1. Open Access Institutional Repositories (OA IRs): Leadership, Direction and Launch University of Southampton. 25th and 26th January, 2005 http://eprints.soton.ac.uk http://tardis.eprints.org/ http://eprints.soton.ac.uk http://tardis.eprints.org/ Developing an Institutional Repository at the University of Southampton - the TARDis experience Policy meets Practice in Building a Sustainable Institutional Repository for Research Pauline Simpson TARDis Project Manager Jessie Hey, TARDis Research Fellow Mark Brown, University Librarian

2. The Culture, Care, Content and Continuance of IRs TARDis in transition UK Context (PS) Developing policies (PS) Working with disciplines and cultures (JH) Continuance - the next stage: (MLB) a shared service

3. IRs : a little history 1991 – first author self archiving subject repository (e-Print archive) Los Alamos High Energy Physics now called arXiv located at Cornell University. Very successful 1994 - Prof Stevan Harnad (Southampton), strong advocate of author self archiving 1997 - more subject archives introduced (Chemistry, Economics etc) – varying success 2000 onwards - complementary model emerging - institutional repositories with initiative often library-led – many supported by project funding eg. USA, Canada, Australia and UK.

4. UK Context HEFCE / JISC Focus on Access to Institutional Resources (FAIR) 2002 - 2005 –To support the disclosure of institutional assets: To support access to and sharing of institutional content within Higher Education and Further Education and to allow intelligence to be gathered about the technical, organisational and cultural challenges of these processes … Inspired by the vision of the Open Archives Initiative (OAI) that digital resources can be shared between organisations based on a simple mechanism allowing metadata about these resources to be harvested into services

5. ? why INSTITUTIONAL Repositories Subject or project repositories often linked to an individual or a group – can be transitory - collection at risk eg. Paul Ginsparg Institutions take responsibility for –Centralising a distributed activity –Framework and Infrastructure –Permanence that can sustain changes –Stewardship of Digital assets –Preservation –Provide central digital showcase for the research, teaching and scholarship of the institution

6. UK Context - FAIR FAIR Programme August 2002 - £3 million on 14 projects Clusters: Museums and Images e-Prints e-theses IPR Institutional portals (New Call for IR Proposals in Feb 2005)

7. FAIR - ePrints Cluster Sharing experiences : SHERPA: broader - Consortium of University Research Libraries – filling archives and joint infrastructure ( some 20 universities led by Nottingham University) HaIRST: A testbed for Scotland for harvesting Institutional resources led by Strathclyde University (includes 10 FE colleges) Daedalus : Glasgow University ePrints-UK :harvesting UK e-Print archives (E-Theses led by Robert Gordon University & Theses Alive led by Edinburgh University and RoMEo worked within this cluster) TARDis: Targeting Academic Resources for Deposit and dISclosure

8. TARDis built on Southampton visions EPrints software had been created at School of Electronics and Computer Science (ECS), Southampton to enable the self archive vision ECS already used the software for a publications database – now a sustainable repository Southampton Oceanography Centre wanted to be an early adopter of e-Prints culture Resulting TARDis Project is the collaboration of The University Library, School of Electronics and Computer Science, and Information Systems Services alongside academics as one institution

9. TARDis : Targeting Academic Resources for Deposit and Disclosure – activities Investigating practical ways in which university research output can be made more freely available - more accessible, more rapidly – as a fundamental building block of e-Research Creating an IR model - Southampton University Research e-Prints (e-Prints Soton) http://eprints.soton.ac.uk Refining Software -feeding back into pioneering EPrints software, good citation and information management practice experimenting with best balance of assisted deposit and fast track ( functionality, fields, interface) Supporting ease of use for depositors of different backgrounds with a wide variety of research output – essential ingredient, working closely with schools – identifying barriers

10. TARDis evolution to e-Prints Soton Original intent to provide secure storage for the full text of Southampton research output (e-Print Archive including post refereed pre published versions of papers deposited by researchers) Feedback: from our advocacy, pilot and full service was that e-Prints Soton would provide maximum benefit if the service also assisted researchers with time consuming research metrics Evolved to hybrid publications database for all research output with full text where available

11. Policy into Practice (1) The Name! Mandatory Use – dovetailing with present working practices Target - Proof of concept or full-scale service (one leads into the other) but never a Project Scope - What to deposit - all Research Output, excluding learning objects or administrative documents (at present). Current research or legacy? Who can Deposit – what size of footprint? Database - one for ease of maintenance (Nottingham x 2; Glasgow x 3) Software – multiple choices – but Southampton = no contest! Essential technical support : customization, functionality Deposit Options – we offer choice : self, assisted and fast track deposit Mandatory Metadata fields – document dependent - sufficient for citation but too many = barrier to deposit Metadata quality – all data is validated. Institutional responsibility requires quality data. QA is labour intensive – what level? Submitted data often poor

