Focus on Access to Resources - West Virginia University, Thursday October 14th Focus on Access to Resources Simon J. Bevan Information Systems Manager

Focus on Access to Resources - West Virginia University, Thursday October 14th

Focus on Access to Resources

Simon J. Bevan

Information Systems Manager

Cranfield University


Agenda• What am I doing here?

• Where am I from?

• Access to institutional resources– Moving to Electronic thesis submission– Developing an Institutional Repository


What am I doing here?

• CILIP/ESU Traveling Librarian 2004 award

• Message from my sponsors




Cranfield University• A small, virtually bespoke university, Cranfield University is

distinctive. Our postgraduate study programme is focused on real life rather than on pure theory. We facilitate work with industry and commerce, rather than just within the lecture room.

• Industrial and commercial sponsors recognise this, so our contract research income outstrips that of most other UK universities. As a result of our unique approach, our graduates are found worldwide, making significant contributions in their fields - an enviable network of men and women with the reputation for excellence that the name of Cranfield bestows.

• “to transform world class science, technology and management expertise into viable, practical, environmentally desirable solutions that enhance economic development”


ACTIVITIES

Scope and Scale

SilsoeSilsoe CranfieldCranfield ShrivenhamShrivenham

Bioscience & technology Agriculture,

engineering & food technology

Water & environmental management

Land use & the environment

Aerospace

Engineering

Industrial & manufacturing science

Management

Electronics & electro-optics

Mechanical, materials & civil engineering

Computing and IT

Applied mathematics

Defence management

10%

65%

25%


Student Profile

Postgraduate88%

Undergraduate12%

Postgraduate11%

Undergraduate89%

Cranfield University Average of all other UK universities



Electronic theses

• Founder member of UTOG (1994)

• EURILIA project (1994-97)

• Index to theses pilot (2001)

• JISC/FAIR (Focus on Access to Institutional Resources) programme (2002)

• Membership of NDLTD (2004)


‘Why is the University doing this?’

• Why e-theses?– Was it to ease submission process?– To save space?

• Will e-thesis be copy of record?• Will paper archive be maintained?

– Was it to make research more widely/easily available?

– Benefit graduate education?– Initiate ‘born digital’ development


Cranfield progress• Institutional progress

– Initial report developed 2002• Teaching Committee (Feb 03)

– Faculty Boards (Jun 03)

– Faculty Boards (Oct 03)

• Teaching Committee (Nov 03)– Faculty Boards (Feb 04)

• Teaching Committee (Feb 04)

– Senate (Mar 04)– Senate minutes confirmed (Jul 04)


Who has been involved?

• Who involved at Cranfield?• Who are the stakeholders?

– Library– Registry– Academic staff– Computer Centre– Press– Students (copyright permissions?)

• Who to lead?• What issues need to be addressed?• Terms of reference


Workflow

– E-submission up-front Version control

– E-submission final version– Compulsory

For all?

– Research level only– Submission

Student upload Physical – CD-ROM




Main difficulties at Cranfield

• Quality thresholds for open access

• IPR & Access

• Plagiarism

• Marking paper theses

• Copy of record


E-thesis submission conclusions• Pragmatic stepped approach (this is the first

phase)• Path of least academic resistance• Continuing with paper storage• Continuing with paper marking• Final corrected version only• Current submission process still stands• Library staff creating metadata and uploading files


Electronic theses – a national perspective

• JISC/FAIR projects– Theses Alive!– Electronic theses– Daedalus

• New call - UK HE e-theses Test-bed Project


Cranfield University Institutional Repository

• QuePrints@Cranfield

• Expanding e-theses collection into Institutional Repository

• Bulk loading– Reports– Working papers


Academic advocacy – ‘getting stuff’

• E-theses email• Product champions• Elsevier (Romeo Green)

– Adding material– Critical mass

• Usage– Advocacy– Google access




Other issues

• Quality– Important?– ArXiv

• Preservation

• Cost

• Institutional versus disciplinary– ArXiv


National perspective• ROMEO

– http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php

• SHERPA– http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/index.html

• Daedalus

• Parliamentary Committee report

http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php

http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php

http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/index.html

http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/index.html


Parliamentary Committee• On July 20th 2004 the House of Commons Science & Technology

Committee published its much anticipated report on scientific publications. The report gave a ringing endorsement to the principle and practice of self-archiving in institutional repositories and encouraged further investigation of the author-pays publishing model:

Key recommendations include:• all UK HE institutions establish institutional repositories• Research Councils and other Government funders mandate their

funded researchers to deposit a copy of all of their articles in repositories

• Government establish a central body to oversee the implementation of the repositories.

• Identifies the need for a period of experimentation to the impact of a change of publishing models

• Research Councils each establish a fund to which their funded researchers can apply should they wish to pay to publish


Thanks for listening!

[email protected]://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk

mailto:[email protected]

http://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/

Documents

Focus on Access to Resources - West Virginia University, Thursday October 14th Focus on Access to Resources Simon J. Bevan Information Systems Manager