Monday 3 July 2017
09.00-18.00: Leadership Development Programme
14.00-15.30: Finance Committee
15.00-18.00: Executive Board Meeting
Tuesday 4 July 2017
09.00-18.00: Leadership Development Programme
09.00-12.30: Executive Board Meeting
12.30-14.00: Executive Board lunch
13.00-17.00: Working group: Copyright
Steering Committee 1
Steering Committee 2
Working group: leadership
Working group: metrics
Working group: OA
15:00-17:00: Steering Committee 3
17:00-18:00 Digital Collections Group
Wednesday 5 July 2017
09.00-12.00: Workshops (an interim coffee break at 10.30)
13.00-14.30: Opening Ceremony
14.15-15.00: Plenary session 1
Costas Fotakis has been appointed Alternate Minister for Research and Innovation in January 2015. He has been President of FORTH (Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas), since 2011. He has also served as Director of the Institute of Electronic Structure and Laser (IESL) at FORTH (1997-2013) and he is Professor of Physics at the University of Crete. He has also served as Chairman of the Association of the Presidents of the Research Centers in Greece. Fotakis is the founder of the Laser and Applications Division of FORTH, and since 1990 has been leading the European Laser Facility at FORTH, which is currently part of the EU “LASERLAB-Europe” project, linking 26 major European laser infrastructures.
His research interests are in the fields of laser spectroscopy and photonics; in particular, laser interactions with materials and biomaterials and related biomedical diagnostic and processing applications. He has been chair and co-chair of major international scientific conferences and member of influential EU and national scientific policy panels and expert groups, including the European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructures (ESFRI), the European Advisory Group for Research Potential, the Experts Committee for the Interim Evaluation of the EC 7th Framework Programme (Research Infrastructures), and the National Advisory Board for Research and Technology. He has also served as Chairman of the EU Advisory Group on Research Infrastructures in HORIZON 2020 and he has chaired the Expert Group on the role of Universities and Research Organizations in Smart Specialization Strategies for regional development. He has over 300 publications in refereed scientific journals, and more than 7000 citations, primarily in the field of photonics and its applications. He has been plenary, key note or invited speaker in numerous international scientific conferences and events and has also served on the editorial boards of several international scientific journals.
Distinctions awarded include the 2004 “Leadership Award” of the Optical Society of America (OSA) “…for decade-long leadership of, and personal research contribution to, the field of laser applications to art conservation and leadership in establishing and guiding the scientific excellence of laser science programs…”. He has been Springer Professor at the University of California, Berkeley for 2005-6. He has been elected as a Life Member and Fellow of OSA and has been a Member of the Fellows Committee of the European Optical Society (EOS). Currently, he serves as a member on the Board of Stakeholders of the European Technology Platform “Photonics 21″. In 2010 he was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the Mediterranean University of Marseille.
15.30-16.30: Parallel sessions
1.1. Research Data Management Policy derived from Best Practices
Ringersma, Jacquelijn*, Wageningen University & Research, Netherlands, The
Since 2014 Wageningen University & Research (WUR) has a Research Data Management (RDM) Policy. All PhD students and all university chair groups must have a Data Management Plan (DMP). In a DMP they describe which data will be collected during a project, where the data will be stored during the project and where it will be archived when the project is finished. The DMP also defines the data sharing policy for each project (open or restricted access). In 2016 the board of WUR evaluated the policy, and concluded that although most PhD students and chair groups had indeed made a DMP, the implementation of the Plans fell short, because guidelines for data storage and data archiving or registration still lack.
Thus, the Data Management Support Unit of WUR was asked to give an advice on guidelines for data storage and data archiving & registration. In our presentation, we describe how we based this advice on existing frameworks and principles as well as on the diversity and on best practices found in our organisation.
The required advice had to take existing frameworks (the National Code of Conduct for Scientific practice) and on the FAIR data principles into account. Two of the FAIR principles, Findable and Accessible, can be easily matched to this CoC. We translated these frameworks and principles to criteria for data storage and data archiving, and matched these criteria to existing solutions for storage and archiving. These solutions could be either internal Wageningen University & Research, infrastructure offered externally.
