Scottish Higher Education Digital Library (SHEDL)


Published on

Tony Kidd discusses the Scottish Higher Education Digital Library at the CILIPS 2010 Conference.

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Scottish Higher Education Digital Library (SHEDL)

  1. 1. SHEDL Scottish Higher Education Digital Library Tony Kidd CILIPS Conference, June 2010
  2. 2. Context <ul><li>Scottish HE tradition of co-operation </li></ul><ul><li>Manageable size </li></ul><ul><li>Separate funding arrangements </li></ul><ul><li>Competitive concerns </li></ul><ul><li>Research Pools </li></ul><ul><li>Examples of other consortia </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  3. 3. History <ul><li>Previous attempts to implement ‘Scotland-wide’ access too ambitious </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cross-sectoral funding </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Continuing concerns over patchy access </li></ul><ul><li>Investigative funding from Principals of Glasgow/Edinburgh Universities </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  4. 4. Investigative Study <ul><ul><li>May-October 2007 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SCURL sponsored – Scottish Confederation of University and Research Libraries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>John Cox Associates Ltd </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interviews </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Libraries </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>University administrators/Universities Scotland </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Academics/Research Pools </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Stakeholders – Scottish Funding Council/JISC etc </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Report launched Oct 2007 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>SCURL website: </li></ul></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  5. 5. Relationship with JISC Collections/NESLi2 <ul><ul><li>Strong consensus that SHEDL should work within JISC Collections framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SFC and Principals expect SHEDL to co-exist with and complement JISC </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But wish to fill in gaps, to move away from ‘opt-in’ arrangements, to ensure overall access for Research Pools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Plus possibility of wider range of deals (recognising NESLi2’s current work with ‘small/medium publishers’) </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  6. 6. Structure & governance <ul><li>SCURL </li></ul><ul><li>SCOPNet </li></ul><ul><li>SHEDL Steering Group </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interest groups </li></ul></ul><ul><li>SHEDL Working Group </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Buy-in from all 19 HEIs </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Procurement – APUC </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  7. 7. Phase 1 <ul><li>Steering Group & Working Group – collaborative working </li></ul><ul><li>Initial agreement to work with 3 publishers, covering a wide range of subjects </li></ul><ul><li>Agreements for 2009-2011 with: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>American Chemical Society </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Cambridge University Press </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Springer </li></ul></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  8. 8. Costs <ul><li>Costs are fixed at the start of the contract, with agreed annual price caps </li></ul><ul><li>SHEDL institutions continue to fund their own subscriptions, and do not expect to pay more than before </li></ul><ul><li>Option to buy print at ddp </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced overheads – single payment and early payment where possible </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  9. 9. Process <ul><li>Verification of holdings and expenditure with each publisher </li></ul><ul><li>Confirmation of contract entitlement </li></ul><ul><li>Licence agreement, based on JISC Model Licence </li></ul><ul><li>Local consultation on print retention </li></ul><ul><li>Adjustments to holdings – link resolvers & opacs </li></ul><ul><li>Monitoring of usage – locally and centrally </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  10. 10. Phase 2 <ul><li>Consultation across all 19 HEI’s </li></ul><ul><li>40 nominations </li></ul><ul><li>6 publishers approached, following consultation with JISC </li></ul><ul><li>3 new publisher agreements for 2010-2012 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Berg </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Edinburgh University Press </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Oxford University Press </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Portico licensed across SHEDL </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  11. 11. Phase 3 – in progress <ul><li>Consultation process completed </li></ul><ul><li>46 nominations </li></ul><ul><li>7 publishers identified for 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Details of expenditure and holdings provided </li></ul><ul><li>Negotiation process underway </li></ul><ul><li>Letters of Commitment in process </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  12. 12. Benefits – HEIs <ul><li>Institutional buy-in and support </li></ul><ul><li>Shift to e-only </li></ul><ul><li>Single payment </li></ul><ul><li>Cost containment </li></ul><ul><li>Proof of concept </li></ul><ul><ul><li>widening access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>increased availability of content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>increased usage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>efficiency gains </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Shared services agenda </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  13. 13. Benefits - Publishers <ul><li>Reduced overheads – single point of contact for administration and invoicing </li></ul><ul><li>Wider dissemination of content </li></ul><ul><li>Improved compliance </li></ul><ul><li>Encourages adoption of e-only </li></ul><ul><li>Cash flow – protects market </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  14. 