• Save
Implementing an Institutional Repository for Leeds Met
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Implementing an Institutional Repository for Leeds Met



A presentation introducing the project to library colleagues and updating on progress.

A presentation introducing the project to library colleagues and updating on progress.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Implementing an Institutional Repository for Leeds Met Implementing an Institutional Repository for Leeds Met Presentation Transcript

  • Nick Sheppard
    • Repository Development Officer
    • 125 Online Office
    • James Graham Building
    • Headingley
    • [email_address]
    • Ext: 24731
    • Blog: http://repositorynews.wordpress.com/
  • Institutional Repository
    • Digital collection capturing and
    • preserving the intellectual output of a
    • single or multi-university community
    • Definition adapted from SPARC (2002)
  • Session Aims
    • The project
      • Implementing an Institutional Repository for Leeds Metropolitan University
    • Open Access – An overview
    • Institutional Repositories
    • Demonstration of a live IR
    • Benefits of OA and IRs
    • Objections to OA and IRs
    • How you can contribute
    • A discussion forum
  • Project Staff
    • Project Director Jo Norry
    • Project Manager Wendy Luker
    • Repository Development Officer Nick Sheppard
    • Copyright Clearance Officer Rachel Thornton
    • Data Ingest and Enrichment Officer TBA
    • Key members of academic and TBA
    • research community
  • An Institutional Repository for Leeds Met - Background
    • Funded by JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee)
    • JISC’s “Start-Up and Enhancement Projects” (SUE)
    • March 2009
    • An institutional needs analysis
    • A set of priorities for repository content
        • Open Access research repository
        • Assessment, learning and teaching repository
        • Showcase for students’ work
        • Digital images of heritage collections
        • A managed environment for the deposit of internal documents
  • Where are we?
    • Market analysis of software
    • Software identified
    • Currently being implemented
  • Timeline
    • Commencement of advocacy campaign
    • Work with chosen software provider to appropriately customise
    • software
    • Workflows (processes) defined
    • Populated with a representative body of initial content
      • Published, peer-reviewed research output
    • Embedded in workflows of relevant sections of the University
  • The Role of the Development Officer
    • Technical/administrative/advocacy
    • Select appropriate software
    • Liaise with provider to customise and test software
    • Implement and administer the Repository
    • Establish workflows for ingest of content
    • Advocacy to the University community to encourage awareness, understanding and use of the repository
    • Establish the Leeds Met repository as a standard element of the workflow of those generating research outputs
  • Open Access
    • “ Open Access (OA) means immediate, free
    • and unrestricted access to digital scholarly
    • material.”
    • “ OA was made possible by the advent of
    • the internet.”
    • Peter Suber
  • Open Access
    • The Open Access journal
      • So called “Gold route” to OA
      • Difficulty in establishing viable cost recovery model (eg. Author-institution pays)
      • Biomed Central
      • DOAJ currently holds records of 2834 free, full text, quality controlled scientific and scholarly journals
    • Self-Archiving
      • So called “Green route” to OA
      • Personal web pages
      • Subject based repository
        • arXiv.org
      • Institutional Repository
    • Not mutually exclusive
  • Self-Archiving
    • Increasingly journal publishers adapting formal policies on self-archiving
    • SHERPA RoMEO project – University of Nottingham
    • Database of self-archiving policy by journal
      • Colour coded
        • Green – can archive pre-print and post print
        • Blue – can archive post-print
        • Yellow – can archive pre-print
        • White – archiving not formally supported
    • Entry for each publisher also lists conditions or restrictions
      • Embargo
  • Institutional Repositories
    • Most widely used technology for self-archiving
    • The Directory of Open Access Repositories (openDOAR) currently lists 120 repositories in the UK
    • The majority (90) are institutional repositories
    • http:// www.opendoar.org/index.html
    • A live example:
    • http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/
    • The majority (up to 80%) of hits come from Search Engines
  • What are the benefits of an OA IR?
    • “ Removing access barriers”…“will
    • accelerate research, enrich education,
    • share the learning of the rich with the poor
    • and the poor with the rich, make this
    • literature as useful as it can be, and lay the
    • foundation for uniting humanity in a
