Presentation on theme: "Institutional repositories and records management: overlaps, obstacles & opportunities Jackie Knowles Repository Support Officer Steve Bailey Senior Advisor,"— Presentation transcript:
Institutional repositories and records management: overlaps, obstacles & opportunities Jackie Knowles Repository Support Officer Steve Bailey Senior Advisor, JISC infoNet
Contents/Intro What is a repository? The repository scene The JISC perspective Institutional repositories Stakeholders Benefits Typical content Functionality Key issues The future
What is a repository? At root they are mechanism for managing and storing digital content. But should be considered more as a set of services which are offered to the academic community. Repositories can be institutional or subject based.
JISC investment in repositories JISC have a repositories and preservation programme through which they are making a £14m investment in Higher Education repository and digital content infrastructure. Heery, R. and Powell, A. (2006) Digital Repositories Roadmap: Looking Forward http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/rep-roadmap-v15.doc Accessed 3rd December 2007. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/rep-roadmap-v15.doc
JISC investment in repositories Main initiatives cross-searching facilities across repositories funding for institutions to develop a critical mass of content preservation solutions advice for the development of repositories. Funding lots of projects and research.
The RSP Repository establishment Technical Support DSpace & ePrints High-level advocacy Presentations / materials aimed at senior managers Grassroots advocacy Presentations / materials for researchers / teachers Encourage use Presentations / materials for researchers / teachers Encourage re-use Presentations / materials for service providers Repository Administrators Support to run repositories (e.g. preservation) High level representation Funding councils / publishers etc
The RSP co-ordinate and deliver good practice provide guidance and advice Activities Outreach programme On-site support Enquiry service Web site Briefing papers
So back to Institutional repositories Institutional repositories are concerned with intellectual output … Collecting Preserving Managing Accessibility Re-use Based on open standards
Main repository features Submission forms User area Licences & terms and conditions Metadata records Full text of items (optional) Search and browse functionality
Harvesting Most traffic coming to an IR comes via Google and other search engines. Harvesting and exposure of information to the wider world is a key element. So cannot talk for very long about repositories before mentioning Open Access …
Open Access Traditional research publishing Publically funded but readership limited by economies. Authors signing away rights. Publisher monopolies. Open access Encourages a wider use of information assets and increases citations. Makes information freely accessible to anyone in the world using an internet connection. Potential readership is far, far greater than that for articles where the full-text is restricted to subscribers.
Key stakeholders in a repository Senior management Academics as authors Academics as users Repository staff Library, IT and other support staff Publishers Funding agencies General public
Benefits to institutions Management Marketing showcase Collection stewardship Consistency of data collected Economies of scale Preservation Management information tool RAE QAA audit Competitor analysis tool
Benefits to authors Academic authors Visibility Impact Recognition Usage feedback Discussion Collaboration Career development
Administrative documents Main focus of repository development to date has been on research outputs and theses Although JISC funding has gone towards some records management specific projects Kings College London http://www.kcl.ac.uk/projects/jiscrec/ http://www.kcl.ac.uk/projects/jiscrec/ http://www.kcl.ac.uk/blogs/committee-zone/ University of Plymouth Repository Others?
A note about preservation The accessibility agenda is more prominent in the repository community - at the moment. … someone else will deal with it! National solutions? Preservation policies are encouraged http://www.opendoar.org/tools/en/policies.php
What are the issues? For senior managers: Resources Awareness Culture change Policy framework Mandates
What are the issues? For academic authors: Awareness Rights (confusion and misinformation) Time Complexity of metadata required Final versions of their papers Difficulty Apathy
What are the issues? For repository staff: Awareness Defining a metadata schema Defining workflows and the level of mediation needed for submission Managing copyright and intellectual property rights Advocacy
Challenges for the sector Lots of material we could collect Lots of different stakeholders Institutions often have multi-centred power hubs To mandate or not to mandate Defining success …. the numbers game!
Top UK repositories Cambridge (189,216) Southampton (27,328) Open University (5,986) UK average about 300 Aberystwyth (274 items)
Challenges for the sector The cultural challenge is uppermost in peoples minds Embedding this in the academic or institutional workflow But … technology is moving forward Web 2.0
The balancing act Technology Organisation Resources
The future Lots of best practice and case studies out there Tools are available, for example Romeo & Juliet OpenDoar Policies Tool Repository community now being established JISC is making a significant investment in this area Help and support mechanisms emerging, such as the RSP!
Background (a personal perspective) C.2003 Sudden and rapid rise in profile of the repository agenda within JISC A watching brief maintained + formal/informal discussions with those responsible Always with a series of questions in mind: What is the overlap with RM, now & in the future? Are we trying to achieve the same things? Is it a threat, opportunity or irrelevance to RM? To what extent do repositories need RM & how do we prevent them re-inventing the wheel?
Findings There are fundamental differences: Drivers (open access etc) Reflected in technical priorities (inter-operability not retention mgt for example) Standards Practitioner community User community? Content? But there is also much in common…
Similarities Both: relate to the management of information are primarily concerned with internal information require a combination of technology, policies, procedures & user behaviour rely on the participation & engagement of the user involve resource discovery impose centrally-determined controls around the behaviour of information May require access to digital content in the medium- long term
Key RM questions & concerns which may (should?) be of interest to the IR community Regardless of their content…
Controlling the content How is the content of an IR defined & by whom? When in its lifecycle is content deemed appropriate for inclusion? E.g. drafts or final content Who is able to add content?
Regulating retention Who defines how long the contents should be retained? Based on what criteria? Is this consistent with the corporate retention schedule? Is the deletion process controlled, complete and auditable?
Preserving the provenance How is the link preserved between the content and the process which created it? How is the link preserved between content in the repository & related content held elsewhere? How is the provenance of who created the content, when, why & how captured?
Other RM considerations Where is the metadata sourced from? Free text? Internal pick list? Shared, verifiable external resource? Protecting the evidential value Ensuring qualities of authenticity, integrity & non- repudiation Preservation planning Appropriate choice of format, media, strategy etc Appraisal: identifying what is worth preserving
Possible areas of overlap (competition?) IR scope creep into capturing business records Project proposals, grant applications, financial reporting… Institutional Repository vs EDRMS Should this content be in / managed by your EDRMS? Or will they be two separate stove-pipes IRs may beat RM for resources More directly relevant to core institutional activity Direct backing from important stakeholders (RC/FCs) Heavy backing from JISC & others Build a national infrastructure of interoperable digital repositories (addressing institutional, subject and learning object repositories)
Summary Work on institutional repositories is, or will be, happening within your institution They may need your help We may well have the answers to some of their problems There may be issues regarding respective scopes & remits to be resolved…and soon There may be opportunities for records managers to increase their profile & impact