Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

"From Reading Rooms to Research Commons" Sheila Corrall, DARTS4


Published on

The research environment is challenging libraries to raise their game by providing higher-end services in response to technological change and policy developments. Librarians are being urged to move from service-as-support to a partnership model involving “deep collaboration” across the whole knowledge lifecycle. But libraries are no longer the “go-to” place for researchers. Perceived as dispensers of goods, more geared to students and education, they struggle to gain take-up for research offerings. Innovative practitioners are using various strategies to reposition themselves as key players in the research arena, notably space-as-service strategies, which can bring researchers back to the physical library and improve visibility of virtual services.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

"From Reading Rooms to Research Commons" Sheila Corrall, DARTS4

  1. 1. From  Reading  Rooms   to  Research  Commons   Context  is  Cri+cal   Sheila  Corrall   Professor  and  Chair   Library  &  Informa;on  Science   scorrall@pi>.edu    
  2. 2. Agenda   •  Developments  in  the  digital  research  environment   •  Library  service  challenges  and  responses   – Scope  for  rethinking  space  for  researchers   – Opportuni;es  for  higher-­‐end  support   – Problema;c  percep;ons  of  libraries   •  Emerging  trends  in  library  support  for  research   •  Innova;ons  in  library  space  for  researchers   •  Ques;ons  for  debate  
  3. 3. What  is  the  Purpose  of  Library  Space?   •  A  store  or  archive  for  the  residuum  of  physical   materials?     •  A  quiet  place  for  study  and  reflec;on?   •  A  “thinking  place”   –  where  users  are  encouraged  to  “slow  down  and   take  a  mind  break”?   •  A  s;mula;ng  environment  for  crea;ve  innova;on?     •  A  social  space,  or  “social  hub”   –  for  mee;ngs  or  collabora;ve  work?   (Beard  &  Bawden,  2012)  
  4. 4. The  Research  Environment     •  Networked  data-­‐driven  science,  digital  humani;es,   “grand  challenges”  and  transdisciplinary  research   •  Policy  developments  and  funding  body  mandates:   open  access,  data  sharing,  and  research  impact   •  Evidence  of  unmet  needs  for  research  support,  e.g.,   infrastructure,  systems,  tools,  and  expert  help   •  Calls  for  academic  libraries  to  change  what  they  offer   and  how  they  engage  with  the  research  process   –  Moving  from  “service-­‐as-­‐support”  to  partnership  and   “deep  collabora;on”  across  the  knowledge  crea;on  cycle  
  5. 5. Libraries,  Research,  and  Space   “The  library  is  the  only  centralized  loca;on  where  new  and   emerging  informa;on  technologies  can  be  combined  with   tradi;onal  knowledge  resources  in  a  user-­‐focused,       service-­‐rich  environment  that  supports  today’s  social  and   educa;onal  pa>erns  of  learning,  teaching,  and  research.”     (Freeman,  2005,  p.  3)     “Is  there  any  scope  to  provide  researchers  with  spaces  for   mee;ngs,  good  levels  of  access  to  a  mixture  of  technology  for   presenta;ons,  informa;on  crea;on  and  publishing,  a  mixture  of   study  environments,  including  soa  sea;ng  and  food-­‐tolerant   zones,  as  well  as  individual,  reservable  formal  study  and  working   spaces,  with  some  storage?  (Gannon-­‐Leary  et  al.,  2008,  p.  5)  
  6. 6. Research  Libraries:  Call  to  Ac;on   “In  order  to  con;nue  to  play  a  central  role  in  support  of   scholarly  research  and  publishing,  academic  libraries  must:     2.  Design  flexible  new  services  around  those  parts  of  the   research  process  that  cause  researchers  the  most  frustra;on   and  difficulty.     3.  Embed  library  content,  services,  and  staff  within  researchers’   regular  workflows;  integra;ng  with  services  others  provide… where  such  integra;on  serves  the  needs  of  the  researcher.     7.  Embrace  opportuni;es  to  focus  on  unique,  core  services  and   resources;  while  seeking  collabora;ve  partnerships  to   streamline  common  services  and  resources.     (Extract  from  Bourg  et  al.,  2009,  pp.  1-­‐2)  
