DOCSLIB.ORG

SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide The Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition 21 Dupont Circle • Washington, DC 20036 www.arl.org/sparc Prepared by Raym Crow, SPARC Senior Consultant SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide Acknowledgements SPARC and the author wish to thank the many people whose comments have shaped this document. We would especially like to thank Chris Gutteridge of the University of Southampton and EPrints; Ed Sponsler and Kim Douglas of the Caltech Libraries; and MacKenzie Smith of the MIT Libraries and DSpace. The benefit of their experience and insight has improved this Guide immeasurably. Any errors or omissions that remain, however, are the sole responsibility of SPARC and the author. This document will be revised and updated on an ongoing basis as new information warrants. To comment on this document, please contact Raym Crow at [email protected]. SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide Release 1.0 November 2002 © SPARC, 2002 Permission is granted to reproduce, distribute or electronically post copies of this work for nonprofit educational purposes, provided that the author, source, and copyright notices are included on each copy. This permission is in addition to the rights of reproduction granted under Sections 107, 108, and other provisions of the U.S. Copyright Act. These items may be further forwarded and distributed so long as the statement of copyright remains intact. All trademarks and service marks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners. Page 2 of 51 SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................Page 5 The Institutional Repository................................................................................... 5 Document Purpose .................................................................................................. 5 Intended Audience .................................................................................................. 6 SECURING ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT ............................................................ 6 New Scholarly Publishing Paradigm ...................................................................... 7 Institutional Visibility and Prestige........................................................................ 7 Impact of Institutional Repositories on the Existing Publishing System .............. 8 Cost Issues ............................................................................................................... 9 Intellectual Property Issues .................................................................................. 10 Resources & Further Reading: Securing Administration Support ............................. 10 SECURING FACULTY PARTICIPATION ............................................................. 11 Primary Author Benefits....................................................................................... 11 Benefits to Teaching Faculty................................................................................. 12 Resources & Further Reading: Benefits to Faculty ............................................... 12 Addressing Faculty Objections............................................................................. 12 Impediment to Publication................................................................................. 13 Resources & Further Reading: Concerns About Impeding Publication ...................... 14 Quality Control & Perception ............................................................................ 14 Resources & Further Reading: Quality Control and Perception ............................... 15 Intellectual Property Issues & Author Rights ..................................................... 15 Author Rights.................................................................................................... 16 Resources & Further Reading: Intellectual Property Issues & Author Rights............... 18 Undermining the Existing Journal Publishing System........................................ 18 Resources & Further Reading: Coexistence with Scholarly Journals ......................... 19 Faculty Workload.............................................................................................. 19 Resources & Further Reading: Faculty Workload ................................................ 20 Impact of Discipline-specific Practices ................................................................. 20 Resources & Further Reading: Discipline-specific Differences................................ 21 Other Authors and Contributors: Students and Non-faculty Researchers ....... 22 LIBRARIANS: BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES................................................... 22 Resources & Further Reading: Librarians: Benefits & Challenges............................ 23 Encouraging Repository Participation................................................................. 23 Demonstration Programs ................................................................................... 24 REPOSITORY MANAGEMENT AND POLICY ISSUES ...................................... 24 Repository Content: Published Material.............................................................. 25 Repository Content: Gray Literature................................................................... 26 Preprints................................................................................................................ 26 Curriculum Support and Teaching Materials ..................................................... 29 Electronic Theses and Dissertations ..................................................................... 29 Page 3 of 51 SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide Resources & Further Reading: Institutional Repository Content Issues, Gray Literature, Benefits to Students..................................................................................... 29 Defining Repository Communities........................................................................ 30 User Groups ...................................................................................................... 30 Content Deposit Processes................................................................................. 31 Distribution Licenses............................................................................................. 32 Resources & Further Reading: Defining Repository Communities ........................... 33 TECHNICAL & SYSTEM ISSUES........................................................................... 33 Development & Operational Costs ....................................................................... 34 Ability to Migrate and Survive ............................................................................. 35 Resources & Further Reading: Technical System Issues, Institutional Repository System Overviews, EPrints Implementations................................................................ 36 Digital Content: Document Formats .................................................................... 37 Digital Content: Longevity.................................................................................... 37 Preservation Outsourcing ..................................................................................... 39 Scalability .............................................................................................................. 39 Resources & Further Reading: Digital Content: Formats & Preservation.................... 39 Persistent Naming: Digital Object Identifiers & the Handle System.................. 40 Interoperability & Open Access ........................................................................... 41 OAI-compliant Search Services............................................................................ 43 Resources & Further Reading: Interoperability & the Open Archives Initiative ................44 User Access & Rights Management...................................................................... 44 SOURCES CITED...................................................................................................... 46 APPENDIX: INSTITUTIONAL REPOSITORY IMPLEMENTATIONS.............. 48 Page 4 of 51 SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide INTRODUCTION The Institutional Repository Institutional repositories—used in this Checklist & Guide to indicate digital collections capturing and preserving the intellectual output of a single university or a multiple institution community of colleges and universities—provide a compelling response to two strategic imperatives of most academic institutions. Such repositories: Provide a critical catalyst and component in reforming the system of scholarly communication by expanding access to research, reasserting control over scholarship by the academy, and bringing heightened relevance to the institutions and libraries that support them; and Have the potential to serve as tangible indicators of an institution’s quality and to demonstrate the scientific, societal, and economic relevance of its research activities, thus increasing the institution’s visibility, status, and public value. Institutional repositories contribute as a logical extension of a university’s core mission and as a channel through which to increase institutional visibility. However, they can achieve far greater results in synergy with a network
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scientometrics1
    Scientometrics1 Loet Leydesdorff a and Staša Milojević b a Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam, Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; [email protected] b School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University, Bloomington 47405-1901, United States; [email protected]. Abstract The paper provides an overview of the field of scientometrics, that is: the study of science, technology, and innovation from a quantitative perspective. We cover major historical milestones in the development of this specialism from the 1960s to today and discuss its relationship with the sociology of scientific knowledge, the library and information sciences, and science policy issues such as indicator development. The disciplinary organization of scientometrics is analyzed both conceptually and empirically. A state-of-the-art review of five major research threads is provided. Keywords: scientometrics, bibliometrics, citation, indicator, impact, library, science policy, research management, sociology of science, science studies, mapping, visualization Cross References: Communication: Electronic Networks and Publications; History of Science; Libraries; Networks, Social; Merton, Robert K.; Peer Review and Quality Control; Science and Technology, Social Study of: Computers and Information Technology; Science and Technology Studies: Experts and Expertise; Social network algorithms and software; Statistical Models for Social Networks, Overview; 1 Forthcoming in: Micheal Lynch (Editor), International
    [Show full text]
  • The Serials Crisis and Open Access: a White Paper for the Virginia Tech Commission on Research
    The Serials Crisis and Open Access A White Paper for the Virginia Tech Commission on Research Philip Young University Libraries Virginia Tech December 2, 2009 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. 1 Introduction This white paper offers an introduction to open access as well as a look at its current development. The open access movement is an attempt to free scholarly communication from restrictions on access, control, and cost, and to enable benefits such as data mining and increased citations. Open access has gained significant momentum through mandates from research funders and universities. While open access can be provided in parallel with traditional publishing, it is increasingly available as a publishing option. While open access is approached here from the problem of subscription inflation, it is important to recognize that open access is not merely a library issue, but affects the availability of research to current and future students and scholars. The Serials Crisis The phrase “serials crisis” has been in use for more than a decade as shorthand for the rise in costs for academic journals and the inability of libraries to bring these costs under control. Price inflation for academic journals significantly exceeds the consumer price index (see graph, next page). The most recent data show that journal prices increased at an average rate of 8% in 2007.1 Because journal subscriptions are a large part of the collections budget at academic libraries, any reduction in funding usually results in a loss of some journals. And the high rate of annual inflation means that academic library budgets must increase every year simply to keep the same resources that students and faculty need.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is an Institutional Repository to Do? Implementing Open Access Harvesting Workflows
    publications Article What Is an Institutional Repository to Do? Implementing Open Access Harvesting Workflows Rachel Smart Office of Digital Research and Scholarship, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA; [email protected] Received: 16 March 2019; Accepted: 23 May 2019; Published: 27 May 2019 Abstract: In 2016, Florida State University adopted an institutional Open Access policy, and the library staff were tasked with implementing an outreach plan to contact authors and collect publication post-prints. In 2018, I presented at Open Repositories in Bozeman to share our workflow, methods, and results with the repository community. This workflow utilizes both restricted and open source methods of obtaining and creating research metadata and reaching out to authors to make their work more easily accessible and citable. Currently, post-print deposits added using this workflow are still in the double digits for each year since 2016. Like many institutions before us, participation rates of article deposit in the institutional repository are low and it may be too early in the implementation of this workflow to expect a real change in faculty participation. Keywords: open access policy; metadata; author outreach; web of science; open source; repositories 1. Introduction This content recruitment workflow is a component of a larger Open Access (OA) implementation plan proposed to the Florida State University (FSU) Faculty Senate by University Libraries staff following the adoption of an institutional OA policy in 2016. The challenge and goal of this plan is scaling repository operations by gathering author content and encouraging faculty to submit their manuscripts without the robust technical services of a commercial solution, such as Symplectic Elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Institutional Repositories Work “Making Institutional Repositories Work Sums It up Very Well
    Making Institutional Repositories Work “Making Institutional Repositories Work sums it up very well. This book, the first of its kind, explains how IRs work and how to get the greatest re- sults from them. As many of us know, numerous IRs launched with high hopes have in fact languished with lackluster results. Faculty have little in- terest, and administrators see little promise. But the many chapter authors of this very well edited book have made their IRs successful, and here they share their techniques and successes. This is a necessary book for anyone contemplating starting an IR or looking to resurrect a moribund one.” — Richard W. Clement Dean, College of University Libraries & Learning Sciences University of New Mexico “This volume presents an interesting cross-section of approaches to in- stitutional repositories in the United States. Just about every view and its opposite makes an appearance. Readers will be able to draw their own con- clusions, depending on what they see as the primary purpose of IRs.” — Stevan Harnad Professor, University of Québec at Montréal & University of Southampton “Approaching this volume as one of ‘those of us who have been furiously working to cultivate thriving repositories,’ I am very excited about what this text represents. It is a broad compilation featuring the best and brightest writing on all the topics I’ve struggled to understand around re- positories, and it also marks a point when repository management and de- velopment is looking more and more like a core piece of research library work. Callicott, Scherer, and Wesolek have pulled together all the things I wished I’d been able to read in my first year as a scholarly communication librarian.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring the Maturity of Open Source Software for Digital Libraries: a Case Study of Dspace
    Measuring the Maturity of Open Source Software for Digital Libraries: a Case Study of DSpace A Thesis submitted to the Cochin University of Science and Technology for the award of the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In Library and Information Science Under the Faculty of Technology by Surendran Cherukodan (Reg.No. 3540) Under the supervision of Dr. Humayoon Kabir S. Department of Computer Applications Cochin University of Science and Technology Cochin-22, Kerala, India. April 2015 Certificate Certified that the study presented in this thesis entitled “Measuring the Maturity of Open Source Software for Digital Libraries: a Case Study of DSpace” is a bonafide work done by Mr.Surendran Cherukodan, under my guidance in the Department of Computer Applications, Cochin University of Science and Technology and this work has not been included in any other thesis submitted previously for the award of any degree. Also certified that all the relevant corrections and modifications suggested by the audience during the pre-synopsis Seminar and recommended by the Doctoral Committee of the candidate have been incorporated in the thesis. Kochi Dr.Humayoon Kabir S. April 7, 2015 (Supervising Guide) Declaration I, Surendran Cherukodan, hereby declare that the thesis entitled “Measuring the Maturity of Open Source Software for Digital Libraries: a Case Study of DSpace” is the outcome of the original work done by me under the guidance of Dr. Humayoon Kabir S., Associate Professor, Department of Library and Information Science, University of Kerala, and that the work did not form part of any dissertation submitted for the award of any degree, diploma, associateship, or any other title or recognition from any University/Institution.
    [Show full text]
  • Will Sci-Hub Kill the Open Access Citation Advantage and (At Least for Now) Save Toll Access Journals?
    Will Sci-Hub Kill the Open Access Citation Advantage and (at least for now) Save Toll Access Journals? David W. Lewis October 2016 © 2016 David W. Lewis. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Introduction It is a generally accepted fact that open access journal articles enjoy a citation advantage.1 This citation advantage results from the fact that open access journal articles are available to everyone in the word with an Internet collection. Thus, anyone with an interest in the work can find it and use it easily with no out-of-pocket cost. This use leads to citations. Articles in toll access journals on the other hand, are locked behind paywalls and are only available to those associated with institutions who can afford the subscription costs, or who are willing and able to purchase individual articles for $30 or more. There has always been some slippage in the toll access journal system because of informal sharing of articles. Authors will usually send copies of their work to those who ask and sometime post them on their websites even when this is not allowable under publisher’s agreements. Stevan Harnad and his colleagues proposed making this type of author sharing a standard semi-automated feature for closed articles in institutional repositories.2 The hashtag #ICanHazPDF can be used to broadcast a request for an article that an individual does not have access to.3 Increasingly, toll access articles are required by funder mandates to be made publically available, though usually after an embargo period.
