Curating, But Still Not Mediating by Jim Ottaviani, Amy Neeser
aka “don’t let anyone get away with 6accdœ13eff7i3l9n4o4qrr4s8t12ux” (Isaac Newton establishing priority on calculus in code)
Chinese proverb: “The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago; the second best time is now.”
Curation starts immediately: don’t wait or people will forget. You have to open every data file and check it’s usable. They assume if it’s intended for humans it’s a “document” but if it’s intended for machines it’s “data”.
Acknowledge/thank the deposit (signing your name so they know you’re human not bot). Then you can ask for a README.txt or offer to help write it.
Home and Away: Exploring the use of metrics in Australia and the UK, with a focus on impact by Jo Lambert, Robin Burgess
Sydney measures metrics through: Atmire tools embedded in repository; PlumX integration altmetrics; ERA requirements; CAUL stats; exploring UK methods. Employing FAIR principles. Researchers provide context for impact.
JISC OA services support through article lifecycle of submission (SHERPA/RoMEO etc), Acceptance (Monitor UK, Jisc collections, OpenDOAR), Publication, etc. Stats collected via aggregation then available in COUNTER format; raw download data from UK IRs using DSpace, Fedora, PURE, ePrints…. Collaboration is important – working with OpenAIRE, concept of creating other IRUS instances eg IRUS-ANZ?
Set up Australian Repository Working Group. Looking at standards and collaboration. “We dream the same dream, we want the same thing” – Belinda Carlisle
Uniform metadata for Finnish repositories by Jyrki Ilva, Esa-Pekka Keskitalo, Päivi Rosenström, Tanja Vienonen, Samu Viita
Open Scientific Publishing project (Tajua). 60 orgs in Finland have an IR, mostly DSpace – some are shared so total of 17 IRs.
Challenges: heterogeneous metadata practices, ad hoc solutions, no general metadata guidelines so repository managers have to fend for themselves.
80 experts got together, formed a smaller working group including National Library experts. Goal-oriented approach to develop a “good-enough” metadata format, semantics prioritised over correct Dublin Core. Compiled most used metadata fields and suggesting fields closer to standard DC.
Spreadsheets collected into Google Drive, meetings held online and in person – then done! Final version published on National Libraries public wiki fields. 62 core dc fields, and 11 extras if needed. 6 fields labelled important: title, author, date, persistent ID, rights (pref Creative Commons). Guidelines at: https://www.kiwi.fi/x/94R7B
Isomorphic Pressures on Instutional Repositories in Japan by Jennifer Beamer
Comparing US and Japanese repositories as interested in situation as institutions interact with repositories. In Japan repositories exploding from 2015-17 and wants to know why. More of a national push in Japan (whereas in the US it’s more grassroots). Previous work not looking at research in Japan especially on big picture scale.
Isomorphism – regulatory/coercive pressures; cognitive/mimetic pressures; normative pressures.
Collecting data from OpenDOAR and ROARMAP – content analysis of themes, mandates, core beliefs. Then interviews with SPARC in Tokyo, librarians, faculties. National Institute for Informatics has a shared cloud server with IR architecture so limited resources not a barrier. OA policies have started very recently, but librarians play a major role in getting deposits even though only in that role briefly and assist directly. You don’t have to be a PhD to work in faculty so tenure and promotion completely different – publishing isn’t connected to tenure.
The role of the repository in increasing the reach and influence of research by Belinda Tiffen, Kate Byrne
(Acknowledge work of Catherine Williams). Repository enables reporting and assessment but also shopfront to sell research to the world. These roles don’t always sit well together – hard to explain to researchers why we want two versions of their papers.
What role does repository play in sharing research? Data from last year: 2609 UTS publications from Scopus. 33% also in repository. Looked at Almetrics for engagement. 1000 (of the 2609) have an Altmetric score. 47% in both Scopus and repository have an Altmetric score. 63% also in other repositories have an Altmetric score. But only 34% of outputs only in Scopus have an Altmetric score.
What will UTS do with this data? Have OA policy (since 2014) which has increased IR content but still only 35%. In 2015 rolled out new user interface. Active training to get authors to deposit. Want to find out which interventions are having an impact.
(In Q&A: redesigned theme done by part-time graphic designer in library, and in-house DSpace developer.
Scholarly Identity and Author Rights: guiding scholars as they make choices with their scholarly identities in a messy world by Jen Green
Project to managing scholarly/research identity. Schol comm team with wider working group and work with research community to focus outreach efforts. Workshop attendees mostly faculty and postgrads – but this changed when they started talking about online identity.
Workshops on ORCID – in the absence of a repository seemed a good place to start. Short pop-up sessions with ice-cream worked well, chatted, they created an ORCID.
Thought they needed help creating ORCIDs. Learned they needed that plus managing professional identity online and helping their student too. Scholars have limited time and want to spend it on own goals which may not match institution’s.
“Your Research Identity” – covered Twitter, Facebook, etc – so they’d know their online identity exists whether they manage it or not, and here are tools to manage it. Started with Google search on their names, discussed results. When results come up with other people with same name bring up ORCID. Suggested creating one place everything else can link back to (eg her own website).
Outcomes: after this workshop, workshops began to fill up. Once accidentally sent invite to whole campus and 30 seats filled in 10 minutes. Audience didn’t know existed mostly support staff.
(In Q&A: many faculty had never googled themselves, or didn’t know different results with different IP addresses.)
The University of the Philippines Baguio Faculty Research Database: starting a university repository by Cristina Borja Villanueva, Jay Mendoza Mapalo
Cordillera region home to country’s second largest concentration of indigenous people with 7 major ethnolinguistic groups. At Uof Philippines Baguio research is a priority. and library needs to collect and make outputs available to wider community.
Faculty Research Database started in June 2012, launched 2013, 500+ entries to document and disseminate outputs, increase citations, and advance knowledge. Use Joomla. Search author (by dropdown menu). Results page shows number of visits for each item – stats available to show most viewed. Item page may have full-text or may say available on request from author.
Has accomplished availability objectives. Hope to continue improve repository.
Crosswalks, mapping tables, and normalisation rules: when we don’t even share the same vocabulary for authority control by Deborah Fitchett
That’s me! So I didn’t summarise; instead see my full slides and notes.