At first glance that seems surprising: Surely almost everyone has made up their minds about whether they support Donald Trump or Joe Biden? While the sliver of voters who are still undecided about the presidential elections is small, there’s more to the US election than just the presidency. This year, 35 seats in the US Senate and all 435 seats in the US House are up for election. In addition, state legislatures, state ballot initiatives, and a host of other races (including school board members and county drain commissioners in some states) are up for elections.

Coverage of state-level elections is spotty on Wikipedia. The coverage of some states in some years is excellent, but most lack even the most basic set of information about the election. Like everything else, the articles that get written are those catch the interest of Wikipedia’s volunteer editor base. In August, to try to get better information relevant to voters in the 2020 elections, we ran our Informing Citizens Wiki Scholars class.

Several participants in the course focused on state-level election pages. New articles were created about the 2020 Tennessee Elections and 2020 Kansas Elections, while a new article about the 2020 Colorado Elections was created jointly by a class participant and another Wikipedian (in the serendipitous way that collaborations sometimes work on Wikipedia). Other people focused on specific issues, like improving the Oakland Unified School District or the 2020 California Proposition 14 article. Given the relevance of climate change to voters decisions, another participant decided to improve the volcanic gas article to make it clear that the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by volcanoes is small compared to anthropogenic emissions.

Courses like these are important ways to encourage subject matter experts to contribute their research skills and knowledge to Wikipedia, ahead of when these pages will be most important as voters seek neutral, fact-based information. To see a current list of course offerings, visit learn.wikiedu.org.

Wikipedia is one of the most popular online resources for anyone to get information that they’re interested in learning. During election years, voters will use Wikipedia to read about different candidates that are running for federal-level positions such as the President of the United States of America. Within each of these pages there exist links to different topics that are relevant to science. With this understanding, a group of researchers and myself participated in a Wikipedia training program offered through Wiki Education and funded by the National Science Policy Network (NSPN). The goal of this training was to provide our group with the knowledge to edit Wikipedia pages that are based either directly on science or science policy-related topics.

With my expertise in nuclear science and nuclear policy, I wanted to make a difference by improving Wikipedia pages related to nuclear policy. After a few weeks of training through the course, we were assigned to begin making improvements on a page that we were interested in, beginning in an on-Wikipedia draft space called the “sandbox”. The sandbox is an excellent tool because it allows people to practice editing a Wikipedia page without making edits to the main pages directly. I chose to edit the page that discussed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).

This page was important to me because the CTBT is a cornerstone treaty that has been signed and ratified by most states across the world. The US has not ratified the treaty, despite the CTBT organization’s ability to monitor and verify whether a nuclear explosion occurred. This motivated me to improve the quality of the monitoring and verification sections for the Wikipedia page. One area that needed improvement for the page included finding and adding more citations for the section, as suggested by a warning banner above the section.

The second article that I chose to edit was on the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which was incredibly outdated. The NPR is a document that is ordered by a new incoming president that describes the US’s position on nuclear weapons for the administration in power since the Clinton administration. The Wikipedia page hasn’t been updated since the Obama administration published its NPR in 2010. However, the Trump administration published its NPR in 2018. The page also offered little information about the 1994 NPR and 2001 NPR, which is of little use to readers interested in nuclear policy topics. After my edits, the page now has descriptions of the four NPRs that have been published in the last 30 years.

The cohort of Wiki Scientists worked to improve a variety of  Wikipedia pages relevant to science policy, such as genetic testing, agriculture in California, and food safety in the United States. The results speak for themselves. The edits that were made through our group have had approximately 2.99 million views since the inception of the group. Thirty-eight thousand words have been added to improve the quality of Wikipedia articles. There have also been 386 references added to a variety of topics, improving the quality of the content found on this resource across disciplines.

Now that I have completed the course, I will continue staying active with the Wikipedia community and its resources. I think it’s great that there are monthly challenges and contests revolved around improving the quality of a specific group of articles. Different articles that I plan to edit in the future include penning traps and science policy of the United States. My goal is to provide quality content on topics that I think are important for the general public. I thank the Wiki Education team and NSPN for the incredible course and support.

