Tag: scholarly communication

The Scholarly Communication & Information Policy (SCIP) office is pleased to announce the release of our Oral History Agreement Toolkit—a collection of templates, guidance documents, and resources that we created to help institutions approach oral history agreements.

The Oral History Center participated in the process to help SCIP to develop this toolkit. These agreements were developed specifically to meet the legal requirements of UC Berkeley. For guidance on letters of consent and legal agreements more broadly, especially for independent oral historians, please consult the Oral History Association’s best practices.

Why We Created This Toolkit

Over the past two years, SCIP worked to improve oral history agreements in ways that we believe:

• Resolve the “version of record” as between edited and unedited audio and transcripts
• Ensure consistency in representations to narrators, by having an integrated agreement
• Address privacy and defamation
• Standardize terms
• Define use and access rights by the institution in the event that narrators pass away or disengage after completing the interviews
• Resolve ambiguities for downstream granting of usage permission and licenses by the institution

Generally speaking, past approaches to oral history agreements have often created an imbalance between narrators and institutions. Our new toolkit addresses this by:

1. Centering narrator agency and control over their stories and how they’re shared;
2. Improving rights administration for libraries and oral history programs;
3. Providing clear, accessible language to explain complex legal concepts; and
4. Creating flexibility through multiple agreement options that accommodate diverse needs.

What’s Included in the Toolkit

There are two key documents in the toolkit:

• Talking Points for Conversations with Narrators
• Presentation for Oral History Centers and Staff

SCIP created both of these documents as training materials we presented to the UC Berkeley Oral History Center, but we believe they may be adapted, repurposed, and improved upon by other institutions.

The “Talking Points for Conversations” document is really the leading tool here, and includes:

• Agreement templates: Customizable templates covering a variety of narrator needs and signing scenarios (e.g. signing before the interview, signing after the interview, funded oral histories, deceased narrators, etc.);
• Explanatory Materials: Detailed talking points to help oral historians explain each clause in plain language;
• FAQs: Addressing common questions, including specific concerns for historically marginalized communities; and
• Sample Scenarios: Real-world examples showing how the agreements work in practice.

Key Benefits for Narrators

The template agreements protect narrators by ensuring they:

• Can review and correct transcripts before finalization
• May withdraw participation at any point before final approval
• Can restrict access to sensitive portions for specified time periods
• Retain the right to use their own stories regardless of copyright decisions
• Can request removal of identifying information about third parties
• Have clarity about their rights and responsibilities

Enhancing Institutional Practice

For libraries and oral history programs, the toolkit helps:

• Establish clear legal frameworks for rights management
• Reduce risk related to third-party claims
• Create flexible options for different interview scenarios and signing preferences
• Provide consistent language for explaining agreements to narrators
• Address complex situations like posthumous agreements and funded projects

Accommodating Narrator Requests for Modifications

A key principle underlying this toolkit is flexibility. The agreements can be modified to better reflect narrators’ comfort levels and preferences. If a narrator requests changes to the standard terms (additions, deletions, etc.), you can consider whether you are able to accommodate those requests.

In our case, we outline our own processes for:

• Modifications: Changes requested before signing
• Amendments: Changes requested after signing, including rights and embargo selections and substantive term modifications

Customization Is Expected and Encouraged

We recognize that institutions have diverse practices and needs. And we do not expect that these templates or materials will work for everyone!

In addition, institutions must make policy decisions even if they decide to utilize these materials. For instance, what range of embargo time periods are you willing to offer? Do you want to allow narrators to redact information once they’ve shared it? How do you wish to convey or encourage Creative Commons licensing options?

The toolkit is designed merely as a foundation—a starting point for important conversations about reforming oral history practices at your institution. We encourage programs to:

• Review the materials with institutional stakeholders, including legal counsel
• Adapt the templates to align with your specific circumstances and policies
• Use the talking points as a basis for developing your own communication strategies
• Consider the sample scenarios as illustrations rather than prescriptive examples

Getting Started

We invite you to explore these resources and consider how they might enhance administration of your oral history agreements. We believe the toolkit offers valuable perspectives on balancing ethical responsibilities to narrators with practical institutional needs.

As you begin to use these materials, we welcome your feedback at schol-comm@berkeley.edu. Your experiences and insights will help us continue to refine these resources to better serve the oral history community.

---

The Scholarly Communication & Information Policy (SCIP) office provides guidance on copyright, publishing, and information policy matters to support the research and teaching mission of our institution.