1. Building next generation Digital Libraries in Bangladesh through cooperation, collaboration and innovation Hasina Afroz University Librarian and Project Director ILS, Discovery Tool, Institutional Repository, Drupal and RFID Project Ayesha Abed Library http://library.bracu.ac.bd

2. BRAC University Library 2 Dspace- Institutional Repository Koha - Integrated Library System (ILS) VuFind- Discovery Tool Drupal Website- Library Website using CMS (2007-2015) Ayesha Abed Library

3. Institutional Repository@BRACU library Institutional Repository using Open Source Software Dspace funded by INASP, UK - collect and preserve various teaching and learning materials and research outputs generated by BRACU academics, researchers and students and ensure access to these resources to the users. April 2007- April 2008 (2007-2015) 3Ayesha Abed Library

4. Institutional Repository@BRACU http://dspace.bracu.ac.bd 4Ayesha Abed Library

5. Integrated Library System@BRACU A complete Integrated Library System (ILS) using Open Source Software Koha funded by ELSEVIER Foundation, UK - implement a complete library automation system using open source software Koha and develop ourselves as local resource, and in turn help to build capacity in other libraries who may want to move to automation using Koha. - Convert data from the existing library systems into International Standard format (MARC 21) March 2009 – February 2010 (2007-2015) 5Ayesha Abed Library

6. Integrated Library System (Koha)@BRACU http://library.bracu.ac.bd/opac 6Ayesha Abed Library

7. Discovery Tool@BRACU Next Generation Open Source Discovery Tool VuFind funded by INASP, UK - to offer access and discover all of BRACU Resources (catalogue records, digital library items, institutional repository, databases, and e-journals) in one single search-and-browse system in a robust, and distributed digital environment. (2007-2015) May 2010-December 2010 7Ayesha Abed Library

8. Discovery Tool (VuFind)@BRACU http://library.bracu.ac.bd/vufind 8Ayesha Abed Library

9. Old Discovery Process For Institutional Repository items dspace.bracu.ac.bd For ejournals – Publisher’s Databases (40,000 ejournals) For ejournals – Publisher’s Databases (40,000 ejournals) For Book Library Catalogue library.bracu.ac.bd For Book Library Catalogue library.bracu.ac.bd Users having to do 3 separate navigations and separate searches (2007-2015) 9Ayesha Abed Library

10. New Discovery Process Searching multiple resources through one interface Search Results (2007-2015) 10Ayesha Abed Library

11. 2011 SMS Services@BRACU Library (2007-2012) RFID @BRACU Library BRAC University Moving toward a next-generation library (2007-2015) 11Ayesha Abed Library

12. Library Website in Drupal@BRACU http://library.bracu.ac.bd 2012 12Ayesha Abed Library

13. Mobile Library Website Project, 2013 http://library.bracu.ac.bd/m 13 2013 (2007-2012) (2007-2015)

14. Generation of Digital Library Development First Generation BRACU Library Second Generation BRACU Library Third Generation BRACU Library Development of Online Catalogs ExperimentationInstitutionalization MARC Standard √(MARC 21) Remote Access to Catalogs √ Integration of digital materials into library collections through a modular systems architecture √ (Drupal) ILS Systems√ (Koha) Abstracting/Indexing Services √Federated SearchX Cataloguing Cooperatives X Electronic Journals/Databases √User Focus√ Institutional Repository/Digital library √ (Dspace) Discovery Tool√ (Vufind) *Greenstein, Daniel.2002. Next-generation digital libraries. 14Ayesha Abed Library

15. Sources of Funding Grant funding - Elsevier Foundation (Integrated Library System Koha) -INASP (MARC 21, Institutional Repository Dspace, Discovery Tool VuFind, CMS Drupal) Internal Funding – RFID, Library Mobile Site (2007-2015)

16. COOPERATION, COLLABORATION AND INNOVATION Building next generation Digital Libraries 16Ayesha Abed Library

17. Network of IRs Establish a Network of Institutional Repositories in Bangladesh Academic Institutions to aggregate the digital research output (theses, dissertation etc ) of the member institutions into a single access point for end users. 17Ayesha Abed Library

18. Network of IRs Benefit  Expand access to research and impact of research both in Bangladesh and internationally.  Increase the amount and diversity of scholarly output  Preserve and maintain the research output of academic institutions in the long-term. 18Ayesha Abed Library

19. Network of IRs Benefit  Facilitate more timely access to research and scholarship  Promote the use of standards and best practices, guaranteeing the international interoperability of their content through OAI-compliance and metadata standards 19Ayesha Abed Library

20. Network of IRs Model  Centralized Model  Distributed Model  Harvesting Model 20Ayesha Abed Library

21. Centralized Model (IRs) Central IR Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution 3 Institution 4...... User sends out a search query Central repository returns aggregated result Each Institution Inputs their data into the central repository 21Ayesha Abed Library

22. Centralized Model (IRs) Advantages  Has complete control of the whole process from article deposition through to the user interface  Software selection  Able to manage preservation issue Disadvantages  It is an expensive option  It may surpass the existing institutional repositories 22Ayesha Abed Library

