DOCSLIB.ORG

Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open Portland State University PDXScholar Library Faculty Publications and Presentations University Library 10-2019 Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open Jill Emery Portland State University, [email protected] Graham Stone Jisc Peter McCracken Cornell University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/ulib_fac Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Emery, J., Stone, G., & McCracken, P. (2020). Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: Terms and the Transition to Open. Chicago: American Library Association. 10.15760/lib-01 This Book is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Library Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. TECHNIQUES FOR ELECTRONIC RESOURCE MANAGEMENT From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. ALA Editions purchases fund advocacy, awareness, and accreditation programs for library professionals worldwide. From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. TECHNIQUES FOR ELECTRONIC RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TERMS and the Transition to Open JILL EMERY GRAHAM STONE and PETER McCRACKEN CHICAGO 2020 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. Available in print from the ALA Store and distributors. 2020 © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). Extensive effort has gone into ensuring the reliability of the information in this book; however, the publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein. ISBN: 987-0-8389-1904-0 (paper) Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Emery, Jill, author. | Stone, Graham (Librarian), author. | McCracken, Peter, author. Title: Techniques for electronic resource management : TERMS and the transition to open / Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. Description: Chicago : ALA Editions, 2020. | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “Growing open access options, big-deal price pressure, fluid ebook purchasing models. You need a framework for managing the many details of your online material. TERMS – Techniques for Electronic Resource Management Systems – gave you one. Now its creators, mining 5 years of notes and with input from many voices in the field, have updated their influential life cycle model. In six sections you will circle through selection, procurement and licensing, implementation, troubleshooting, evaluation, and preservation and sustainability. The book’s structure supports easy reference whether a single team manages electronic resources or if responsibility is spread across the library organization. Each section breaks into six categories which in turn give guidance in three areas: Basic (80 percent of issues with electronic resources), Complex, and the growing universe of Open Access resources”— Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2019024842 | ISBN 9780838919040 (paperback) Subjects: LCSH: Libraries—Special collections—Electronic information resources. | Electronic information resources—Management. | Open access publishing. Classification: LCC Z692.C65 E47 2019 | DDC 025.2/84—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019024842 Cover design by Kim Thornton. Text design in the Chaparral, Gotham, and Bell Gothic typefaces. This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). Printed in the United States of America 24 23 22 21 20 5 4 3 2 1 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. Contents List of Illustrations ix Acknowledgments xi 1 | What’s New with TERMS 1 Influence of TERMs 3 Intention 4 Structural Updates 4 Audience 8 Design 9 Notes 11 2 | Investigating New Content for Purchase and Addition 15 Introduction 15 1. Request 16 2. Developing Selection Criteria 21 3. Completing the Review Form 24 4. Analyzing and Reviewing 27 5. Establishing a Trial and Contacting Vendors 28 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, / v by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. vi / CONTENTS 6. Making a Decision 30 Notes 32 3 | Purchasing and Licensing 35 Introduction 35 1. Establishing Negotiation Criteria 37 2. Common Points of Negotiation in License Agreements 40 3. License Review and Signature 47 4. Negotiating and Renegotiating Contracts 49 5. Working with Other Departments and Areas on Resource Contracts 54 6. Recording Administrative Metadata 56 Notes 58 4 | Implementation 63 Introduction 63 1. Access 65 2. Descriptive Metadata Management 74 3. Administrative Portals and Metadata 79 4. Subject Portals, Reading Lists Management Systems, Courseware, and Local Digital Collections Discovery 80 5. Testing Access 83 6. Branding and Marketing 84 Notes 86 5 | Troubleshooting 91 Introduction 91 1. A Systematic Approach to Troubleshooting 93 2. Common Problems 98 3. Metadata 105 4. Tools for Troubleshooting 107 5. Communication in Troubleshooting 110 