More importantly, the advice had to be based on the diversity in the organisation and current best-practices. We decided to explore this by selecting a number of use-cases and carry out interviews. For the selection of the use-cases, we asked members of the graduate schools and scientific units for examples. In total, we got around 20 data use cases, of which we selected 12 to interview them on their data storage, data archiving & registration practices. Variables on which we based the selection were the scientific domain, the complexity of the cooperation in their research, the sensitivity of the data, the duration of the project and the data storage capacity required (size).
To our own surprise, the results of the interviews led us to viable and pragmatic data storage solutions, which can be easily implemented in the whole organisation, since most of the infrastructure is already in place. It was also not very difficult to present an advice for data archiving & registration based on the selected data use-cases.
Using best-practices as the basis for our advice made that the enthusiasm for the advised storage and archiving requirements and solutions was great. We expect that the approach will contribute to a high(er) adoption of viable RDM practices. We hope that other Universities and their Libraries can benefit from our experience.
1.2 The Role of Libraries in the Adoption of Research Data Management
Verheul, Ingeborg* (1); Ringersma, Jacquelijn* (2)
1: SURFsara; 2: Wageningen University & Research
About 5 years ago the first societal demands for Research Data Management (RDM) were heard. Since then, RDM has been a topic of growing interest for Universities and their Library & IT services. Motivations for RDM were, and still are: scientific integrity, improvement of the verification process, research continuity and financial/funding. In the Netherlands, most University Libraries played a major role in RDM awareness amongst researchers. Libraries developed a series of RDM services, and at the same time Libraries have built RDM capacity in their Library staff.
At the same time, a national initiative to facilitate cooperation, knowledge sharing and enhancing the development of RDM-policy was launched in the Netherlands, in the form of the National Coordination Point Research Data Management (https://www.surf.nl/en/lcrdm). University libraries are the linking pins in the current working groups of the LCRDM, who work at a national level on topics such as legal aspects and ownership of RDM, financing of RDM, facilities and data infrastructure for RDM, research support and advise and awareness raising/engagement.
However, despite the efforts and growing awareness, we still observe a relatively low adoption of RDM by the scientific community.
Our presentation is twofold. After an introduction of the national initiative in the Netherlands and a comparison with the national initiatives in the UK and in Germany we want to dive deeper into the issue of how libraries can contribute to a better adoption of RDM by the research communities through improved RDM services, facilitating the findability (and re-use) of data, and communication. Libraries cannot work alone in achieving this. In our presentation we show that collaboration with IT, Legal Services and the Research Community is pre-requisite for a successful RDM adoption, both on a national level and within individual universities.
In our presentation we will give some concrete working examples, based on experiences in Wageningen University, especially on how the Library at Wageningen University & Research facilitates the registration of research data, thus making the data findable and citable.
RDM services cannot be developed by Libraries only. A close and trusted collaboration with IT services and Legal/policy services is required. RDM demands many types of expertise. We present how to create a collaborative Data Management Support Unit, in which all three services work together. With a single point of entry for the Researcher.
Finally: an increased adoption of RDM can only be achieved when we communicate a lot. And not just within the Library community, but with our researchers! The main sender of the message is however, preferably not the Library or the IT services, but the research community spokes persons themselves. To obtain this, we work closely together with the Graduate Schools, who take the lead in the communication.
1.3 Research Data Management Practices at the University of Tartu
University of Tartu, Estonia
Paradigm shift in thinking about open science has resulted in the development of open science policies all over the world. Funders of science have here taken a firm initiative, because they expect that the projects they are financing would bring maximum long-term benefit for society.
In the academic world, the key role is performed by researchers. Research publications and the underlying data form the most valuable property of a researcher, determining their academic career. Quality of research results can adequately be measured only when the underlying data can be accessed, interpreted and re-used either in replicate research or as a basis for new hypotheses. Today, the obvious and personal benefits of the researcher in sharing their research data are rather small; mostly, researchers are aware of the loss of time and resources related to archiving and sharing of data.
