49

The Manuscript as Question: Teaching 
Primary Sources in the Archives—The 
China Missions Project

Michelle McCoy

Michelle McCoy is the Bibliographic Assistant at DePaul University Special Collections and Archives and 
will graduate with her MLIS from Dominican University in spring 2009. She has undergraduate degrees 
in Art and Education. ©Michelle McCoy

The collaborative effort between two Special Collections librarians and a 
history professor at DePaul University led to a quarter-long undergradu-
ate project in the archives using China Missions Correspondence. In a 
reversal of traditional methods that assumes archival use to answer a 
question, this project looks at the document as the source of the questions. 
A qualitative analysis of student responses from these class sessions 
between 2002 and 2008 reveals the impact that direct experience has 
on primary source education and how outreach and user instruction in 
the archives can transform research, education, and the place of special 
collections within the institution. As a case study, this paper examines 
planning, administration, identification, instruction, and assessment of 
the project from the librarians’ perspective.

rchival collections provide 
tangible links to elements of 
history and society. These 
collections are unique clus-

ters of letters, diaries, photos, memos, 
pamphlets, and many other documents 
that offer first-hand accounts of persons, 
groups, places, and/or events. Whether it 
is a word that is blacked out by a censor, 
a flourished cursive hand, doodles in 
the margins, or type that bears the soft 
purplish halos of an early mimeographed 
copy, the mere physicality of these docu-
ments exudes clues about the writer, the 
receiver, and the time period or the 
context. To interact with archival sources 
is an intimate experience; a sensation 
not captured through well-intentioned 
excerpts transcribed in textbooks. These 

materials in their original form have 
been long prized by history professors 
and archivists as the ultimate primary 
source due to their enormous potential 
for teaching students how to evaluate and 
interpret evidence.1

It is these very qualities that make the 
China Missions project at DePaul Univer-
sity so enticing for undergraduate instruc-
tion in historical concepts, methods, and 
materials. Born from a collaborative effort 
between librarians Kathryn DeGraff and 
Morgen MacIntosh Hodgetts and history 
professor Warren Schultz, the project 
contains critical elements beneficial to 
both parties. Since assuming leadership 
of the Special Collections and Archives 
department, DeGraff has been developing 
relationships with faculty and identifying 



50  College & Research Libraries January 2010

collections that could both cater to specific 
disciplines and fulfill the department’s 
commitment to student education and 
use.2 Professor Schultz was interested in 
broadening the reach of primary source 
education by conducting a quarter-long 
project using original materials.3 The proj-
ect’s enduring success, as evidenced by 
student responses spanning 2002–2008, 
depended upon meeting numerous chal-
lenges, not the least of which was getting 
students past any initial skepticisms that 
can result from mentioning “missionary 
priests” and “China” in the same breath 
as “assignment.” 

Despite the wealth of literature sur-
rounding student instruction with main-
stream library resources, accounts and 
analyses from the perspective of librar-
ians in Special Collections departments 
are somewhat scarce. Given the added 
considerations of handling unique and 
fragile materials, the guidance needed to 
provide first-time users the navigational 
confidence to locate materials with a 
finding aid, comparatively smaller de-
partmental staffs, and the psychological 
barriers that many students face when 
confronted with reading rooms, rules, 
and noncirculating rare materials, more 
professional exchange is certainly war-
ranted. The case at hand works through 
these inherent challenges as well as 
examining the larger organizational plan-
ning aspects of outreach, identification, 
administration, and assessment entailed 
in creating and hosting students for this 
quarter-long research project. 

Literature Review
Since the time the China Missions project 
began in 2002, more case studies about 
class assignments in the archives began 
to appear. Most of these accounts were 
written by professors and published in 
educational journals. Little at this time has 
been written from the perspective of the 
Special Collections librarians. However, 
the educational literature is significant in 
that these cases outline the active learn-
ing and critical thinking components that 

were met as a result of an assignment in 
an archive or special collections setting. 
In addition, these success stories promote 
the desired faculty and librarian col-
laboration necessary to encourage further 
outreach efforts.

University of Colorado German pro-
fessor Ann Schmiesing engaged with 
the Special Collections Department to 
specifically stimulate an active and col-
laborative learning environment where 
alternative sources could be employed in 
“student-directed exploration.”4 English 
professor Carol A. Senf describes bringing 
her undergraduate Victorian studies class 
to the Special Collections Department 
as a means to encourage students move 
beyond their tendency to use “already 
digested” secondary sources that were 
often chosen without much thought.5 
Senf also notes that archival sources can 
dramatically reduce plagiarism, since 
their individual nature means that sec-
ondary sources defining and analyzing 
a particular document are less likely to 
exist.6 Additional benefits of course proj-
ects conducted in the Special Collections, 
as detailed by history professor Marian J. 
Matyn, are an increase in the confidence 
level of student research and papers that 
are better informed and more engaging.7

In contrast to these testimonies, Kath-
leen D. Roe writes, “The general lack of 
understanding of archives is painfully 
evident to the archival profession.”8 While 
Roe’s article appeared in 1989, a qualita-
tive study conducted by Elizabeth Yakel 
and detailed in her 2002 article “Listening 
to Users” suggests that this lack of under-
standing persists.9 Yakel interviewed a 
variety of individuals from undergradu-
ate students to professional scholars. The 
findings reveal that many were uncertain 
if they had been to an archive or had used 
a primary source and that, even among 
more experienced researchers, the find-
ing aid that maps the arrangement of an 
archival collection was often a source of 
confusion.10 To Yakel, the survey results 
indicated that, despite an increasing 
awareness of primary sources and their 



