Durham Research Online: exploring the pros and cons of a joined up approach Jackie Knowles, Repository Support Officer (Organisational) RSP Project University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IRRA DSpace April 2006 Claire Knowles University of Edinburgh.
Advertisements

UKCoRR meeting Kingston University, November 2007 Mary Robinson European Development Officer University of Nottingham, UK
Consortium within a consortium: the basis for the York service model Elizabeth Heaps (University Librarian) Elizabeth Harbord (Head of Collection Management)
RSP Goes Back to School September 2009 Mary Robinson European Development Officer University of Nottingham, UK
2011 Census Outputs Plans and Progress. CONTENTS Aims for 2011 Census Outputs Strategy Development User Consultation Next Steps.
CURRENT ISSUES Current contents Over 3,000 items open access, 42% reports and working papers, 21% journal articles, 21% conference items, 7% book chapters,
Development of HEAR at Ulster Background to HEAR Content of HEAR Challenges in development Academic performance (4.3) Additional information (6.1) Roll.
Open Stirling: Open Access Publishing and Research Data Management at Stirling Monday 25 th March 2013 Michael White, Information Services STORRE Co-Manager/RMS.
A Toolbox for Blackboard Tim Roberts
Enlighten: integrating a repository with University systems and processes Morag Greig Advocacy Manager- Enlighten University of Glasgow UKCoRR meeting.
The institutional repository and research management at the University of Glasgow Susan Ashworth.
Bringing an Institutional Repository to the Ball State University Community Cardinal Scholar (CS) Bradley Faust, Assistant Dean LITS University Libraries.
Monash's Mock RQF − Lessons learnt David Groenewegen ARROW Project Manager.
Protocol, the virtual project room. This brief tour will help you visualise Protocol and how best to take advantage of its benefits. Protocol helps you.
Online Reading Lists at Loughborough University Gary Brewerton, Library Systems Manager.
Administration & Workflow
Background Current Status Future Plans. Agenda Background First Steps Current Status Future Plans Joomla Basics Questions 2.
ARROW Progress Report to CAUL September 2004 Geoff Payne, ARROW Project Manager.
Dspace – Digital Repository Dawn Petherick, University Web Services Team Manager Information Services, University of Birmingham MIDESS Dissemination.
Institutional Repositories Tools for scholarship Mary Westell University of Calgary AMTEC Conference May 26, 2005.
© University of Reading October 2009 CentAUR Central Archive at the University of Reading Introduction for ‘early adopters’ Alison.
So You Want to Switch Course Management Systems? We Have! Come Find Out What We’ve Learned. Copyright University of Okahoma This work is the intellectual.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Implementing DSpace at NASA Langley Research Center 1 Greta Lowe Librarian NASA Langley Research Center
VIBRANT MEDIA Online Marketing & Event Administration Solutions 11 March 2009.
Management, marketing and population of repositories Morag Greig, University of Glasgow.
The Repositories Support Project DSpace UK&I User Group Meeting Chris Yates, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.
Faculty Center for Instructors and Roster Contacts Roles and Access Faculty Center Features Grade Changes and Approval.
Geoff Payne ARROW Project Manager 1 April Genesis Monash University information management perspective Desire to integrate initiatives such as electronic.
Bridging the Impact Gap: Systems and Serendipity 13 September 2013 ARMS Conference, Adelaide 2013 Natalie Thompson Acting Research Support Services Manager.
Where is the Library? Research Support at MMU Mary Pickstone Research Support Librarian.
Developing an accessibility strategy. In this talk we will discuss an accessibility strategy an accessibility policy getting started - steps to consultation.
Libra: Thesis and Dissertation Submission. What is Libra? UVA’s institutional repository, providing online archiving and access for the scholarly output.
