2.1 Consultation

Many of the recommendations in this guide refer to consultation as a method to learn about the appropriateness of terms, approaches, or access conditions directly from individuals belonging to the communities represented. To preface the recommendations below, readers should note that this type of consultation is distinct from researching available resources, which can be done independently, and instead refers specifically to reaching out to community members. While approaches to consultation may vary, below are some considerations to think of beforehand 1:

  • Reach out to groups or offices on campus whose mandate might encompass this type of work or who might be able to provide initial advice, resources, contacts, or introductions.

  • Consider reaching out to organizations who may have already worked with a specific community. Are there areas where collaboration with an institution could reduce undesired labour from a community themselves?

  • Remember that this type of consultation requires significant labour on the part of community members.

    • Ensure general information regarding terms, protocols, and community history is researched beforehand.

    • Ensure that the individuals most affected, or their delegates from within a community, are being consulted.

    • Enquire about accessibility needs, meeting protocols, and documentation styles.

  • UTARMS should endeavour to establish ongoing, reciprocal relationships with communities as the preferred framework for requesting consultative labour. Although such relationships are currently rare, archivists should act in a way that prioritizes the potential for more meaningful connections. This includes understanding how mutual exchange shapes the relationship, maintaining honesty in communication, and actively nurturing these relationships.

  • Consider whether it is appropriate to consult with specific community representatives, or whether multiple people / communities with different perspectives and understanding should be approached.

  • Ask community members what they most value as a result of this work. If necessary, reorient work around community objectives.

  • Enquire about community or consultant expectations for compensation, including amounts, options for in-kind support, and timelines. Establish and communicate the types of compensation that can be offered by the University to ensure appropriateness (be upfront and transparent). There should be no expectation that this labour will be provided for free, nor that timelines will be short-term.

  • Ask consultants how they want to be credited (E.g. individually identified, referenced in case file, generalized acknowledgment).

  • Within the description of the relevant archival material, use the Description Control Area ‘Sources’ field to reference the nature of the consultation, time frame, and the individuals or groups that have been consulted, if appropriate.

  • If a community or individual declines working with UTARMS, consider whether the reason impacts the context or understanding of the records (for example, if refusal is based on a position of protest) and should be noted in the description with permission. Consider whether refusal affects the necessary knowledge required to ethically make the material available to researchers.

Endnotes

  1. For an example of a framework for meaningful consultation, see the 4Rs Youth Movement’s Framework for Cross-Cultural Dialogue, https://4rsyouth.ca/our-framework/ ↩