UBC Library and Archives

Institutional Repositories : UBC and Europe Starr, Lea Katharine May 20, 2009

Item Metadata


494-Institutional Repositories with speech2.ppt [ 1.81MB ]
JSON: 494-1.0077947.json
JSON-LD: 494-1.0077947-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 494-1.0077947-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 494-1.0077947-rdf.json
Turtle: 494-1.0077947-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 494-1.0077947-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 494-1.0077947-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

*Institutional RepositoriesUBC and EuropeInstitutional Repositories??????????? ????????????: ?????? ????????? ? ??????????????? ???? (Lea Starr), ????????? ?????????, ?????????? ???????????? ??????????? ????????, ???? ????????? ???????????????? ????????? ? ????????? ?????? (University of British Columbia, Associate University Librarian - Public Services, Vancouver,  Canada)???????? ???????? ???????? ?????? ???????? ? ???????????????????  ????????????? ?????????? ????????????? ?????????? ???????-????????? ?????????????????????????????. ??????????????????. ???????????? ??????????:???????? ?????, ?????? ?? ?????????19-21 ?????? 2009 ?., ?. ????, ???????????????-?????????? ???????"??????????? ? ?????????? ?????????? ??????????? ??????????"Institutional RepositoriesState Academy of Culture and the Arts; National Parliamentary Library of   the UKRAINE  Sixth International Scientific Conference "Documentation. Library. Information activities:  Problems of education, research and practice " May 19-21, 2009, Kyiv, Ukraine  Workshop "Organization and technology of the electronic library"*Lea StarrUniversity of British Columbia, Associate University Librarian - Public Services, Vancouver,  Canada*Who am I and why IRAssociate University Librarian ? Public ServicesProject sponsor for IR pilot projectInterest in preservation of research dataLiaison Librarians in my area need to develop relationship with facultyNeed to develop understanding to advocate with Vice-Provost and Provost*UBC*Purpose of Study LeaveTwo ProjectsCollaborative shared print repositoryInstitutional Repositories in EuropeWhat makes researchers depositNetworks ? work and benefitsDataPreservationOrganizational structure*IR?s in CanadaCurrently 48Research Universities -26, 5 in planning stagesCISTI still planning but currently a reorg; maybe a site for PubMed Central CanadaOldest University of Toronto https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/ 16,700 itemsNetworking informal unlike EU, UK or Australia*TSpace*Canadian MandatesCanadian Institutes of Health Research, (CIHR) Largest funder of researchMandate for deposit/open access within 6 months but will permit up to 12 month embargoRecommended site is PubMed Central or PubMed Central CanadaNot currently strictly enforcingInterested in deposit of data as well as published articles*Mandates ContinuedCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteEffective July 20096 Months after publication make work publicly availableWill provide funding in research grants for publishers requiring for OACanadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance (CBRCA)Provide a copy of final manuscript for posting in CBRCA Open Access ArchiveOntario Institute for Cancer Research (OICR)6 months after publication make publicly available on author?s website, through OA journal or in OICR*Mandates ContinuedFonds de la recherch? en sante QuebecAuthors to make available within 6 months on an OA websiteGenome CanadaRECOMMENDSBe made freely accessible in central or institutional repository within 6 monthsPublish in OA journal or deposit in PubMed CentralData to be shared and released no later than publication date of main findings *Mandates ContinuedNational Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)-interested in following lead of CIHR ? working on OA policy to come out in 2009Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC)-OA principle 2005-interested but concerned about effects on small humanities/social sciences publisherslikely to participate if funding can be made available to assist publishers in developing new business modelsseveral projects to model potential Aid to Scholarly Journals Program provides funding for OA articles in journals, conditions around distribution and publication patternSYNERGIES ? electronic publication infrastructure for SSH journals*UBC cIRcle*University of British Columbia Institutional Repository cIRcle https://circle.ubc.ca/Two year pilot project ended April 1 , 2009Pilot overviewProject charterProject team who oversaw the project work1 librarian FTE seconded from Arts and Humanities.25 FTE systems supportVolunteers ? over 40 from library staffDSpace*cIRcle Volunteer teamsDeveloped WebsitePoliciesCommunications and MarketingMet with interested groups external to libraryRaised staff awarenessDetermined record structure and worked on metadata issues*cIRcle  Pilot Outcomes to DateNo mandate at Provost level - but interestFunding from President?s Office to support digital libraries work including IRStaffing now 1 librarian, 1 support staff, .5fte systemsDSpace now 1.5 with specific functionally provided by @mirePreservation backup at separate location*cIRcle Pilot Outcomes -27436 documentsRelationship with Office of Research Services and UBC PressOrganized by communitiesFaculty of Education wants all material included BUT need to solve some issuesRSS feeds to own web pagesBulk uploadsUser statisticsRemoval of materialsEmbargo periodsDevelopment of Policies*cIRcle Communities*cIRcle Material TypesResearch papers (pre- or post-prints, or published versions) Conference and workshop papers Current theses and dissertations Outstanding student projects; eg Forestry, Community and Regional  Planning, Sociology etcUnpublished reports and working papers Books, chapters and sections Datasets Learning Objects Multimedia and audio-visual materials, including podcasts Software Special materials: University administrative documents *cIRcle Policies*cIRcle Specific ProjectsOffice of Research ServicesConsidering how to capture and store data results as per funding agency mandatesConsidering link to CV databaseUBC PressOnline supplements to published booksFocus on research of Vancouver 2010 Olympics ?hiring 1 fte librarian*Graduate Thesis and Dissertations Community*cIRcle eThesisStarted before cIRcle pilotRequested by Faculty of Graduate Studies After 1 year pilot, submission is voluntaryPaper submissions are digitizedCurrently back digitizing all UBC thesis to start of University ( at 2005)Copyright issuesBenefit to students ? work readily accessible, more likely to cited, book publishing offersHarvested by National Library and Archives Canada ? part of Canadian eThesis collectionOAI-PMH compatible *UBC Other Digital CollectionsContent DMDigitized materials ? unique or rare, of interest due to local history, geography, and politics.Materials digitized as funding made available often through grants*Digital Collections*Pilot SuccessInterest of Office of Research Services, UBC PressHigh rate of voluntary deposit of thesis in electronic formatIncreased interest by UBC scholarsSignificant interest by UBC Library staffInterest by UBC students*Pilot ChallengesNot enough staff for systems supportLow deposit rate for published workLack of services for scholarsLack of collaboration/networks in CanadaLong term management of deposit licenses*Study Leave VisitsAttended Bielefeld Conference ? February 2009Georg-August Gottingen UniversityBielefeld UniversityHumboldt UniversityGent UniversityJISC Conference in Edinburgh and interviewed 4 peopleSHERPA ? NottinghamSURF and Utrecht UniversityICM ? WARSAW University*What I learnedSenior government interest if not always fundingEU support of Driver, EuropeanaUkrainian legislationValue to eScience*NetworksCollaboration on projects that will benefit everyone ? enhanced depositsMentoring ? Belgium - repository manager groupSupport for small institutions that can?t yet support own IR ? The DEPOT (UK)Working together on advocacy  - SURF creation of materials for use by institutionsBasis for interdisciplinary research Combined database to provide opportunity for effective text mining for areas of new research ? BASE, inTUTEhttp://www.intute.ac.uk/irs/Development of common standards  - DINI May be source of funding for start up or projects*Working with ScholarsAdvocacy to gain interest is keyRepository services desiredNeed to perceive benefit to selfIncreased visibility of research worldwide ? citations and viewingCream of Science ? recognitionDownload and update own websiteSave time in research and evaluations assessment processesPart of larger university work tracking research outputWon?t participate if adds to workload; strive for ease of deposit tominimize workload on libraryDesire some autonomyNeed to be able to have embargoes to comply with publisher requests*Working with Scholars 2Lack knowledge of author rights and opportunities for self or institutional archivingDon?t know how to work with publishersROMEODon?t know how to create Creative Commons license or use addendums such as SPARCMay lack knowledge of funder mandatesJULIETIR must be perceived to be reliable, trustedResearchers want their work to be in a repository that has longevityOther materials in repository must be of qualityMandates important but need to be enforcedNot as useful as gaining interest of researchersInterest of senior university administrators importantIncrease profile of universityImportant to celebrate achievements with depositors*DataPublicly funded so should be freely availableLots of challenges Common format for data not possible but are there synergies within disciplinesShould data repositories be institution specific or subject focusedCan the long term preservation of the data be ensured Will some data need to be protected due to privacy of information, eg health dataWill data manipulation software programs also need to be preserved and migrated*Data 2How will metadata and keywords be providedPilots need to be runWork in collaboration with research communityData will grow exponentiallyData in many formatsNeed to have persistent identifiersEnhanced documents*OrganizationNo one modelStaffing usually 1- 3 people unless special funding for projects at network offices.Trying to integrate work into regular work of library staff, promotion as well as metadata workMost recognize that not yet at full capacity for ingestion.Much of the work is still around advocacy*Otherdesire for emphasis of published research but most repositories contain other materialsyearly intake rate low ? less than 50%most repositories have a higher proportion of metadata only vs fulltextrepositories in Europe have chosen a focus to assist with recruiting materials, eg Cream of Science, Bibliography of research output aligned with fulltext deposit, changes to copyright law in Germany, architecture engineering project in Ghent. Need to develop tools of interest to researchersResearch assessment process could be driverThe broader the knowledge of library staff ? the more effective the advocacyDepartmental interest in local repositories can contribute to raising awareness on campustwo streams ? develop tools and infrastructure that will support the vision of eScienceWork collaboratively on advocacy and education *Thank you for inviting me to your symposium.  Let me tell you a little bit about myself.  I have been a librarian for about 28 years.  Most of my work experience has been in health and science libraries. I am currently the Associate University Librarian responsible for all the public branches.  UBC is the 2nd largest university in Canada.  