Teaching Primary Sources in the Archives  51

educational potential, archival organiza-
tional methods and the integral concept of 
provenance (or the actual “user” aspects) 
continue to be lacking from the instruc-
tion and in literature accounts.11 In other 
words, archival education falls short in 
an environment where the one-shot class 
session is the norm; and, for purposes 
of practicality, course relevant items are 
merely showcased as a means to create 
awareness and invite future use from the 
attending class.12

Nevertheless, class sessions in Special 
Collections are largely the result of part-
nerships and collaborations with faculty 
developed through the outreach efforts of 
librarians. Anna Elise Allison conducted 
a survey in 2005 of Special Collections 
departments with membership to the 
Association of Research Libraries (ARL) 
to assess the nature and extent of their 
user instruction. Of the respondents, 74 
percent reported contacting faculty to 
develop instructional sessions with their 
classes. Allison’s findings also indicate 
that 96 percent of the Special Collections 
departments participate in instruction 
sessions with undergraduates.13 Most of 
these sessions are course related and av-
erage about one hour in length, and only 
20 percent “always” require an assign-
ment within the collections.14 Allison’s 
study also finds that, because professors 
have already identified course-relevant 
materials in conjunction with the Spe-
cial Collections staff, less time is spent 
on how to find sources via the finding 
aids.15 The majority of class sessions with 
undergraduates are more or less orienta-
tions and introductions to the types of 
resources the facility contains.

Finding a diplomatic approach to meet 
the faculty expectations of course-related 
content and the special collections depart-
mental expectations of educating students 
in how to access and use these materials 
is a challenge, particularly in the one-shot 
instructional model. A recent case study 
by Reynolds and Sauter16 combined the 
archive orientation with an assignment. 
While this case study specifically included 

information on how to use a finding aid, 
the students were also given a number 
of pregenerated examples of items that 
would be appropriate for their project. A 
decision was quite possibly made to facili-
tate a class where only so many original 
resources were available on the topic and 
all would be listed in the same finding 
aid. Nonetheless, as with Yakel’s earlier 
contention, Marcia W. Keyser’s findings 
suggest that, if the instruction process is 
not reinforced by actual student use, the 
exercise is diminished.17 In a follow-up 
article to her previous findings about user 
knowledge in the archives, Yakel further 
points out that, without more studies and 
assessment from these archival instruc-
tion sessions, we cannot fully appreciate 
which aspects of the instruction were the 
most helpful to students as opposed to 
the most interesting.18

A 2001 symposium, “Building on 
Strength: Developing an ARL Agenda 
for Special Collections,” focused on how 
to determine and improve the directional 
course of special collections in research 
libraries including collaborative educa-
tional opportunities. From the working 
notes, Robert L. Byrd writes: 

Other types of assignments—choos-
ing and editing a document from a 
pre-selected group of manuscripts, 
writing a brief interpretive essay or 
assessment about a primary docu-
ment or text, and so on—serve the 
purpose of putting the students in 
touch with primary sources and 
providing them with opportuni-
ties to develop their analytical and 
interpretive skills.19 

Thus, a challenge was put forth to 
rethink the traditional models where a 
researcher comes in to answer a ques-
tion or where a selection of materials is 
displayed for students with the hopes 
that their interest would be piqued. Fully 
engaging students requires more actual 
use, and that use is equally effective when 
it stems from a different formula. 



52  College & Research Libraries January 2010

The majority of literature written on 
archival instruction makes note of one or 
more potential barriers to student use. 
Sutton and Knight note that, of the 4,000 
undergraduate students at the University 
of the Pacific, only about 125 in a typical 
year receive a Special Collections orien-
tation, thus leaving a significant number 
unaware of the department’s existence, let 
alone its contents or their use.20 Greg John-
son, Professor and Archives Curator, dis-
cusses the additional levels of anxiety that 
students, particularly undergraduates, 
have about using materials that they can-
not browse, that involve strange systems 
of organizations that are not searchable by 
subject, and that restrict them by numer-
ous rules and regulations.21 Kathleen D. 
Roe notes that there is a perception that 
outside of advanced scholarship, archives 
are merely a “curiosity.”22 Schmiesing and 
Hollis concur that, too often, Special Col-
lections departments have been wrapped 
in the aura of being resources only for 
serious researchers and not for students.23 
Educator Katherine R. Morgan opens her 
case study by noting the common misper-
ceptions of primary sources as “stale ideas 
of moldy texts on brittle paper.”24

To counter these image problems and 
overcome use barriers, Special Collec-
tions educators employ and recommend 
a number of strategies to be used in con-
junction with each other. In “Introducing 
Undergraduate Students to Archives 
and Special Collections,” Greg Johnson 
outlines such pragmatic methods as cre-
ating a welcoming atmosphere, explain-
ing rules and procedures in the context 
of protecting rare and fragile materials, 
tailoring the presentation materials to 
student interest or to the needs of the 
class, and providing handouts to reinforce 
the lesson. Particular importance is placed 
on sessions that build in time for hands-
on examination of the materials used in 
the demonstration.25 Sutton and Knight 
quote Harvard history professor Laurel 
Thatcher Ulrich’s statement, “‘Object-
centered lessons are most effective when 
students can do their own looking.’”26 

