User Advisory Group Minutes
Title:
User Advisory Group
Date of Meeting:
01 December 2015
Location:
The National Archives, Kew
Attendees:
Staff
Caroline Ottaway-Searle (COS) – Director of Public Engagement (Chair)
Lee Oliver (LMO) – Head of Public Services Development
Susannah Baccardax (SB) – Senior Project Manager, Strategic Projects (item 5 only)
Paul Lamey (PL) – User Experience Manager (item 4 only)
Foluke Abiona (FA) – Customer Intelligence Manager
Mark Jones (MJ) – Customer Intelligence Assistant (Minutes)
Delegates
Dr Geoff Monks (GM) – Academic Users
Graham Woolgar (GW) – On site Personal Interest Users
Nell Darby (ND) – Online Users
Margaret O’Sullivan (MO’S) – County/External Archives
Jo Pugh (JP) – Student Users
Kristina Bedford (KB) – Map Room Users
Carol Beardmore (CB) – County/External Archives
Anne Samson (AS) – On site Personal Interest Users
Rosemary Morgan (RM) – Independent Researchers
Dr Martin Farr (MF) – Academic Users
David Shiels (DS) – Early Academic Career Researchers
Apologies
Jacqui Kirk (JK) – Independent Researchers
Nigel Browne-Davies (NBD) – Equality and Diversity
Item
Action
1.
Minutes, Matters Arising and general updates
1.1
COS welcomed Dr Geoff Monks to the User Advisory Group. Geoff has replaced
Professor Grace Ioppolo as a representative for academic users. You can find out
more about Geoff, and all the other UAG delegates, here.
1.2
COS explained that GW will remain a UAG delegate, representing on site personal
interest users, while we go out to re-recruit. She added that Susan Moore may
also agree to return as a representative for Map Room users if no replacement has
been found for her by the time of the next UAG meeting.
Page 1 of 9
1.3
(Item 1.10 09/15) COS confirmed that she and GW met to discuss the digitisation
of the Royal Navy cards. GW reported that it had been agreed that the digitisation
of the cards would be a priority for the financial year 2016-2017, subject to funding
being available.
1.4
(Item 2.1 09/15) See agenda item 7.
1.5
(Item 2.5 09/15) See agenda item 7.
1.6
(Item 3.1 09/15) COS explained that we would return to this item once the new
Record Copying service has been launched.
1.7
(Item 6.2 09/15) COS explained that Emma Allen has now left TNA but that PL will
be giving a presentation at today’s UAG meeting (see agenda item 4).
1.8
COS confirmed that Isobel Hunter has now been appointed the Head of Archives
Sector Development.
2.
Business Plan strategies – an opportunity for UAG input
2.1
COS gave a brief overview of TNA’s new four-year strategy, Archives Inspire
2015-19, which was officially launched at this year’s Discovering Collections,
Discovering Communities conference in October. She also circulated copies of the
promotional brochure produced to accompany the launch. She explained that the
strategy is very outward facing, focussing on the key audiences for TNA – the
public, academics, the archive sector and government, with a core theme of digital
running throughout. The strategy has been published on TNA’s website. Take a
look here.
2.2
RM, speaking on behalf of Susan Moore, pleaded for any future cuts to not affect
basic research services.
COS acknowledged Susan’s concerns.
2.3
MF queried whether there was any indication of a change in footfall at TNA over
the last few years.
LMO explained that orders of original documents have remained relatively stable,
though he acknowledged that there was a slight dip during London’s hosting of the
Olympic Games in 2012. He added that we are cataloguing, and in some cases
re-cataloguing, more and more material, which has promoted the use of original
records. There has, however, been a noticeable decline in the number of people
coming to look at digitised records over the last 5 years, as people choose to
remain at home and purchase subscriptions to the sites available to view for free
on site at Kew. It was acknowledged that there had been a slight increase in
footfall over the last month following the launch of the 1939 Register, but that the
numbers were not comparable with those experienced during similarly high profile
launches, such as that of the 1911 census.
