1. Retrospective Digitization of Theses and Dissertations: Case Studies of Selection Criteria and Funding Sources Scott Eldredge, BYU Austin McLean, ProQuest / UMI

2. Agenda Why digitize retrospective dissertations? How to digitize retrospective dissertations? What selection criteria should be used? Case study in selection criteria: BYU

3. Why Digitize? Create easier access for institution and world-wide audience Showcases institutional history for a discipline Faster dissemination of research Digital preservation component Reduces ILL expense for library

4. How to Digitize Library / Institution Incorporate dissertations/theses into existing digitization workflow Service Provider ProQuest / UMI offers digitization / microfilming services 80 institutions worldwide in last 5 years have contracted with ProQuest / UMI Digital and microfilm can be created Titles can be included in Dissertations Abstracts / PQDT as well as distributed OA by institution in repository

5. Selection Criteria Variety of criteria can be used including ILL Requests (University of Texas – Austin) Subject (University of Tulsa – Civil Rights Content) Department (Washington State - Education) Distance Learners (Union Institute and University) Year (Popular with Reference) Ascending (Yale, University of Virginia) Descending (Stephen F. Austin State University) Format (University of Oklahoma) Space / Preservation (Rice University) Funding Source (Purdue University)

6. BYU Case Study

7. Retrospective Conversion of Masters Theses at Brigham Young University: Two Models

8. The Projects Mormon Theses Mormon Theses Benson Institute Theses Benson Institute Theses

9. Mormon Theses

10. Selection Limited by topic Limited by topic Importance to institution Importance to institution User demand User demand

11. Rights Management Permission forms Permission forms

13. Outsourcing Vendor Selection Vendor Selection RFI RFI RFP RFP Proposal Review Proposal Review

17. Outsourcing Vendor Selection Vendor Selection RFI RFI RFP RFP Proposal Review Proposal Review

21. Outsourcing Vendor Selection Vendor Selection RFI RFI RFP RFP Proposal Review Proposal Review

23. Document Prep Pulling Pulling Checkout Checkout Review – PNT Review – PNT Disbinding Disbinding Packaging Packaging Shipping Shipping

25. Document Prep Pulling Pulling Checkout Checkout Review – PNT Review – PNT Disbinding Disbinding Packaging Packaging Shipping Shipping

26. Document Deprep Receiving Receiving Review Review Reprinting (Optional) Reprinting (Optional) Rebinding Rebinding Re-tag (bar-code, etc.) Re-tag (bar-code, etc.) Check in Check in Reshelving Reshelving

27. Billing Review and approve invoices Track Budgets

28. Conversion Receipt of files Receipt of files FTP FTP CD CD

29. Quality control Image files Image files Text files Text files Mark up Mark up

30. Access Decisions driven by capabilities Decisions driven by capabilities Databases Databases Hyperion Hyperion CONTENTdm CONTENTdm Convert to HTML Convert to HTML OPAC records OPAC records 856 field 856 field Separate record? Separate record? Harvested by NDLTD/OCLC Harvested by NDLTD/OCLC Return to Stacks? Return to Stacks?

31. Benson Institute

32. Selection Decisions made by Institute Focus on developing countries

33. Rights Management Secured at time of submission International copyright laws apply

34. Document Prep Pulling Pulling Transcription (abstract) Transcription (abstract) Translations (abstract) Translations (abstract) Review Review Disbinding Disbinding

35. Scanning In house In house

36. Quality Control Post-scan review Post-scan review

37. Document Deprep Rebinding Return to Institute No copies in library

38. Post Scan processing Despeckle/Deskew Create PDFs

39. Metadata MARC record in OPAC URL in MARC record (856 field) Metadata for CONTENTdm from MARC record Harvested by NDLTD/OCLC

40. Load into Digital Library CONTENTdm

41. Major Issues Selection Rights Management In house vs. outsource Standards Text Conversion Mark-up Scanning Metadata Access Digital Library Products or Databases Bandwidth considerations Costs

42. Future Directions Decision not to digitize all theses Resources Quality concerns Rights issues “Best of the Rest” Identified by college faculty

43. URL http://lib.byu.edu/online