6. Negative Impact of End Users Giving Up 113 Notes 114 6 | Assessment 117 Introduction 117 1. Performance of the Resource against the Selection Criteria and Troubleshooting Feedback 119 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. CONTENTS / vii 2. Usage Statistics 125 3. Cost per Download 130 4. Non-Traditional Bibliometrics 133 5. Consultation 137 6. Cancellation Review 141 Notes 144 7 | Preservation and Sustainability 151 Introduction 151 1. Choosing What to Preserve and Sustain 152 2. Developing Preservation and Sustainability Plans 157 3. Metadata Needed for Preservation 160 4. Local Preservation Options (Servers, Media Drives, LOCKSS/ CLOCKSS, MetaArchive) 163 5. Cloud-Based Options (Archive-It, Portico, Media Portals, DPLA Hubs, Shared Preservation Structure) 164 6. Exit Strategy 166 Notes 171 8 | Conclusion 179 The Next Major Collection Topic: Data and Other Scholarly Outputs 180 The Next Major Procurement and Licensing Topic: Significant OA Growth 181 The Next Major Implementation Topics: Knowledge Bases and Persistent Identifiers 182 The Next Major Troubleshooting Topic: Web Browser Plug-ins 183 The Next Major Assessment Topics: COUNTER Release 5 and Book Data Enhancements 183 The Next Major Preservation Topic: Preservation of Non-Traditional Scholarly Outputs 184 Open Access as a Real Alternative? 184 Notes 187 Glossary 191 About the Authors 197 Index 199 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. Illustrations Tables 2.1 Examples of Institutional and Consortial Collection, Management, and Development Policies 18 3.1 Negotiation Deal Breakers 41 5.1 Decision Grid to Support Problem Reporting 95 5.2 Browser Rubric 103 6.1 Negotiation Deal Breakers 120 7.1 Resource Retention Chart Example 153 Figures 1.1 Pesch’s Electronic Resources Lifecycle 1 1.2 TERMs Version 1 2 1.3 OA Tube Map 3 1.4 Open Science Is . 7 1.5 Subdivisions of TERMs Sections 10 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, / ix by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. x / ILLUSTRATIONS 2.1 UC Libraries Star Team Transformative Scholarly Communications Initiatives Review Process 26 3.1 Example License Agreement Signature Relationship 48 3.2 Checklist for Tender or RFP 49 3.3 Administrative Metadata to Capture 56 4.1 PassKey from Cornell University 72 4.2 Portland State University Library Accounting and Finance LibGuide 81 4.3 Contextually Aware Library Widget for D2L (Desire2Learn) at Portland State University 82 5.1 Sample Web Form for Error Reporting #1 94 5.2 Sample Web Form for Error Reporting #2 96 5.3 University of Strathclyde, Library eResources Status Web Page 111 5.4 Oregon Health & Science University, Workshops: Research Communication and Impact 114 6.1 Tools Regularly Used by Respondents 134 6.2 Metrics Toolkit Logo 135 From Techniques for Electronic Resource Management: TERMS and the Transition to Open, by Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken (Chicago: American Library Association, 2020). © Jill Emery, Graham Stone, and Peter McCracken. Acknowledgments his version of the content grew out of conversations and interactions and from
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Measured Approach
    DRAFT Chapter Six A Measured Approach Evaluating Altmetrics as a Library Service Hui Zhang and Korey Jackson [6.0] The emergence of altmetrics has drawn the attention of academic libraries as a new and effective approach for capturing the types of impact often ignored by traditional citation-based metrics. At Oregon State University Libraries, before investing in a full-scale implementation of altmetrics services, we conducted an assessment survey of faculty and other researchers in order to determine whether such products were as valuable to researchers as tradition- al bibliometrics (including h-index and journal impact factor). Based on the survey results, this chapter seeks to understand best practices for the intro- duction and implementation of altmetrics services. The results reveal a mix- ture of both enthusiasm and suspicion toward altmetrics as an impact meas- ure. Ultimately, we find that, while academic libraries are in the best position to act as intermediary providers of altmetrics services, there is much need for refinement of altmetrics evaluation techniques and a more robust set of best practices for institution-wide implementation. [6.1] INTRODUCTION [6.2] The term altmetrics has already become familiar to many librarians, and as more libraries and journal publishers add altmetrics data to their scholarly content, the term is finding currency among researchers as well. But the actual practice of altmetrics—which we define as the “tracking of multichan- nel, online use and conversation around a discrete piece of scholarship”—has yet to gain wide acceptance among scholars, in part because scholarly and administrative motivations for adoption have not yet appeared.