LMO went on to explain that data obtained from surveys conducted on site show
that people generally come for 5 hours or more per day and that the majority of
visitors travel from ‘hotspots’ running along the M3/M4 corridor. Equally, it was
noted that there are areas, relatively close by, where TNA has surprisingly little
reach, such as those within the UB postcode. This does not appear to be about
TNA per se but more about social demographics – people from those areas do not
generally seem to visit archives at all. LMO explained that TNA has, however,
Page 2 of 9
been involved in outreach work with schools located in such areas (Southall,
Tower Hamlets, Bethnal Green) and that we teach around 11,000 children each
year on site at Kew. He emphasised that all the traditional measures of an
archive’s success in relation to footfall do not capture this sort of data, or, for
example, the number of people coming to view exhibitions or attend events.
Footfall data generally focuses on the number of people who use the reading
rooms, whereas the reality is that there are now many different areas of demand
that need to be taken into consideration.
MO’S suggested that the length of stay and the range of resources people are
using should also be taken into consideration, noting that it is an important aspect
of public engagement.
LO agreed that it is significant. He explained that a lot of it is about preparation –
as more and more can now be done before arrival on site (downloads, catalogue
searches etc.), we have noticed that people are increasingly arriving and saying,
“I’ve done that – what’s next?”
2.4
GW suggested that the UAG delegates need more information on what choices
are being made by TNA – are the goals ‘this or that’, or are they already decided?
COS explained that TNA have to set a strategic framework and that the goals are
explained in the strategic plan.
ND added that UAG delegates can only state their priorities and try to help inform
TNA’s thinking.
3.
UAG Recruitment – an update
3.1
COS explained that we had a very disappointing response to our recent
recruitment drive for new UAG delegates. She stated that we will be redoubling our
efforts and that there will be a second push in the New Year. We are currently
looking to recruit three new UAG delegates – a representative for family history
societies, a representative for Map Room users, and a representative for on site
personal interest users.
3.2
ND said that she knew a couple of people who were interested in applying but
explained that they felt that they were not suited to represent the groups required
by the current vacant posts.
3.3
CB suggested that it might be worth contacting the Federation of Family History
Societies and the Family and Community Historical Research Society.
3.4
GW reported that the response from User Forum attendees he had approached
had been very negative. He suggested making the UAG vacancies an agenda item
for the next User Forum meeting.
AS further suggested making an announcement about the vacancies on User
Forum meeting days, or on other days when she and/or GW are on site and
available to meet with prospective applicants.
4.
Accessibility - update
4.1
PL briefly outlined how accessibility of our digital services works at TNA – how we
do it, what we are doing better and how we still need to improve. He explained that
Page 3 of 9
FA
what we mean by ‘accessibility’ is making sure everyone can access our website,
regardless of their skill, their ability or their browsing technology, and that it
particularly relates to disabilities – it is thinking about people with cognitive
impairments, physical impairments, learning disabilities, ability and technology
issues, and making sure we design our digital services with those things in mind.
The web content accessibility guidelines we work to can be viewed here.
A guide introducing the different components that make up our webpages - how
they should appear and behave - can be viewed here.
PL further explained that in the future, in a bid to better understand and meet the
needs of all users of our digital services, we will be looking to carry out more work
in partnership with agencies who will recruit people to carry out testing on our
website. He stressed that it is important for the design team to observe such
testing sessions, as it is difficult to get the same kind of value by simply reading a
report.
4.2
CB queried whether videos on TNA’s website have subtitles.
PL stated that some do, but not all - we have subtitles for our information based
videos, and all new ones, such as the one we are currently developing for Record
Copying, will also have subtitles. He explained that creating transcriptions for all
video content (including webinars) is more of a challenge, mainly due to a lack of
resources. He indicated, however, that transcriptions of all audio and video content
is the ultimate goal.
ND asked if all subtitling is done in-house.
PL explained that it is.
GM wondered if subtitles are physically typed in, or whether there is a voice
recognition programme that is/could be used.
