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.

Evaluation of Open Access (OA) Resources METU Case Study


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Evaluation of Open Access (OA) Resources METU Case Study

  1. 1. Evaluation of Open Access (OA) Resources: METU Case Study Burcu Bulut, PhD., Middle East Technical University Library Emre Hasan Akbayrak, Middle East Technical University Library Comprehensive studies carried out in order to ensure OA to scientific knowledge have made it necessary to review the scholarly communication process, support e-science, and restructure services offered to information users in our country as has happened all over the world. The presence of EU partnership projects that have been launched and are ongoing in the areas of OA and institutional repositories in Turkey has increased awareness and emphasized the abovementioned requirements. Taking this awareness into account, it is now necessary not only to determine and apply methods to ensure OA to the scientific production of institutions and related data sets without limitation but to also consider in detail the OA resources provided to knowledge users within the scope of collection development policies. In this context, we will try to share the process of adding to the collection development policy of the open access resources that the Middle East Technical University Library offers access to via its own Web page, while ensuring that they are indexed by eresource management tools and that their numbers are increased, together with the determined evaluation/selection criteria in the paper. The process considered in five steps has not yet been completed. The goal of this study is not only to share the METU case study, but to obtain the views and recommendations of the participants with feedback during/after the presentation in order to finalize the OA resource evaluation/selection criteria. We plan to realize the studies started at the METU Library on January 2013 in five stages as set out below: 1st Stage: Current situation analysis 2nd Stage: Determination of evaluation/selection criteria of OA resources and including them in the collection development policy 3rd Stage: Deciding the form of OA resource sharing on the web (categorization, layout, platform, etc.). 4th Stage: Evaluation of the existing and new OA resources and creation of resource recommendation lists 5th Stage: Sharing identified resources on the web as decided on As of February 2013, the current situation analysis has been concluded and we are working on the second phase. Determining the evaluation/selection criteria of OA resources cannot be done quickly so the longest period has been allocated to the second stage. There are no current report or guides by institutions/organizations that are well-known in the area so university web pages have been examined, literature reviews have been accessed as much as possible, and contact has been made with groups and individuals working on OA. Preliminary studies related to the second phase will be shared within the scope of the paper and feedback will be obtained before the criteria are finalized. Determining the evaluation/selection criteria of OA resources
  2. 2. This stage consists of the general definition and policies regarding OA resources and general and detailed evaluation sections. After completion of the preliminary study, we intend to group the criteria as relates to the resource type (journals, books, reference, and etc.) and publishers (academic, government, commercial, non-profit, etc.) and then expand them. The definitions, policies, and general and detailed criteria that will form the basis for evaluation/selection will be explained during the presentation and therefore will only be outlined in the text. The general definition of and policies for OA resources that can be evaluated 1: OA Resource Definition: These are resources presented to the access of the users without any financial or legal barriers (some resources may only have opened some content as in journals or may require registration). Policies: Scientific OA resources (e.g. peer-reviewed journals) are suitable for evaluation. Proposals made by the institution librarians take priority regarding the resources to be evaluated. Following the publication of evaluation criteria, suggestions can also be collected from users but approval of the librarians who are specialists on the subject is required for the final decision on suitability. The journals to be evaluated should be part of the main topic indexes. OA resources other than journals (databases, collections of monographs, websites, maps, image collections, etc.) are also suitable for the evaluation. Evaluation Criteria (General): In this context, answers are sought to the following questions: Does the resource support university's research and educational areas? Is the resource being produced or supported by respected authorities or organizations in their field? Is the resource being published on a regular basis and reliable? Is the resource's interface easy to use? Does the use of the resource require a special technology (a special application, a custom font, etc.)? Evaluation Criteria (Detailed)2: Detailed evaluations will be performed under the headings of the form of presentation, relevance, objectivity, method, source, and timeliness. We believe that the results of this study will serve as a reference to develop comprehensive policies on not only providing access to OA resources but also for subjects such as institutional collection development policy, whether a budget should be allocated for OA, and whether OA resources should be evaluated within a catalog or e-resource management tools. 1 Open Access Resources at the UC Libraries: Open Access Information Resources: How We Evaluate Sites for Inclusion: Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, Code of Conduct: Scholarly Open Access: Critical Analysis of Scholarly Open-Access Publishing: 2