  7. 7. Problema;c  Percep;ons  of  Libraries   “Libraries  are  perceived  by  users  to  be  more  geared     to  suppor;ng  teaching  and  learning  ac;vi;es”     (Bent  et  al.,  2007,  p.  82)   “edged  out  of  the  top  spot  as  the  ‘go-­‐to’  place  for   virtually  all  aspiring  researchers”  (Wood  et  al.,  2007,  p.3)   “Few  researchers  see  the  library  as  a  partner,  and   most…seemed  to  regard  the  library  as  a  dispensary     of  goods  (i.e.,  books,  ar;cles)  rather  than  a  locus  for   badly  needed,  real-­‐;me  professional  support”     (Jahnke  &  Asher,  2012,  p.  16)      
  8. 8. Perceived  Importance  of  Library  Roles   (Housewright  et  al.,  2013,  p.  69)   0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%   UG  Info  Lit  Teacher   Research  Supporter   Teaching  Facilitator   Repository   Buyer   Gateway   Faculty   Library  Directors  
  9. 9. Library  Support:  Emerging  Trends   •  Bibliometrics  –  Research  impact  measurement  services   •  Digital  humani;es  –  Centers/ins;tutes  and  scholars’  labs     •  e-­‐Research  –  Data  management  planning  and  support   •  Lifecycle  models  –  Strategic  planning  and  marke;ng   •  One-­‐stop  shops  –  Single  point  of  access  to  research   informa;on,  resources  and  support  across  the  university   •  Scholarly  communica;ons  –  Ins;tu;onal  repositories  and   academic  publishing  (journals,  conferences,  and  monographs)   •  Specialist  posi;ons  –  New  strategic  and  frontline  roles   •  Space-­‐as-­‐service  –  Research  commons/collaboratories  
  10. 10. Bibliometric  Service  Case  Studies   Targeted  at  individuals,  academic  units  or  ins;tu;onal  level,   marketed  in  various  ways,  for  internal  or  external  purposes:     o  Advice  on  publishing  strategies,  e.g.,  early-­‐career  researchers   o  Support  for  job  applica;ons,  promo;on,  or  salary  review   o  Research  impact  measures  for  grant  applica;ons   o  Output  comparisons  for  benchmarking  with  peer  schools   o  Analyzing  publishing  pa>erns  and  usage  data  for  a  library   scholarly  communica;ons  program   o  Finding  a  university’s  most  cited  papers  and  researchers  for   an  ins;tu;onal  promo;on  program   o  Compiling  whole-­‐career  cita;on  counts  across  the  university   o  Facilita;ng  ins;tu;onal  repository  growth   (Corrall  et  al.,  2013)    
  11. 11. Bibliometric  Services  of  ANZUKI  Libraries  (n=140)   13   24   30   47   47   67   82   4   17   20   9   22   27   26   112   92   83   73   65   44   30   0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%   Candidate  evalua;ons   Disciplinary  trend  reports   Grant  applica;on  support   h-­‐index  calcula;ons   Research  impact  calcula;ons   Cita;on  reports   Bibliometrics  training/literacy   Offered   Planned   Not  planned   (Corrall  et  al.,  2013,  p.  652)  
  12. 12. Digital  Humani;es      “a  nexus  of  fields  within  which  scholars  use   compu;ng  technologies  to  inves;gate  the  kinds  of   ques;ons  that  are  tradi;onal  to  the  humani;es,  or…who   ask  tradi;onal  kinds  of  humani;es-­‐oriented  ques;ons   about  compu;ng  technologies”  (Fitzpatrick,  2010)   •  Emerged  from  ac;vi;es  known  as  “humani;es  compu;ng”   –  collabora;ve,  transdisciplinary,  computa;onally  engaged,   but  essen;ally  a  humanis+c  endeavor     –  concerned  with  “Why  possible?”  ques;ons,  rather  than   “How  possible?”  ques;ons  (cf.  science  and  engineering)   •  Three  broad  areas:  textual/linguis;c  analysis,  spa;al  analysis,   and  media  studies/visual  analysis   (Waters,  2013)  