This hands-on concept seems to be a 
generally accepted practice nowadays. 
Allison’s 2005 study found that 82 percent 
of responding institutions encouraged 
direct student examination of documents 
during the class session.27

When the aim is to entice future student 
use, sensory components should not be 
overlooked. Visual elements capture at-
tention in the digital age, and Schmiesing 
also contends that a blend of illustrated 
and textual materials is an important 
means of engaging diverse learning 
styles.28 Robyns goes a step further by not-
ing that “guided use” of actual materials 
empowers students to make their own 
research connections.29 To capture a sense 
of a personal and expert connection with 
archival materials, Sutton and Knight ad-
vocate building time into the presentation 
for the professor to relate a story or two 
about his or her own research experiences 
so that students will also connect use with 
a respected authority figure.30 

Background of the China Missions 
Project
Although most of these articles were 
written after the China Missions project 
began, numerous strategies discussed and 
advocated were employed in the History 
199 class sessions at DePaul’s Special 
Collections. Since Kathryn DeGraff took 
over department leadership of the Special 
Collections and Archives at DePaul, she 
has augmented and transformed the col-
lections toward student use to fulfill the 
departmental goals of supporting cur-
riculum through positive and educational 
experiences with primary source materi-
als. She stresses that relationship building 
with faculty is the key component of the 
department’s outreach efforts. Most of 
these collaborations are one-session de-
partmental introductions. They feature 
a selection of course-related materials 
and are conducted with the hope that, 
once students personally encounter these 
unique sources, they will be inspired to 
return to conduct their research. None-
theless, all successful collaborative class 



Teaching Primary Sources in the Archives  53

sessions build goodwill and have the 
potential to encourage future faculty 
collaborations with loftier class use goals. 

 In 2002, Professor Warren Schultz ap-
proached the Special Collections depart-
ment. He was preparing to teach History 
199 Historical Concepts and Methods, 
a required class for history majors. His 
goals were several: “I wanted the students 
to work with original archival material, if 
possible; I wanted to introduce them to 
the time-honored practice of preparation 
of a critical edition of text, complete with 
annotations; I wanted, if possible, for the 
archive to have an international aspect.” 
Schultz was also looking for a structured 
project so that these first-time archive 
users could be effectively guided through 
the principles and methods of historical 
research while actually using original 
materials in the archive. As a result of 
this meeting, DeGraff suggested several 
options, one of which was the China Mis-
sions documents that were part of a newly 
accessioned collection.

In 2001, the DeAndreis-Rosati Memo-
rial Archives (DRMA) collections were 
transferred to DePaul University from St. 
Mary’s of the Barrens Seminary, Perryville, 
Missouri, the Vincentian motherhouse of 
the Western Province of the Congregation 
of the Mission. Among the numerous 
boxes were jewels in the form of cor-
respondence from missionary priests in 
China during the turbulent years of 1923–
1952. In these letters, the priests described 
their personal experiences to the young 
confreres back at the Perryville seminary. 
Known as the Clet Correspondence Guild, 
the letter-writing campaign was meant to 
encourage interest in missionary work 
and to ease the homesickness of young 
priests serving in a foreign land. While 
these letters reveal a wealth of information 
about foreign missionary work, they also 
provide testimony and observations about 
everything from weather conditions to the 
purchasing of motorbikes to pivotal events 
in China’s history, including the National-
ist Movement, the Sino-Japanese invasion, 
WWII, and Mao. 

Schultz was particularly intrigued by 
the DRMA correspondence. Not only 
was it a good fit with his criteria, but he 
also noted that the English from that time 
period would reflect enough of an un-
familiar worldview to challenge today’s 
students. His interest created the impe-
tus to transform a collection into a class 
project. DeGraff characterizes three es-
sential components in this transformation 
process. First, the right faculty member 
needs to come along with the need and 
desire to build a project from materials 
in the collection; second, a collection with 
“sources of potential interest” needs to be 
identified; and, finally, the right “attitude” 
or a way of perceiving that collection as 
a learning source is required. The DRMA 
accession met these sets of the identifica-
tion criteria. Its China connection had 
elements of broad historical interest 
and included the international aspect 
desired by Schultz. The collection was 
large enough to effectively serve a class. 
From a preservation and conservation 
perspective, the overall collection was in 
good condition and could withstand the 
increased student use. In addition, the 
Vincentian Studies Institute’s book, The 
American Vincentians, contained a chapter 
on the missions to China that could be 
used to lay the groundwork for approach-
ing this collection. 

The final part of transforming a col-
lection into an educational experience 
involved visualizing how students could 
best be guided through the use of that ma-
terial. Schultz structured an assignment in 
steps. He began by having students select 
a letter that they would transcribe and 
later annotate and build outward from. 
The transcription process approached 
traditional archival instruction from a 
different angle. Instead of having students 
use the archives to answer a question, the 
item in the archive itself would be the 
question to be answered. This provided 
the last piece of the equation: it rethought 
the student approach to the collection. By 
examining a letter, transcribing, annotat-
ing, and eventually building outward 



54  College & Research Libraries January 2010

from the letter’s content, the assignment 
created a manageable way for Schultz to 
monitor and assess student progress as 
they worked with the materials as well 
as a manageable way for the Special Col-
lections department to facilitate the needs 
of these new student users. From these 
seeds, Schultz was able to build a quarter-
long class project in the archives, and the 
China Missions project was formed.