    [Show full text]
  • MAJ 04/2021, Cf. Feuilletage Ci-Dessous
    Recherche d’informations sur Internet (perfectionnement) méthodologie et outils disponibles A. Bouchard 04/2021 Pour commencer Principes Moteurs de recherche Sites internet Bases de données bibliographiques Autres bases de données textuelles Images et multimédia Web social Actualités et temps réel Quelques outils complémentaires Veille automatisée Exercices de synthèse Bibliographie Principes Internet ? web ? • internet • réseau de réseaux • fin des années 1960 • protocole TCP/IP • applications et services divers : courrier électronique (mail), messagerie instantanée (IM), forums de discussion, transfert de fichiers (FTP), pair à pair (P2P), web (www)… • données • utilisateurs : 5,1 MM. dans le monde (Internet World Stats, 2020) • langues : 61 % du contenu en anglais, 2,8 % en français (W3Techs, 2021) • voir également Internet live stats Internet ? web ? • Web • World Wide Web (www) • milieu des années 1990 • ensemble de pages HTML (textes, images, liens…) avec une URL et accessibles avec le protocole HTTP • web visible / web invisible • web invisible ou web profond (deep web) : partie du web non indexée et qui ne peut être trouvée par les moteurs de recherche (pages protégées par un mot de passe, pages générées dynamiquement à la suite d’une requête…), voire dark web (web illégal) : 95 % du total ? • taille • 1,2 MM. de sites (Netcraft) • web indexé : au moins 5,3 milliards de pages (Worldwidewebsize) • taille du web identifié (URL connues) ? web général ? Internet ? web ? Ascodocpsy ConceptArt multimédia, 2010 Les âges du web du web âges Les Méthodologie • DEBUSQUER l’information Différents outils Esprit critique Bookmark organisé URL significative Syntaxe de recherche Questions préalables Utilisation réfléchie Evaluation Règles à respecter d’après Eduscol. Rechercher sur internet Méthodologie 1° définir le sujet (contexte de la recherche et mots-clés) Questions Prendre du temps au départ pour en gagner par la suite..
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Future of Scholarly Publishing
    THE OPEN SCIENCE INITIATIVE WORKING GROUP Mapping the Future of Scholarly Publishing The Open Science Initiative (OSI) is a working group convened by the National Science Communi- cation Institute (nSCI) in October 2014 to discuss the issues regarding improving open access for the betterment of science and to recommend possible solutions. The following document summa- rizes the wide range of issues, perspectives and recommendations from this group’s online conver- sation during November and December 2014 and January 2015. The 112 participants who signed up to participate in this conversation were drawn mostly from the academic, research, and library communities. Most of these 112 were not active in this conversa- tion, but a healthy diversity of key perspectives was still represented. Individual participants may not agree with all of the viewpoints described herein, but participants agree that this document reflects the spirit and content of the conversation. This main body of this document was written by Glenn Hampson and edited by Joyce Ogburn and Laura Ada Emmett. Additional editorial input was provided by many members of the OSI working group. Kathleen Shearer is the author of Annex 5, with editing by Dominque Bambini and Richard Poynder. CC-BY 2015 National Science Communication Institute (nSCI) www.nationalscience.org [email protected] nSCI is a US-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization First edition, January 2015 Final version, April 2015 Recommended citation: Open Science Initiative Working Group, Mapping the Future of Scholarly
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal Impact Factor Should Not Be Discarded
    OPINION Editing, Writing & Publishing https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2017.32.2.180 • J Korean Med Sci 2017; 32: 180-182 The Journal Impact Factor Should Not Be Discarded Lutz Bornmann1 and Alexander I. Pudovkin2 1Division for Science and Innovation Studies, Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society, Munich, Germany; 2A. V. Zhirmunsky Institute of Marine Biology, Far Eastern Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok, Russian Federation Journal editors and experts in scientometrics are increasingly calculation. In contrast to the JIF, the new CiteScore metric con- concerned with the reliability of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF, siders the papers from 3 years (instead of 2 years). Clarivate Analytics, formerly the IP & Science business of Thom- As such, the JIF (and also the CiteScore) covers rather short son Reuters) as a tool for assessing the influence of scholarly term of interest toward papers (i.e., interest at the research front) journals. A paper byLarivière et al. (1), which was reposited on and overlooks long-term implications of publication activity bioarXiv portal and commented on in Nature (2), reminded all (the so-called sticky knowledge) (7). Focus on the short-term stakeholders of science communication that the citability of attention of the field-specific community makes sense since most papers in an indexed journal deviates significantly from the JIF was initially designed to guide librarians purchase the its JIF. These authors recommend to display journal citation dis- most used modern periodicals for their libraries. Accordingly, tribution instead of the JIF, and the proposal is widely discussed the JIF cannot and should not be employed for evaluating the on social networking platforms (3,4).