To see our current training courses that are open for registration, visit learn.wikiedu.org. For inquiries about partnering with Wiki Education, contact Director of Partnerships Jami Mathewson at jami@wikiedu.org or visit partner.wikiedu.org

In the last few years, the world’s favorite online encyclopedia has taken up more space in conversations around the spread of misinformation online. Unlike the early days of the site, society increasingly attests to its power as a force for good in its ability to provide reliable information, rather than a culprit for the bad. Social media giants like Youtube (a huge influencer of our online landscape now) even point their users to Wikipedia pages alongside videos about conspiracy theories to combat misinformation.

This January 15th, Wikipedia’s birthday, is a great opportunity to reflect on the importance of Wikipedia not only in our cultural landscape, but also in an individual student’s life. In the days where students have trouble distinguishing fake news sites from reliable ones, getting them involved in making Wikipedia better equips them with skills to navigate the information they encounter online with a critical eye.

Through our Student Program, Wiki Education helps instructors teach Wikipedia writing assignments like the one in Helen Choi’s course at the University of Southern California. In this particular course, 18 students added 17,000 words of content and 226 references to 8 pages on Wikipedia. Those pages have since been viewed 220,000 times.

The deepfakes page, specifically, sees about 2,500 views a day, but it spiked to more than 6,000 in the days after Facebook’s announcement. Your students have the power to participate in cultural discussions on a mass scale by providing the public with well-sourced summaries of the latest research in your field.

In an assignment like this, you as the instructor share your expertise with students; help them put together well-researched, summarized content; and use Wiki Education’s free classroom resources to help get that information onto Wikipedia. It means students take an active role in fighting misinformation on the very platforms that they consume.

Whether you consider Wikipedia to be a fact-checker, a work-in-progress, or a nuisance, its ubiquity makes understanding how it works critically important. Wiki Education helps de-mystify those inner-workings, inviting people into the community and giving them appropriate training and tools to improve the site’s accuracy. The result is a more well-informed public.

Interested in incorporating a Wikipedia writing assignment into a future course? Visit teach.wikiedu.org for all you need to know to get started.

Students fight misinformation through a Wikipedia assignment in a variety disciplines. Read more about how a medical student is helping correct misinformation about vaccination.

500 million readers come to Wikipedia each month to shape their understanding of topics; their behavior; and ultimately the world. That’s why the National Science Policy Network (NSPN) is sponsoring an upcoming Wiki Scientists course as part of their 2020 Election Initiative. The initiative highlights the importance of rigorous science in policy making in the United States and offers early career scientists a way to get involved.

NSPN is an organization committed to training early career scientists and engineers how to advocate for science and technology in policy making. The Wiki Scientists who participate in the NSPN course this fall will add neutral, fact-based information to the site, informing policy makers and voters on the critical role science and technology has in our community.

Making science policy a key part of the 2020 election

The National Science Policy Network believes the scientific community has an obligation to participate in the Wikipedia community to ensure the public has access to high-quality scientific information, especially as it relates to real-world policy decisions. But the barriers for entry into the “Wikipedia ecosystem” can deter scientists, especially early career scientists, from taking the time to learn Wikipedia’s technical, procedural, and cultural practices. That’s where Wiki Education’s professional development courses come in. Our team of Wikipedia experts will spend 12 weeks with NSPN members, helping them learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia. While these early career scientists make critical scientific knowledge more accessible to the public, they’ll hone their science communication skills.

NSPN Wiki Scientists will work with our team to learn how to update and improve Wikipedia’s coverage of science policy topics. Participants may work on articles about net neutrality, facial recognition systems in the United States, smart cities, science diplomacy, clean energy, broadband, artificial intelligence arms race, blockchain and cryptocurrencies, genetic privacy, or algorithmic bias. Some of these issues offer opportunities to document candidates’ policy proposals and political positions, ensuring voters have access to information from high-quality sources. We’re excited to see where these early career scientists take the course, bringing their expertise to the public.

Apply

Early career scientists interested in becoming a member of the National Science Policy Network to advance the role of science in policy making are eligible to apply for this course by August 16, 2019. Accepted applicants will be contacted by August 23, 2019.

Course details

Participants meet virtually each week on Fridays from 12:00 – 1:00pm Pacific to learn how to contribute to Wikipedia. The upcoming class meets weekly from September 6, 2019 – November 22, 2019 (12 weeks). 