In Estonia, the open science policy is still largely in formation. Since 2009, the University of Tartu Library has been advocating the principles of open science. The Library joined DataCite in 2015 and started to offer research data management-related services and training courses to Estonian librarians and researchers. The practices of research data management in Estonia have not yet been thoroughly studied and established.
A web-based pilot survey “Research Data Management and Sharing Practices among the University of Tartu Researchers and Doctoral Students in the Fields of Natural and Exact Sciences and Social Sciences” was carried out in spring 2016. The results were analysed by using quantitative methods.
The survey and analysis were motivated by the need for mapping and recording the current situation in how the University of Tartu researchers and doctoral students collect, preserve, share and re-use research data. It was necessary to find out what kind of additional information on the subject is still needed, as well as to identify the main obstacles and, finally, to discover which are the benefits of data sharing as seen by researchers.
In general, the idea of open science was welcomed by respondents. My paper examines the outcomes of the survey, describing the situation where the researchers do not have the support of national and institutional guidelines in research data management.
Results of the survey will help us in developing research data management-related services at the University of Tartu Library, and will also allow us to offer advice to the Estonian Research Council about the drawing up of the Open Data policy in Estonia.
2.1 The Interactive Library as a Virtual Working Space
Degkwitz, Andreas Rudolf*
Humboldt-University Berlin, Germany
The internet and the new digital media are challenging the traditional organization of academic libraries and enable new capabilities of information provisioning as well as new shapes of collaborations between the librarians and the users. To pick up the demands and the expectations of the many users, whose information behavior is heavily influenced by the internet, a new organization model for academic libraries should be created. The aim of the project “The interactive library as a virtual working space” is to analyze and to identify the organizational and technical requirements for the future model for libraries, which is based on the digital potential of the internet and the digital media. The result of the project, which we want to work out, will be a pilot study about the interactive, virtual library as the future organization for libraries from the following background. The logistic of printed books and journals is influencing all the processes and structures of libraries since the age of Gutenberg. These processes like acquisition, cataloging, circulation, short- and long term availability are based on linear, operational structures just concerning the library. However the logistic patterns of digital materials are collaborative, interactive, multimedia and networked globally. Even in so called digital libraries the organization and workflows of libraries are related to the traditional patterns still. Picking up the potential of the digitization we are in the situation, to shape the future library model as an interactive virtual working space. The Digital Public Library of America, the German Digital Library, the Europeana, the HathiTrust, the Internet Archive, and many other hubs and platforms like Google Scholar, Mendeley and Wikipedia are not interactive libraries in principle. But these information hubs and data platforms demonstrate collaborative and interactive approaches, components and procedures of virtual working spaces, which digital libraries are determined to be developed to. The working packages for the pilot study are: (1) Analyzing the organization models of selected data and information platforms (private/public) by defined criteria, (2) designing the organizational framework and (3) identifying the technical requirements. The talk will present some fundamental considerations about the model for the library of the future and the first steps of the project. The project approach is inspired by the following research results:
- Lorcan Dempsey et al (2014): Collection Directions. The Evolution of Library Collections and Collecting. In: Libraries and the Academy 2014 (3), 393-423.
- K. Jane Burpee et al (2015): Outside the Four Corners: Exploring Non-Traditional Scholarly Communication. In: Scholarly and Research Communication, Vol 6, No 2.
- John W. Moravec et al (2015): Designing the future of research libraries and special libraries in “knowmad society”. – Congreso Amigos, Mexico, 2015 .
2.2 ETH Zurich’s University Collections and Archives in the Digital Age: Innovative Indexing, Digitization and Publication of Unique Materials
ETH Zürich, Switzerland
ETH Zurich’s university collections and archives encompass around twenty facilities. Their diversity reflects the historic development of collections at the university and its modern potential for research and teaching. ETH Zurich makes its collections and archives available for research and teaching in a form that befits the digital age. To this end, it combines ETH Library’s skills in information science with the expertise of the collection owners in the departments in accordance with the “Strategy 2015–2020″ which was passed by the Executive Board.
