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.
Exercising Creativity to    Implement an Institutional           Repository               with Limited Resources          ...
Presenters2    Yuji Tosaka    Cataloging/Metadata Librarian    The College of New Jersey Library    Cathy Weng    Head of ...
Presentation Outline3       IRs and IRs at smaller academic institutions –        Context and problems       IR efforts ...
The College and the Library4       The College of New Jersey (TCNJ)         State college, located in Ewing, NJ        ...
1    IRs and IRs at smaller    academic institutions    Context and problems
IR Context and Problems6       IR needs and benefits at academic institutions       IR challenges at smaller institution...
Institutional Repository7       Digital library collection and service designed        to manage, organize, and showcase ...
IR needs at academic8    institutions       Take stewardship of the intellectual output of        the campus community   ...
IRs and Smaller Institutions9    ―Sleeping beast of demand for institutional    repositories (IRs) from master’s and bacca...
IR Challenges at Smaller10     Institutions        Limited resources          Funding          Staffing          Techn...
IR implementation options at11     smaller institutions        Predominant choice: consortial repositories        Other ...
2   IR efforts at TCNJ
TCNJ IR Developing Journey (bumpy road)13        IR initiative began in Spring 2009        Assessed local resources     ...
Change of Strategy14        Exercised beyond the box thinking        Initial goal – a pilot IR        Possibility of in...
TCNJ MUSE Program15        MUSE – Mentored Undergraduate Summer         Experience        TCNJ Faculty-Student Scholarly...
TCNJ MUSE Program16        Program funds research stipend (both         students and faculty), student on-campus         ...
Forming a Team for MUSE Project17        Library faculty to handle          Technical needs          Content recruitmen...
Library MUSE IR Pilot Team18        Three library faculty          Emerging  Technologies Librarian          Head of Ca...
Library MUSE Project19        March 2011 – Library IR team successfully         awarded MUSE grant ($9,795.00)        Si...
MUSE General Schedule20        June 6-July 29, 2011 (8 weeks)        Weekly luncheons to learn academic research       ...
Preparation21        The team critically and carefully examined and         evaluated open source IR platforms        IR...
IR+22        Developed by University of Rochester        First production release: August 2009        Has promising fea...
IR+           Image taken from UR23         Research website,           accessed, 5/24/2012.
Image taken from UR     Research website,     accessed, 5/24/201224
IR+Facetedfiltering searchresults Image taken from UR Research website,25 accessed, 5/24/2012
Project Process – General26        Established initial contact and maintain close         communication with IR+ develope...
Project Process – Technical27     part        Chose to have a physical server over virtual         server          Allow...
Project Process – Content28     Building        Outreached two departments: Library,         Department of Chemistry     ...
Project Process – Copyright29     management        Sought advice for copyright management        Used SHERPA / Romeo as...
Logistics of Working with30     Students        MUSE Google site established for         communication and expectation   ...
MUSE IR+ site on Google31
MUSE IR+ site on Google32
33
Project Logistics34        Students and library MUSE faculty met weekly         to discuss project progress and assignmen...
Project Logistics35        Students later joined IR+ community and         received much needed guidance from the        ...
Project Outcomes36        TCNJ pilot IR, TCNJ Digital Scholar,         successfully implemented        Local enhancement...
Project Outcomes37        Preliminary metadata application profile         established        Preliminary rights managem...
TCNJ Pilot IR38
39
Author’s Work Space40
3   Life after MUSE Program    Work in progress – From a pilot to a     sustainable service
From a Pilot to a Sustainable42     Service        Library administration support        Library faculty support       ...
Support from Library Administration43     and Faculty        Library Administration            Dean obtained some fundin...
Metadata Application Profile44        Continued to refine the local metadata         documentation        Why? — metadat...
Sample Metadata ApplicationProfile
Copyright and Permissions46        Continued to develop a simple and intuitive yet         organized workflow          E...
CORAL47        Centralized Online Resources Acquisitions and         Licensing        Open-source ERMS, built by the Uni...
Copyright Information on Excel
What’s Next?53        Collection development          Majorfocus on student work: reflection of the          increasing ...