How content experts can reach the public through Wikipedia

Editing Wikipedia is an incredibly powerful way to reach the public in a way few other publications can. When institutions collaborate with Wiki Education to train experts to do work on Wikipedia that aligns with their mission, the results are impressive.

We collaborated with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to conduct courses last fall, for example. In one course, 10 scholars worked together to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of women’s suffrage in the United States, a topic area and goal aligned with NARA’s mission. During the training period, these scholars added biographies of suffragists, expanded articles about civil rights, and ensured suffrage organizations were represented on Wikipedia. They added more than 200 high-quality references to Wikipedia, and some of them even found images to illustrate their contributions. In less than a year, their work has reached 965,000 readers.

Organizations across disciplines want to reach the public with accurate information about topics they care about. Wikipedia is the way to do it. We can help.

If you’re interested in buying out a customized professional development course for your members or for faculty at your institution, contact Director of Partnerships Jami Mathewson at jami@wikiedu.org.

Wikipedia is one of the most trusted sites among the cacophony online. That’s because it’s built on the principle of verifiability; its community-made policies take a strict stance against promotion and advertising; and the volunteers that curate its content value neutrally presented and well-referenced facts. Information that doesn’t adhere to these standards is deleted as soon as one of Wikipedia’s thousands of devoted volunteers encounters it.

But there are still gaps in information on Wikipedia, which can be harder to spot than false information. That’s where instructors and students in our Student Program are making a difference. Higher education instructors use our tools and assignment templates to teach students how to identify gaps on Wikipedia and use what they’re learning in class to correct those gaps.

That’s what Dr. Ada Palmer did with her 32 students at the University of Chicago last fall term. Students added 90,000 words of well-researched content to Wikipedia about “how new information technologies trigger innovations in censorship and information control.” *

Did you know, for example, that food producers can more easily sue their critics in certain states in the US because of food libel laws? The laws are often criticized as a restriction of first amendment rights.

And newspaper theft, a form of censorship, occurs when an individual, organization, or government removes a large portion of a publication without the consent of the publisher in order to prevent others from reading it. The Wikipedia article now highlights some notable cases, as well as the strategies that various states and cities in the US employ to counteract it.

Margaret Sullivan of the Washington Post calls April 2 (also known as Fact-Checking Day) “a global counterpunch on behalf of truth.” She also writes that it’s an opportunity to get the public more involved in the processes of informational evaluation that journalists undertake daily.

In a Wikipedia writing assignment, students participate in fact-checking Wikipedia, looking for informational gaps, and correcting those gaps for the benefit of millions of readers. Wikipedia writing is fact-checking in action, with an added praxis of making the digital informational landscape better.

In the case of Dr. Palmer’s students, the assignment is also an opportunity to educate others of their rights in the face of false information and censorship.

In general, a Wikipedia writing assignment provides students with an opportunity to learn to critically evaluate information and participate in modes of knowledge creation that they typically accept passively. When Stanford Graduate School of Education found in 2016 that most students can’t tell the difference between a credible news website and a fake news site, a lot of instructors sprung into action to understand how they could help reinforce these skills in their students. Critical media literacy is an essential part of education and a skill that every instructor in higher education has the power to teach.

The ability to access trustworthy and free information equips citizens to know and protect their rights. Access, however, is just the first step. Access plus judgement – the ability to discern reliable from unreliable information – is what truly makes a digital citizen.

Read more about how our work at Wiki Education combats fake news and how you can help. And for more information about Dr. Palmer’s course, visit the University of Chicago’s course page here or their Youtube channel.

Interested in adapting a Wikipedia writing assignment to fit your course? Visit teach.wikiedu.org for all you need to know.

That’s why we engaged subject matter experts in updating Wikipedia’s coverage of political topics prior to this November’s midterms. These scholars and professionals learned how to edit Wikipedia in our professional development course. Over three months, they gained Wikipedia editing skills and brought their knowledge to a wide range of articles about political topics – from broader, theoretical articles like activism and politics and technology, to adding specific polling information to articles about congressional districts.

Take a look at the range of articles that scholars improved in both our Tuesday and Wednesday courses. Below are a few examples of the new content that Wikipedia’s readers can now access.