Department Preparation and Archival 
Instruction
In the age of institutional assessment, de-
veloping programs that promote use like 
the China Missions project go a long way 
toward integrating the resources of the 
Special Collections department into the 
curriculum. To ensure departmental suc-
cess in this project, MacIntosh Hodgetts 
immediately processed portions of the 
recently acquired DRMA collection. Suc-
cessive classes have each progressively 
benefited from more processed material, 
enhanced finding aids, the identifica-
tion of supplementary resources within 
DRMA materials, and the creation of 
auxiliary indices and glossaries that fa-
cilitated research. 

Another strategy for success was to go 
beyond the Special Collections instruction 
session that all of the History 199 classes 
receive. In these basic departmental ses-
sions, the students are oriented to the 
department and its available resources 
with a discussion on how collections are 
built, how the department’s rules are a 
component of preservation for unique 
materials, and some direct exploration 
of selected items in the collection. And, 
to prepare for an intensive quarter-long 
assignment in Special Collections, Profes-
sor Schultz’s History 199 class had an ad-
ditional instruction session. This second 
one focused more acutely on the DRMA 
collection, how to use a finding aid, and 
other practical applications in the archives 
such as using out cards, requesting photo-
copies, and citing an archival document. 

To further meet the Special Collections 
department’s goals of teaching students 

how to use the archive resources, ana-
lyzing a historical document, and gen-
erating a positive experience among the 
students, several educational components 
mingled to create an inviting and open 
atmosphere. As the practical archival pro-
cedures were taught, Schultz would in-
terject with research hints and anecdotes 
of his own research experiences, thus 
providing his professional expertise and 
insight to the process. To better establish 
the peer relationship with the materials, 
a student employee in the Special Col-
lections department demonstrated the 
archival box out card procedures and 
how to handle the materials physically. 
The students were also given a tour of the 
closed stacks so that they might be able 
to better visualize how and where the 
materials were kept. Several students re-
marked that they particularly enjoyed this 
aspect of the instruction because they felt 
it provided a sense of how and where all 
of these “mysterious” boxes were kept.31 
Photographs from the DRMA collection 
depicting priests in the 1940s wearing 
short-sleeved shirts while sitting on mo-
torbikes provided another entry point to 
the DRMA collection. As confirmed by 
accounts in the literature, DeGraff is well 
aware that unexpected and nontraditional 
images can spark student curiosity and 
help to soften the anxiety of researching 
unfamiliar subjects.

Despite the additional instruction, 
the responses written into the student’s 
papers reveal that a few students still felt 
an initial intimidation about coming to 
the archives for the first time to research 
the letters. Among the comments, stu-
dents expressed they did not feel fully 
prepared to use the finding aid or know 
where to begin their searches. For many 
students, this was their first encounter 
with an archive and with primary source 
materials, an important consideration for 
instruction in Special Collections and a 
consideration that was greatly eased by 
the structure and content of Schultz’s 
class. Many students also responded that 
MacIntosh Hodgetts and the Special Col-



Teaching Primary Sources in the Archives  55

lections staff helped to put them at ease by 
taking the time to go through all of these 
procedures again and assist with find-
ing materials.32 The students, however, 
were also required to elaborate on which 
research methods taught in Schultz’s 
History 199 class were most helpful to 
their understanding and use of archival 
materials. From these responses, it can be 
concluded that the early confusion that 
they expressed about finding aids and 
material arrangement was resolved by the 
combination of Schultz’s phased instruc-
tion in research methods and concepts 
and by the practice of actual use. 

The phased approach to primary 
materials research methods designed by 
Schultz was instrumental to the overall 
educational experience and to the man-
agement of student use in the reading 
room. Each phase corresponded to the 
historical research methods and concepts 
that were covered in his class sessions. 
The first phase was to choose a letter and 
make an accurate transcription. In terms 
of archival use, this step involved students 
reading a lot of letters and familiarizing 
themselves with the finding aids and box-
es. Schultz’s next steps asked students to 
identify such elements as names, places, 
events, or terminology in their letter. The 
identifications were to be annotated and 
would provide the elements that could 
be followed to develop a paper that built 
outward from the letter’s testimony; this 
was the third phase. For the archives, this 
meant that students would need to use 
these name, place, event, or terminology 
elements as a way to locate other rela-
tive materials, such as directories, logs, 
books, and/or other letters. The last phase 
was the creation and presentation of the 
complete process, an integration of the 
primary and secondary sources gathered 
to put the letter in both its local and broad 
contexts. By 2005, Schultz named each 
phase respectively: “Text as Artifact,” 
“Text as Source,” “People and Places,” 
and “Research From the Ground Up.”33 
No duplication of letters was allowed, 
and Schultz encouraged students to read 

as many letters as possible before choos-
ing one, stressing that this was the best 
way to find one that most interested the 
student.34 The classroom instruction by 
Schultz instilled the strategic tactics and 
concepts for archival research that Special 
Collections departments do not have the 
luxury of teaching in a one-shot session. 
The student outcomes point to the success 
of this cooperative approach. 

Student Outcomes
As part of the assignment, the students 
were also required to describe how they 
found their experience using archival 
materials and the various research 
methods they employed to create their 
papers. This self-assessment was written 
into the research papers, and a copy of 
every paper was deposited into the De-
Paul University Archives. A qualitative 
survey of these papers was conducted to 
assess their responses. Seven class ses-
sions were analyzed from 2002 through 
2008 for a total of 133 students. Among 
the data collected were the number of 
students who found the experience to 
be a positive influence on their outlook 
for both research and using the archives. 
A total of 118 students, or 88.7 percent, 
considered working with original source 
materials to be a rewarding experience. 
To combat against students who would 
be loath to admit otherwise on a graded 
paper, the papers were individually vet-
ted by citation. Students who used a total 
of four citations or fewer or relied heavily 
on Wikipedia or other Web sources whose 
reliability cannot be verified were moved 
to a neutral position and not included 
in the positive total. While these 15 stu-
dents may have felt that their experience 
was positive, their resulting paper fails 
to capture the object of the exercise or, 
as Professor Schultz so aptly remarked, 
“They don’t have the leg work to match.” 