  13. 13. Digital  Humani;es  Agenda  for  Libraries   1.  The  par;cular  type  of  research  being  pursued  is  a  key  issue   –  literary,  spa;al,  and  visual  analysis  have  quite  different   staffing,  equipment  and  related  requirements   2.  Digital  preserva;on  is  a  cri;cal  R&D  need  across  all  areas   3.  Tools  and  infrastructure  spanning  the  three  areas  are   increasingly  needed  (e.g.,  annota;on  tools)   4.  Tools  facilita;ng  visual  and  spa;al  analysis,  and  also   emergent  areas  (e.g.,  audio)  are  an  immediate  need   –  investments  in  textual  analysis  tools  are  well  advanced   5.  Understanding  requirements  and  building  the  capacity  for   publishing  and  cura;ng  scholarly  products  is  a  high  priority   6.  Training  people  in  tool-­‐based  scholarship  is  another  priority   (Waters,  2013),    
  14. 14. Digital  Humani;es     in  ARL  Libraries  (n=64)   •  5  host  digital  humani;es  centers   •  30  provide  ad  hoc    DH  services   •  15  host  d-­‐scholarship  centers   (Bryson  et  al.,  2011)  
  15. 15. Does  Every  Library  Need  a  DH  Center?   •  In  most  sewngs,  it  is  best  to  observe  what  DH  academics  are   already  doing  and  then  set  out  to  address  gaps,  e.g.,   –  package  collec;ons  and  services  as  a  "virtual  DH  center"   –  advocate  coordinated  support  for  digital  scholarship   –  create  avenues  for  scholarly  use  and  enhancement  of   metadata   –  consult  scholars  at  start  of  library  digi;za;on  projects   –  get  involved  in  planning  for  sustainability  and  preserva;on   of  DH  research  results   •  A  "DH-­‐friendly"  environment  may  work  be>er  than  a  center   •  Library  culture  may  need  to  evolve  for  librarians  to  be  seen  as   effec;ve  DH  partners  (Schaffner  &  Erway,  2014)  
  16. 16. Influence   na;onal   data  policy         Iden;fy   required  data  skills   with  LIS  schools         Develop  local   data  cura;on   capacity       Develop   LIS  workforce   data  confidence       Develop   researcher   data  awareness       Provide   researcher   data  advice       Lead  on  local   (ins;tu;onal)   data  policy   Teach  data  literacy     to  postgraduate   students   Bring  data  into   UG  research-­‐ based   learning   Data  Collec*on  Development  and  Access  Management   Iden;fy,  select,  describe,  preserve  and  present  research  data  resources  for  use   Data  Management  Pyramid  for  Libraries   (Corrall,  2012)   What  are  the  priority   areas  for  library   engagement?   (Lewis,  2010)  
  17. 17. Research  Data  Services  of  ACRL  Members  (n=221)    (Tenopir  et  al.,  2012,  pp.  17-­‐19)   21   24   24   26   32   39   45   49   97   58   51   73   48   60   52   49   74   48   141   143   121   144   129   127   126   97   75   0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%   Preparing  data  for  deposit   Collabora;ng  with  other  services   Iden;fying  data  for  deposit   Metadata  crea;on   Technical  support,  e.g.,  repository   Advice  on  data/metadata  standards   Advice  on  data  management  plans   Web  guides  and  finding  aids   Help  with  finding  and  ci;ng     Offered   Planned   Not  planned  
  18. 18. Research  Data  Services  of  ANZUKI  Libraries  (n=140)   15   15   21   22   24   25   45   54   62   61   64   53   61   55   78   31   50   47   49   50   54   45   49   27   49   27   22   0%   20%   40%   60%   80%   100%   Developing  RDM  tools   Data  management  planning   Digital  cura;on  techniques   RDM  guidance/educa;on   Suppor;ng  external  deposit   Developing  ins;tu;onal  policy   Finding  external  datasets   Suppor;ng  ins;tu;onal  deposit   Assis;ng  technology  use   Offered   Planned   Not  planned   (Corrall  et  al.,  2013,  p.  657)  