The Religious Liberty Accommodations Act, for example, was a sparse article before a course participant improved it. The 2016 legislation, also known as H.B. 1523, was passed in Mississippi as a response to federal rulings in favor of same-sex marriage. It protects people, businesses, and organizations who withhold services from LGBT people based on “deeply held religious beliefs or moral convictions.” Organizations are allowed to withhold such services as “issuing marriage licenses, granting adoptions, hiring practices, healthcare coverage, housing agreements, as well as specific medical services.” Many Mississippi cities want to repeal the legislation and there have been a handful of court cases that challenge the law, including one that was appealed to the United States Supreme Court in January 2018. See how much a scholar in our course added to the article by looking at our authorship highlighting tool here.

In a similar vein, another scholar improved Wikipedia’s article about anti-discrimination law, an article that has been viewed more than 13,000 times since they added an additional 2,200 words of content. The article speaks to anti-discrimination laws and historical contexts broadly around the world. It outlines legislation and court cases that have determined definitions of discrimination in different countries, as well as the effects of some of these decisions. To view exactly what this scholar contributed to the article, see authorship highlighting.

If a voter wants to learn about campaign finance in the United States, they can read all about it on Wikipedia. Thanks to another scholar in our course, the article boasts additional details about how campaign financing differs at the federal, state, and local levels. It also sheds light on campaign finance law, which requires candidates campaigning at the federal level to disclose information about donors who give more than $200 in an election cycle. Our course participant specifically improved the section about attempts to regulate campaign financing. This scholar had such a good experience editing Wikipedia themself, that they will also now continue incorporate a Wikipedia assignment into their classroom using our resources and support!

To read personal reflections of participants in our professional development courses, click here. For more information about teaching with Wikipedia, visit teach.wikiedu.org. Reach out to contact@wikiedu.org if you have questions about how you can get involved.

An opportunity to inform public knowledge on this scale comes, for many, only once in a lifetime.

Actually, for me, it came twice. The first time occurred when I attended the Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA) conference in Chicago earlier this year, where I first learned about the Wikipedia Fellows Program.

Unfortunately for me at the time, I didn’t get in – a testament to the competitive popularity of the program, I’m sure.

The second time occurred when I applied again for a later round after my initial application was rejected. This time, I got in – but only because a previous member of the cohort had dropped out.

The experience of involvement in learning how to edit Wikipedia since then has followed this trend of constant surprises and unexpected opportunities to participate and contribute. I did not expect, for example, to work on topics related to the Midterm Elections, nor did I expect to be significantly involved in editing, restructuring and rewriting the two articles I did, one of which relied extensively upon discussion and involvement with another member of my cohort.

However, such was the case, and I chose to place my focus on enhancing the articles on authority and political activism for the duration of the cohort. In collaboration with the other members of our cohort, enhancement proceeded with gusto. I found that existing treatments of these topics on Wikipedia were incomplete or over-embellished, and that an entire segment on the history of the terms was missing from each site. The extent of the contributions my fellow editors and I made in the end surprised me.

I also did not expect to have the level of involvement, cooperation, and feedback on drafts that I received through some of my editing projects through the Wikipedia Talk Page feature. Learning how to interact with multiple editors in real time, often halfway across the world and with the insight of different educational backgrounds and interests was an experience that asked for a new level of communication and sensitivity. For introducing us to this feature and for the information and facilitation he offered, I would like to thank Wiki Education’s Program Manager Will Kent.

Throughout the Wikipedia Fellows Program sponsored by Wiki Education, I have learned so much beyond simply how to write for, edit, and improve Wikipedia. I’ve learned what makes knowledge accessible, memorable and relevant, and what goes into making it shareable. I have come to realize in practical terms what I had already been writing about in academic terms, that the pursuit of knowledge is such that it can be undertaken by an individual, but it can only be advanced in partnership with others.

Wiki Education gave me the opportunity to experience this cumulative phenomenon of shared learning and a public approach to knowledge firsthand, all while cooperating with others equally committed to the team task. I got to learn about topics related to the Midterm Elections, activism, and the political and social understanding of authority – topics of interest to me and of relevance to the students I teach and the voters I helped inform in the build up to the U.S. Midterm Elections. I feel that my contributions are a part of what will make Wikipedia a better place for the casual, active, or eager reader to drop by, stick around, and explore. More importantly, I now understand the responsibility we all have to share our knowledge with others, and to do it in a way that is accurate, open, communicable, and fair. When we do so, we may well find, as I have, that learning and helping others to learn is not an experience for once in your lifetime, but an experience that can and will be pursued time and time again on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis.