    [Show full text]
  • Do You Speak Open Science? Resources and Tips to Learn the Language
    Do You Speak Open Science? Resources and Tips to Learn the Language. Paola Masuzzo1, 2 - ORCID: 0000-0003-3699-1195, Lennart Martens1,2 - ORCID: 0000- 0003-4277-658X Author Affiliation 1 Medical Biotechnology Center, VIB, Ghent, Belgium 2 Department of Biochemistry, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Abstract The internet era, large-scale computing and storage resources, mobile devices, social media, and their high uptake among different groups of people, have all deeply changed the way knowledge is created, communicated, and further deployed. These advances have enabled a radical transformation of the practice of science, which is now more open, more global and collaborative, and closer to society than ever. Open science has therefore become an increasingly important topic. Moreover, as open science is actively pursued by several high-profile funders and institutions, it has fast become a crucial matter to all researchers. However, because this widespread interest in open science has emerged relatively recently, its definition and implementation are constantly shifting and evolving, sometimes leaving researchers in doubt about how to adopt open science, and which are the best practices to follow. This article therefore aims to be a field guide for scientists who want to perform science in the open, offering resources and tips to make open science happen in the four key areas of data, code, publications and peer-review. The Rationale for Open Science: Standing on the Shoulders of Giants One of the most widely used definitions of open science originates from Michael Nielsen [1]: “Open science is the idea that scientific knowledge of all kinds should be openly shared as early as is practical in the discovery process”.
    [Show full text]
  • Aggregating Research Papers from Publishers' Systems to Support Text
    Aggregating Research Papers from Publishers’ Systems to Support Text and Data Mining: Deliberate Lack of Interoperability or Not? Petr Knoth, Nancy Pontika The Open University Walton Drive, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom [email protected], [email protected] Abstract In the current technology dominated world, interoperability of systems managed by different organisations is an essential property enabling the provision of services at a global scale. In the Text and Data Mining field (TDM), interoperability of systems offering access to text corpora offers the opportunity of increasing the uptake and impact of TDM applications. The global corpus of all research papers, i.e. the collection of human knowledge so large no one can ever read in their lifetime, represents one of the most exciting opportunities for TDM. Although the Open Access movement, which has been advocating for free availability and reuse rights to TDM from research papers, has achieved some major successes on the legal front, the technical interoperability of systems offering free access to research papers continues to be a challenge. COnnecting REpositories (CORE) (Knoth and Zdrahal, 2012) aggregates the world’s open access full-text scientific manuscripts from repositories, journals and publisher systems. One of the main goals of CORE is to harmonise and pre-process these data to lower the barrier for TDM. In this paper, we report on the preliminary results of an interoperability survey of systems provided by journal publishers, both open access and toll access. This helps us to assess the current level of systems’ interoperability and suggest ways forward. Keywords: Interoperability, publishers, standardisation 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Exposing Dmps: Use Cases, Workflows and Guidelines
    Exposing DMPs: Use cases, workflows and guidelines Case statement for community review July 2017 Contributors David Carr - The Wellcome Trust John Chodacki, California Digital Library John Faundeen, Earth Resources Observation Center, USGS Bev Jones University of Lincoln Natalie Meyers, Centre for Open Science/ University of Notre Dame Paul Millar, DESY Fiona Murphy, MMC Ltd Kathryn Unsworth, Australian National Data Service Angus Whyte, Digital Curation Centre (Editor) Elena Zudilova-Seinstra, Elsevier Working Group Charter A variety of stakeholders are showing growing interest in exposing data management plans (*) to other actors (human/machine) in the research lifecycle, beyond their creator and the funder or institution that mandates their production. Interested stakeholders include researchers themselves, funders, institutions, and a variety of service providers and community organisations including repositories, institutions, journals, publishers, and providers of tools for writing and maintaining plans. Implementation and adoption is currently hampered by two problems: ● A lack of standards for expression and interchange of DMPs ● Insufficient understanding of the needs of users and the benefits and risks of different modes of action This proposed working group will address both of these issues; the issue of a standardised form of expression for DMPs is the concern of the proposed DMP Common Standards Working Group. The group’s output will include a reference model and alternative strategies for exposing plans, to best serve community interests in meeting FAIR principles,1 based on shared experience of ‘early adopters’ in test implementations. It will be supported by work to gauge user needs and motivations for exposing DMPs as well as perceived risks and disbenefits.
