Training in Computational Archival Science: Do CAS Educational Frameworks meet Professional Expectations?

This paper explores the evolving landscape of training for archival professionals in the context of big data and emerging technologies. By comparing two educational frameworks—the CAS framework, developed from computational thinking research and CAS research papers, and the InterPARES framework, based on empirical studies with archivists working with AI/ML, we identify areas of alignment and divergence. While both frameworks share significant concordance, suggesting a growing consensus on integrating computing into archival work, key differences in their approaches (learning outcomes vs. competencies) and focus areas (such as work practices, systems thinking, and cybersecurity) highlight the need for further discourse among archival scholars, educators, and practitioners. These distinctions must be addressed before formalizing CAS educational frameworks. This paper also initiates efforts to integrate emerging technological competencies by bridging the CAS and InterPARES frameworks, emphasizing the value of complementary perspectives from both professional practice and academic research. We argue that such integration is essential for developing robust competency frameworks in archival education, particularly within higher education's professional programs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-12-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/bigdata62323.2024.10825962
Primary Topic
Teaching and Learning Programming
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Training in Computational Archival Science: Do CAS Educational Frameworks meet Professional Expectations?

Richard Arias‐Hernández, Victoria L. Lemieux
Teaching and Learning Programming
article

Training in Computational Archival Science: Do CAS Educational Frameworks meet Professional Expectations?

Richard Arias‐Hernández, Victoria L. Lemieux
article en

Abstract

This paper explores the evolving landscape of training for archival professionals in the context of big data and emerging technologies. By comparing two educational frameworks—the CAS framework, developed from computational thinking research and CAS research papers, and the InterPARES framework, based on empirical studies with archivists working with AI/ML, we identify areas of alignment and divergence. While both frameworks share significant concordance, suggesting a growing consensus on integrating computing into archival work, key differences in their approaches (learning outcomes vs. competencies) and focus areas (such as work practices, systems thinking, and cybersecurity) highlight the need for further discourse among archival scholars, educators, and practitioners. These distinctions must be addressed before formalizing CAS educational frameworks. This paper also initiates efforts to integrate emerging technological competencies by bridging the CAS and InterPARES frameworks, emphasizing the value of complementary perspectives from both professional practice and academic research. We argue that such integration is essential for developing robust competency frameworks in archival education, particularly within higher education's professional programs.

University of British Columbia (CA)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Teaching and Learning Programming
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.