14. Impact – the users <ul><li>More content, accessible at the point of need </li></ul><ul><li>1800+ titles available </li></ul><ul><li>Increase in usage across all Phase 1 publishers, and across all institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Usage increased by 41% from 2008 to 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis shows that previously non-subscribed titles are being used </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  15. 15. Issues <ul><li>Impact on intermediaries and consortial purchasing agreements </li></ul><ul><li>Impact on institutional workflows </li></ul><ul><li>Monitoring – within and across institutions, changing patterns of use </li></ul><ul><li>Resource Discovery and findability </li></ul><ul><li>User expectations are raised – sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Budgets – impacts on collection management decisions </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  16. 16. Evaluation - RIN <ul><li>Evaluation of the impact of SHEDL </li></ul><ul><ul><li>John Cox Associates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Usage data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interviews – academics/librarians </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Single year </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reporting July 2010 </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  17. 17. Evaluation - RIN <ul><li>Impact of SHEDL – provisional findings </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Confirmed overall usage increase of 41%, compared with 22% ‘average’ annual increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wide variation in increases – single year – whether or not titles already accessible </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Some evidence that Research Pool participants benefiting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Heavy use of top 10 titles, but also long tail </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cost/use variable, and declining (by 20%+) </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  18. 18. Evaluation - RIN <ul><li>Impact of SHEDL – interviews </li></ul><ul><ul><li>SHEDL accentuates existing trends </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Access/convenience/power browsing </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Student expectations/VLE/Google </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cross-institutional research </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Marketing – variations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Large target list of publishers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Extend to e-books/databases/datasets/back runs </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  19. 19. Evaluation – JISC Coll <ul><li>Bloc payment mechanisms </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cost redistribution criteria </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Albert Prior/John Cox </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not specifically SHEDL </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Experience elsewhere/modelling </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reporting June/July 2010 </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  20. 20. Evaluation – JISC Coll <ul><li>Bloc payment mechanisms – provisional findings </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No ‘magic formula’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Six consortia using cost distribution models </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Size </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expenditure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Usage </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  21. 21. Evaluation – JISC Coll <ul><li>Bloc payment mechanisms </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Authoritative/credible data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>JISC Banding </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Institutional income </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Research/contract income </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Staff/student numbers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not usage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Variable </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discourages promotion etc </li></ul></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  22. 22. Evaluation – JISC Coll <ul><li>Bloc payment mechanisms </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Use >1 variable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transition period, from ‘current spend’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maximum rate of change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Top-slicing… </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  23. 23. Sectors <ul><li>National Library of Scotland </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Portico </li></ul></ul><ul><li>National Health Service </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Current discussions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Further Education </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scottish Funding Council </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  24. 24. Funding <ul><li>Scalability/viability? </li></ul><ul><li>Funding cuts? </li></ul><ul><li>UK countries/regions </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Journals as infrastructure’ </li></ul><ul><li>Top-slicing – current climate?? </li></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow
  25. 25. Questions/Discussion <ul><ul><li>Website – under development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gillian Anderson, Chair SHEDL Steering Group </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tony Kidd, Vice-Chair </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Kidd, T. Collaboration in electronic resource provision in university libraries: SHEDL, a Scottish case study. New Review of Academic Librarianship , 15 (1), 2009, pp 97-119 </li></ul></ul>June 2010 CILIPS Conference, Glasgow