Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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.
ContentsBackgroundEarly stages of repository development at DurhamIdentifying the need for a new approachExploring the overlap with central systemsPursuing the joined up approachThe solution – details of the workflows and systems implementedProgress to dateProsConsConclusion
Background
Durham University …-Old, established 1832-Traditional-Members of
-1994 Group-CURL
-Research led-Approx 16, 000 FTE students-Approx 1172 FTE staff-Focus on reputation
Early stages2002 - 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.
2003 - 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.
2003- 2004 - 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 approachAgreed 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 solutionMain 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
ConclusionOverall 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!
