shared academic knowledge base: Approach and Vision

1,419 views

Published on

A presentation given by Liam Earney on the approach and vision of the shared academic knowledge base for UK HE (KB+)

Published in: Education, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,419
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I’d like to thank all of you for coming today, it’s very heartening to see the level of interest in this activity and it’s objectives.I’ve been with JISC Collections for over 8 years and it was back in 1996 that I saw my first ERM being tested at LSE.At that time, I thought how brilliant it would be for us if we could start to use one as the source of all of our administrative and publication information, rather than try to manage it in spreadsheets, web pages and the like.Two years later we licensed an ERM in jisc collections for that reason, and I guess the issues that we faced and the reasons we failed are a small part of why we’re here today.I hope that what I present today will seem sensible, cohesive and achievable.
  • This is not a new problem, and whether we called it ERM or something else, the issues that we’ll be starting to address in this project are ones that we have been facing up to for a long while.It was back in 2005 that the old JISC Collections team in JISC commissioned a study on the value of NESLI2 agreements which made a recommendation for a usage stats portal.In 2007 SCONUL started to become interested in the challenges facing library management systems and uncovered widespread interest from its members in approaching these issues at the consortium level.And whilst the direction of travel has been maintained over that period, it has been maintained in fits and starts, through a variety of disparate projects tools and services, often operating in isolation from or ignorance of each other.As such, whilst we may not realise it, we’ve taken alot of the first steps, be it around post cancellation access, usage statistics, or licensing.But it does seem as though we now have a confluence of services, requirements from those services, demand from the community and all importantly funding to really try to address some of the issues
  • I don’t intend to spend very long on the problems and challenges associated with ERM, but I think that these three are the key ones for me:DataIn some ways this isn’t a technology project at all, this is a data project and no matter how good the service, if the underlying data is inaccurate then it’s all for nothing.Knowledge bases are beset by problems of inaccurate data. In JISC Collections we receive numerous queries about them and have made efforts to overcome them, but this is the first time that we’ve ever been in a position where we could assign dedicated manpower to the problem.Then there is the problem of interoperability or rather the lack of it. Too often where data does exist it is impossible to get it to somewhere else where you may need it. – Usage stats are a case in point, but I could just as easily speak about licence terms, be they locked away in filing cabinets or locked away in word documents.And even when we develop standards that can help us overcome the problems of silos, and the lack of data flows between them, we find that those standards either aren’t implemented at all, or have been implemented in such an inconsistent way as to render them all but useless.3. Finally, and I suspect most importantly is the huge and wasteful duplication of effort by so many people undertaking the same tasks, on the same data, often on the same systems.It is no surprise that so many institutions have opted for home grown approached to ERM, or left those theyve purchased unused.Put simply, the level of effort needed to achieve anything is out of all proportion to the benefits to be realised.
  • Sector Specialists During ProjectAny technical co-ordinator will need access to sector specialists with knowledge of the data, functions and processes that we hope to provide for within the KB+. I propose employing on a part-time basis 2 or 3 sector specialists for the life of the project who can provide timely advice, guidance and corrections to the technical lead and any software developers employed. They would also be available to test the KB+ as it comes together and any software that it develops.These would help keep us honest, prioritise work and provide a useful sanity check against an work packages.Prioritisation of title listsI feel that an initial focus by the project on A-Z title lists for link resolvers will not only deliver benefits to the community, but be an early demonstration of the focussed approach the project is taking to resolving existing issues and lightening the existing load on institutions. In such a way we intend to build momentum and put in place an ongoing schedule of deliverables. We will need to prioritise this work though and the community would seem to be the best way to go about this.Data cleaning and verificationLinked to the work above, JISC Collections via the project, intends to undertake the work involved in getting a-z lists right – and use this in the evidence for the business model. However, we can’t do all of it and we would like to see a process where different institutions take responsibility for cleaning up the metadata for different lists of titles in such a way as to reduce duplication and share benefits.A n instant place for us to start would be on the entitlements registryLicence mapping/prioritisationWe want to create more ONIX licence expressions. Which ones should we choose? How can we make the process more efficient – would groups be willing to take on the work associated with a subset of licence expressions? What resources might institutions be willing to contribute in phase 1?  What are the key issues around those commitments from the institutional perspective?
  • shared academic knowledge base: Approach and Vision