DAEDALUS Project William J Nixon Service Development Susan Ashworth Advocacy.
5-7 November 2014 DR Workflow Practical Digital Content Management from Digital Libraries & Archives Perspective.
Practical Advice Morag Greig Advocacy William J Nixon Service Development DAEDALUS Workshop – 27 June 2005.
1 ISA&D7‏/8‏/ ISA&D7‏/8‏/2013 Systems Development Life Cycle Phases and Activities in the SDLC Variations of the SDLC models.
Electronic Theses at Rhodes University presented by Irene Vermaak Rhodes University Library National ETD Project CHELSA Stakeholder Workshop 5 November.
Scholarly Communication in a Digital World: the Role of the Digital Repository at the Raman Research Institute Girija Srinivasan, Y.M. Patil and Jacob.
ANDS Back to Basics Workshop Research Data Management and the ECU Library Poh Lin Teow & Gordon McIntyre Librarians: Research Services Bentley Technology.
Digital Commons & Open Access Repositories Johanna Bristow, Strategic Marketing Manager APBSLG Libraries: September 2006.
Complaints Resolution Framework March What is a Complaints Resolution Framework? The International Standard on complaint handling ISO 1002 directs.
Enlighten: Encouraging deposit at the University of Glasgow Professor Steve Beaumont Vice-Principal, Research and Enterprise.
1 ARRO: Anglia Ruskin Research Online Making submissions: Benefits and Process.
Rev.04/2015© 2015 PLEASE NOTE: The Application Review Module (ARM) is a system that is designed as a shared service and is maintained by the Grants Centers.
This project is part of the JISC FAIR programme The Copyright Conundrum: how to populate your repository and stay legal SPARC Workshop, 18-19th November.
Cardiff ePrints Caerdydd: from Vision to Reality Anne Bell
The University of Edinburgh Where are our books : improving the recommendation to shelf process EVUGM September 5 th 2003 Jeremy Upton Bibliographic Services.
1 SERD Project Director’s Conference CRIS OVERVIEW Education Component Current Research Information System March 30, 2005 Dr. Irma A. Lawrence National.
Jackie Knowles, Project Manager Welsh Repository Network.
After the RAE: Continuing to manage research outputs Morag Watson Digital Library Development Manager University of Edinburgh.
DAEDALUS - An ePrints Case Study William J Nixon Service Development Susan Ashworth Advocacy.
Oman College of Management and Technology Course – MM Topic 7 Production and Distribution of Multimedia Titles CS/MIS Department.
Introducing the RSP Chris Yates, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.
The Glasgow Experience: From DAEDALUS to Enlighten William J Nixon and Morag Greig Glasgow University Library IUA Librarians Group, 20 th February 2007.
EXPLORER project Elizabeth Lunt Project Manager De Montfort University.
Perspectives from the Next Generation of Repository Managers
Bringing a buzz to NECTAR: Outcomes and impact Miggie Pickton 'How embedded and integrated is your repository?‘ JISCrte event, Nottingham, 10 th February.
Repository Reboot The Center for Digital Scholarship Stephen F. Austin State University.
Metadata & Repositories Jackie Knowles RSP Support Officer.
DAEDALUS Project William J Nixon Service Development Susan Ashworth Advocacy.
RSP University of Hertfordshire Research Archive UHRA ….‘real life self-archiving’ Farnham 1 st November 2007 Monica Rivers-Latham
Outline of Talk What is eResearch and why does it matter? The South African SARIS project Challenging the current scholarly communication system eResearch,
Moshe Shechter | Alma Product Manager
The Marshall University Experience with Implementing Project Server 2003 August 9, 2005 Presented by: Chuck Elliott, M.S. Associate Director, Customer.
Moving on : Repository Services after the RAE
Reusing and repurposing metadata in a Current Research Information System and Institutional Repository 3 June 2010 Robin Armstrong Viner Cataloguing.
SFU Open Access Policy Endorsed by Senate January 9, 2017
HRA User Satisfaction Report
Open access in REF – Planning Workshop
Policy Frameworks: building a firm foundation for your IR
Presentation transcript:

