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.
Read Source, the online newsletter, to learn about the news, events, people and happenings in UC Libraries.
In this issue of Source, Liz Kiscaden, dean and university librarian, writes about how UC Libraries is taking advantage of funding opportunities to Invest in Strategic Priorities. The Archives and Rare Books Library announces receipt of a national grant to process historic Cincinnati schools desegregation case records.The Carl Solway Gallery Archive in the Robert A. Deshon and Karl J. Schlachter Library for Design, Architecture, Art and Planning (DAAP) Library is featured. Ted Baldwin, head of the Sciences Libraries, writes about how the razing of the iconic Crosley Tower will necessitate the move of the current Chemistry-Biology Library space to Braunstein Hall where it will merge with the Geology-Mathematics-Physics Library to become the Science Library opening fall semester.
Read these articles, as well as past issues, on the website. To receive Source via e-mail, contact melissa.norris@uc.edu to be added to the mailing list.
Before social media, even before xerox-copied zines and flyers, marginalized communities used simple copying techniques- hectography (gelatin printing) mimeography (stencil printing) and spirit duplication (alcohol transfers, also known as “ditto”)- to make their voices heard. From political activists struggling for independence in India to the early gay rights activists in New York City, and from the dissident writers of Samizdat (self publishing) in the Soviet Union to the striking migrant farm workers of Southern California, these analog copiers were used to spread the word through words and pictures in the 20th century.
Each year, librarian, zinester and lover of “arcane technologies” Rich Dana sets out across the US on a series of in-person workshops to demonstrate these low-cost techniques and how contemporary artists and writers can use them to publish editions of zines, chapbooks, prints, and flyers. The Archives and Rare Books Library and the Elliston Poetry Room are sponsoring Rich’s Cincinnati stop of his Obsolete Roadshow series on April 7, 2025.
Rich will present a hands-on workshop for UC students in the morning (sign up online or via the QR code below; space is limited to 25). In the afternoon, the public is invited to hear Rich talk about the history and use of the technologies and receive a hands-on experience, as well.
Both events will take place in the Elliston Poetry Room (Langsam Library 646). Come join us and get some ink on your hands!
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.
All achievements and accomplishments of the witnesses listed are current as of 1979, the year that the witnesses began giving depositions.
Our final spotlight of Black History Month is a well-known figure in Cincinnati’s history of civil rights and activism, Marian Spencer. Born in Gallipolis, Ohio in 1920, Marian Alexander was a graduate of Gallia Academy and went on to study English literature at the University of Cincinnati. During her time at the university, she was involved in campus life and was an active member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority. While here, she also met her husband, Donald Spencer. After college, the couple settled down and had two sons, Donald and Edward.
Spencer’s sons were actually what sparked her passion for civil rights and equality. When the boys were young, they wanted to go to an event at Coney Island Amusement Park but were disappointed when they showed up and were escorted out because it was a segregated event. Spencer, along with 28 other witnesses filed a lawsuit and won the case to desegregate the park.
Following this event, Spencer dedicated herself to fighting for civil rights and equality in the Cincinnati area. She spent time as the NAACP Cincinnati Chapter president, served on Cincinnati’s City Council and was a representative of Ohio’s Democratic Party at a national level. Even more than this, Spencer was passionate about equality in education and played a pivotal role in the 1974 Bronson case, which was a catalyst in desegregating Cincinnati Public Schools. Other organizations Spencer worked with include Housing Opportunities Made Equal, Planned Parenthood, Cincinnati Human Services Task Force and the U.S. Civil Rights Commission Ohio Advisory Board.
You might recognize Marian Spencer’s name by the street that’s named after her downtown, the dormitory that’s named after her or perhaps by her well-known scholarship here at UC. To learn more about Marian Spencer’s life and work, visit the digital exhibit:
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.
For the continuing blog series on this project, project archivist Julianna Witt provides a timeline of events from the filing of the case in 1974 to its settlement nearly a decade later.
