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s.
