won - like the school in Marburg - a still larger autonomy, although financed
by the Cultural Ministry. From that time, the training did not take place in the
Archie/school itself, but rather in the two colleges, which "bought" these services
from the Archie/school. The education was provided not only just for archivists as
it did up to 1995 but was integrated at both colleges in wider disciplines and thus
in related subjects. At the Universiteit van Amsterdam, archival education became
part of the "Faculty of Arts", as "Chair Group of Book, Archival and Information
Sciences", while at the Hogeschool it became part of the "Institute for Media and
Information Management".
With these changes, archival education in the Netherlands left the old way in
two respects. The relationship between practical and theoretical education was
reversed totally and the integration into the field of information sciences led to a
new focus with regard to the content.
When Theo Thomassen wrote in 1992 about the old system "the combination
of theory and practise all in all was welcomed by the students as well as by the
archives"20, he expressed the idea that the implementation of the theoretical part
into the field gave the students the possibility to regularly compare the theory
with the daily practice. But the high practical component of this education led to
the impression that archival education in the Netherlands was something like a
learning-by-doing system and this kind of education always has a reputation for
being unprofessional. When, in the late 80s, the Archiefschool could not expand
the number of lessons without shortening the practical component, this was
the moment to think about implementing archival education into the Dutch
university system. By doing this the practical education could only play a
limited role in form of a practical semester, but not more. So, the decision
to professionalize the Dutch archival education by integrating it into the
university [higher education] system at the same time led to a bigger distance
from the field.
With the integration of archival education into information science the
Archiefschool tried to open the education to a wider range of fields like records
management or archives of the private sector. This expansion was a reaction to
the Dutch discussion about the job description of archivists. The focal point was
the question of whether archives and archivists are more a part of the cultural
heritage sector or more of the administrative sector. This discussion was still
continuing when the reforms took place and the staff had to decide which way
would be the best. They decided to play the records management card. Therefore,
the new curricula in Amsterdam pushed the idea of breaking down the walls
between archivists and records managers.21 This means a paradigm shift from the
historian archivist to an information specialist and opened a lot of new sectors
for students to work in after their examination.
KARSTEN UHDE TIMES ARE CHANGING
17 The whole curriculum of 1999 is published in English in: Karsten Uhde: 'New Education in Old Europe'
in: Archival Science 6, 2006, p. 193-303, here p. 201. The current curriculum is available only in German
under: http://www.archivschule.de/ausbildung/kurrikulum-hoeherer-archivdienst/kurrikulum-hoeherer-
archivdienst-liste.html (as at 04.20.2010).
18 http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0007376/geldigheidsdatum_05-02-2010 (as at 04.02.2010).
19 http://www.st-ab.nl/wettennr01/0036-001_Archiefbesluit_1995.htm (as at 04.02.2010).
20 Theo Thomassen: 'Aus- und Fortbildung der Archivare in den Niederlanden' in: Erstes Deutsch-
Niederlandisch-Belgisches Archivsymposion (=Miscellanea archivistica studia 18), Brüssel 1992, p. 97.
21 About this discussion and the conclusion of the Archiefschool staff see: Theo Thomassen: 'Looking into
the future - Visions on the position and challenges of archivists and archives' in: Archivpflege in Westfalen-
Lippe, 70, 2009, p. 15-22.
193