Gj Sue Tr Policy

Uploaded on


More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. David Wilson Library Liberating Your Policies (Or Theory’s all very well in practise) Gareth J Johnson LRA Manager www.twitter.com/llordllama 18th Feb 2009 National Library of Wales www.le.ac.uk lra.le.ac.uk
  • 2. Why Am I Here today? • Give a personal view of repository policy • Used to work for a (in)famous JISC funded project – With a pet repository alongside • Today – A repository manager in the HE wilds
  • 3. So what’s it all about? • I’ve always believed that policy – Underpin repository development & practise – Should be evolutionary not in homeostasis – Are invaluable for coping with staff changes – Provide transparency/clarity of purpose, function and decision making
  • 4. The SHERPA years (06-08) • Repository Development Officer – Externally funded on multiple projects – Also Repo Administrator on Nottingham Eprints • Policies in place before in post – All standard meta, data, preservation etc – Devised by SHERPA team, agreed by InfoServices • A purist outlook and acceptance – A broad church of item acceptance – Full text only with an avoidance of metadata only • Author-mediated submission – Admin checks ©, metadata creation then live
  • 5. The SHERPA years (06-08) • Practically this meant that – Repository over-shadowed by national project work – Result not as high impact internally as externally • But IR high on institutional agenda – Funding open access pay-up-front model – Internal impact was less than it might have been • So what drove policy developments? – External projects and events – Software developments – Emerging best practice examples – A slowly creeping centralisation culture…
  • 6. OpenDOAR & Policy • OpenDOAR survey of 1,000 repositories – Included examination of policy – Conclusion at time 80% had few or no polciies • Policies seemed a private thing – “This is how we run the repository, but we don’t tell anyone” – Uncertainty as to what made a good policy created fear • OpenDOAR policy generation tool
  • 7. Policies today? • Submission most commonly defined • Still an apparently weak area
  • 8. Moving into the Real World • Leicester University – Research focussed university means a research focussed repository • Origins (2006) – Library wanted IR but didn’t want to be first – Research Committee interest • Secondment of 0.5 FTE – Formation of project group – Tried establishing Academic Steering Group • Mediated deposit – All handle-turning done by LRA team
  • 9. Academic RSS Ignored Publication Letter of LRA: Live alert Feed Notification Potential No Archived Yes Prepared Info Academic Info Request Embargo Yes Embargo Deposit Librarians Librarians Author ? Stored expired? No Submitted LRA: Deposit Academic Delete article Letter of Submissions Submitted Notification File LRA Yes Publisher Can No Yes Do Rights article be Do we Publisher Records used as Yes have an rights provided? author allow license? ingest? No SHERPA/ Unclear RoMEO No Academic Academic Author Contact Rights Author holder Recontact Recontact LRA: Publisher Recontact Response No Response Pending No ? ? No Yes Yes Response Signed Depositable ? Author version Licence Yes Suitable Yes format version LRA Item Yes Permission available? Granted? No Submission & Academic No Ingest Letter of notification (non-theses)
  • 10. LRA Today • Took over from old manager Jan 09 – Still around and a gold mine of information • Staff – 0.5 FTE Manager – 0.5 FTE Administrator (two people) – No FTE tech, but excellent ad hoc support • Project Group – Library Director, ProVC, IT Services plus staff – Considers operational and practical issues – Approves policies
  • 11. Where’s Poli(c)y? • More formal approach to policy from the start – Research Committee and Project Group • Final version focus, No learning objects, Preprints left to faculties but strong retention policy • Operational policy – Fits into existing processes – Internal focus for documentation
  • 12. Policy Evolution • In-house custom and practise – Author deposit license – Takedown statement – not true policy – Data & Conferences at Leicester • Made use of OpenDOAR Policy tool – Standardising with the community – Exposed via OAI and on Web
  • 13. Driving Forces • Internal drivers – Quick wins and metrics – RAE, REF & bibliometrics – Data archiving – Etheses mandate implementation • External drivers – Ethos – Watching the national scene but not leading
  • 14. Etheses Mandate • All PhD’s now mandated to deposit etheses – Decision taken by Board of Graduate studies – Up to 3 yr moratorium possible (as with print) – Total embargo also possible • Policy devised collaboration with Graduate Office – Rights agreement devised with strong input from LRA Copyright Officer – LRA chasing incomplete or missing forms • Promotion – A role for the LRA and Librarians – Embedding is going to take time
  • 15. Bibliometrics • LRA Uses Google Analytics – Implemented by not much done to date – Starting monthly analytical runs in Feb • Bibliometrics – Provision for new Bibliometrician post in 2009 – Webometrics (11th or 15th in the UK) – Will work closely with departments towards REF – Interest already from the Chemistry department – May well significantly impact on how the repository operates and operating policies
  • 16. So what have I actually learned? • The attitude might be: “It works…so why do we need policy?” • But policy is crucially important – Defines the repository service – Underpins developments as well as activities – Essential for long term sustainability
  • 17. Policy Liberates the Future…
  • 18. Contact Details gjj6@le.ac.uk www.twitter.com/llordllama 0116-252-2055