1. an analysis in brazilian digital libraries of theses and dissertations
ISKO UK THE UK CHAPTER OF ISKO ISKO UK CONFERENCE INDEXING POLICY IN A COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENT:
an analysis in brazilian digital libraries of theses and dissertations
Mariângela Spotti Lopes Fujita
Roberta Cristina Dal’Evedove Tartarotti
UNESP – São Paulo State University
Paula Regina Dal’Evedove
UFSCar – Universidade Federal de São Carlos
2017

2. INTRODUCTION
Users' interests and expectations regarding information products and services are increasingly complex, urgent and diversified.
Interactivity in digital media fostered the emergence and application of more dynamic knowledge organization processes, breaking with the traditional application of secular models for the creation of information products and services.

3. INTRODUCTION
One of the main changes comes with the organization, representation and sharing of information and objects by the collaborator users in digital environments.
The folksonomy asserts the breaking of the traditional model for the information treatment and inserts the user as a decision maker and an active part in the description of digital objects.
In the collaborative categorization of Web resources, users choose and assign their own descriptors to store and retrieve Internet content.

4. INTRODUCTION
The free creation of personal tags offers a solution to improve access to information, while it is the users themselves that categorize information and objects available in an open environment to their own recovery.
This new reality experienced signals the application of principles that solve the problems and challenges arising from changes in representation and access to information.
Indexation policy becomes an instrument that favors the improvement of the conditions of folksonomy’s use and application, while it guides and directs the thematic representation of information and objects performed by users, whose participation in this process gains proportions never seen before.

5. OBJECTIVE
The objective of this work was to analyze the presence of the indexation policy in collaborative environments, before the inherent specificities surrounding the social indexing performed by users- thematic representations of documents.

6. METHODS
Digital libraries of theses and dissertations of Brazilian public universities as environments for analysis and discussion of the elements of indexation policy.
Survey of the digital libraries in Brazil
Identification of the responsible manager
Sending of an electronic questionnaire
In total, 106 questionnaires were sent electronically, obtaining 41 responses from 33 different institutions, corresponding to 31% of the institutions identified.

7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Indexing policies in the digital libraries
63.3% of the institutions contemplated in the research do not have an indexing policy that guides the attribution of theses and dissertations;
36.6% of the institutions the indexation policy is implemented;
4 of the digital libraries have an indexation policy formalized (Indexing Manual).
The continuity and refinement of an indexation policy over the years depends, above all, on its registration in documents.

8. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Collaborative Indexing (Folksonomy) in Digital Libraries
68.3% of the institutions do not adopt;
31.7% affirmed to have some element of collaborative indexing, in the sense of allowing the opening and suggestions of terms, subjects or descriptors of the theses and dissertations by the authors themselves, in general, during the preparation of the works catalog;
most institutions do not intend to implement folksonomy;
information presented indicates that improvements are being made, which favors openness to collaborative environments.
We are currently planning to develop an indexing policy. (Institution M)

9. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Reflection on the insertion of social collaboration in digital libraries
Many professionals recognize the benefits of users' participation in library services and the important role indexation policy plays in this process.
Show interest in the development of theoretical approaches that bring reflections and contributions about the constitution and elaboration of indexing policy for collaborative environments.
It is evident the need for improvements in the search of our repository, especially when there is no indexing policy. Faced with this need, we have been trying to help build our policy. If we can act in any way, we are receptive to partnerships.
We have been working to have our main base (pergamum) "talk" to our BDTD so that the subjects inserted into one are also available to the other. The intention is that in our BDTD there are authorized subjects (of the pergamum) as well as the free ones (of the authors). We would like to receive information of any progress you may have in this research.

10.  CONCLUSIONS
The policy of indexing in a collaborative environment is a neglected topic in the domain of Knowledge Organization and Representation and deserves more attention.
Most of Brazilian digital libraries of theses and dissertations or institutional repositories analyzed do not have an indexing policy that supports the contemporary practice of indexing in collaborative environments.
Discussions that address the role of indexing policy in a collaborative environment are opportune for the expansion of theoretical subsidies and a better understanding of their effects in the digital libraries environment.

11.  CONCLUSIONS
As a key factor which influences each of the indexing process steps, the elaboration, implantation and evaluation of a indexing policy in a collaborative environment might allow the retrieval improvement by subject in digital libraries of theses and dissertations and in institutional repositories.
Studies dedicated to the structuring of index policy guidelines under the folksonomy precepts should be expanded to support libraries and digital repositories in the decision-making of library services in times of social collaboration, with the objective of systematizing knowledge about indexing policy for collaborative environments.

12. THANK YOU!