I started this project as a Wikipedia Fellow, eager to learn, help, and maybe even make my mark. What I have found, however, is that while Wikipedia may be a once-in-a-lifetime idea, it is not meant to end with a once-in-a-lifetime click.

Image: File:Covered walkway at the southern edge of the Great Court at the University of Queensland July 2015.jpg, Nick-D, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The public gets science information online

According to a 2017 study by Pew Research Center, “most Americans say they get science news no more than a couple of times per month, and when they do, most say it is by happenstance rather than intentionally.” People primarily learn about science from general news outlets. But what information are they receiving exactly? And where can they go if they want to learn more? The answer is, they go online.

“Individuals are increasingly turning to online environments to find information about science and to follow scientific developments,” says Dominique Brossard in a recent PNAS article. It’s therefore crucial for scientists and scientific institutions to engage online platforms to reach the public sphere with the latest research.

When citizens are informed, they can make policy decisions and behavioral choices that have a positive effect on our planet’s future. The urgency of science communication has never been stronger.

“Public debates over science-related policy issues – such as global climate change, vaccine requirements for children, genetically engineered foods, or developments in human gene editing – place continuous demands on the citizenry to stay abreast of scientific developments,” states the Pew Research Center study.

Science journalism is in decline. Without journalists to do the work of science promotion, it’s more important than ever for scientists to do it themselves.

When the public wants to learn more about a scientific topic, they turn to search engines, which inevitably point them to Wikipedia. But, depending on how well that topic is covered on the online encyclopedia, they may not find what they’re looking for. That’s why it’s important for scientific experts to contribute to Wikipedia and fill in content gaps.

But there’s another reason why scientists should engage in Wikipedia. And that’s because not only is the public looking to Wikipedia to understand science, so are scientists!

Wikipedia influences science itself

In a study published in November 2017, Doug Hanley, a macroeconomist at the University of Pittsburgh, and Neil Thompson, an innovation scholar at MIT, found that Wikipedia articles about science have an effect on the progress of future scientific research. In the study, Hanley and Thompson analyzed the language that appears in Wikipedia science articles and measured that against how language in scientific research papers changes over time. Read more about their methodology in Bethany Brookshire’s write up on ScienceNews.org here.

What Hanley and Thompson found was that Wikipedia articles have a real effect on the vocabulary of scientific journal articles all around the world, but especially in countries with weaker economies. Scientists in these countries don’t necessarily have access to the latest paywalled research and are more likely to rely on public resources like Wikipedia. Whether or not scientists are admitting they’re among the millions of people who turn to the online encyclopedia daily, the influence is real.

Essentially, Brookshire explains, the research shows that “Wikipedia is not just a passive resource, it also has an effect on the frontiers of knowledge.”

“[Wikipedia] is a big resource for science and I think we need to recognize that,” researcher Thompson says. “There’s value in making sure the science on Wikipedia is as good and complete as possible.”

Wikipedia articles are meant to incorporate all facets of a topic from a neutral point of view and from all angles. That consensus building is vital to the Wikipedia editing community, as well as the scientific community. So, not only is improving Wikipedia an act of public scholarship, but it’s also one that allows scientists to indirectly communicate with (and better inform) their peers.

Improving Wikipedia performs a public good and it advances scientific knowledge. It turns out that the experience is also personally rewarding for the scientists doing it.

Scientists want to engage in public scholarship

“Many academics enter science to change the world for the better. … [But] most academic work is shared only with a particular scientific community, rather than policymakers or businesses, which makes it entirely disconnected from practice.”

That’s what Julian Kirchherr of the Guardian stresses in his article A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos. Some even cite science communication as a moral imperative. Environmental scientist Jonathan Foley speaks to the personally fulfilling aspects of sharing one’s knowledge:

“Communicating your science with the broader world is one of the most fulfilling things you will ever do,” he writes. “I guarantee you will find it fun, rewarding, and ultimately very educational.”