    • common intellectual conversation and quest
    • for knowledge.”
    • Budapest Open Access Initiative 2001
  • What are the benefits of an OA IR?
    • For the Information Professional
      • Scholarly publishing crisis (1970’s/1980’s)
        • High cost
    • For the teacher/student
      • All have access to key resources
      • No barriers to access
    • For the academic
      • Career advancement
      • Research impact
      • Evidence that OA is cited earlier and more often than non-OA
  • What are the benefits of an OA IR?
    • For the Institution
      • A showcase to the world
      • Funding opportunities
    • For the Tax payer
      • Publicly funded research should be publicly available
        • Mandates by funding bodies
        • JISC/Wellcome Trust/Arts and Humanities Research Council
    • For funding bodies
      • Increases return on investment
      • Results more widely available and more useful
  • What are the benefits of an OA IR?
    • OA represents the democratisation of knowledge
      • In interests of the first as well as developing world
      • Research is 'missing' to the international knowledge base
      • Incomplete pictures of global science
      • Particularly environmental and development issues
        • Yiotis 2005
  • What are the benefits of an OA IR?
    • Statistics
      • number of hits
      • number of full downloads
    • Links
      • to related material
      • to data resources
      • author biographies/CVs
    • Multimedia
      • podcasts (eg. author interview)
      • video
    • Citation tracking
      • who and why?
  • Benchmarking Consortium
    • University of Derby – currently no repository
    • University of Huddersfield – Repository in use
    • Liverpool John Moores – Repository in use
    • University of Liverpool – Pilot project; full rollout 2008
    • University of Salford – Repository under development
    • Staffordshire University – Repository under development
  • Some Objections
    • Self-archiving is an amateur form of publishing
      • Complement not replace existing publishing paradigm
      • ACCESS to research
    • Many predict a decreased role for publishers if OA becomes dominant
      • Practise of putting authors’ papers into repositories has so far had little impact on subscription rates (Kingsley, 2008)
      • May be an advantage to publishers to allow authors to post their preprints and then attract the readers to the final edited version at their journal
  • Some Objections
    • Quality Control/Peer Review
      • Peer-review medium independent; can be made more efficient within a fully realised Open Access model
      • Need not be any ambiguity relating to self-archived preprints as long as they are clearly identifiable as such
    • Digital preservation
      • Issue not restricted to IRs
      • Current best practice
  • Some Objections
    • Intellectual Property and Copyright
      • complicated area and the industry is still adapting
  • Intellectual Property and Copyright
    • Copyright + Electronic = FEAR
    • In a repository this is multiplied
    • Manage interests of:
      • Author/creator
      • Copyright owner
      • Users of the copyrighted material
      • Institution
      • Re-publishing of material
  • Intellectual Property and Copyright
    • The law – provides a baseline
    • Deal with individual situations as they arise
    • Guidelines not rules
    • Takedown policy
  • Flashpoints
    • Multiple authors
    • Third party copyright ownership
    • Publishing works originally produced for examinations
    • Data protection issues
    • Multimedia – “nested” materials
  • Intellectual Property and Copyright
    • The Project Team invite input from:
      • information professionals
      • academic staff
      • research community
        • Specific concerns?
        • Our response?
  • You may have more!
  • Where do you come in?
    • Academic Librarians
      • Source of information
        • Disciplinary differences
        • arxiv.org
      • Communication channel
      • Elicit opinion
      • Identify “champions”
  • Where do you come in?
    • Information Officers
      • Advocates
      • Demonstrators
        • Students
        • Staff
        • Other prospective users of the repository
      • Volunteers
        • Continued Professional Development
        • More information later in the project
  • In Summary
    • Initial project focus is an Open Access research repository
    • Future diversification for changing institutional needs
    • The benefits of IRs are considerable for
        • researchers
        • information professionals
        • institutions
        • the public
        • The Whole World!
    • IRs are rapidly becoming an integral part of Universities’ infrastructure
    • The project needs your support
  • References/Further Information
    • http:// www.sherpa.ac.uk /
    • http:// www.ukoln.ac.uk /repositories
    • http:// www.jisc.ac.uk
    • http:// www.sparceurope.org /
    • Peter Suber’s Open Access Overview
  • Thank you!