    1. 1. KB+<br />Towards a Shared Knowledge Base for UK Academic Institutions<br />
    2. 2. Introduction<br />Background <br />Issues with ERM<br />Recommendations to HEFCE<br />JISC Collections role<br />Approach<br />Priorities<br />Business Models<br />Timetables<br />Governance<br />
    3. 3. We’ve been interested in ERM for a while…<br />
    4. 4. Issues with ERM<br />Data<br />Accuracy<br />Availability<br />Interoperability<br />Data silos and flows<br />Implementation of standards<br />Duplication of effort <br />Population of knowledge bases<br />Maintenance of link resolvers<br />
    5. 5. Recommendation to HEFCE<br />Hosted and Mediated Knowledge Base Plus<br />Community centric ‘above campus’ knowledge base<br />Mediation and validation by a trusted third party<br />Integrated management tools<br />Linked to UK licensing initiatives<br />Works in conjunction with existing market offerings<br />Knowledge Base Plus – a shared service for subscription resources.<br />David Kay and Owen Stephens 2011<br />
    6. 6. JISC Collections<br />Appointed by HEFCE and JISC as managing agent for the shared services project<br />Commence implementation of KB<br />Investigate and implement sustainability plan<br />BUT...<br />Very tight budget<br />Very tight timetable<br />Very high community expectations<br />
    7. 7. approach<br />
    8. 8.
    9. 9.
    10. 10.
    11. 11. Interoperability<br />Data <br />Exchange<br />Data <br />Maintenance<br />JISC <br />Services <br />Supplier <br />Systems<br />Local <br />Systems<br />Open <br />Source <br />Investing in the enhancement and improvement of existing services whilst supporting<br /> the needs and viability of local systems and new services<br />
    12. 12. How do we ensure that benefits outweigh the investment of staff time?<br />
    13. 13. Two things you won’t see...<br />Not about inventing a new ERM product<br />We don’t have the money<br />We don’t have the time<br />We don’t have the manpower<br />More articles restating the challenges of ERM<br />This is a practical project focussed on building a service<br />
    14. 14. Deliverables<br />Accurate Publication Information<br />NESLi2 A-Z title lists<br />Core Databases<br />Holdings and Entitlements<br />Entitlement Registry<br />Subscription Data and Management<br />Alerting services etc<br />Organisations<br />Identifiers<br />Licensing Management and Information<br />Licence comparison tool, ONIX-PL<br />Usage Data and Analysis<br />JUSP<br />
    15. 15. Business Models <br />Potential models<br />Issues <br />Funding availability<br />Existing expenditure on ERM & LMS<br />Size of potential market<br />Structure of JISC<br />Sustainability of other services<br />JUSP, El-cat etc<br />Timetable to achieve sustainability<br />Central funding<br />Loss of policy control<br />Harmonisation of current funding<br />Subscriptions from sector<br />Part of a wider offering from JISC Collections/JISC?<br />Licence fees from suppliers<br />We populate their KBs<br />‘KB+ Foundation’<br />Funding members set priorities etc<br />
    16. 16. Time Scale<br />Phase One<br />August 2011 to August 2012<br />Outputs throughout the year<br />Business plan by April 2012<br />Decision on phase two and transition to service by July 2012<br />Phase Two<br />From August 2012 KB+ Service?<br />
    17. 17. Project Lead<br />Independent Adviser<br />Independent Adviser<br />
    18. 18. Thank you<br />Liam Earney<br />L.Earney@jisc-collections.ac.uk<br />
    19. 19. Open discussion<br />
    20. 20. How can institutions contribute? <br />Subject Specialists<br />Prioritisation of activity<br />Licensing<br />Publication activity<br />Data Cleaning and Verification <br />Information sharing<br />Entitlement Registry<br />Advocacy<br />Encourage suppliers to engage constructively with the project<br />
    21. 21. What would you like to see as part of future developments for the service?<br />What are priorities for the service in phase 2 from August 2012 onwards?<br />
    22. 22. What happens next?<br />We would like institutions or groups of institutions to indicate their willingness to participate in the project, and the work areas that they are most interested in.<br />We will communicate the outcomes of this meeting to all of you and those who couldn’t attend.<br />We will start contacting institutions to seek their input on specific issues.<br />

    ×