    [Show full text]
  • INVESTIGATING the APPARATUS the Social
    Econ Journal Watch, Volume 1, Number 1, April 2004, pp 134-165. INVESTIGATING THE APPARATUS The Social Science Citation Index: A Black Box—with an Ideological Bias? DANIEL B. KLEIN* WITH ERIC CHIANG** ABSTRACT, KEYWORDS, JEL CODES THE SOCIAL SCIENCE CITATION INDEX (SSCI) IS A DATABASE of scholarly literature. SSCI is used in many important ways. The most conspicuous use of SSCI is showing whose work gets cited in other research. Which other research? The articles published in journals on the SSCI journal list. As of June 2003, SSCI included 1,768 journals. Your citation count is the number of times your work has been cited by articles in SSCI journals (actually, in those journals during the years that the journal was included in the SSCI).1 * Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA. ** Note on authorship: Although two authors are shown above, this paper is written in the first- person singular. Daniel Klein led the investigation and wrote up the paper. He is the “I” here. Eric Chiang is a student at Santa Clara University. He did most of the data collection and some of the institutional investigation. We thank the following ISI employees for their help with understanding SSCI and checking facts: Chris Pasquini (Technical Support Representative), James Testa (Director of Editorial Development), and Rodney Yancey (Manager of Corporate Communications). For comments on an earlier draft, we thank Niclas Berggren, Dan Johansson, Per Hortlund, and Richard Johnsson. 1 James Testa, Director of Editorial Development at Thomson ISI, writes in an e-mail correspondence to Eric Chiang: “When a journal is dropped it is from that moment forward.
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts Ii Contents
    CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI8) Wednesday, 19 June 2013 - Friday, 21 June 2013 University of Geneva Book of Abstracts ii Contents Altmetrics in the Wild - Alternative Impact Measurement for Scientific Publications . 1 BG1 - Gold OA Infrastructure (Room 1140) .......................... 1 BG2 - Open Annotations (Room 1150) ............................. 1 BG3 - Altmetrics (Room R160) ................................. 2 BG4 - Open Access Policy Developments (Room R170) ................... 2 BG5 - How to make your university into a monograph publisher? (Room 1130) . 2 BG6 - Reusing Open Acces materials - a Wikimedia perspective (Room R150) . 3 BG6 - Using Wikipedia’s popularity to share research .................... 3 CERIF for Datasets (C4D) .................................... 3 COnnecting REpositories (CORE) - the current state of aggregating Open Access content 4 Citation Finder. A tool for enhancing bibliographic research by extracting references from unstructured scholarly works ............................... 4 DML-CZ, Czech Digital Mathematics Library ......................... 4 Empowering Development: Why Open is Right for Development ............. 5 EuDML, the European Digital Mathematics Library ..................... 5 Guidelines towards implementing Open Access policies ................... 6 Humanities Session: OA Research Monographs in HSS: Opportunities & Challenges . 6 Humanities Session: The Humanities in and for the Digital Age .............. 7 Hydra: open, flexible workflows and community for
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook of E-Resources from Yenepoya Central Library
    Yenepoya Central Library The Handbook of E-Resources Prepared by: Verified by: Dr. K. S. Ali Dr. Mamatha P.K Deputy Librarian Chief Librarian E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Phone no. +91-9686618671 Phone no. +91-9845783853 Extn. no.2067 Extn. no. 5085 Updated on 12-05-2020 Dr. K. S. Ali E-Resources Handbook List of E-Resources Subscribed by Yenepoya (Deemed to be University) Access Details Name Descriptions Discipline User ID credential, Remote Remote Access If any Access URL Links Web of Science is a platform consisting of several Web of Science literature search databases designed to support No Click Here scientific and scholarly research. Multidiscipline Yes The evidence-based clinical decision support UpToDate resource from Wolters Kluwer, is trusted at the Healthcare No Click Here point of care by clinicians