Digging for Buried Treasure: Strategies for Promoting Institutional Repository


Published on

This session will highlight successful strategies at two institutions for gaining participation in institutional repositories. Librarians from Southern Illinois University Carbondale will discuss their experience in designing and implementing an effective marketing program, recruiting content and expanding collections. Librarians from Kansas State University will describe their best practices focusing on the pivotal role of library liaisons and value-added services in ensuring the success of the institutional repository.

Published in: Education
  • 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

No notes for slide
  • SIUC factsMorris factsIR - live since Fall 2008Platform: bepress digital commonsStaffing: Institutional Repository Implementation and Application Group = 3 librarians (nobody full time)Content types:Student work (ETDs, Research Papers, Honors Papers, Posters)Faculty work (presentations, published articles, working papers, etc.)University documentation (committee work, presentations)Current holdings: over 1800 papersUsage: over 27,500 full-text downloads to date
  • Major challenge for any IR is content recruitmentCopyright TimeMarketing for more efficient content recruitment
  • Design elements : what’s in a nameBrochure: do not reinvent the wheel, borrow from others quoting university administrator cost distribution (campus mail, and meetings)Handouts to demonstrate ease of useIR documentation, help pages, author pages with detailed infoImportant tools when IR is started
  • Library - meetings with staff, website links, website news itemMedia – newspapers radio, TV interviews with IR staff, also involve people on campus who are active users of the IR Links on university websitesOn campus – meetings, meetings, meetings
  • There are just three of us with other regular job duties. It would be challenging to reach every faculty member on our own. Liaisons needed because Greater numbers Have contact alreadyBUT liaisons weren’t part of the development & have a broad range of knowledge about Institutional Repositories.
  • Time NOT to reinvent the wheel – recycled materials Reused materials that we already had developed.Posted materials in OpenSIUC to make it easy for liaisons to access
  • Ultimately the submissions are coming from the individuals who produce the materials, and one-on-one contact is important. Liaison + Team member: Automotive Technology – support of the chair was a big help Content – Presentations (among the most popular downloads)Honors programAlready had electronic versions of old theses & dissertations Excitement about download level (example of Nazi experiment thesis)Graduate school: Theses and Dissertations Meeting with them to get it started. At this point only submission is voluntary not mandatoryProQuest has provided copies for us to include – but we want author permissions to make them open access We send emails to recent grads to get permission
  • DigitalCommons automatically sends monthly download statistics to authors if they provide an email address AND the submission had downloads that month. Demonstrates to authors that someone is reading it.Submitting materials isn’t a regular part of faculty workflow. Even if they provide materials once, it won’t be the first thing on their minds when they publish something.
  • Digging for Buried Treasure: Strategies for Promoting Institutional Repository

    1. 1. ER&L 2010, Austin, TX February, 2, 2010Julie Arendt, Jonathan Nabe, Andrea Imre –Southern Illinois University CarbondaleTara Baillargeon, Beth Turtle – Kansas StateUniversity
    2. 2. Julie ArendtAndrea ImreJonathan NabeElectronic Resources and Libraries 2010Austin, TXFebruary 2, 2010
    3. 3.  Overcome challenge of content recruitment  Copyright  Time constraints (authors, IR managers)
    4. 4.  General, for a broader audience High profile, one time, broad or targeted Targeted, for specific audiences
    5. 5.  Design elements of IR Promotional material  Brochure  Handouts  submission guidelines  Author guide and help pages
    6. 6.  Promotion within the Library (meetings, websites) Promotion on campus  Media outlets (newspaper, radio, TV)  Links placed on university webpages  Meetings at multiple levels of the organization (administration, colleges, departments, special programs, research centers, individual faculty, etc.)
    7. 7.  Forum Survey Open Access policy (or mandate, or resolution, etc.)
    8. 8. CatchyProminent titlespeaker Local panel Food!
    9. 9.  Use successful adopters’ language:  Harvard http://osc.hul.harvard.edu/OpenAccess/policytexts.php  Stanford http://ed.stanford.edu/suse/faculty/openaccess.html  Kansas http://www.lib.ku.edu/scholcomm/OA_announce.shtml  MIT http://info-libraries.mit.edu/scholarly/faculty-and- researchers/mit-faculty-open-access-policy/  Oregon State Libraries http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/jspui/handle/1957/10850 Visit SPARC’s site: http://www.arl.org/sparc/advocacy/campus/
    10. 10.  Learn from others’ failure: University of Maryland’s experience http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publi cations/crlnews/2009/oct/pyrrhicvict.cfm
    11. 11.  Information about the repository, repository policies Responses to frequently asked questions from faculty Two requests  Deposit your stuff  Go forth and spread the word  Requirement for new hires
    12. 12.  Brochure Talking Points
    13. 13.  Liaison visits to department  With or Without Team members Other units  Honors program  Graduate School
    14. 14.  Make it easy Keep in contact  Download statistics  Solicit again
    15. 15.  Email: opensiuc@lib.siu.edu Materials: http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/morris_opensiuc/