Another phenomenon that occurred 
in the student experience: a majority of 
them formed a bond with the priest who 
wrote the letter they chose. Upon analyz-
ing numerous papers, this connection 



56  College & Research Libraries January 2010

was so apparent that a second analysis 
of the papers was done to explore the 
pervasiveness of this empathetic con-
nection. Within the papers, 94 students, 
or 70.6 percent, made telling statements 
regarding the priest’s personal character, 
remarked sympathetically on the nature 
of his dilemmas, and/or sought out photos 
and other personal documents. Several 
students even requested photocopies of 
photographs to be used on the title pages 
of their papers. Direct quotes from stu-
dent papers will be presented in the next 
few pages. 

In addition to the positive results, 
there was a desire to assess the extent of 
archival and other materials consulted by 
the students over the course of the project. 

The following chart is broken down by 
whether the sources cited were archival, 
secondary, reference, or other. The sources 
defined as “other” includes period maps 
and photos as part of the research analy-
sis. These sources are, for the most part, 
archival sources as well. As a word of 
caution, there is no way to really know 
how many letters the students may have 
read or how many other DRMA materials 
were consulted, both in the letter selection 
process and to gain more information on 
their priest and his situation. Given that, 
the number of archival sources reflected 
in this graph were by necessity drawn 
from citations and show how many of 
these archival sources were actively inte-
grated into the paper. The steady increase 

Average Number of Sources Used Per Student
Year Archives Secondary Reference Other Footnotes
2002 Spring 2.2 3.3 2.1 0.4 16.5
2002 Fall 3.8 3.6 2.6 0.2 24.9
2004 5.5 4.9 2.6 0.4 27.4
2005 6 7.4 1.9 1.7 32
2006 Spring 8.2 4.6 3.1 0.8 34
2006 Fall 9.8 5.7 1.9 1 47.1
2008 11 4.2 2.2 1.5 39.4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2002 
Spring

2002 Fall 2004 2005 2006 
Spring

2006 Fall 2008

Archives

Secondary

Reference

Other



Teaching Primary Sources in the Archives  57

in the number of archival sources cited in 
the papers over the years indicates that, as 
more of the collection has been processed, 
both the department and Schultz have 
been able to better facilitate the sessions. 
This increase also reflects the subsequent 
processing of materials in the more than 
25 linear feet of the China Missions col-
lection.35 

Student Responses36

“It was not until this project that I even 
knew there was a Special Collections 
department in our library.” (2004)This is 
but one candid comment among the many 
reactions to using the archives. Another 
student referred to the archive resources 
as “…a diamond in the rough.” (Spring 
2002) In many instances, similar state-
ments were seen over and over. Among 
the words expressed frequently in student 
reflections were “overwhelmed,” “frus-
trating,” “rewarding,” “satisfaction,” 
“puzzle,” “detective,” “time consuming,” 
“new appreciation,” and “fascinating.” 
The following statements extracted from 
student papers aim to show a variety of 
the student observations and sentiments 
without being redundant. The comments 
have been broken down into three themes 
respectively: a general response to the 
archives and this project; a response to 
the archival research and retrieval pro-
cesses; and, finally, statements that reveal 
a personal connection with the primary 
source materials. Below are the general 
responses:

It seemed like a daunting task.…
Truth be told, I wasn’t looking for-
ward to spending many extra hours 
out of class researching something 
I did not know about and therefore 
did not care much about. However, 
I decided to stick with the class…
and I quickly found myself having 
fun with the project. (2008)

…admitted lack of interest…What 
I found was that as I uncovered 

more information about the events 
and people discussed in my letter, 
the more fascinating those events 
became. (2008)

While doing the hands on research, 
I found everything to be of much 
more interest because it was real and 
important in some way. (Spring 2006)

This research process taught me to 
take a piece of historical evidence 
and build upward to a larger pic-
ture…While at times this project 
was frustrating and difficult it re-
inforced one of the most important 
attributes of a historian, patience 
and resilience. (Fall 2006)

I am sure that I did more research 
on this project, than any research I 
had done previously, and in a more 
professional and scholarly man-
ner.…In the end, my efforts in this 
project provided me with informa-
tion and skills in researching that I 
will be able to apply to the rest of 
my life. (Fall 2006)

Never before have I worked so hard 
researching for a single paper and 
surprisingly enough I have never 
felt so involved and excited about 
one either. (Fall 2006)

One thing I will take from this 
course is that you don’t know what 
you’re interested in until you’ve 
researched it. (2005)

This exercise was unique in its use 
of primary documents and the dis-
covery of other sources and research 
from the use of a single document 
provided a perspective that the 
“typical” research paper lacks. (2005)

It is important to realize that one 
single letter may have no impor-
tance at all, but when it is placed in 
an archive with many letters on the 



58  College & Research Libraries January 2010

same topic, it becomes important as 
a piece of evidence. (2004)