What’s Next?54        Copyright and permissions management          Experiment  with CORAL for managing author          ...
Conclusion55        Minimum-cost, bottom-up approach to         developing an IR with limited resources          Think l...
Thank                   You!     Questions?                  tosaka@tcnj.e56                du                  weng@tcnj.ed
Exercising creativity to implement an institutional repository with limited resources
Exercising creativity to implement an institutional repository with limited resources
Exercising creativity to implement an institutional repository with limited resources
Exercising creativity to implement an institutional repository with limited resources
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Exercising creativity to implement an institutional repository with limited resources

1,041 views

Published on

The College of New Jersey Library had intended to implement an institutional repository since 2008. Many options were approached to secure resources for the new digital repository initiative but to no avail. It was not until early 2011 that we had a long awaited breakthrough when a team of three faculty librarians received a MUSE (Mentored Undergraduate Summer Experience) grant to implement a pilot IR for the open access initiative to take off. The College MUSE program is established to promote and support campus-wide faculty-student scholarly and creative collaborative activity. This was the first library MUSE project. Two students majoring in Computer Science were recruited to help install IR + (recently developed and released as open source by University of Rochester) and customize the codes to enhance local access and data entry. This presentation will describe the implementation process, how our students collaboratively working with the IR+ software developer to add new features for data migration as well as lesson learned. Planning and actions taken to sustain the initiative including digital rights management and outreach within and outside the campus academic community will also be described.
Presenters: Cathy Weng and Yuji Tosaka, The College of New Jersey

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Exercising creativity to implement an institutional repository with limited resources

  1. 1. Exercising Creativity to Implement an Institutional Repository with Limited Resources Yuji Tosaka Cathy Weng The College of New JerseyJune 9, 2012 NASIG Annual Conference, Nashville, TN
  2. 2. Presenters2 Yuji Tosaka Cataloging/Metadata Librarian The College of New Jersey Library Cathy Weng Head of Cataloging The College of New Jersey Library
  3. 3. Presentation Outline3  IRs and IRs at smaller academic institutions – Context and problems  IR efforts at The College of New Jersey (TCNJ)  MUSE project – TCNJ IR pilot development  Life after MUSE
  4. 4. The College and the Library4  The College of New Jersey (TCNJ)  State college, located in Ewing, NJ  Seven schools, primarily undergraduate programs  Approximately 6,000 undergraduate students  Faculty and undergraduate research strongly encouraged and supported  TCNJ Library  Collectionsize: over 600,000 volumes  Few digital library collections *Images taken from TCNJ web site, May 3, 2011.
  5. 5. 1 IRs and IRs at smaller academic institutions Context and problems
  6. 6. IR Context and Problems6  IR needs and benefits at academic institutions  IR challenges at smaller institutions  IR implementation options at smaller institutions
  7. 7. Institutional Repository7  Digital library collection and service designed to manage, organize, and showcase the intellectual output of an academic community to a broader audience
  8. 8. IR needs at academic8 institutions  Take stewardship of the intellectual output of the campus community  Open access and dissemination of faculty scholarship  Showcase student research and accomplishments: demonstrated academic/educational quality  Institutional advancement and accountability
  9. 9. IRs and Smaller Institutions9 ―Sleeping beast of demand for institutional repositories (IRs) from master’s and baccalaureate institutions‖ Librarians at these institutions ―want to know about the IR experiences of master’s and baccalaureate institutions generally. They also want to learn about their peers’ experiences with IR costs, required technical expertise, funding the IR effort, whether the local learning community will contribute to and use the IR, and raising the issue of IRs with their institution’s central administration.‖ Source: Census of Institutional Repositories in the United States (Council on Library and Information Resources, 2007), p. 74-75 [http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub140/pub140.pdf]
  10. 10. IR Challenges at Smaller10 Institutions  Limited resources  Funding  Staffing  Technical expertise/support  Need for a minimal cost approach to develop and maintain IRs
  11. 11. IR implementation options at11 smaller institutions  Predominant choice: consortial repositories  Other options  Outsourcing:vendor-hosted platform  Independent repositories *Jingfeng Xia and David B. Opperman. (2010). Current trends in institutional repositories for institutions offering masters and baccalaureate degrees. Serials Review 36, 10-18. Melissa Nykanen. (2011). Institutional repositories at smaller institutions in the United States: Some current trends. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 23, 1-19.
  12. 12. 2 IR efforts at TCNJ
  13. 13. TCNJ IR Developing Journey (bumpy road)13  IR initiative began in Spring 2009  Assessed local resources  Conclusion: very limited – i.e. support of hardware and software, staffing, etc.  Decision made to move forward with existing staff and an open source system  Explored open source IR platforms  DSpace, Greenstone, Fedora  Progress made with RUcore (Rutgers Community Repository, a Fedora based system)  Other possibilities also explored to no avail
  14. 14. Change of Strategy14  Exercised beyond the box thinking  Initial goal – a pilot IR  Possibility of involving students helping with developing an IR  Utilizing campus resources  Ultimate goal – a permanent and sustainable library service  TCNJ MUSE Program seemed a good fit
  15. 15. TCNJ MUSE Program15  MUSE – Mentored Undergraduate Summer Experience  TCNJ Faculty-Student Scholarly and Creative Collaborative Activity  Eight weeks (June-July) of summer research program  Undergraduate students conduct research or engage in creative activity in mentored collaboration with TCNJ faculty
  16. 16. TCNJ MUSE Program16  Program funds research stipend (both students and faculty), student on-campus housing  Project grants competitive; reviewed and selected by Faculty-Student Collaboration Program Council
  17. 17. Forming a Team for MUSE Project17  Library faculty to handle  Technical needs  Content recruitment  Metadata application  Rights management  Front / back ends IR platform ease of use  Computer Science major students  To learn library repository system  To learn system installation and server administration  To learn working in an open source community  To help customize open source IR to meet local needs
  18. 18. Library MUSE IR Pilot Team18  Three library faculty  Emerging Technologies Librarian  Head of Cataloging  Cataloging/Metadata librarian  Two Computer Science major students  Recruited with help from a Computer Science faculty  MUSE application package prepared and submitted in February 2011
  19. 19. Library MUSE Project19  March 2011 – Library IR team successfully awarded MUSE grant ($9,795.00)  Significance:  Firstever Library MUSE Project  Library’s participation in academic mentoring  Recognition of library faculty as part of the research community  Acknowledging the importance of a campus central repository
  20. 20. MUSE General Schedule20  June 6-July 29, 2011 (8 weeks)  Weekly luncheons to learn academic research  Voluntary progress reports throughout  MUSE symposium held in week 8  Oraland poster presentations of all MUSE projects
  21. 21. Preparation21  The team critically and carefully examined and evaluated open source IR platforms  IR+ selected for TCNJ adoption for its next- generation look and feel
  22. 22. IR+22  Developed by University of Rochester  First production release: August 2009  Has promising features  Browse by author, publication, sponsor  Faceted filtering  Author’s workspace for collaboration and self archiving  Name authority control  Researcher’s profile page
  23. 23. IR+ Image taken from UR23 Research website, accessed, 5/24/2012.
  24. 24. Image taken from UR Research website, accessed, 5/24/201224
  25. 25. IR+Facetedfiltering searchresults Image taken from UR Research website,25 accessed, 5/24/2012
  26. 26. Project Process – General26  Established initial contact and maintain close communication with IR+ developer and repository coordinator  Assessed system requirements for hardware – server space, server specifications, etc.
  27. 27. Project Process – Technical27 part  Chose to have a physical server over virtual server  Allowedstudents to learn server administration  IR+ manual written for Windows server  Reviewed  Installation manual  System administration manual  User manual  Learned to use the system  As administrator  As user  As author
  28. 28. Project Process – Content28 Building  Outreached two departments: Library, Department of Chemistry  Obtained lists of publications authored or co- authored by library and Chemistry faculty  Began to establish preliminary metadata application profile and create metadata
  29. 29. Project Process – Copyright29 management  Sought advice for copyright management  Used SHERPA / Romeo as first place to check for instructions of posting articles on IR  Contacted publishers as needed for further clarification of copyright regulations  Established local profiles for individual publishers and journals
  30. 30. Logistics of Working with30 Students  MUSE Google site established for communication and expectation  Announcements  Calendar  Collaborating documents  Dailyreport  Suggested added features  Related timelines
  31. 31. MUSE IR+ site on Google31
  32. 32. MUSE IR+ site on Google32
  33. 33. 33
  34. 34. Project Logistics34  Students and library MUSE faculty met weekly to discuss project progress and assignments for the following week  Emerging Technologies librarian met with students almost daily and provided technical advice  Frequent informal discussions with students as needed
  35. 35. Project Logistics35  Students later joined IR+ community and received much needed guidance from the original software developer
  36. 36. Project Outcomes36  TCNJ pilot IR, TCNJ Digital Scholar, successfully implemented  Local enhancements made (e.g. more intuitive metadata creation process)  Over 70 records (articles, book chapters, ppt presentations, poster presentations) created  Most significantly: contributed to enhancement of IR+ version 2.1 general release  To support batch import and export of MARC 21 files
  37. 37. Project Outcomes37  Preliminary metadata application profile established  Preliminary rights management workflow established
  38. 38. TCNJ Pilot IR38
  39. 39. 39
  40. 40. Author’s Work Space40
  41. 41. 3 Life after MUSE Program Work in progress – From a pilot to a sustainable service
  42. 42. From a Pilot to a Sustainable42 Service  Library administration support  Library faculty support  Policy/procedure development  Metadata  Copyright and permissions  Future plan  Collection development  Campus outreach/buy-in
  43. 43. Support from Library Administration43 and Faculty  Library Administration  Dean obtained some funding from Academic Affairs to hire a student worker for help with further IR development  Library Faculty  IR demo, Q&A document for keeping the library faculty informed  Faculty expressed support for moving forward on IR planning as a new library initiative  Work in progress to develop an initial formal IR proposal to the Dean with input and comment from the entire library faculty
  44. 44. Metadata Application Profile44  Continued to refine the local metadata documentation  Why? — metadata quality control mechanism  Accuracy, completeness, consistency in metadata creation  Clear guidance for paraprofessionals and student workers  Revised profile worked well with a student worker
  45. 45. Sample Metadata ApplicationProfile
  46. 46. Copyright and Permissions46  Continued to develop a simple and intuitive yet organized workflow  Existing tools used to record publisher copyright notices: e-mails (58.2%), hard-copy printouts (47.8%), spreadsheets (41.8%) *Ann Hanlon and Marisa Ramirez. (2011). Asking for permission: A survey of copyrights workflows for institutional repositories. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 11, 683-702.  TCNJ experiment with CORAL for copyright management
  47. 47. CORAL47  Centralized Online Resources Acquisitions and Licensing  Open-source ERMS, built by the University of Notre Dame library (2010– )  Adopted by TCNJ for use as ERMS  Its functionality inspired IR team and is being tested for IR copyright management  CORAL worked well with a student worker
  48. 48. Copyright Information on Excel
  49. 49. What’s Next?53  Collection development  Majorfocus on student work: reflection of the increasing emphasis on deep student learning and intensive faculty-student collaboration in scholarly and creative activity  Campus outreach/buy-in  Need for multiple approaches to promote the IR as a unique library service
  50. 50. What’s Next?54  Copyright and permissions management  Experiment with CORAL for managing author permissions  If CORAL works, might suggest to IR+ developer to incorporate into IR+
  51. 51. Conclusion55  Minimum-cost, bottom-up approach to developing an IR with limited resources  Think like a startup/entrepreneur  Be flexible and try any approaches that work  Do not aim for one big rollout  Quickly formulate a ―good enough‖ plan and implement  Constantly review and adjust  Never fear ―failures‖
  52. 52. Thank You! Questions? tosaka@tcnj.e56 du weng@tcnj.ed

×