(Abstract)
The Public Records Act was enacted in 2000, and each national university established a record center and hired a record manager, but until now, the management of university records has not reached the evaluation standard. In this regard, t...
(Abstract)
The Public Records Act was enacted in 2000, and each national university established a record center and hired a record manager, but until now, the management of university records has not reached the evaluation standard. In this regard, the National Archives of Korea (NDL) included the task of encouraging self-inspection in its university records management guidelines.
In this study, the actual state of record management of the colleges and departments' administrative offices of K University was investigated and the improvement plan was presented through records management and operation status of other university record centers established as independent systems.
The results of the survey and interviews with staffs working at the colleges and departments' administrative offices of K University on the actual state and awareness of records management are as follows.
First, staffs of the administrative office of colleges and departments didn’t systematically carry out records management due to the lack of knowledge and headquarters-centered records management. Futhermore, the guidelines for records management of departments and colleges were not clear.
Second, staffs of the administrative office of colleges and departments felt the need for records management and education, but records management work was perceived as having a lower importance than other tasks and thus was recognized as incidental work.
Through the analysis of the above results, the problems of K university records management were eventually seen as 'poor records management of colleges and departments', 'lack of awareness of records management of the staff 'and ' difficulties to the operation of the university record center'. The improvement plan for the aforementioned problems are as follows.
First, measures to voluntarily participate in the recording work should be devised to improve the awareness of records management by the staff of colleges and departments.
Second, guidelines for records management of colleges and departments should be prepared, and education should be developed and implemented through the opinions of the staff.
Third, one record researcher is currently in charge of records management, and there is a limit to work all the role of public records management, university history records management, and permanent record center. Therefore, increasing of manpower and reorganizing of records center is needed.
Fourth, the policy for records management, such as the establishment of essential education for records management education, accurate standard establishment for the role of university record center, and development of evaluation tools suitable for university characteristics, should be improved.
Records of colleges and departments are primary evidence of administration and should be systematically managed given the importance of information and value. In addition, if records management is carried out systematically from the production stage, records will prove the history of the university in the future and instill pride in the university's members.