Through this assignment I was able 
to feel like I was an acting historian 
trying to figure out a puzzle.…I 
wish most of my papers were like 
[this] because you actually retain the 
information that you learn. (2004)

The assignment was not as painful 
as I imagined it. There was such a 
substantial amount of documents 
and helpful staff in the Special Col-
lections department that made this 
assignment enjoyable. (Fall 2002) 

In this exercise I was able to not only 
learn what doing history meant but 
I was also able to experience the 
“doing” process myself. (Fall 2002)

Wendy M. Duff and Catherine A. 
Johnson conducted a study of the ar-
chival research methods of historians 
in 2002. From this study, they were able 
to distinguish the following behaviors: 
orienting themselves to the collection, 
locating materials, filling in the contex-
tual background, and determining what 
information is relevant.37 In discussing 
their findings, the authors note that work-
ing back and forth with background or 
contextual information is what allowed 
these historical researchers to determine 
the relevance of documents. Furthermore, 
having secondary information is critical to 
understanding how to use the finding aid 
most effectively.38 Guiding the students 
through this type of research was a core 
component of the History 199 class and 
Professor Schultz also required students 
to seek out secondary sources to help con-
textualize the primary source documents 
and determine their relevance.

This second set of student comments 
speak to how the students felt about con-
ducting research in an archive and which 
research methods they favored or found 
useful. The four types of activities and the 
complexities of working back and forth 

with contextual information that Duff 
and Johnson describe are present in the 
student experience. Numerous students 
indicated that they felt “frustrated” at 
times and were uncertain how to know 
what sources were relevant. “Dead ends” 
is another student phrase to recur in dis-
cussing how they would arrive at a point 
where more information about a person 
or place could not be ascertained either 
in the archives or in secondary sources. 
Another student commented that finding 
a relevant source among all of the materi-
als was “a gamble.” (Spring 2006) Issues 
of time management become apparent 
in such comments as, “It takes a lot of 
time to go through books, atlases, letters, 
encyclopedias, dictionaries, journals” 
(2005) and “I became bogged down in 
research, obsessed with studying one 
subject.” (2004)

Despite the acknowledgements that 
learning how to conduct research with 
original documents is a difficult process, 
these same students also expressed that 
they felt like a “real historian” and that, 
when the pieces came together, they felt 
deeply rewarded for their ability to re-
solve an issue. Each of these statements 
was chosen to provide insight into how 
first-time archive users work through and 
develop the research skills that often still 
challenge experienced historians. Their 
frustrations and observations can help 
to pinpoint how we approach reference 
services in a university archive setting.

The answers were not black and 
white. I couldn’t just turn to a book 
to solve the problems presented in 
my letter. What I found interest-
ing though was the fact that often 
when the [sic] I found a source of 
information on one aspect of my 
letter, that source led me to another 
solution. (2008)

It took a few weeks of working 
with the material before I began to 
feel a strong connection. The initial 
pitfalls or dead-ends…caused me to 



Teaching Primary Sources in the Archives  59

that there was a session dedicated 
to helping us organize our findings 
and letters.…I am too stubborn to 
ask for help. (2004)

It was also frustrating because you 
can’t read the liner notes or look 
through the table of contents to see 
if what you want is in the document 
you are looking at.…I also learned 
in the archives about the infinite 
ways to spell names of places in 
China. (2004)

It [the assignment] is instead almost 
like a dinosaur being found. At first, 
you know you have something, but 
you don’t know what it means or 
what it is entirely. But after brushing 
off the rocks slowly and methodi-
cally, everything begins to clear up 
and most of your questions start to 
be answered. (2004)

I created a typology of annotation 
to help organize everything that 
needed further investigation. This 
included identifying references to 
people, places, and events, foreign 
language terms, and other vocabu-
lary. (2004)

I guess one of my greatest struggles 
was how to assess what was impor-
tant. (Fall 2002)

The feeling of “a-ha!” that I expe-
rienced when finally finding what 
I was looking for and having my 
desk scattered with copies of letters 
that eventually came together like 
puzzle pieces made me feel like a 
“real historian.” (Spring 2002)

Not finding what I was looking 
for taught me a valuable lesson. 
I think it is important to realize 
that often times, even though we 
do everything right we may still 
not find what we are looking for. 
(Spring 2002)

question my own abilities.… What 
I finally realized is that every topic, 
whether perceptually great or small, 
will always be subject to further 
inquiry.…The evidence a researcher 
uses determines the validity of an 
argument a historian makes. (2008)

It [the letter] was one tiny piece to an 
immense and sophisticated puzzle. 
The letter itself is only a small three 
pages of worn paper, yet the infor-
mation gained from it is expansive. 
(Fall 2006)

In doing context research, the sheer 
number of possibilities was daunt-
ing. (Fall 2006)

I was never aware of whether or not 
I had the right answer. (Fall 2006)

With most papers finding a few 
sources off the Internet would sup-
ply enough information to act like I 
knew what I was talking about. With 
this project it took a lot of in depth 
studying of materials. (Spring 2006)

I learned to be skeptical of sources. 
(Spring 2006)

[I]t was important to learn how to 
take good notes. (Spring 2006)

The thought that [a] secondary 
source existed because of primary 
sources never entered my mind 
prior to this assignment. (2005)

I was overwhelmed with the amount 
of information I was uncovering, but 
that helped me to realize the most 
important aspects of it and pull that 
together to tell a cohesive narrative. 
(2005)

The class held in the library was a 
good learning tool for the introduc-
tion to the special archives and li-
brary research; however, I now wish 



