A STUDY OF THE THEORY OF APPRAISAL FOR SELECTION By ...

informational value is submerged unabashedly in the subjectivity
of prediction. But, according to Schellenberg, such subjectivity
is a strength rather than a weakness, for the resulting diverse
judgements "may well assure a more adequate social
documentation."28
As part of the content analysis of records, used to identify
informational value, Schellenberg alludes to a form of analysis
that anticipated the present trend of documentation strategy:
The appraisal of records from the point of
view of their historical interest becomes
difficult when the records relate to broad
historical movements, historical causation,
and the like. Here a discriminating choice
may have to be made among the records that
are available. A movement like the westward
expansion of the United States, for example,
can be traced in a number of record groups in
the National Archives. . . . In making this
choice, the archivist may need the help of
historical specialists.29
Such an analysis undermines Schellenberg's own insistence on the
archivist as "independent arbiter" of the value of records, and
intermediary between records creators and researchers in
preserving records useful for research in a variety of
subjects.30 By advocating assessments of historical movements
and causation rather than assessments of records creators,
Schellenberg endangers the power of the principle of provenance.
This approach to appraisal weakens the contribution that
28 Schellenberg, Modern, 149.
29 Ibid, 150.
30 Ibid, 31-32.
103