    [Show full text]
  • Different Preservation Levels: the Case of Scholarly Digital Editions
    Oltmanns, E, et al. 2019. Different Preservation Levels: The Case of Scholarly Digital Editions. Data Science Journal, 18: 51, pp. 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2019-051 RESEARCH PAPER Different Preservation Levels: The Case of Scholarly Digital Editions Elias Oltmanns, Tim Hasler, Wolfgang Peters-Kottig and Heinz-Günter Kuper Department Scientific Information, Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum für Informationstechnik Berlin, DE Corresponding author: Elias Oltmanns ([email protected]) Ensuring the long-term availability of research data forms an integral part of data management services. Where OAIS compliant digital preservation has been established in recent years, in almost all cases the services aim at the preservation of file-based objects. In the Digital Human- ities, research data is often represented in highly structured aggregations, such as Scholarly Digital Editions. Naturally, scholars would like their editions to remain functionally complete as long as possible. Besides standard components like webservers, the presentation typically relies on project specific code interacting with client software like webbrowsers. Especially the latter being subject to rapid change over time invariably makes such environments awkward to maintain once funding has ended. Pragmatic approaches have to be found in order to balance the curation effort and the maintainability of access to research data over time. A sketch of four potential service levels aiming at the long-term availability of research data in the humanities is outlined: (1) Continuous Maintenance, (2) Application Conservation, (3) Application Data Preservation, and (4) Bitstream Preservation. The first being too costly and the last hardly satisfactory in general, we suggest that the implementation of services by an infrastructure provider should concentrate on service levels 2 and 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping Scientometrics (1981-2001)
    Mapping Scientometrics (1981 -2001) Chaomei Chen College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Email: [email protected] Katherine McCain College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Email: kate .mccai n@cis .drexel . ed u Howard White College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Email: [email protected] Xia Lin College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Email: xia .I in@cis . d rexel. edu We investigate an integrated approach to co-citation analysis could lead to a clearer picture of the scientometric studies with emphasis to the use of cognitive content of publications (Braam, Moed, & Raan, information visualization and animation 1991a, 1991b). techniques. This study draws upon citation and In Little Science, Big Science, Derek de Solla Price co-citation patterns derived from articles (1963) raised some of the most fundamental questions that published in the journal Scientornetrics (1981- have led to the scientometric study today: Why should we 2001). The modeling and visualization takes an not turn the tools of science on science itself? Why not evolutionary and historical perspective. The measure and generalize, make hypotheses, and derive design of the visualization model adapts a virtual conclusions? He used the metaphor of studying the landscape metaphor with document cocitation behavior of gas in thermodynamics as an analogue of the networks as the base map and annual citation science of science. Thermodynamics studies the behavior of rates as the thematic overlay. The growth of gas under various conditions of temperature and pressure, citation rates is presented through an animation but the focus is not on the trajectory of a specific molecule.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Three Open Source Software in Terms of Managing Repositories of Electronic Theses and Dissertations: a Comparison Study
    ISSN 2090-4304 J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 2(11)10843-10852, 2012 Journal of Basic and Applied © 2012, TextRoad Publication Scientific Research www.textroad.com Evaluation of Three Open Source Software in Terms of Managing Repositories of Electronic Theses and Dissertations: A Comparison Study Mohamad Noorman Masrek1, Hesamedin Hakimjavadi2 1 Accounting Research Institute and Faculty of Information Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah Alam, Malaysia 2Faculty of Information Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah Alam, Malaysia ABSTRACT Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs), as a new generation of scholarship resources, are gradually increasing in number and quality at higher academic institutions. Meanwhile, by introducing various types of software solutions for managing Institutional Repositories (IRs), selection of appropriate solutions has become a time- consuming process for institutions. The goal of this paper was to appraise 59 features of three widely utilized open source IR solutions (DSpace, EPrints, Fedora) from the perspective of managing ETDs, via an in-depth evaluation of their important functionalities in this regard. For this purpose, all applications were installed and the features were tested in a test-bed environment (a benchmark machine) with a predefined set of ETD collections and registered users. Findings related to assessment of each feature were presented in the tabular format. Our comparison indicated that, although all three solutions are capable of managing ETD systems, in most of the comparative areas that are vital for an ETD repository DSpace was ahead of EPrints and Fedora. KEY WORDS: Institutional Repository, DSpace, EPrints, Fedora, Open-source software assessment. INTRODUCTION Nowadays, there is a broad consensus on the vital importance of openness and dissemination of scientific information resources over the Web.
