個人檔案不僅是一個人一生的總合紀錄，更重要地，可以補充國家歷史記憶，對研究社會歷史、風俗民情具有重要的參考價值。但基於個人檔案之特殊產生方式及不具固定書寫格式等性質，檔案典藏單位在個人檔案的整理實務上，如何進行最佳的編排與描述，以提升檔案資訊的有效利用，亦成為重要的研究課題。
本研究採用「文獻分析法」、「深度訪談法」及「比較法」進行研究。以具代表性的兩大典藏機構(國史館、中央研究院)為研究對象，中央研究院內以近史所檔案館、近史所胡適紀念館、史語所傅斯年圖書館、台史所古文書室等四個單位為代表。首先藉由文獻分析及深度訪談探究個人檔案典藏單位對於個人檔案編排與描述之現況，然後加以比較分析。
根據研究結果，對於國內個人檔案典藏單位編排與描述實務，提出結論如下：一、編排實務現況：(一)多數檔案典藏單位無法遵守原始順序原則，(二)檔案典藏單位缺乏一致性的編排原則；二、描述實務現況：(一)檔案典藏單位缺乏一致性的內容描述標準，(二)多數檔案典藏單位缺乏全宗及系列層級的描述，(三)「題名、摘要、日期、實體描述、備註、使用限制」是各單位共同描述的項目，(四)大部分檔案典藏單位未進行權威控制工作；三、相較於一般檔案，個人檔案的編排與描述面臨更多的問題與挑戰。
最後就前述研究結論，提出建議：一、擬定一致性的編排原則與描述標準；二、將個人檔案納入全國性檔案聯合目錄之中；三、強化檔案產生者的描述；四、加強全宗及系列層級的描述；五、建置個人檔案人名權威檔；六、加強個人檔案整編人員的專業訓練；七、成立個人檔案特殊興趣團體。 / Personal archives are not just the records of one's life. More importantly, they are contributing to a nation's history and are valuable in research on social history and cultural habits. However, because of the special way that personal archives are produced and their lack of unified formats, how the arrangement and descriptions of these archives are managed by repositories to elevate their value as resources becomes an important question to be discussed.
This study used "literary analysis," "in-depth interviews" and "comparisons" on our subjects and it used two representative archives: the Academia Historica and Academia Sinica of Taiwan. Within the Academia Sinica, we chose the Archives and Hu Shih Memorial Hall of the Institute of Modern History, the Library of the Institute of History and Philology, and the Paleography Archives of the Institute of Taiwan History for our study. First, we explored the situations of the arrangements and descriptions of personal archives in these institutions through literary analysis and in-depth interviews; then we ran the results through comparative analysis.
According to our findings, we reached the following conclusions on the current arrangements and descriptions of personal archive repositories in Taiwan: First, on arrangement: 1) most repositories do not follow the original order, and 2) repositories often lack unified formatting principles. Second, on descriptions: 1) repositories lack unified content description guidelines, 2) most repositories lack descriptions for fonds and series, 3) common elements shared by various repositories are: title of unit, abstract, date of unit, physical description, notes and restrictions on use, 4) most repositoires are not under authority control. Third, compared to public records, the arrangements and descriptions of personal archives are more problematic and challenging.
Finally, based on the aforementioned conclusions, we suggest: 1) a set of unified arrangement principles and description guidelines be set, 2) personal archives be added into the contents of national archives, 3) more emphasis be placed on the descriptions of creators, 4) more emphasis be placed on the descriptions of fonds and series, 5) name authority files be established, 6) professional training for personal archivers be provided, and 7) interest groups for personal archives be established.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0095155016 |
| Creators | 廖淑媚, Liao, Shu-Mei |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds