In 2008, Southern New Hampshire University was awarded a threeyear, $500,000 national leadership grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services to create a digital repository using DSpace open source software. Events from the first year of the repository’s development are presented and discussed. Key elements addressed include the challenges involved with customizing the DSpace infrastructure, creating standards for access and master files, implementing metadata standards, and developing digital preservation policies.
The value of cross-departmental participation is shown, and the importance of planning for digital preservation is presented.
URL : http://metroblogs.typepad.com/files/ditrw_16.pdf
Open access dissemination resonates with many distance education researchers and practitioners because it aligns with their fundmantal mission of extending access to learning opportunity. However, there remains lingering doubt whether this increase in access comes at a cost of reducing prestige, value (often determined in promotion and tenure hearings) or reference of the work by other authors.
In this article, we examine 12 distance education journals (6 open and 6 published in closed format by commercial publishers). Using an online survey completed by members of the editorial boards of these 12 journals and a systematic review of the number of citations per article (N = 1,123) and per journal issue between 2003 and 2008, we examine the impact, and perceived value of the 12 journals.
We then compute differences between open and closed journals. The results reveal that the open access journals are not perceived by distance eductation editors as significantly more or less prestigious than their closed counterparts.
The number of citations per journal and per article also indicates little difference. However we note a trend towards more citations per article in open access journals. Articles in open access journals are cited earlier than in non-open access journals.
URL : http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/viewArticle/661/1170
Digital preservation aims to keep digital objects accessible over long periods of time, ensuring the authenticity and integrity of these digital objects. In such complex environments, Risk Management is a key factor in assuring the normal behaviour of systems over time.
Currently, the digital preservation arena commonly uses Risk Management concepts to assess repositories.
In this paper, we intend to go further and propose a perspective where Risk Management can be used not only to assess existing solutions, but also to conceive digital preservation environments.
Thus, we propose a Risk Management-based approach to design and assess digital preservation environments, including:
• the definition of context and identification of strategic objectives to determine specific requirements and characterize which consequences are acceptable within the identified context;
• the identification, analysis and evaluation of threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the normal behaviour of a specific business or the achievement of the goals and conformance to the requirements identified in the context characterization; and,
• definition of actions to deal with the risks associated with the identified threats and vulnerabilities.
We generalize and survey the main requirements, threats, vulnerabilities and techniques that can be applied in the scope of digital preservation.
URL : http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/143
Quality management is an essential part in creating a trustworthy digital archive. The German network of expertise in Digital long-term preservation (nestor), in cooperation with the German Institute for Standards (DIN), has undertaken a small study to analyse systematically the relevance and usage of quality management standards for long-term preservation and to filter out the specific standardisation need for digital archives.
This paper summarises the results of the study. It gives an overview on the differences in understanding the task “quality management” within different organisations and how they carry out appropriate measures, such as documentation, transparency, adequacy, and measureability in order to demonstrate the trustworthiness of their digital archive.
URL : http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/146
Comparative study on current European policies and/or guidelines for open access in the health field.
URL : http://eprints.rclis.org/14788/
The Association of Research Libraries E-Science Working Group developed a survey to “build an understanding of how libraries can contribute to e-science activities in their institution” and “identify organizations and institutions that have similar interests in e-science to leverage research library interests.”
The August 2009 survey gathered 57 responses to the survey from the 123 ARL member libraries in the United States and Canada. Twenty-one respondents report their institution provides infrastructure or support services for e-science, 23 institutions are in the planning stages, and 13 do not provide support for e-science.
After analyzing the survey results, the authors identified a small set of respondents (Purdue University, the University of California, San Diego, Cornell University, Johns Hopkins University, the University of Illinois at Chicago, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) for interviews to further elaborate their activities.
The resulting six case studies synthesize the interviews with the corresponding institutions’ responses to the survey. The cases further illuminate programs and services mentioned only briefly in the survey and allow some interesting patterns to emerge from interviewees’ reflections on faculty connections, staffing levels, and organizational structure and culture.
This report presents a summary of the survey results and the six cases studies. It also includes a bibliography of related articles, reports, and Web sites, along with the survey instrument and a selection of recent research library position descriptions with significant e-science support components.
URL : http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/escience-report-2010.pdf