60  College & Research Libraries January 2010

The secondary sources helped me to 
better understand the topics written 
about in my primary source, and 
helped me to put the subject of the 
primary source into a more clear 
historical context. (Spring 2002)

The final area of student responses ex-
plores the bond or connection that result-
ed from using original source materials. 
One student called her experience “voy-
euristic.” (Spring 2006) This empathetic 
connection to the priest of their letters and 
other materials also directly corresponds 
to more comprehensively researched 
papers. The close association with the ma-
terials spurred the interest quotient of the 
students, thus driving them to know more 
about how this individual was affected 
by his contextual situation. For example, 
one student suspects that her priest was 
suffering from depression and took the 
time to carefully follow his actions and 
symptoms over several letters and com-
pare them to those listed at Mayo Clinic. 
(Spring 2006) Another student notes the 
irony that his priest is “light and optimis-
tic, and at times even funny” despite the 
miserable and trying circumstances in 
China at the time. (Fall 2006) 

I have found that priests are simply 
like all individuals, they get scared 
and they get angry. (Spring 2006)

I could not help but become fascinat-
ed with some of the unquantifiable 
aspects of this Priest’s life. Items such 
as personal letters to his mother, as 
well as pictures of the priest as he 
aged through life gave the process 
an intimate feel. (Spring 2006)

Furthermore, understanding the 
lifestyle and lives about the priests 
was surprising in itself, especially 
when the common assumption of 
priests are that they tend to be subtle 
and quiet, when these priests were 
actually interesting and had charac-
ter. (Fall 2006)

I was moved by their [the priests] 
determination and selfless acts as 
Dunker and the others committed 
and risked their lives for the mission 
and for the people of China. (2005)

My favorite part of this assignment, 
in fact, was holding Father Misner’s 
passport in my hands.…I began to 
think of him as an actual person and 
as a gateway to a broader lesson 
about the events that were going on 
at his time in history. (2005)

My initial analysis of the letter had 
not prepared me for the realization 
I had when one day during [sic] I 
thought to myself, these men are 
actually living under communist 
rule, and their lives were actually 
in danger. (Spring 2002)

Conclusion
As the educational literature discusses 
and the student responses confirm, using 
primary sources in an archive promotes 
creative and critical thinking skills, dras-
tically reduces plagiarism, and produces 
more engaging papers. From an archives 
perspective, the undergraduate instruc-
tion and use is fruitful on multiple levels: 
it dispels anxiety about using different 
and noncirculating materials in the read-
ing room; it reinforces the research prac-
tices with finding aids and the concept of 
provenance; it physically and emotionally 
connects students with history; and, not 
to be overlooked, it further integrates 
the resources into the curriculum as 
well as increasing the usage statistics of 
a department in an environment where 
quantifying your value and services has 
assumed increasing importance. Robert 
L. Byrd concurs: “In my experience, the 
key to eliminating, or at least decreasing, 
the marginalization of special collections 
has been active promotion of access to, 
and use of, those collections.39 

The positive responses from the His-
tory 199 students imply that a significant 
number of them will return to a Special 



Teaching Primary Sources in the Archives  61

Collections and Archives department at 
some time in their future. The universal 
assessment tools currently being devel-
oped by the Archival Metrics Project 
seeks more systematic ways for reposito-
ries to track the user impact of their ser-
vices both internally and against similar 
repositories.40 Nevertheless, rethinking 
how to use the materials for the purposes 
of education has expanded how the col-
lections are viewed and how outreach 
might be approached with regard to both 
user instruction and faculty relationships. 
Analyzing how students respond to ac-
tual use of the materials in the capacity of 
a long-term assignment helps us to better 
understand why students describe feel-
ing intimidated. Constance A. Mellon’s 
pivotal study of library anxiety revealed 
that students often feel their search 
skills are inadequate from the start,41 
and Carol Collier Kuhlthau’s analysis of 
the research process revealed that that 

sense of anxiety extends to all phases 
of research paper creation.42 Combin-
ing these already present anxieties with 
“touching” unique materials and not 
feeling confident to use a finding aid or 
request an archive box only intensifies the 
initial encounters. Since actual research 
with archival materials has the potential 
to be both frustrating and deeply reward-
ing, user instruction sessions that also 
teach and reinforce the access tools and 
methods on the most practical levels go 
a long way toward helping to remove 
use barriers. However, the most effec-
tive component for success in the China 
Missions Project was faculty/librarian 
collaboration that worked in tandem to 
build the necessary understanding and 
skill sets in a structured format. If the 
goal is to create competent new users, 
guided use with solid methodology is 
necessary and faculty partnerships are 
the key to success. 

Notes

 1. Numerous authors from the archival and education fields emphasize this relationship be-
tween primary sources and history in particular. Among them, Marcus C. Robyns, “The Archivist 
as Educator: Integrating Critical Thinking Skills into Historical Research Methods Instruction,” The 
American Archivist, 64 (Fall/Winter 2001) describes archives as a “laboratory of critical thinking” 
on page 373; and Wendy M. Duff and Catherine A. Johnson in their article “Accidentally Found 
on Purpose: Information-Seeking Behavior of Historians in Archives,” Library Quarterly 72.4 
(2002) state on page 473, “The heart of historical research involves the use of primary resources.” 
See also: Julia Hendry, “Primary Sources in K–12 Education: Opportunities for Archives,” The 
American Archivist 70 (Spring/Summer 2007): 114–29; Sharon Ann Cook, “Connecting Archives 
and the Classroom,” Archivaria 44 (1997): 102–17; and Ken Osborne, “Archives in the Classroom,” 
Archivaria 23 (Winter 1986–1987): 16–40. 