Durham Research Online: exploring the pros and cons of a joined up approach Jackie Knowles, Repository Support Officer (Organisational) RSP Project University of Wales, Aberystwyth

Introduction Durham has taken a joined up and embedded approach to populating their institutional repository by linking the database into institutional web pages and the 2008 RAE via their central university content management system. This talk will outline the development of the repository and explore the advantages and disadvantages of their experiences.

Contents Background Early stages of repository development at Durham Identifying the need for a new approach Exploring the overlap with central systems Pursuing the joined up approach The solution – details of the workflows and systems implemented Progress to date Pros Cons Conclusion

Background Durham University … -Old, established Traditional -Members of Group -CURL -Research led -Approx 16, 000 FTE students -Approx 1172 FTE staff -Focus on reputation

Early stages Scholarly Communication debate was ongoing within the University but generally there was a fairly low awareness of the issues. - The concept of a repository had entered into strategic planning within the Library. - Newly appointed E-Resourced Manager (me) assigned to take this area forward. - December 2002 the library arranged a one day advocacy event to explore Open Access and the concept of a repository with the academic community Set up a demonstrator repository. - Used an existing server. - Used the e-prints software. - Brought in colleagues in the IT department to help install and configure Content generation strategies and advocacy - Lunchtime road shows. - Green publisher led strategies. - Durham Middle East Papers Online. - Pilot project group with Geography Department.

Durham University e-Prints

A new approach ? One of the outcomes of the pilot project with Geography. Became aware of a publications database on the University Content Management System (CMS) being used to store information about research outputs for the purposes of : RAE Populating staff web pages

Overlap? The CMS had the data (thousands of publications!) But the system was a bit anarchic: Categories had proliferated Standards were not being used Field structures were incomplete Data was not being formatted consistently

A joined up approach Agreed that it was a ‘good thing’ to pursue a joined up approach but now the various interested parties had agree on implementation plans. Began to talk to one another Operational level Strategic level Wrote lots of documentation Scoping papers Technical specifications

Our solution Main features: Single input. Key once, use many times for different purposes. CMS would be the main interface as academics were already engaged and using this. Library staff would become involved by verifying data within the CMS for the RAE submission. As each item was verified in the CMS a copy of the publication record would be automatically moved across to a new e-prints repository. When they arrived in the repository library staff would then add value by obtaining copyright clearance and adding the full text. Verified items would become locked in the CMS and any further changes would be done in consultation with library staff.

An attempt at a diagram An academic adds a description of their research publication to the CMS CMS The item is available immediately on their personal web site Library staff verify publication records Any changes made to record during verification are reflected immediately on staff web pages CMS Verified items become locked and any further changes must be mediated by Library staff. The locked data is now ready to be exported to the RAE software. Repository And a copy of each verified publication is automatically sent to the repository ‘buffer’ Buffer Repository Copyright is checked and full text is added if allowed The item is now available in the repository !

Some screen shots

Content Management System

Management Information

Record

Web page

Durham Research Online

Publications … in full text

Progress to date System is working well 3,500 items moved into the repository to date Approx 60 % will be available in full text Staffing One FT member of staff and 4 x half days per week of Library Assistant time doing metadata verifications at present Digital Library Developer due to be appointed Repository cannot be launched to the public as it contains the Durham RAE submission Top level approval for the concept of a repository gathering pace Mandate approved in March 2007

Pros Sheer volume of content we can now tap into Single input – type once … use several times Academics already engaged with the CMS and using the system Joined up approach proved fruitful raises awareness of repositories outside the library places it on the agenda for senior managers and decisions makers sets a precedent for other projects Tie in with the RAE has really defined a valuable role for the library showcase expertise and skills gain extra staffing resource CMS written in house which gives maximum flexibility

Cons CMS written in house gives maximum flexibility … but it developed ad hoc and is often chaotic as it is constantly being ‘updated’ Complexity – needed to consider lots of options Slow – joined up approach adds time lags Multipurpose records – causes big problems Formatting nightmares Author ownership of the final repository is lacking Lots of activity behind the scenes but no launch Still need advocacy but sensitive data ownership issues are emerging Building up a back log Huge amount of work - goal posts and targets constantly changing Lack of IT support for the repository

Conclusion Overall a successful strategy. In particular it has laid down building blocks of support for a repository at the top levels of the university. It has re-enforced the role of the library within the institution. Most of the drawbacks should be surmountable. Critical point will be when the mandate is announced and the repository is launched, how will the academics react? One to watch!

Questions ? Thanks for listening! Contact details: Telephone: