Osteopathic colleges are implementing subject and consortial repositories to enhance student enrollment as a result of higher costs, personnel reductions, and the need for increased institutional visibility. A master's thesis analyzed the current status of repositories at osteopathic colleges through surveys and research. The results showed that about half of the colleges have institutional repositories while fewer have subject or consortial repositories. Repositories were found to benefit academics but had negligible effects on enrollment or marketing. Many colleges are in the planning stages of repositories or upgrading existing ones to provide more research materials and improve searching.
Osteopathic Colleges Implementing Repositories to Enhance Student Enrollment
1. Margaret Lewis
Rosemont College
Master’s in Management Thesis
December 2012
2. As a result of higher costs, personnel reductions,
improvements in software, and the general need for
search and increased institutional visibility, osteopathic
colleges are implementing subject and consortial
repositories in an effort to enhance student enrollment.
(Goal is to add to primary care and research through
sharing information.)
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 2
3. Current status of osteopathic colleges
College libraries
Definition and use of repositories
Literature review
Methodology
Results
Conclusions about repositories at colleges
Improvements mentioned in surveys
Management issues
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 3
4. Low graduation and placement rates
Soaring tuition costs
Shrinking endowments
Student debt at medical schools
Minority and female enrollment is down
There are cost disincentives to practice primary care and
family medicine due to student debt
(Hazen, 2011, 196)
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 4
5. 300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000 25% Graduates
100,000 10% Graduates
50,000
0
Medical School Graduates
(Greysen, et.al, 2011, 840)
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 5
6. 70%
60%
50%
40%
Allopathy
30%
Osteopathy
20%
10%
0%
Year 2011 Year 2016
(Schenarts, et.al, 2011, 239)
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 6
7. 300%
250%
200%
150% Serials
CPI
100%
50%
0%
Year 1 Year 18
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 7
8. Repository
12
10
8
6
Repository
4
2
0
Net Economic Value Return on Investment
(Beagrie, et.al, 2012, 50)
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 8
9. The general public is flocking to the Internet in search of
“education, inspiration, invention, and interaction”
Institutions are not leading the way to building repositories
Repositories are pushing against academics and imposing conditions to
attract content
Can’t help with navigating large amounts of data
Must be combined with national (research) and subject repositories for
better searching
Only the largest universities have the requisite number of depositors (for
example, MIT)
IRs are dependent on the resources of the institution, and may be unstable
Two international repository registries show little current deposit activity
(Armbruster, 2010, 3)
(Calise, 2008, 611)
(Jones, et.al, 2006, 18)
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 9
12. Internet searching with keywords
Five different surveys through email to the colleges, and
posted on LinkedIn, a form of social media
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 12
13. Searching on Google and college websites:
◦ Six colleges with subject repositories (18%)
◦ Five have consortial repositories (15%)
◦ Five have institutional repositories (15%) versus seven in surveys
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 13
14. 90%
80%
70%
60%
Institutional
50%
Archival
40% Discipline
Subject
30% Consortial
20%
10%
0%
Library directors Deans MLA members ALA members
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 14
15. 7
6
5
4
Added to research
Added to studies
3
Found research
Found faculty members
2
1
0
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
disagree
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 15
16. 9
8
7
6
5 Added to research
Added to studies
4
Found research
3
Found faculty members
2
1
0
Strongly agree Agree Neutal Disagree Strongly
disagree
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 16
17. 25
20
15
Added to research
Added to studies
10 Found research
Found faculty members
5
0
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
disagree
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 17
18. 80%
70%
60%
50%
Strongly agree
40%
Agree
30% Neutral
20%
10%
0%
Library directors Deans Students MLA members ALA members
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 18
19. Half to 75% surveyed have IRs, a few have subject or
consortial repositories
Ease of searching was neutral, through the library, and
not through Google
Academics benefited; half of the respondents believed
marketing benefited; enrollment benefits negligible
Half of respondents are in planning stages, and half of
the library directors planning an IR
Half are contemplating changing or upgrading
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 19
20. 7
6
5
More research material
More full-text material
4
More archival material
Better searching
3
Greater advertisement
More integration with studies
2
Unsure
1
0
Beginner Advanced beginner Intermediate Expert
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 20
21. 3.5
3
2.5
More research material
More full-text material
2
More archival material
Better searching
1.5
Greater advertisement
More integration with studies
1
Unsure
0.5
0
Beginner Advanced beginner Intermediate Expert
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 21
22. 18
16
14
12 More research material
More full-text material
10
More archival material
8 Better searching
Greater advertisement
6 More integration with studies
Unsure
4
2
0
Beginner Advanced beginner Intermediate Expert
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 22
23. Repositories are on global scale, with medical research and breakthroughs
in every country
Born digital files (never been printed): using and preserving them is an
issue
Technology growing and changing
Technical infrastructure insufficient
Legal issues-copyright
Traditional academic environment where no one wants to use the repository
Government involvement, especially with genomes, and alliances
necessary. Science based on evidence now.
Risk management and board development, especially diversity, critical
Required growth through innovation, improvements, and differentiation
M. Lewis, Consortial and Subject
Repositories and Students 23