worldwide. Professionals Yes Clinical Key supports healthcare professionals and students with the latest evidence across specialities Healthcare Click Here in a variety of formats, including full-text reference Yes Professionals Clinical Key books and journals, point-of-care monographs, drug No information, videos, practice guidelines, customised patient education handouts and more. The BMJ share that global endeavour with millions The BMJ (online) of readers working in clinical practice, research, education, government, and with patients and the Healthcare No Click Here public too. Professionals Yes BMJ Case Reports is an important educational resource offering a high volume of cases in all disciplines so that healthcare professionals, Healthcare Click Here researchers and others can easily find clinically Professionals BMJ Case Report important information on common and rare No conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationships Between Metadata Application and Downloads in an Institutional Repository of an American Law School
    volume 28, issue 1, pages 13-24 (2018) Relationships Between Metadata Application and Downloads in an Institutional Repository of an American Law School Hollie C. White Libraries, Archives, Records, and Information Science (LARIS), School of Media, Creative Arts, and Social Inquiry Curtin University, Australia [email protected] Sean Chen Duke Law School, Duke University, United States [email protected] Guangya Liu Duke Law School, Duke University, United States [email protected] ABSTRACT Background. The Duke Law Scholarship Repository is a successful digital repository of an American law school, with over 1 million downloads per year. A series of studies were conducted to understand the relationship between metadata work and downloads. Objective. The paper reports an analysis of the relationships between certain metadata elements and repository downloads. Methods. Quantitative statistical methods, specifically correlation, t-test and multiple regression analysis, were used. Results. Statistically significant relationships were found between download frequency and factors relating to abstract, co-authors, page count and discipline. Negative statistically significant relationships were found between download frequency and free text keywords, as well as controlled vocabulary subject terms. Contributions. This study is an example of how in-use repository system administrators can demonstrate the impact of metadata work for institutional scholarly outreach. Also, this study adds another dimension to the keyword and searching/download
    [Show full text]
  • CAUL Review of Australian Repository Infrastructure
    CAUL Fair, affordable and open access to knowledge program CAUL Review of Australian Repository Infrastructure Review of Australian Repository Infrastructure A project within the CAUL Fair, affordable and open access to knowledge program To: Director, FAIR Access to Research Program, CAUL From: Project Leader, Review of Australian Repository Infrastructure Subject: Report from the Review of Australian Repository Infrastructure Date: Version 15 March 2019 Dear Catherine, On behalf of the Project Team I am pleased to provide you with the report from the CAUL Review of Australian Repository Infrastructure, a project of the CAUL Fair, affordable and open access to knowledge program. The project was resourced using a large number of volunteers from across the CAUL member libraries. This model has proved to be successful. This final version of the report includes reports from work packages #1 - #7. All feedback provided by the 2/2018 CAUL Council meeting a community consultation process conducted in February/March 2019 were considered and incorporated into the document where possible. Suggested changes to project scope could not be incorporated into the project and the report at this stage. Best regards, Martin Borchert Project Lead Page 2 of 171 CAUL (Council of Australian University Librarians) +61 2 6125 2990 | [email protected] | www.caul.edu.au Table of Contents Project Overview……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 #1 Review and Report on the current Australasian institutional research repository infrastructure…………………………………………………………………………………………………..................................
    [Show full text]