  19. 19. Idea   Development   Funding   Proposal   Conduc;ng   Dissemina;on   • Find  background  literature   • U;lize  research  tools  effec;vely     • Locate  data  sources   • Iden;fy  collaborators   • Learn  grant  seeking  tools   • Iden;fy  specific  grant  opportuni;es     • Find  alterna;ve  funding  sources   • Prepare  data  management  plan   • Describe  data     • Navigate  repository  op;ons   • Track  compliance  with  NIH  Public  Access  Policy   • Manage  cita;ons   • Review  IRB  and  IACUC  protocols   • Conduct  systema;c  reviews   • Select  journals   • Iden;fy  OA  journals   • Manage  copyright   • Design  posters   • Cite  grants   • Track  research  impact   • Deposit  in  repository   Research  Lifecycle  Model  for  Library  Services   “the  library  is…  poised  to  be  a     partner  through  the  en;re  process,     not  just  at  the  bookends  of  research.”     (Adapted  from  Vaughan  et  al.,  2013,  p.  312)  
  20. 20. Library  Roles  in  Scholarly  Communica;on   •  Advice  to  faculty  on  intellectual  property  issues   –  Answering  ques;ons  on  copyright  and  publisher  policies   •  Awareness-­‐raising  and  advocacy  for  alterna;ve   forms  of  scholarly  publica;on   •  Digital  preserva;on  of  ins;tu;onal  research  outputs   –  Managing  repositories  of  eprints  (preprints/postprints),   working  papers,  theses/disserta;ons,  etc.   –  Providing  valued  added  services,  e.g.,  mediated  deposit,     database-­‐driven  reports  of  faculty  outputs  and  usage  data   •  Hos;ng  and  publishing  of  scholarly  research  outputs   –  Journals,  conference  proceedings,  and  monographs  
  21. 21. Library  Publishing  Services   ARL  ac;vity  in  2007   •  Offering  services  –  43%   •  Planning  services  –  21%   Types  of  publica;ons     by  ac;ve  members   •  Journals  –  88%   •  Conference   proceedings  –  79%   •  Monographs  –  71%     (Hahn,  2008)   ARL  ac;vity  in  2010   •  Offering  services  –  49%   •  Planning  services  –  29%     Typical  services  provided     to  conference  organizers   •  Repository  for  program,  papers,   slides,  video,  and  audio   •  Metadata  enhancement   •  Long-­‐term  website  hos;ng   •  Soaware  training   •  Design  services     (Mullins  et  al.,  2012)  
  22. 22. Specialist  Research  Support  Posi;ons  (Examples)   •  Academic  Support  Manager   (Research)   •  Biomedical  and  Transla;onal   Research  Librarian   •  Data  Cura;on  Librarian   •  Data  Reference  Services  Librarian   •  Data  Services  Librarian   •  Digital  Scholarship  Librarian   •  Digital  Science  Librarian   •  Head  of  Scholarly  Communica;on   •  Interdisciplinary  Science  Librarian   •  Librarian  for  Advanced  Research   and  Engagement   •  Librarian  for  Digital  Research  and   Scholarship   •  Open  Access  and  Data  Cura;on   Manager   •  Open  Access  Coordinator   •  Research  Data  Manager   Coordinator   •  Research  Services  Librarian   •  Research  Support  Services   Manager   •  Research  Support  Leader   •  Scholarly  Communica;ons   Manager   •  Scholarly  Services  Librarian   •  Senior  Librarian  (Research   Support)   •  Social  Sciences  Data  Librarian  
  23. 23. Library  Research  Collaboratories   •  Space  freed  up  by  library  collec;ons  going  virtual  can  be   repurposed  for  research  collabora;on  and  compu;ng     •  Key  audiences  are  doctoral  and  post-­‐doc/early  career   researchers  who  may  not  have  their  own  offices  or  labs   •  Several  US  and  other  libraries  have  opened  or  are  planning   “research  commons”  facili;es  as  renova;ons  or  new  builds   •  Spaces  support  interdisciplinary  data-­‐intensive  scholarship   and  offer  services  in  partnership  with  other  campus  units   •  Offerings  include  assistance  for  researchers  in  grant  wri;ng,   research  conduct,  copyright,  and  open  access  publishing   •  Facili;es  are  typically  access  controlled  to  exclude  undergrads   (Corrall  &  Lester,  2013)  
  24. 24. UW  Research  Commons   VISION   FOSTER  INTERDISCIPLINARY   CONVERSATIONS  AND  COLLABORATION   HUB  OF  SUPPORT  FOR  EACH  STEP  OF   RESEARCH  PROCESS   EXPERIMENTAL,  CREATIVE,   PARTICIPATORY  SPACE   SEATS   •  164  work  seats   •  25  computer  sears   •  3  booths   FEATURES   •  Whiteboard  walls   •  Whiteboard  tables,  mobile   chairs  and  Media:scape     •  Collabora;on  screens     •  Open  presenta;on  place   Talk.  Share.  Connect.  Research.  
