The Drexel University Archives acknowledges that archival collections do not represent all groups equitably and that not everyone has the same access to archives. We endeavor to more fully and accurately represent all parts of Drexel’s history and to provide access to our collections in the broadest sense. Please read our complete statement on inclusivity:

Archivists have a responsibility to society to make the historic record as accessible as possible to as many people as possible.

While our collections are open to anyone, we recognize that not everyone feels welcome in an archives. Some of the factors that influence whether a person approaches an archives in the first place and how welcome they feel in our digital and physical spaces are not within our control—but many of them are.

The archival record generally and the archival record of Drexel University in particular contain gaps and silences. Individuals and groups are unrepresented, underrepresented, or misrepresented. Sometimes this is due to happenstance, but often it reflects decisions and practices of archivists past and present, as well as larger patterns of exclusion and marginalization at Drexel and throughout society.

Drexel University Archives staff constantly make decisions that affect how well and how badly different groups are represented. We make decisions about what materials to collect, how much time we spend organizing or inventorying a particular collection, how collection guides are worded and how detailed they are, and which materials to digitize next. While we try to make the best decisions we can, we recognize that our actions may be flawed or lacking in ways we cannot currently predict.

Archival material may include language and ideas that are harmful or offensive, reflecting the attitudes and opinions of their creators and the social context in which they were created. Descriptions of collections may also include harmful or offensive language, since preferred terminology and archival best practices are always changing.

Please read our statement on harmful content in archival collections (below) for information on how we handle harmful content in archival material and in collection descriptions, and how we approach creating new collection descriptions and editing old descriptions.

Making the Drexel University Archives inclusive is an ongoing process that requires long-term, sincere engagement with individuals and groups from all parts of the University, past and present, as well as beyond the University.

In order to make the Drexel University Archives more inclusive:

• We seek to provide access to our collections in the broadest sense.
• We endeavor to make everyone feel welcome in the archives and provide our fullest support to researchers from any background.
• We aim to counteract gaps and silences in the archival record by making our collecting practices and the ways we describe collections more inclusive.
• We help to make the archives profession more inclusive by providing hands-on experience to students at different levels and from any background.
• We expand opportunities for Drexel students and others to engage with primary source materials and to become familiar with the principles of archival research and archival practice.
• In order to more fully and accurately represent all aspects of Drexel’s history, we seek to work with groups that are currently underrepresented or misrepresented in our current collections, including past and current students, staff, and faculty.
• We collaborate with colleagues in the Philadelphia area and beyond to make archival collections and spaces, as well as the archival profession, more inclusive.

 

If you encounter any harmful or offensive language or content in Drexel University archival collections on this website, in our finding aids, or in our digitized collections, please contact us at archives@drexel.edu. Please also contact us if you have any questions or suggestions about this statement. It is a work in progress, and we welcome feedback.

Drexel University archivists are taking the following steps to address offensive language and content in our archival collections:

1. Updating old collection descriptions. Drexel University Archives staff strive to use respectful and accurate language to describe all our historical materials. However, we acknowledge that language, conventions, and archival best practices are always changing, and that language that was considered acceptable by archivists in the past is sometimes no longer adequate or appropriate. When we discover unacceptable language in collection descriptions, we will update them to remove any language that could harm researchers or that is offensive to the people being described.
2. Flagging historical materials that contain offensive or harmful language or images. Some materials in collections may contain offensive language or imagery. In the interests of historical integrity, we are not removing these images or words from archival materials, but we will provide a note about these contents in the item’s description. This may be a note in the description of a digitized item, or a line in a collection guide that you would read before requesting access to an item in person. We do this so that researchers may decide for themselves if they wish to view an item knowing it has potentially harmful content.
3. Retaining harmful language in collection descriptions when it is has great historic value. Sometimes we retain offensive or harmful terms in collection descriptions for historical accuracy or to document the issues and social context of a specific time and the attitudes and opinions of the people who created the material. Some situations where this might occur are:
   • Organization names that include outdated terms (for example, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People)
   • An individual identifying themselves by a term that is no longer favored by people within that group
   • Title or language from a published book, article, film, or song.
   • We will sometimes retain language from original historical documents in collection descriptions when it provides additional value; although we always try to clearly indicate (through quotation marks) which language is from an historical source and which language comes from Drexel University Archives.
4. Favoring terms used by the communities and individuals in our collections and using people-first language. When creating new descriptions and updating old ones, we strive to use terms that communities and individuals used to describe themselves. If that is unclear, we will use people-first language (describing a trait as something a person has rather than who they are, for example, “a person with diabetes” instead of “a diabetic”). However, we acknowledge that this practice is not universally preferred.

If you have any questions about this statement or about language used elsewhere in our online materials, please contact us at archives@drexel.edu.

Additional Resources

For library and archives professionals interested in doing similar work, we encourage you to read the annotated bibliography found in the Archives for Black Lives in Philadelphia’s “Anti-Racist Description Resources,” linked below. This resource focuses on race and racism in archival collection descriptions, but the bibliography covers many related issues of representation in the archives.

• Archives for Black Lives in Philadelphia, “Anti-Racist Description Resources” October 2019: The first part of this guide is intended for archivists who want to remove racist and other harmful language from their collection descriptions, but is also helpful for researchers and members of the public who want to learn more about the work archives are doing around this issue. It includes an extensive bibliography that will be of great interest to other archivists and librarians who want to do similar work, although some resources are behind paywalls or require subscriptions.
• Dominique Luster, “Archives Have the Power to Boost Marginalized Voices,” TEDxPittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, June 2018: This 8-minute TED talk from archivist Dominique Luster is an excellent overview of why representation in archival collections is important and how archives can interact with and support the communities they represent.
• Sam Winn, “The Hubris of Neutrality in Archives,” Mid-Atlantic Regional Archives Conference, Newark, NJ, April 2017: This presentation from an archives conference uses some academic language and archives jargon, but provides a thorough explanation of why archivists should pay close attention to the language they use to describe historical materials.