LO explained that we are currently looking into products with automated subtitle
and translation facilities.
5.
Shakespeare anniversary plans – an update
5.1
SB provided details of our plans to mark the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare’s
death. She announced that we will be holding an exhibition, in collaboration with
King’s College London, at Somerset House from 3 February 2016 to 29 May 2016.
The exhibition will be entitled By Me, William Shakespeare: A Life in Writing. It will
explore the social impact of his plays, the birth of the Globe Theatre, and will
include a retelling of the story of his will. You can find out more about the exhibition
here.
5.2
COS explained that this exhibition is very much a part of Archives Inspire, and that
it is a new venture for TNA – curating and collaborating on an exhibition with
another cultural institution; taking our place in that cultural sector where we have
previously been rather shy.
5.3
GM asked if there is much publicity planned.
SB confirmed that there will be. She stated that there will be a press
announcement and that there will be a dedicated spokesperson based at King’s
Page 4 of 9
College London.
5.4
RM asked if there will be a shared website
SB confirmed that there will be and that King’s College London will administer the
bookings for the exhibition. The exhibition website can be found here.
Information about other events marking the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare’s
death can be found here.
6.
Space Programme - update
6.1
LMO reported that the designers have now presented their initial plans to the
Executive Team and the Management Board, and that they have been met
favourably. He explained that they are effectively a set of layout plans and
stressed that they are by no means definitive – we are now pulling apart and
refining the plans. LMO stated that this process will last around four months and
will involve a number of pilots of new things. For example, in the new calendar
year we will be moving the reception desk to the corner of the link to see what
impact this has. There will also be a new exhibition space in the open reading
room on the first floor (between Start Here and the Red Enquiries Desk), which will
remain in place for a period of nine months. It was explained that it is all about
trying out different activities on the first floor and considering whether the exhibition
space works - whether it is in the right place. LMO added that we will also be
looking at giving public access to the link on the first floor and assessing the
changes we intend to make to the ceiling in the public restaurant area.
6.2
GW noted that the new exhibition space will be where he prefers to sit when he is
using the open reading room on the first floor. He explained that he likes sitting
there because the desks are bare, and that he does not always want a desk with a
computer terminal on it. He queried whether the bare desks will be relocated.
LMO confirmed that the desks will be relocated.
6.3
RM wondered whether the new exhibition space might block out the natural light
on the first floor.
LMO stated that it won’t, as it won’t be that big – it will be no more than 6ft tall, with
no walls and will be mainly display cases.
COS added that the designers are actually looking to optimise light in the public
spaces, as it has been recognised that we are not currently realising our potential.
6.4
RM asked if the Space Programme was just about public space.
LMO explained that it is broadly focussed on Q1, but not exclusively – the
designers have looked at the whole building. He added that we will also be looking
to reveal some of the original architectural features of the building..
6.5
CB suggested that this might be an opportunity to think about inviting some of
those community groups mentioned earlier, who don’t currently use archives, into
TNA.
LMO explained that we are already trying things out - we have established a popup space in the corner of the Link, which currently contains an installation
displaying school children’s interpretation of Magna Carta, and we will be looking
Page 5 of 9
at using the other corners for further pop-up displays.
6.6
RM noted that the London Family History Centre, currently based in the first floor
open reading room, take up a quite a lot of space. She asked if they are still
moving out.
LMO explained that they have purchased new premises and that we are currently
discussing what kind of legacy service they might be able to offer when they move
out. He noted that their staff provide different skills and a service which is
complementary to the one we provide at TNA - the biggest impact was not them
arriving but will be when they move out, now that people are used to them being
here.
7.
Delegate submitted items:
 1939 register and access issues: - TNA references; QA and
transcriptions
 Map room and advanced order
 Map room delegate and map room staff
 Map room and UV lamps
7.1
RM: Why have FMP removed the TNA reference numbers from the Search
Preview pages in the 1939 Register? This is making it difficult, if not impossible in
some cases, to ascertain whether you have found the correct household before
spending a great deal of money on “unlocking” a household. FindMyPast will find
it harder to recoup their costs this way, as people will simply stop using it. What
was in the original licensing agreement regarding this aspect? Surely with all the
testing that they had “apparently” done, after learning their lesson from last year,
they could have got it right first time this time, and not “messed with” the website 5
days after launch?