 2. Kathryn DeGraff (interview, July 11, 2008). All of the thoughts attributed to Kathryn DeGraff 
throughout this paper are as a result of this interview.

 3. Warren Schultz (e-mail interview, June 3, 2008). Dr. Schultz stated, “In 2001 (I believe), 
the department voted to open up the type of major assignment the instructor could use in 199.” 
History 199: Historical Concepts and Methods is a required course for history majors. All of the 
thoughts attributed to Warren Schultz throughout this paper are as a result of this e-mail interview, 
unless otherwise annotated.

 4. Ann Schmiesing and Deborah R. Hollis, “The Role of Special Collections Departments in 
Humanities Undergraduate Teaching: A Case Study,” portal: Libraries and the Academy 2.3 (2002): 
470.

 5. Carol A. Senf, “Using University Archives to Demonstrate Real Research,” Changing English, 
12.2 (Aug. 2005): 297–98.

 6. Ibid.
 7. Marian J. Matyn, “Getting Undergraduates to Seek Primary Sources in Archives,” The 

History Teacher 33.3 (May 2000): 354.
 8. Kathleen D. Roe, “Public Programs,” Managing Archives and Archival Institutions, ed. James 

Gregory Bradsher (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989): 220.
 9. Elizabeth Yakel, “Listening to Users,” Archival Issues 26.2 (2002): 111–27.
 10. Ibid., 116–18.



62  College & Research Libraries January 2010

 11. Ibid., 119.
 12. Ibid., 120.
 13. Anna Elise Allison, Connecting Undergraduates with Primary Sources: A Study of Undergraduate 

Instruction in Archives, Manuscripts, and Special Collections (master’s thesis, School of Information 
and Library Science of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2005): 27. Available online 
at http://etd.ils.unc.edu/dspace/bitstream/1901/158/1/annaallison.pdf. [Accessed 26 July 2008].

 14. Ibid.
 15. Ibid., 33.
 16. Matthew Reynolds and Dale Sauter, “Engaging Undergraduates in Special Collections 

Through English Composition,” College & Research Library News, 69.6 (June 2008): 318–21.
 17. Marcia W. Keyser, “Active Learning a Cooperative Learning: Understanding the Difference 

and Using Both Styles Effectively,” Research Strategies 17 (2000): 39.
 18. Elizabeth Yakel, “Information Literacy for Primary Sources: Creating a New Paradigm for 

Archival Researcher Education,” OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives 
20.2 (2004): 62.

 19. Robert L. Byrd, “One Day…It Will Be Otherwise: Changing the Reputation and Reality 
of Special Collections,” RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Cultural Heritage 2.2 (Fall 
2001): 165.

 20. Shan Sutton and Lorrie Knight, “Beyond the Reading Room: Integrating Primary and 
Secondary Sources in the Library Classroom,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 32.3 (May 
2006): 321.

 21. Greg Johnson, “Introducing Undergraduate Students to Archives and Special Collections,” 
College and Undergraduate Libraries 13.2 (2006): 91–100.

 22. Roe, “Public Programs,” 220.
 23. Schmiesing and Hollis, “Special Collections Departments,” 465.
 24. Katherine R. Morgan, “Using Primary Sources to Build a Community of Thinkers,” English 

Journal 91.4 (Mar. 2002): 69.
 25. Schmiesing and Hollis, “Special Collections Departments,” 469; Sutton and Knight, “Beyond 

the Reading Room,” 322; Robyns, “The Archivist as Educator,” 374.
 26. Sutton and Knight, “Beyond the Reading Room,” 322.
 27. Allison, Connecting Undergraduates with Primary Sources, 39.
 28. Schmiesing and Hollis, “Special Collections Departments,” 472.
 29. Robyns, “The Archivist as Educator,” 364.
 30. Sutton and Knight, “Beyond the Reading Room,” 322.
 31. History 199, Student Papers, DePaul University Archives (2002–2008). Note: The student 

commentary referred to in this study was derived from the responses that students were asked 
to include in their course papers, all of which were deposited into the archives. 

 32. Ibid.
 33. Warren Schultz, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of History, DePaul University, 

History 199 Course Syllabi, 2002–2008.
 34. Ibid.
 35. Finding Aids, DeAndreis-Rosati Memorial Archives. DePaul University Special Collections 

and Archives. Available online at http://library.depaul.edu/Collections/DRMA.aspx. [Accessed 
17 November 2009].

 36. History 199, Student Papers.
 37. Duff and Johnson, “Accidentally Found on Purpose,” 472–96.
 38. Ibid., 490.
 39. Byrd, “One Day…It Will Be Otherwise,” 163.
 40. Wendy Duff and Joan M. Cherry, “Archival Orientation for Undergraduate Students: An 

Exploratory Study of Impact,” The American Archivist 71 (Fall/Winter 2008): 499–529. For more 
information on this project, see: http://archivalmetrics.org/.

 41. Constance A. Mellon, “Library Anxiety: A Grounded Theory and Its Development,” College 
& Research Libraries (Mar. 1986): 160–65.

 42. Carol Collier Kuhlthau, “Developing a Model of the Library Search Process: Cognitive 
and Affective Aspects,” Research Quarterly (Winter 1988): 232–42.