    [Show full text]
  • IRUS-UK: Standardised Institutional Repository Usage Statistics
    IRUS-UK: standardised institutional repository usage statistics Paul Needham, IRUS-UK and COUNTER Two Approaches for Accurately Counting IR Usage: RAMP and IRUS-UK CARL and COAR Webinar Tuesday, October 3, 1:00-2:00 p.m. ET (19:00-20:00 CEST) Who is responsible for IRUS-UK? • Funded by Jisc • Team Members: – Jisc – Service Management & Host – Cranfield University – Service Development & Maintenance – Evidence Base, Birmingham City University – User Engagement & Evaluation Bringing together key repository services to deliver a connected national infrastructure to support OA What is IRUS-UK? A national aggregation service for UK Institutional Repository Usage Statistics: • Collects raw download data from UK IRs for *all item types* within repositories • Processes raw data into COUNTER-conformant statistics - so produced on the same basis as ‘traditional’ scholarly publishers About COUNTER • Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources – an international initiative serving librarians, publishers and intermediaries – setting standards that facilitate the recording and reporting of online usage statistics – consistent, credible and comparable • COUNTER Codes of Practice: – Release 4 of the COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources • Books, databases , journals and multimedia content – Release 1 of the COUNTER Code of Practice for Articles • Journal articles • The Codes specify: – How raw data should be processed into statistics – How statistics reports should be formatted and delivered The Tracker Protocol • To enable repositories
    [Show full text]
  • Eprints Institutional Repository Software: a Review
    Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 5, no. 2 (2010) Eprints Institutional Repository Software: A Review Mike Beazley Academic librarian Vaughan Memorial Library, Acadia University [email protected] Keywords Institutional Repository, Eprints, Review, Software, Open-Source Abstract Setting up an institutional repository (IR) can be a daunting task. There are many software packages out there, some commercial, some open source, all of which offer different features and functionality. This article will provide some thoughts about one of these software packages: Eprints. Eprints is open-source, and the software is easy to modify. This presents clear advantages for institutions will smaller budgets and that have programmers on staff. Installation and initial configuration are straightforward and once the IR is up and running, users can easily upload documents by filling out a simple web form. Eprints is an excellent choice for any institution looking to get an IR up and running quickly and easily, although it is less clear that an institution with an existing IR based on another software package should migrate to Eprints. Introduction Setting up an institutional repository (IR) can be a daunting task. There are many software packages out there, some commercial, some open source, all of which offer different features and functionality. This article will provide some thoughts about one of these software packages: Eprints. Eprints was one of the first IR software packages to appear and has been available for 10 years. It is under continual development by its creators at the University of Southampton and the current version is v3.2.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutional Repository: a Road Map to Open Access and Resources Sharing in Nigeria (Issues and Challenges)
    International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 1, January-2015 598 ISSN 2229-5518 Institutional Repository: A Road Map to Open Access and Resources Sharing in Nigeria (Issues and Challenges) Sani Murtala Ridwan Kashim Ibrahim Library, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria Kaduna-Nigeria Contact: [email protected] Phone no. +2348068877574 +201116942299 Abstract- Nigeria with higher number of universities and research institutions compared to any other country in sub-Saharan Africa produce large volume of research outputs that are of paramount value to scholarly. Institutional repositories are contemporary services academic research institutions render to its community members in the form of managing and disseminating of their intellectual works through a digital medium, open access IR have been found to play an important role in the preservation and dissemination of institutional research outputs which will in turn become a constituent part of a global research outputs especially in Nigeria with that higher number of universities and research institutions. This paper highlighted the conceptual framework of institutional repository, definitions, benefit, institutional repository software systems, open access institutional repository in Nigeria, resource sharing and some the challenges in Nigerian institutions. Keywords- Institutional Repository, Open Access, Resources Sharing, Issues, Challenges —————————— —————————— 1 INTRODUCTION Institutional repositories are been established in academic libraries. University based institutional repositories manage, disseminate and preserve where appropriate, digital materials created by the institution and its community members. They also organize and access these materials, (Lynch 2003). The growth of open access institutional digital repositories has been very remarkable in developed countries as well as some developing countries like Brazil, India and South Africa (Christian, 2008).
    [Show full text]