Case Studies Series Process Overview

The Case Studies Series, sponsored by the Publications Board, provides SAA component groups the opportunity to develop and edit a set of freely accessible works relating to a closely defined area of archival theory or practice. Case Studies are typically 1,500 to 5,000 words in length and offer examples of archival practice or illustrate issues worthy of broad discussion and debate. Works should be modeled on the successful approach used for Campus Case Studies and Case Studies in Archival Ethics.

Copyright of individual works will be retained by the author; each case study will be published in PDF form under a Creative Commons Attribution No Derivatives license. Works will be freely available on the SAA website, making them broadly accessible and facilitating high impact.

To assist component groups seeking to publish a set of case studies, the SAA Publications Board supplies the following resources:

• advice and assistance in developing a series theme, call for participation, and authoring template;
• a review rubric for peer assessment of submissions; and
• editorial and publishing support from the Publications Board and SAA staff.

The Process

A process has been developed for a component group to establish its own case studies series. Here are the suggested steps:

1. The SAA Component Group Chair serves as point of contact with the Publications Board.

2. The Component Group Chair consults with the chair of the Publications Board (who is also the SAA Publications Editor) about launching a case study series. Once agreement is reached, the Component Group Chair issues the following documents:

a. Call for case studies relating to the group's topic. This is published on the component group’s microsite and promoted by the group and SAA, and it should include an email address for submissions.

b. An authoring template, which supplies a prescribed format/citation style. The case study template has the following basic structure, with sub-sections fleshing out what should be required in four areas (these are specific to each project and should be reviewed by Publications Editor before template is released):

 i. Intro/context/problem statement
 ii. Methodology/narrative
 iii. Analysis/discussion
 iv. Reference list note: Use Chicago Manual of Style Author/Date format for in text citations.

3. Prospective authors submit case study drafts to the email address indicated in the call. The email and any attachments are forwarded to the Component Group Chair, the Publications Editor, and the Assistant Director of Publications. The Component Group Chair replies to the submitter acknowledging receipt.

4. The Component Group Chair sends the case study and the assessment rubric to two peer reviewers (i.e., members of the component group or another appropriate reviewer) for single blind peer review process. The rubric is available for download from the SAA website in the publications area and should also be linked on the component group’s microsite so prospective authors know the criteria and process being used.

5. Typically within three weeks, peer reviewers return the completed rubric to the Component Group Chair.

6. The Component Group Chair reviews feedback, shares with the Publications Editor, and makes recommendations. 

7. The Publications Editor makes a decision about publication and conveys it to Component Group Chair and the author.

a. If the draft case study is accepted in its current form, it is sent to the Assistant Director of Publications.

b. If revisions are recommended to the draft case study:

i. The Publications Editor supplies comments to the Component Group Chair and the author.

ii. The author revises the draft using the supplied comments and sends a revised draft to the Component Group Chair.

iii. The Component Group Chair reviews and sends the revised version to the Publications Editor and the Assistant Director of Publications.

c. If rejected, the Publications Editor conveys the decision to the author.

8. The Assistant Director of Publications completes light copyediting.

a. A draft with the edits in Track Changes is sent to the author for review and approval.

b. The author returns a clean, final version of case study to the Assistant Director of Publications (Google Docs or MS Word format).

9. The Assistant Director of Publications works with SAA's designer to lay out the document and convert it to PDF for posting/publication on the SAA website.

10. Copyright is retained by the author, but the work is published under Creative Commons Attribution No Derivatives license on the SAA website.

Each case studies series will be considered open-ended until terminated by the component group and/or Publications Board.

*      *      *

Component groups interested in sponsoring or commissioning a series of case studies should contact the SAA Publications Editor.