May 29, 1974
Bronson v. Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati is filed on behalf of Mona Bronson, and other school children by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to address racial isolation in Cincinnati’s public schools. The lawsuit is filed against the Cincinnati Board of Education, Ohio State Board of Education, State Superintendent, Attorney General, and Governor.
January 30, 1975
The affirmative defense opinion by Judge David S. Porter of the District Court is declared. Judge Porter raises the question whether the decision in the earlier Cincinnati desegregation case Deal v. Board of Education is still viable in the 10 years since the decision and if the same matters can be re-litigated. Judge Porter finds that the decision in Deal v. Board is still acceptable, and the doctrine of res judicata is acknowledged. This doctrine prevents the plaintiffs from relitigating arguments prior to the July 1965 Deal v. Board decision.
April 23, 1975
The plaintiffs file an appeal that transferred the case to the Sixth Circuit Court. Judge C.J. Lively and Judge Harry Phillips find that res judicata does not apply and instead collateral estoppel, which is the least strict of the two re-litigation doctrines. They introduce the fact that this does not prevent the plaintiffs from bringing forth post-July1965 evidence that occurred after Deal v. Board. Pre-Deal v. Board evidence can also be offered, however, only if the evidence is introduced on behalf of children born or not of school age as of July 1965 as long as it does not contradict earlier arguments. A rehearing of the appeal is denied, and the case is returned to the District Court.
June 27, 1980
Judge Porter retires and the case is transferred to Judge Walter H. Rice. Judge Rice issues “Entry Setting Forth This Court’s Interpretation of Sixth Circuit Opinion in Bronson v. Board of Education” which asserts Judge Porter’s affirmative defense opinion.
October 14, 1980
The plaintiffs file a response memorandum with the court that introduces the dual school system theory which was argued in two United States Supreme Court cases, Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman and Columbus Board of Education v. Penick. Both cases ended in 1979 and evidence in both found that in the Cincinnati schools, dual school systems were existent in May 1954, the date of the Brown v. Board decision. Since this was not discussed in Deal v. Board, the plaintiffs maintain that the case does not have to follow collateral estoppel completely.
February 11, 1982
Judge Rice decides collateral estoppel is still in effect as there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that Cincinnati schools had a dual school system but enough reasoning to consider if evidence is brought forth. The plaintiffs cannot relitigate the exact arguments that were discussed in Deal v. Board. However, they do not have any restrictions when it comes to pre- or post-July 1965 evidence that was declared in 1975 and 1980.
December 19, 1983
Judge Rice accepts the suburban school districts’ motion for summary judgement and dismisses them from the case. In the court pleadings, Judge Rice explains the reason for dismissal as the plaintiffs were unable to produce sufficient evidence to find the suburban school districts guilty of unlawful segregation. Cincinnati Board of Education and the State defendants have not been excused.
April 6, 1984
A settlement is reached and agreed by both sides without going to trial. This does not include the suburban school district defendants, as they were dismissed. The matters of the settlement include:
The Cincinnati Board of Education has seven years to reduce the current Taeuber Index of Dissimilarity score by 17 points. This index measures racial composition within a school compared to the district.
The Board can decide how they will reduce racial isolation. However, they must claim responsibility to achieve the target Taeuber Index score.
The State will provide financial assistance for efforts in reducing racial isolation with some restrictions.
A committee will meet yearly to review the district’s progress.
This project has been made possible in part by grant RH-104772-24 from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC). Any views, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this blog post do not necessarily represent those of the NHPRC.
The University of Cincinnati Libraries will be closed Monday, Jan. 20 in observance of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. The Libraries will resume normal hours on Tuesday, Jan. 21.
Martin Luther King, Jr. from LIFE Magazine
This Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, we invite you to join the Libraries Racial Equity, Support & Programming to Educate the Community Team (RESPECT) in commemorating this civil rights legend by checking out these library resources. In addition, just when you thought you knew everything there was to know about Martin Luther King, Jr., History.com has compiled a list of 10 surprising facts that you probably didn’t know. For example, Martin Luther King, entered Morehouse College at the tender age of only 15!