LMO explained that there has been some low-level infringement of terms and
conditions led by bloggers on specialist genealogy forums, involving the deliberate
manipulation of TNA catalogue references within the image metadata on the site.
FindMyPast and TNA have worked together to manage this, with the result that
catalogue references can only now be used within the advanced search function,
but they are still displayed in paid images and transcriptions which a customer
views or downloads, and should still be used when citing images or information
from the Register in published works.
RM contended that by taking away the TNA catalogue reference, 95% of legitimate
users are being penalised – they don’t want an original image, they are simply
trying to make sure that they have the right household.
JP added that that is the nature of what digital historians do. It is not abuse - it is
research.
LMO explained that, unfortunately, there had been evidence of systematic abuse.
He stated that he would obtain more information on this matter from our Licensing
team and report back to the UAG in March.
7.2
RM: There seems to be an enormous number of transcription errors, both in street
names, individuals’ names and their dates of birth, as well as some
occupations. Some of these errors in birth dates have resulted in living persons
being shown as un-redacted and therefore visible for all to see! Could we please
have some information about the Accuracy Checking Process, and its oversight by
Page 6 of 9
LMO
TNA, as specified in the licensing agreement? I understand that FMP "have
committed to an accuracy of 98.5% of readable records across the whole
dataset”, according to their own website. I would like to humbly suggest that they
may not have achieved that, although it does depend on how they have defined
“readable records".
LMO explained that 98.5% is the standard target for all of our digitisation projects.
JP queried whether that figure was based on word errors or character errors.
LMO acknowledged the difference and stated that he would check and report back
to the UAG at their next meeting.
LMO went on to explain that the 1939 Register involved the transcription of over
41 million records, of which, at the time of its launch, 73% were open and therefore
visible to the public. This means that 615,000 records did contain errors at the time
of launch. LMO explained that pushing for even higher levels of accuracy would
have made the project financially unviable. He further explained that the 1939
Register continues to self-heal by absorbing staff and customer transcription error
reports, and therefore, with usage, accuracy levels will increase over time. LMO
added that since the launch of the 1939 Register, a data matching exercise on
deaths has been undertaken with the General Register Office, which has resulted
in a further 3 million names being opened up. He explained that when the register
was originally transcribed, some of the entries already had a ‘D’ code next to them,
which means the individual is deceased. It transpires that doctors were only
mandated to give that information until 1952, and thereafter it was voluntary. The
register stopped being updated at all in 1991.Therefore, just because someone
was dead before 1991, it does not always mean that there was a ‘D’ code placed
next to their name. The percentage of records still closed is now down to 24.4%,
and there are a further 35,000 partial data matches which are currently being
researched further.
7.3
KB: There appears to be a problem with pre-ordering documents for the Map
Room - it has become quite a regular occurrence for the advance order to register
as being successfully processed, but to find on arrival that the citation has been
deleted from one's order list if it is being worked on by staff. TNA terminals register
such documents as unavailable, and it would be extremely helpful if this
information could be accessed on home-computers, to allow for rescheduling a
visit to coincide with when it becomes available again.
LMO advised that this issue is not exclusive to the Map Room. He explained that
when you are looking at Discovery at home, you are not getting real time data on
whether a particular record is available or not. Technically there are two problems
with streaming live information onto the website. Firstly, as a government agency,
we have stricter controls and guidelines to adhere to than a commercial operation.