There are over 55,000 students and we have degrees in all disciplines as well as several professional schools; medicine, law, pharmacy, engineering, education, businessI have been interested in Institutional Repositories since they first started being developed.  My interest arose because I was aware of the vast amounts of data that is produced by researchers and then often lost.  We have about 45 librarians who do subject liaison with faculty.  We want them to be doing advocacy with faculty about IR. Advocacy with the senior administration regarding contributing to the IR and the value to the university of having a robust IR are also important and one of my roles*I took a 6 month study leave to work on two projects. I came to the Ukraine because my partner, also on leave, was working with Ternopil National Economic University.  One of the projects I was interested in was to learn about the policies and practices for shared storage of print collections particularly back-runs of journals that are also in electronic format.  The other project was to learn about IR?s in Europe.  I wanted to learn whether and how, European IR?s have worked with researchers to obtain deposits of full-text papers, to learn about the networks in the various countries, their projects and the benefits to the participants, whether any repositories are actively collecting data and what work is being done around data.  I was interested to know what preservation practices were in place and whether organizations are extremely confident about the preservation activities.  Finally I was interested in the organizational structure within universities that supports the IR work*Let me give you a little information about IR work in Canada.  There are currently 48 IR?s at universities, institutes and other organizations.  Twenty six universities have IR?s ? some quite recent and 5 are in the planning stages for implementing.  CISTI ? the national science library was planning to start one this year but a reorganization has been announced.  There is interest in Canada in developing a PubMed Central for Canada and CISTI was the logical institution to take this on.  The library which has had an IR longest is the University of Toronto and they now have over 16,000 items.  Still smaller than many IR?s in Europe.    Networking activities are mostly informal unlike what I have observed in Europe, the UK and Australia.*Canadian funding agencies have been slow to develop mandates.  The Canadian Institutes of Health Research was the first.  They fund most biomedical research in Canada.  The mandate is for published research to be deposited in an open access archive within 6 months of publication although they will accept an embargo period of 12 months.  They recommend using PubMed Central and mention PubMed Central Canada although it doesn?t yet exist.  They haven?t started to strictly enforce the mandate so compliance is not high.  This will likely change.  They have indicated that they also want data to be deposited and have set out specific time periods coinciding with the completion of research.  One challenge here is that some health data will have privacy concerns.*These cancer societies have also developed mandates within the last year.  Funding for cancer research is quite high in Canada.  Now we need to get the other Canadian provinces cancer societies to also have mandates*It is likely that a significant amount of the data from projects funded by GENOME Canada is already deposited in genome databanks. *Both the National Science and Engineering Research Council and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council are dragging their feet on implementing mandates.  NSERC is waiting for CISTI?s IRSSHRC has concerns because many of the publishers in the social sciences and humanities are quite small society publishers  They are concerned about the impact of OA on sustainability.  Two pilot projects are being carried out.  One providing funding to the publisher of journals for OA articles published.  There must be 250 readers and they must publish at least 2 times/year.  SYNERGIES is working to develop an infrastructure based on OJS software.*UBC?s IR is called cIRcle.  We had a contest and one of the library staff developed this name.  The logo is from one of the buildings and represents research and knowledge pursued at UBC*cIRcle began as a pilot project.  It took a long while to get off the ground due to internal politics. Once we started the response to the call for library volunteers was really great. We developed a project charter with one year goals and had a senior team responsible for ensuring the work had only 1.25 staff resources,  the volunteer participation really helped.  We chose dspace*Several volunteer teams were created that focused on various aspects with getting the IR going.  Because there were so many people involved it was easier to promote within the library. Our method for getting researchers interested was to educate liaison subject librarians who would talk to faculty.  This is ongoing.  The first year was really cIRcle functioning.   *At the end of the pilot we had achieved several things.  A repository with a website that researchers could self enter their publications.  Interest from the senior university administrators including some funding.  We increased the staffing although it would be probably be nice to have more.  We have improved the dspace functionality so that could offer some of things that researchers were asking and also that we needed.  We have a backup server at another campus location.*As of earlier this week there were 7436 documents.  Most of these are not faculty publications.  A lot are thesis.  We have a relationship with the Office of Research Services and also the UBC press.  We have organized the IR by communities which is how dspace works.  This follows the organizational model of universities so it is good.  The Faculty of Education are very supportive.  John  Willinsky of the PKP project who developed Open Journal Software worked at UBC Education before moving to Stanford so this faculty has a good level of awareness.  They wanted some things that the earlier version of dspace didn?t provide.  We are now upgrading so now we should be able to get lots of education material into the repository.  We hope that this will encourage other faculties to participate more. *Here are the current communities*There are lots of different kinds of material in cIRcle.  There was a strong interest in having quality -4th year Undergraduate research papers added.  In the past, some of these papers in print format have had a lot of use in the libraries.  There are also podcasts of lectures, some of which our librarians recorded. This work has raised the profile of cIRcle*Our policies are listed on the website.  We consulted ARL speckits and with other IR?s in developing these.  We think that these are key policies.  We have consulted with our community in developing them.  One that has had a lot of discussion is the Preservation/Withdrawal policy.  People wanted to able to remove items.  A compromise is that material can be ?removed? from public view for reasons of inaccuracym plagiarism, copyright issues, national security.  Community administrators have a significant role in administering policies for their faculty.  Another important policy relates to distribution.  All contributors must sign a license regarding agreeing to the policies of IR and what UBC Library?s responsibilities are.  One challenge we are having is being able to track those signed agreements. *These are 3 projects that we are very excited about.  If we can link the CV database to the IR this will increase its profile.  The Office of Research Services works with all funded researchers so they will be a key group to help promote the IR. The UBC Press project is a bit different.  It is political relationship that increase the cIRcle profile at the senior university level.  We think there is lots of potential to assist the press with the distribution of electronic materials that accompany their books.  Just recently the UBC Library administration approved funding to focus on the Olympics.  This is a cross disciplinary area that will increase the profile of the IR on campus and beyond*Our eThesis project has been very successful.  After the pilot the voluntary submission rate was about 75%.  We digitize anything that comes in print format so all current thesis are included.   Many of the older thesis were not bound so they are easy to digitize.  We couldn?t get copyright clearance from all past graduates so we promoted this project in the alumni magazine so UBC grads would know and we asked them to let us know if they didn?t want their thesis digitized.  If anyone contacts us we will take it out.Thesis are harvested quarterly by the National Library and Archives Canada.  This was hard to get working but now it is fine.  All Canadian electronic thesis are harvested and available through the National Library and Archives where the print thesis went previously.  Also google harvests.*At UBC we have some other digital collections that are not in dspace.  We consider them to be part of the IR conceptually but as yet they cant be searched together.  Most of the material digitized to date is special.*We consider these to be the successes of our pilot which is now an ongoing program of the library.  We will be working to build on the awareness that exists in some faculties.*There were also some challenges.  We have increased the staffing levels.  Like all IR?s which I am aware of ingestion of published work is challenging.  We will continue to work on this.  We are working on improving our services for scholars with the @mire contract. I think that in Canada we need to develop some formal networks and work on some collaborative project similar to what I have learned on my leave. Finally we are still figuring out how to manage the licenses our faculty sign with us.*During my study leave I was fortunate to attend the Bielefeld conference in February 2009 and I visited with several institutions.  Most of them participate in IR networks*I have learned a lot from my visits.  One that was surprising to me was the interest of governments in Europe in Open Access and in promoting the concept of the value of information as an economic good.  Such that escience and access to information produced through publicly funded research are objectives.  I realize that there is not always funding or mandates but at least there is a profile. I don?t think that this is true in Canada.  In fact, the National Research Council was responsible for publishing 16 journals.  While they were not OA as yet, they were subsidized and there was interest in moving this direction.  The current government has decided to outsource this to the private sector and already the costs of subscriptions have increased.*I was very impressed with what I learned about the networks supporting IR work in Europe.  DRIVER, JISC, DARE etc.  I saw the value in working at advocacy together as researchers are often aligned with others at different institutions so it is good to have the same story out there.  Getting a repository going for small institutions until they can host their own is very positive.  This way the librarians can ensure that their researcher?s work is available and yet not have to solve all of the technology issues to get started.  The work that is done in Belgium in having an IR Managers group that meets regularly to discuss problems and successes has helped move IR?s along there.  Having projects like CREAM of SCIENCE which should happen at a regional or national or international level can get good participation from senior administrators and researchers.  Networks are helpful in developing superior search tools that go beyond google capabilities.  