1. Embedding the Brunel Repository in the academic practice John Murtagh

2. BURA’s embedding aims Self-archiving of publications by authors themselves Enhance presence of open access repository across the University

3. Why self-archiving? Disappointing amount of research materials deposited in repositories –Only 15 percent of annual research is made open access

4. Amount of items in repositories http://roar.eprints.org/index.php?action=browse

5. Why Self-Archiving? Gain long-term material for archive by changing “publishing” culture in university via self-archiving –Encourage change in publishing habit –Easy to navigate DSpace system Other reasons: –Limited repository staff support –Word of mouth effect of repository –Deposit Agreement agreed to by self-archiving author. Mediated deposit – more complicated

6. Issues: tactics System has to be shown to work Has to have sufficient amount of content Numbers game vs. changing culture –Deposit as much as possible and as quick as possible versus academic self-inputting – risk of deterrance and much slower process Offering mediated service Vs trying to get self-archiving embedded BURA uses both but encourages self- archiving

7. Issues: publishers Publisher policies –Restrictive publishing contracts –Final drafts required –Ambiguous language for versions –Must link to published version –Ambiguous language of deposit location –E.g. license says I may post the PDF on my "own" web site. What does "own" mean? –Can mean a personal site, or portion of a site, either owned by you or at your institution (provided this institution is not- for-profit), devoted to you and your work. Or not! E.g. John Wiley & Sons

8. Issues: author rights Larger issue of author rights –Self-archiving contract amendments –SPARC Author copyright Addendum can be added to current copyright agreement with a journal publisherSPARC Author copyright Addendum –Copyright Toolbox Licence to Publish an entire licence, replacing the publisher's own, not just an addendum to modify itLicence to Publish Risk of being seen to “interfere” between journal and author

9. Issues: IPR and academic identity Protecting Intellectual property rights – IPR –Concern over plagiarism Protect document from copying, editing, extracting, printing if you choose Convert word documents to PDF – increasing usability Insert BURA cover sheet for each research paper Enter metadata and publisher details onto research paper

10. Examples: LSE

11. BURA: Post print

12. BURA: Pre print

13. Issues: author permission Different strategies to consider for co- authors –Time –Effort required –Deterrence to author –Realism Chances of co-authors objecting Immediate take down policy

14. Issues: Technical Technical support needed for project –Steep learning curve for academic staff –Repository must be attractive & easy to use – web development –Registered users notification needed –Shared email account needed for repository

15. Issues: Structure of Repository Research Areas need to be represented in collections on repository –Extra collections must secure content –Must be open to request/accommodating –Cross-research centres – fluid at times, extra collection to copy material across to

16. The Embedding Process Secure key research material –Inaugural Lecture series video recorded –Professorial lecture series video recorded –Research Open days video presentations –University research Newsletter Use of the RAE to secure interest and research publications

17. Downloads and Statistics Regular email updates to academics of their papers Regular updates to Heads of School Regular updates to School Boards Ensure repository URIs are used on personal websites and are cited

18. The Embedding Process Obtain Schools/Departments’ support for… –Devolution of control of collections to within schools –Schools know their academics –Retrospective papers can be deposited on academics behalf –Check new submissions for correct info –Encourage those who do not submit

19. Ongoing embedding process Keep community up to date on open access developments –Link Research funders’ mandates to your repository –5 out of 8 require deposit of research paper as condition of funding –European Commission and in US Congress in favour of open access

20. Progress Over 300 researchers registered on BURA Over half of BURA content is self- archived E-theses obligatory submission by October 2008 –Further embeds BURA into University

21. Wise words Secure School/Department approval –Database of research publications –Get schools/dep. To get involved in repository –Familiar with academics in school and research/researcher work patterns

22. Future Developments IncReASe: Increasing Repository Content through Automation and Services http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/increase/index.html The project will investigate ways of increasing the amount of content in White Rose Research Online by assessing how the repository can best be located within researcher workflows. In particular, we will look at which repository upload and checking processes could be automated.

23. IncReASe aims capture significantly more new content, as it is created, than we do at present look at ways of handling the substantial amount of legacy publications across the consortium facilitate a transition from uncoordinated deposit across distributed networks to a coordinated, centralised deposit model for the White Rose Institutions establish a deposit workflow for ESRC funded works investigate repository based services which would be of value to researchers.

24. Thank you for listening Questions? 01895265417 John.murtagh@brunel.ac.uk