Shannon Farrell – InfoDoc MicroVeille

Authors : Linda Eells, Julia Kelly, Shannon Farrell

Introduction

Successfully managing an open-access repository requires constant attention to user community priorities in order to inform the development or selection of a platform that fulfills constantly evolving functional demands in an increasingly complex operational environment.

This paper uses AgEcon Search (AES) as an example of the way that varying platforms address the metadata and other platform needs of a repository. AES is a successful subject repository with an international scope that has resided on several different platforms in its 25-year lifespan.

Elements and Considerations

Critical among the technical requirements of a repository is interoperability with other information sources and the ability to accommodate and describe different types of objects, including data. Experienced in the use of easy and widely used Dublin Core (DC), as well as Machine-Readable Cataloging 21 (MARC 21)-based repository platforms, we discuss both metadata schemas from administrative and user perspectives.

Reconsidering underlying metadata issues might positively impact both technical and administrative issues that are currently restricting the development of robust, interoperable systems. As managers of AES, we are uniquely placed to discuss both technical and sustainability issues.

Conclusions

Although many institutional and subject repositories are on platforms that use DC for their metadata, other options are available. MARC, the well-established library standard, can provide the wide range of fields needed to fully and accurately describe the variety of document and data types that are included in repositories.

URL : Repository (R)evolution: Metadata, Interoperability, and Sustainability

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/ jlsc.16890

Authors : Kristen Cooper, Wanda Marsolek, Amy Riegelman, Shannon Farrell, Julie Kelly

INTRODUCTION

Grey literature is ephemeral, and the level to which it is created, used, and cited by faculty, graduate students, and other researchers is not well understood.

METHODS

This electronic survey was distributed to a sample (57%) of the faculty across a wide variety of disciplines with the only criteria based on tenure and tenure-track faculty at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities, a large R1 institution.

RESULTS

Faculty across disciplines both use and create grey literature for several reasons, including its far more rapid Faculty across disciplines both use and create grey literature for several reasons, including its far more rapid publication process.

DISCUSSION

Many faculty in a wide variety of disciplines are using and creating grey literature. The survey illustrates the different types of grey literature that are being used and for what purpose.

Other topics, such as how faculty are finding grey literature (via Google Scholar and professional contacts), whether they are citing it, and which types they create (e.g., conference papers, preprints, technical reports) are also discussed.

CONCLUSION

As a result of this survey, librarians can provide support for faculty who use and create grey literature in all disciplines and advocate for and promote grey literature to faculty. With more scholars participating in systematic reviews of grey literature, librarians will need to be more cognizant of where and how it may be discovered.

URL : Grey Literature: Use, Creation, and Citation Habits of Faculty Researchers across Disciplines

DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2314