The text-mining ability of the tool inTute will allow researcher to do deep database searching in the text of the documents across disciplines and organizations. It will improve cross disciplinary searching  Tools like OpenDOAR assist with this development.  Also tools like Juliet, Romeo are valuable within the networks they were created for but also for all the world to use.  Ensuring common standards assists with interoperability.  Networks can also act as mentors for organizations starting IR?s and they can be considering the future such as projects that SURF is working on relating to data repositories.*I heard continuously that it is very difficult to get scholars to add to IR?s. Most don?t and can?t add to their already large workload.  They must perceive real benefits.  Many still don?t understand the importance and value of Open Access. So tools that can help scholars in their work are important such as being able to produce bibliographies of their work, upload to their own websites, get statistics on the usage including citations to their articles, making it easy, simple, painless to deposit. Providing incentives such as recognition or funding.  Keeping them apprised of new developments.  Some people thought mandates would be important and while they are useful, within an institution, it is somewhat like using a stick rather than a carrot.  Currently yearly ingestion rates at best are 39%.  We have a long way to go.*Education is really important. We need researchers to think about where they publish so that their articles can be archived for OA.  Also, our IR?s must be seen as being reliable and trustworthy.  This is very important to scholars.  For university administrators, we want to show that IR?s will increase the profile of the university.  Increased content that is valuable and used will increase the use of the universities website.*My discussions with folks working in the IR field were interesting in the data area.  There are already data repositories in some fields often managed by the researchers themselves for such areas as genetics, astronomy and other areas.  There are many other disciplines where the data is lost.  It is recognized that the data structures are not common across disciplines and sometime not even within disciplines.  We will have to work closely with researchers in the various disciplines to determine the structures and packaging for data deposit.  Some questions that haven?t been answered to date is whether data repositories should be discipline based across institutions or institution specific.  How can we really ensure the long term preservation across the years, 10 years, 25 years, 50 years, 100 years, more.  Do we need to also preserve the access methods for the data.  How do we migrate these?  *Who will provide the metadata, keywords, and descriptions.  Most librarians lack the in-depth subject knowledge.  Can this be automated?There needs to be persistent identifiers to the data so that if it is moved, links to it will not be lost.   We need to recognize the storage volume that would be needed to manage the current amount of data and that this will grow.The best approach is to start some pilots and move from there. The pilots will be about learning so that effective decisions can be made.  SURF/DRIVER are working in this area.  Others should as well, probably at a network levelOne form of data that we may all deal with in the short term are enhanced documents.  Where researchers have added additional information to the initial document such as comments, links to other work.etc.  A question then is ?what is the final document??  There is a DRIVER project on enhanced documents*I talked to several institutions about organizational models for IR support.  Sometimes IR work occurs within the library, sometimes it occurs within the faculty of information science, sometimes it occurs within the computing dept. Sometimes faculty have taken on creating departmental IR. As these projects are in their infancy, there are lots of models. I think that the key is for library staff to get involved with promoting this work with their faculty and educating them about OA and institutional repositories.*Some other things I learned. There is a strong desire for IR?s to contain full-text of published articles however most contain other materials as well.  Some librarians would like the IR?s to be pure.  I think we need to find mechanisms to pull the full-text published material for when it is needed that way such as for the BASE search tool.  There is currently a higher proportion of metadata than full-text in most repositories.  Those IR?s which have been able to pick a focus have been more successful at getting a good initial ingestion rate.  Projects such as the Netherland?s Cream of Science, and in Germany, libraries took advantage of the change in copyright law to gain material pre 2007, or working with faculty focused on a particular project such as in Ghent where architectural drawings, digitization of the Piranesi sketches and an interest in the Library Tower created a project synergy.I also learned about the Research Assessment process in the UK.  Here researchers were to submit their top papers to be part of an assessment that had an effect on funding outcomes  The process is currently being revised and there is hope that using the IR?s might become part of the process.I think that as we move forward we must work as partners with our researchers.  Advocacy and education are really important.  Also developing tools that are valuable for our researchers as part of the IR.IR?s cannot be static data warehouses.  They will not be filled or be supported.Finally we must work collaboratively in our nations and internationally to develop tools that will fulfill the potential of this IR work.  We can help each other and we will all benefit.Thank you very much for the opportunity to participate in your conference and share with you about UBC and my study leave work


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items