The latest University of Cincinnati Libraries exhibit showcases historic images of Cincinnati from the Archives and Rare Books Library’s Urban Studies Collection. On display on the 4th floor lobby of the Walter C. Langsam Library, the Cincinnati Subway and Street Improvements exhibit features photographic prints and negatives from 1920 to 1956 from an extensive archive of the City Engineer, City of Cincinnati.
The collection of over 8,000 photographic negatives and prints were taken by the city’s Rapid Transit Commission as part of a failed subway development project in the 1920s, along with photographs documenting various street projects from the 1930s through the 1950s. It provides a glimpse at the interior views of homes and businesses damaged during the construction and follows the growth of the city through various street improvement projects that took place between the 1920s and 1950s.
The Cincinnati Subway and Street Improvements exhibit was designed by Francesca Voyten, communications design co-op student.
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.
ARB is pleased to welcome Julianna Witt, who was hired as the project archivist dedicated to this project. Julianna will be writing a series of blog posts documenting her work and the discoveries she makes while organizing the NAACP records. Her first post below highlights some records related to earlier desegregation efforts in Cincinnati, most notably the Deal v. Cincinnati Board of Education case filed in 1965.
Julianna writes:
The Cincinnati NAACP collection regarding the Bronson court case includes material on various desegregation cases in Ohio and across the country gathered by the NAACP and the plaintiffs’ attorneys as research into prior cases and precedents. Most referenced was an earlier Cincinnati education desegregation case, Deal v. Cincinnati Board of Education which was filed with the NAACP in 1965.
Detail of the first page of the transcript of proceedings in the Deal v. Cincinnati Board of Education lawsuit, 1965.
The plaintiffs in Deal argued that the Cincinnati Board of Education had engaged in segregated practices which did not give African American students equal education opportunities. The 6th District Court ruled that there was no evidence that the Cincinnati Board of Education was intentionally causing racially imbalanced schools but that the schools were a result of the racial makeup of specific neighborhoods.
After Deal, the Cincinnati Board of Education passed a resolution on December 10, 1973, which would redistrict all Cincinnati Public Schools attendance districts and called for full desegregation of schools by fall of 1974. This plan was soon canceled when new, more-conservative, school board members were elected and rescinded the resolution. The board then passed a voluntary integration resolution in January 1974. This new resolution reestablished the prior Cincinnati school attendance districts which had been altered to promote integration, called for voluntary open enrollment, expanded alternative school programs, and canceled all efforts to achieve full integration by fall of 1974.
Bronson v. Board of Education was filed in 1974 to re-establish the December 1973 resolution and to discuss racial isolation inside the schools. The Deal case was quickly reintroduced to determine if res judicata or collateral estoppel applied, which would prevent the re-litigation of the issues found in the earlier case. The 6th District Court found that the doctrine of collateral estoppel applied since the two cases argued that the Cincinnati Board of Education was participating in racial discrimination, and they would not retry the same matter. The court did allow post-1965 racial discrimination to be tried in the Bronson case and pre-Deal evidence could only be introduced if it was regarded as new and relevant on an individual basis.
Detail of the first page of a memorandum regarding the court case Bronson versus Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati, 19xx.
Deal was commonly discussed in the court room which is evident in the various Bronson pleadings concerning pre-Deal evidence, prior decisions, and relevancy. The Cincinnati NAACP collection also includes other documentation regarding Deal besides pleadings, such as individual exhibits, interrogatories, correspondence, and newspaper clippings. During the ten years that the Bronson case was litigated, the plaintiffs’ attorneys continued to bring up Deal and other recent desegregation cases in Ohio and across the country in efforts to provide legal reasoning and support to desegregate the Cincinnati Public Schools and suburban school districts. The NAACP records currently being organized at ARB are proving to document not only the Bronson case of 1974, but earlier efforts to combat racial isolation and segregation in Cincinnati’s public schools.
This project has been made possible in part by grant RH-104772-24 from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC). Any views, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this blog post do not necessarily represent those of the NHPRC.