  25. 25. UW  Research  Commons   PARTNERSHIPS   ▶  Research  Commons  Advisory  Board   ▶  Graduate  School   ▶  Undergraduate  Academic  Affairs   ▶  The  Odegaard  Wri;ng  Center   ▶  Center  for  Commercializa;on   ▶  Microsoa  Research   ▶  Center  for  Social  Science   Computa;onal  Research  (CSSCR)   ▶  Capital  Projects  Office   ▶  UW  IT   ▶  Classroom  Support  Services   ▶  Faculty  Council  on  University  Libraries  h>p:// about/fact-­‐sheet/view  
  26. 26. Concept  Graphic     Research   Commons   Renova;on   Bobst  Library     NY  University     Two  floor  designed  for   21C  scholarship,  with   staff,  technology,   equipment  and   furnishings  selected   and  located  to  ensure   users  can  work  with   maximum  produc;vity  
  27. 27. Research  Commons  Space  Planning   Type  of  Space   Watchwords   Research  Commons     (5th  floor)   User-­‐centered;  Integrated;  Research  intensive;   Technologies;    21st-­‐century  Service;  No  space  lies  fallow;   Mul;disciplinary;  Mobility.     Graduate  Exchange     (10th  floor)   Exchange;  Decompression;  Serendipity;  Interdisciplinarity;   Peer  to  peer.     Individual  Spaces     (4th  and  5th  floors)   Individual  scholar;  Concentra;on;  Diversified  flavors  of   individual  space;  Storage  of  research  materials,  notes.     Collabora*ve  Rooms     (5th  floor)   Collabora;ve;  Shared  desktops;  Presenta;on  rehearsal.     Quiet  Spaces/   Reading  Room  (4th  floor)   Tradi;onal;  Reading  room;  Quiet;  Community  standards.     Intrastacks  &   Contempla*ve  Sea*ng   (4th  and  5th  floors)   Natural  light;  Shorter  dura;on;  Solitary,  contempla;ve,   high-­‐focus;  Deep  reading;    Low  light,  low  traffic,  den-­‐like;   Intra-­‐stacks;  Collec;ons  consulta;on  &  note-­‐taking;   Tradi;onal  library-­‐sea;ng.     See  commons/  for  Descrip*on  and  Why  do  we  need  it?  
  28. 28. December 11, 2007The Research Commons: Planning Library Space and Services for Faculty and Graduate Students h>p://  
  29. 29. Faculty  Publica;ons  Collec;on   Faculty  Workrooms   Visualiza;on  Lab   A  "black  box"  theater  for  high-­‐   defini;on  visualiza;on  and  simula;on,   offering  270-­‐degree  immersive  projec;on  on   three  walls  (80  linear  feet  of  display  surface).     The  award-­‐winning  Hunt  Library  at  NCSU   has  brought   Engineering   Faculty  back   to  Libraries.  
  30. 30. Wolfson  Research  Exchange  (2009)   •  Dedicated  research  space  in  a  prime  campus  loca;on     •  Combines  tradi;onal  quiet  study  places  with  collabora;ve   and  social  areas  in  a  technology-­‐rich  environment   •  Mobile  equipment  can  be  reconfigured  for  types  of  mee;ngs     –  Poster  sessions,  project  mee;ngs  and  reading  groups,  summer  schools   and  academic  conferences   •  Key  services  aims  include  facilita;ng  cross-­‐discipline  research   interac;ons  and  “fostering  a  sense  of  community”     •  Events  on  various  topics   –  Funding  opportuni;es,  grant  applica;on  tracking,  data  management,   bibliometrics,  journal  impact,  patents  and  spinout  companies   •  Peer  support  staffing  model  –  RE  Advisors  are  PhDs/Post-­‐Docs     (Carroll,  2011)  
  31. 31. Dedicated  Research  Spaces  (Examples)   US   Ø  Case  Western  Reserve:  Research  Commons   Ø  Indiana,  Bloomington:  Research  Commons   Ø  New  York:  Research  Commons   Ø  Washington:  Research  Commons   UK   Ø  Durham:  Researchers’  Study  Area/PGR  Studyroom   Ø  Exeter:  Research  Commons     Ø  Queen  Mary:  Research  Reading  Room   Ø  Sussex  Research  Hive   Ø  Warwick:  Wolfson  Research  Exchange   Ø  York:  Research  Study,  Research  Lounge,  Research  Hotel    
  32. 32. Ques;ons  for  Debate   •  Do  academic  and  research  ins;tu;ons  need   dedicated  library/informa;on  space  for  researchers?   –  Should  such  space  have  controlled  access?     •  What  facili;es  and  services  should  be  offered?   •  Should  the  space  be  in  the  library  or  elsewhere?   –  Should  it  be  managed  solely  by  the  library  or   developed  as  a  joint  venture  or  partnership?   –  How  should  it  be  staffed?