23. Distributed Model (IRs) Virtual Interface Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution 3 Institution 4...... User sends out a search query The intermediary virtual interface sends out the search request to individual IR using protocols such as Z39.50, SRU/W Individual Institutional Repository responds with the search results User gets an aggregated result view through the virtual interface 23Ayesha Abed Library

24. Distributed Model (IR) Advantages  Providing up-to-date metadata as it provides instant access to source locations of metadata  Relatively very less expensive as compared to centralized model Disadvantages  No enhancement of metadata  Network dependent  Not many IRs support Z39.50 or SRU/W 24Ayesha Abed Library

25. Harvested Model Virtual Interface IR 1 IR 2 IR n -1 IR n...... Harvests metadata from individual repository Protocol: (OAI-PMH) User sends in the search query Virtual Interface returns the relevant search results 25Ayesha Abed Library

26. Harvesting Model(IR) Advantages Unqualified Dublin Core is mandated to be OAI-compliant, however, more complex metadata schemas can be employed. The institutional archives employ software which supports OAI-PMH Harvesting can be carried out by automatic scheduled tasks 26Ayesha Abed Library

27. Harvesting Model(IR) Ayesha Abed Library27 Disadvantages  Exposed metadata served by the services may not always be updated  Needs to support protocols like OAI-PMH  Every member Institution will need to follow a fixed set of rules when entering metadata in their respective repositories for ensuring consistency.

28. Which Model to Select? Harvesting Model Harvesting model has many advantages as compared to other models It has gained worldwide acceptance It makes easy to share information about scholarly resources and to offer enhanced resource discovery tools. It has been adopted by thousands of institutions around the world. 28Ayesha Abed Library

29. Establish a Union Catalogue Needs for Union Catalogue  Discovery  Resource Sharing  Copy Cataloguing  Cooperative Collection management 29Ayesha Abed Library

30. Union Catalogue Models Distributed Virtual Union Catalog Centralized Union Catalog 30Ayesha Abed Library

31. Distributed Virtual Union Catalog Model Virtual Catalog Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution 3 Institution 4...... User sends out a search query The intermediary Virtual Catalog sends out the search request to individual institutional DB using protocols such as Z39.50 Individual Institutional DB responds with the search results User gets an aggregated result view through the Virtual Catalog Local OPACs 31Ayesha Abed Library

32. Distributed Virtual Union Catalog Model Advantages:  Relatively easy to implement  Less time and efforts required  Easy to extend and Easy to disconnect  Real time searching and retrieval in all catalogs 32Ayesha Abed Library

33. Distributed Virtual Union Catalog Model Disadvantages:  Slower in retrieving results  Limited sorting/relevance  Duplicate  Searching inefficiencies  Varying quality  Depends on availability of local OPACs 33Ayesha Abed Library

34. Centralized Union Catalog Model Central Catalog Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution n -1 Institution n...... User sends out a search query Central Catalog returns aggregated result Each Institution Inputs their library catalog data into the Central Catalog Local OPACs 34Ayesha Abed Library

35. Centralized Union Catalog Model Advantages:  More accurate search results  Such results returned quickly for large groups  Built it once, less individual configuration necessary  Centralizes the cost of technical support  Minimize Cataloging cost sharing bibliographic records  Consistent indexing and Searching policy 35Ayesha Abed Library

36. Centralized Union Catalog  Real-time information Disadvantages:  Problems in merging libraries which already have their own library systems  Requires a greater degree of collaboration in terms of cataloguing and indexing policies  Requires increase in network speed and relibility 36Ayesha Abed Library

37. Which Model to Select? What are we trying to achieve? What are our current members using? What standards are implemented? What services we like to offer? 37Ayesha Abed Library

38. Which Model to Select? Select Virtual Model Approach  Members already have LIS Systems and OPAC  Members uses different Systems, Catalogoing Rules and Standards  Difficult to apply same standards and policies  Target to support end users with greater exposer and additional services 38Ayesha Abed Library

39. Which Model to Select? Select Centralized Model Approach  Members don’t have LIS Systems and Online Accessible Catalogues.  Target to Unify cataloguing Rules and Standards.  Target to minimize cost, and control cataloguing  At the same time target to support end users with greater exposer and additional services  Own the appropriate network (Speed and reliability) 39Ayesha Abed Library

40. References Swan, A., & Awre, C.(2006) Linking UK repositories : technical & organisational models to support user-oriented services across institutional & other digital repositories. Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140702233839/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/progra mmes/digitalrepositories/linkingukrepositoriesreport.pdf http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140702233839/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/progra mmes/digitalrepositories/linkingukrepositoriesreport.pdf Kumar, S. (2010) Establishing National Digital Repository System employing Harvesting Model www.naclin.org/Naclin2010/naclinndrs2010.ppt www.naclin.org/Naclin2010/naclinndrs2010.ppt Hider, P., (2004) The bibliographic advantages of a centralised union catalogue for ILL and resource sharing, Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02641610410520224 40Ayesha Abed Library

41. 41 Thank You