Engaging with the public through platforms that people use and trust is becoming increasingly important to new generations of academics. In Do Scientists Understand the Public?, Chris Mooney writes,

“In a recent survey of one thousand graduate-level science students at a top research institution (the University of California, San Francisco), less than half designated academic research as their top career choice. Instead, these young scientists are often interested in public engagement and communication, but face limited career opportunities to pursue these goals. In other words, if there is a crying need to forge better connections between scientists and the public, there is also an army of talent within universities looking for such outreach work. That base is young, optimistic, and stands ready to be mobilized.”

Wikipedia democratizes science communication, allowing for all to participate

Wikipedia provides these academics the opportunity to reach millions with their scholarship, using language that a non-expert can understand.

“Public sources of scientific information such as Wikipedia,” says Thompson, “are incredibly important for spreading knowledge to people who are not usually part of the conversation.”

Often, when members of the public don’t participate in channels of science communication, it isn’t for lack of interest. Instead, it may be the result of structural inequalities that limit their access to those channels. Everyone with internet access can get to Wikipedia. It’s the most effective way to put reliable, up-to-date scientific information into the hands of everyone, everywhere.

Wikipedia brings science to the public, but also connects the public to scientists and scientists to each other. It is a platform where reliable, neutral fact-reporting is valued and passionate rhetoric is not tolerated. It is a space to work together toward a clearer understanding of scientific research for the benefit of all.

Bibliography

• Brookshire, Bethany. Wikipedia has become a science reference source even though scientists don’t cite it, ScienceNews.org. (February 5, 2018)
• Brossard, Dominique. New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (August 20, 2013)
• Dawson, Emily. Reimagining publics and (non)participation: Exploring exclusion from science communication through the experiences of low-income, minority ethnic groups. Public Understanding of Science / SAGE journals. (January 10, 2018)
• Foley, Jonathan. Science Communication as a Moral Imperative. Medium. (August 5, 2018)
• Funk, Cary, Jeffrey Gottfried and Amy Mitchell, Science News and Information Today. Pew Research Center. (September 20, 2017)
• Kirchherr, Julian. A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos. The Guardian. (August 9, 2018)
• Mooney, Chris. Do Scientists Understand the Public? American Academy of Arts and Sciences. (2010)
• Thompson, Neil and Hanley, Douglas. Science Is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence From a Randomized Control Trial. MIT Sloan Research. (February 13, 2018)

Image: File:Astronomy and curiosity take us to unknown places.jpg, Ralina Shaikhetdinova, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Improving publicly available information about the women’s suffrage movement

Those who participate in this unique course will learn how to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of the history of women’s voting rights in honor of an upcoming exhibit hosted at the National Archives Museum titled, Rightfully Hers: American Women and the Vote. The exhibit celebrates the 100th anniversary of the 19th amendment’s ratification by telling the stories of “the dynamic involvement of American women across the spectrum of race, ethnicity and class” in the women’s suffrage movement. We are honored to take part in the representation of these histories on Wikipedia.

The mission of the National Archives stresses the importance of open access information, a mission that is closely aligned to our own. “Public access to government records,” it states, “strengthens democracy by allowing Americans to claim their rights of citizenship, hold their government accountable, and understand their history so they can participate more effectively in their government.” We wholeheartedly agree. When the public can inform themselves about important topics, they are more prepared to make informed choices in their personal and political lives. All citizens deserve a chance to participate in their democracy, and access to education empowers them to do so. Wikipedia is an immensely valuable resource for self-education. Ensuring that it is representative, accurate, and complete is vital. Through this course, Wiki Scholars will put government records into context within Wikipedia articles, thus expanding the impact of these records on public knowledge and improving the information resource that hundreds of millions turn to every month.

Take this skills development opportunity and share your knowledge for the benefit of the general public

Those who successfully complete the course will receive a certificate from the National Archives and Wiki Education. This exclusive and unique certificate demonstrates a commitment to ongoing learning, as well as an effective approach to public scholarship.

We are humbled to serve the public alongside such an important organization as the National Archives. We hope you join us.

We are currently accepting applications for this one of a kind professional development and certification opportunity until December 8, 2018. See our official announcement for more information or follow the application link below.

REGISTER