Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: THEend8_
FIT5206 2023 DIGITAL CONTINUITY
ASSIGNMENT 3: Evaluation of a Community Digital Archive
from a digital continuity perspective
Summary
The purpose of this assessment is to raise awareness of the range of
considerations that have to be taken into account when developing
digital continuity projects. You are required to assume the role of an
auditor, and undertake a partial evaluation of a digital community
archive solution using criteria from the Trustworthy Repositories Audit
and Certification checklist
NOTE: this is an Individual assignment, although Group interviews will
be held during the Week 12 Applied Class. You must attend these
interviews, both as an interviewee and as an interviewer.
Value 30%
Due Date 1 November 2023
Word Counts 1,500 - 2000 words (excluding references and appendices)
Learning
Outcomes
1. Evaluate and apply archival frameworks, policies and best practice
for the preservation of digital resources as evidence, memory and
cultural heritage;
2. Specify functional requirements for and evaluate digital repository
platforms, technologies, systems and tools;
3. Identify and evaluate digital archiving tools and services for users;
4. Evaluate digital archiving initiatives/projects in the community and
cultural heritage sectors.
Assessment
Criteria
1. Understanding of evaluation of a digital community archive from a
digital continuity perspective
2. Application of a pre-determined set of evaluation criteria
3. Research and investigative effort
4. Identification, coverage and use of relevant resources
5. Presentation of findings including citations and bibliography
Generative AI
tools
In this assessment, you must not use generative artificial
intelligence (AI) to generate any materials or content in relation
to the assessment task.
YOUR TASK
The Trustworthy Repositories Audit and Certification: Criteria and Checklist provides
“criteria to measure the ability of a given repository to preserve digital content in a way that
serves the repository’s stakeholder community” https://www.crl.edu/archiving-
preservation/digital-archives/metrics-assessing-and-certifying/trac
The criteria are divided into three sections, each of which assess areas which are essential to
evaluate from a digital continuity perspective:
A Organizational Infrastructure
B Digital Object Management
C Technologies, Technical Infrastructure and Security
Your role is that of auditor, focusing on just one of either section A or B. You will be
allocated a community archive to evaluate from those developed by your colleagues for
Assignment 2, and you will carry out your audit activity by interviewing fellow students in the
Week 12 Applied Class, as well as working from their written report, if shared.
Prepare for your interview by reviewing the TRAC checklist and deciding whether you would
like to focus on section A or B. Think of what information you would need to find out.
Interviewees can provide additional information to that documented in their assignment reports,
and speculate on future work (e.g. ‘we will definitely develop a disaster plan!’). The focus is on
digital preservation from a recordkeeping approach. Note: this is not primarily a technical report
or an evaluation from a technical point of view.
Your evaluation will be summarised in an audit report, accompanied by the relevant portion of
the checklist.
Your report will include:
1. A front page identifying which community you evaluated, and which set of criteria (A
or B) you focused on.
2. An explanation of how you carried out your evaluation (e.g. by conducting interviews
and review of written documentation)
3. Discussion of findings (related to your completed checklist), including an overall
evaluation of the community’s digital archive’s trustworthiness from the perspective of
organisational infrastructure, or digital object management (whichever you had
focussed on).
4. An evaluation of the relevance of the developed guidelines for the community group in
relation your specific findings, highlighting aspects that might need additional
guidelines (related to the criteria that you investigated).
5. Discussion of the ease of use and appropriateness of the TRAC checklist for a
community group.
6. An appendix with your completed checklist. When completing the checklist, it is
acceptable to indicate n/a to some of the specific questions, but in these cases a brief
note should be included to indicate why the question is not applicable to the digital
archive.
7. Full citations in the text of the paper to all references you have used in your analysis,
and a complete Reference List using the APA7 Style.
ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION OF MARKS
The weighting of marks that will be allocated to the various components will be as follows:
• Explanation of your approach, criteria evaluated and introduction to the community
archive audited (1 & 2) (15%)
• Discussion of findings and overall evaluation, with references to relevant literature (3)
(30%)
• Evaluation of the guidelines provided to the community group and discussion of the
appropriateness of the TRAC checklist, with references to relevant literature (4 & 5)
(30%)
• Completed Appendix checklist, including evidence and findings (6) (25%)
NOTE: for details of what is included in each of these components, see the relevant section
under what needs to be included in the Report (above).
REFERENCING
You must acknowledge any sources that you use in this assignment, so that it is clear what are
your ideas and what are the ideas of others. Use the APA7 Citation Style
to provide enough information about
your references so that a future reader may locate and read the original source.
Plagiarism occurs when students fail to acknowledge that the ideas of others are being
used. Specifically it occurs when:
• other people’s work and/or ideas are paraphrased and presented without a
reference;
• other students’ work is copied or partly copied;
• other people’s designs, codes or images are presented as the student’s own
work;
• phrases and passages are used verbatim without quotation marks and/or without
a reference to the author or a web page;
• lecture notes are reproduced without due acknowledgement.