12. Policy into Practice (2) Value Added – e-journal URL and abstract Full Text v Record – policy linked to Southampton needs, requests for copies Import Records – from subject repositories - arXiv, PubMed File Formats – accept a variety – discipline specific, but thinking about easy dissemination versus preservation. File Conversion - Word into pdf, but wish to add conversion tools to interface with guidance for depositors Digitization – offer scanning for illustrations not held electronically if text deposited Copyright - advising and encouraging rather than proactively seeking permission. SHERPA RoMEO Publishers Copyright Policies & EPrints RoMEO Preservation - secure storage is offered. New Project PRESERV

13. Legal Issues Deposit Agreement and User Agreement Legal documents? Acceptance by click or proceeding through - Withdrawal of records - Quality assurance - not of content appoint editors within research groups - IPR Important to link with your Legal Affairs Office

14. Policy into Practice - summary Choose optimum time to introduce - Southampton restructuring Interface aesthetics - look and feel is important Metadata quality is a huge issue Assisted deposit is time consuming Dedicated Technical, Advocacy & Admin support Sophisticated software functionality expectations by researchers Need Champions within your organization …..

15. Working with disciplines and cultures Advocacy Policy defined Medium to Long Term support required Sensitive to organizational culture and background Enthusiasm Presentation and debating skills Jessie Hey ……..

16. Working with disciplines and cultures for full representation Began with initial knowledge of some areas of a large organisation Advocacy/solutions most effective when you know the background and tailor to suit Key ingredient - exploration of web sites and discussions

17. Sampling of faculty websites – assessing current practice

18. University central recording of research Central recording mechanism via Corporate and Marketing Service – MS Word lists the Research Report provides a comprehensive list of publications by University staff Progressed to pdfs - 1998 to 2002 on the web Need an easier, more proactive way with full text potential

19. Fundamental impact on policy of current practice Hey, Jessie M.N. (2004) An environmental assessment of research publication activity and related factors impacting the development of an Institutional e-Print Repository at the University of Southampton. Southampton, UK, University of Southampton, 19pp. (TARDis Project Report, D 3.1.2) http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/archive/00006218/ http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/archive/00006218/ With much support from Natasha Lucas who has since provided invaluable assisted deposit support See also TARDis article in Ariadne http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/8986/

20. Feedback: Perceived benefits to University, Schools and Researchers Secure storage of publications –including also theses and dissertations, technical reports Links to projects and web pages Research reporting Interdisciplinary research University profile School and discipline visibility Researcher profile Full text content freely accessible link to learning and teaching Increased citations Articles freely available online are more highly cited. For greater impact and faster scientific progress, authors and publishers should aim to make research easy to access Nature, Volume 411, Number 6837, p. 521, 2001 Steve Lawrence Online or Invisible?

21. Benefit of high profile of e-Prints Soton – Google and Google Scholar ………..

22. Creating exemplars Helping individuals with their CV – potential for additional tailoring Developing visibility aids for individuals and schools Updating home page and group research pages Humanities require hybrid database to represent all work Interdisciplinary work – saving deposit time

23. Real benefit of adding a link to your web page – auto update

24. Secure storage and visibility – from e-Prints Soton to S3RI brand

25. Advertising research – by web site and screen at entrance

26. Is my paper here?

27. Hot off the screen

28. Linking to bookseller – search inside bonus

29. Interdisciplinary research – enter once only

30. Next phase includes shared preservation services Act of creating database anticipates future preservation decisions Gained valuable practical experience with IR usage e.g. metadata quality/variety and file formats – Word and pdf v. LaTeX communities but shared services useful for common problems PRESERV (Preservation Services for EPrints) - part of new £1m UK JISC funding – partnering with National Archives File Format Registry (PRONOM) and the British Library http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=project_preserv

31. Current transition Gaining experience on managing input on increasing scale – seeking smart solutions and developing ongoing school partnerships e.g. –school research office - Education, Humanities –web master – Southampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute –library - Southampton Oceanography Centre –academic and librarian – Health Care Innovation Unit Continuing dialogue with individual schools and individuals – building up exemplars within schools and evolving processes to suit Building sustainability Practical level Management level Mark Brown ………

32. From TARDis to Southampton University Research e-Prints Sustainable Institutional Repository – final deliverable of TARDis Service rather than Project Advocacy Multi-Levels The Hooks Led by University Library Phased Business Plan Next Steps

33. To become an integral part of the research infrastructure

34. Open Access Institutional Repositories (OA IRs): Leadership, Direction and Launch University of Southampton. 25th and 26th January, 2005 http://eprints.soton.ac.uk http://tardis.eprints.org/ http://eprints.soton.ac.uk http://tardis.eprints.org/ Developing an Institutional Repository at the University of Southampton - the TARDis experience Policy meets Practice in Building a Sustainable Institutional Repository for Research Pauline Simpson TARDis Project Manager Jessie Hey, TARDis Research Fellow Mark Brown, University Librarian