Secondly, the "in use" information would have to come directly from our ordering
interface, and this contains the core location and status information for documents
(for instance if a document is open or closed). Streaming the data directly would
mean that we would be more susceptible to hacking. If the main location database
were hacked we could essentially lose all of the document location and closure
information for the collection. We could stream data on a delay - i.e. update
availability information overnight to update the web site version of Discovery - but if
anything we would be displaying that a document that is now available wasn't
available yesterday - which is of little benefit to anyone. There is a comments box
on the advance order form and people are encouraged, if they are coming to view
one or more files in particular or are coming a long distance, to let us know via the
comments box that they would like to be informed if one or more particular
Page 7 of 9
LMO
documents are unavailable. Although you can place an advance order for up to six
weeks before your intended date of visit, they are only processed (physically
produced from the repositories) the day before your visit, so it is only at this point
that we will know that a document is unavailable. Placing an advance order online
for a future date does not prevent a reader actually in the reading rooms at The
National Archives from ordering it until we process the advance order.
7.4
KB queried whether Map Room Staff and the User Advisory Delegate for Map
Room Users could liaise together about user’s needs.
COS explained that it shouldn’t be necessary to solicit such information as we will
already know if things are not working correctly (via the Enquiry Service Managers,
who monitor all on site operational issues throughout the day).
7.5
With reference to the use of UV lamps in the Map Room, KB called attention to
feedback expressing concerns that new health and safety regulations were likely
to get in the way of research.
LMO explained that we are trying to find a way in which users can still use UV
lamps when they need to in such a way that protects their health and the safety of
the documents, which the current processes do not do. The main methods of
protection are monitoring the duration of exposure (which should be no more than
15 minutes per day), controlling distance (in terms of how close the document is to
the user and other users, and how close it is to the document) and the use of
protective equipment. LMO explained that we are looking at a solution whereby,
rather than sitting and holding a lamp over a document for some time and reading
it, we will provide a means whereby the user can capture a UV enhanced
photograph of the document to take away to read. He assured KB that we are
conscious of the needs of those people who use UV lamps and why they need to
use them.
8.
Proposed UAG meeting dates 2016
8.1
COS advised the group that the proposed meeting dates are:





15 March 2016
21 June 2016
20 September 2016
06 December 2016
14 March 2017
9.
Paper updates on:
 Cataloguing
 Digitisation
9.1
The group’s attention was directed to the paper updates which had been
distributed in advance of the meeting.
9.2
JP queried whether it is the case that record copying is not currently considered
the same as ‘digitisation’, inasmuch as there is no way of ingesting the result of
that digitisation.
COS explained that the systematic changes we are making to the Record Copying
Page 8 of 9
service will, we hope, give us the future capability to able to do this, but not as part
of the initial release. She confirmed that the new system, which is due to launch in
early 2016, will link into Discovery.
10.
Any other business
10.1
COS briefly outlined the recent changes in the organisational structure of TNA.
She explained that Mary Gledhill, Commercial Director, has now left the
organisation and that we are currently recruiting for a new Digital Director. John
Sheridan, formerly Head of Legislation Services, is acting as Interim Digital
Director. Mary’s commercial responsibilities have moved to Clem Brohier, Chief
Operating Officer.
You can see the updated organisational chart here.
10.2
COS gave a brief overview of what the government’s recent Comprehensive
Spending Review means for TNA. She explained that our revenue funding
throughout the next four years will remain at the same level as 2015-16 – a ‘flatcash’ settlement. She suggested that this was a very good outcome for TNA. We
will still have to manage our budgets and resources very tightly, but it does mean
we will be able to continue to meet our fundamental obligations and to take
forward the ambitious plans we have set out in Archives Inspire.
10.3
JP queried whether any particular projects or work streams are likely to cease as a
result of the recent machinery of government change, which has seen TNA’s
sponsoring department change from the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) to the
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).
COS confirmed that that would not be the case – we simply sit within a different
sponsoring department within government.
10.4
MO’S repeated her request for an update on TNA’s sales monitoring performance.
COS confirmed that James Travers of Archives Sector Development will be asked
to provide an update at the next UAG meeting, in March 2016.
10.5
ND informed the UAG that she has accepted a new freelance job editing Your
Family Tree magazine.
Next Meeting: Tuesday 15 March 2016, 12:00-14:30
Page 9 of 9
FA