The “Strategy 2015-2020″ bases on the fundamental insight that, in the digital age, the duties of libraries, archives and scientific collections are converging. The hallmark of user-oriented services is the spatially and temporally unlimited availability of digital objects with high-quality metadata. The scientific community is currently re-discovering analogue research data in university collections. Its transformation into the digital age aids both research and teaching and paves the way for innovative questions.
This paper presents the strategic approach of ETH Zurich’s Executive Board and focuses on the role of ETH Library in the current line of action:
- establishing a digital infrastructure for scientific object collections as a central service
- conducting broad-based indexing and digitization projects in cooperation with the collection owners with a view to improving accessibility significantly for research and teaching
- establishing attractive and platforms for the general public and the interaction with users
- offering advice while using the collections and archives for scientific marketing
- offering advice and implementing measures in the fields of preventive conservation and restoration within the scope of protecting cultural assets
- offering advice for the Executive Board in the continual improvement of the organisational structures for the administration and further development of the collections.
2.3 A Transition to Fair Open Access with Return on Investment: LingOA, MathOA & PsyOA
de Vries, Saskia Corine Johanna* (1); Rooryck, Johan (2); Eve, Martin (3)
1: Sampan – academia & publishing, Netherlands, The; 2: Leiden University, Netherlands, The; 3: Birbeck University London, United Kingdom
On the 27th of May, 2016, the EU Council proposed that a move to full open-access should be achieved by 2020. Clearly, new publishing models are needed if the transition to open access is to be both swift and affordable. Various routes are being explored at the moment, from OA offsetting deals with the commercial publishers to transitioning existing subscription journals to an open-access model.
Linguistics in Open Access (LingOA) is an example of the latter route. LingOA aims at switching prestigious journals in linguistics from subscription to Fair Open Access. In this endeavor, the LingOA journals are supported for five years by a grant from the Netherlands, while their long-term financial sustainability is assured by the consortial library model of the Open Library of Humanities (OLH). At this moment, the LingOA Fair Open Access transition model is being extended to two other disciplines, mathematics and psychology.
Our new programs consist of three elements:
- Creating a MathOA and a PsyOA foundation alongside LingOA.
- Flipping journals in mathematics, psychology, and linguistics through partnerships with a range of publishers.
- Make use of a consortium of libraries on the model of the Open Library of Humanities (OLH) for long-term underwriting of APCs, market price-pressure, and sustainability.
The Fair Open Access (FAO) model is designed to provide three core features:
- A transition to Open Access under favorable terms (Fair Open Access): MathOA and PsyOA will closely follow the structure set up by LingOA: journal editors and experts in the respective fields will lead both organizations, convincing other editors of the need to move to Fair Open Access by using their personal networks and by setting the same conditions designed to ensure that publishers do not exert undue control over publication venues, see www. lingoa.eu.
- Achieving a transition to OA with a range of publishers: Applications to publish journals in Fair Open Access are available to any publisher who can meet the conditions set out by LingOA. Recent partnerships between LingOA, OLH, Ubiquity Press, Pacini (It) and the University of Wales Press demonstrate the viability of such partnerships.
- Market price sensitivity and competition to provide cost benefits and achieve Return on Investment: The current scholarly communications environment is poor at providing downward pressure on costs for APCs. In the LingOA model, the OLH in-house publishing operation provides a comparison price point for the cost of publishing that other publishers are asked to match. This means that Fair Open Access is not only about flipping prestigious subscription journals to Open Access, it is also about increasing pressure on the commercial publishers to start providing their services on fair and transparent conditions. A calculation over 10 years shows a significant worldwide Return on Investment, since the journals that have transitioned to Fair Open Access no longer require subscription and operate at a much lower cost than that of the subscription model.
3.1 Metadata 2020: Will Richer Metadata Rescue Research?
Crossref, United Kingdom
All parties in the research enterprise aim to improve the discoverability of content. Whether they’re funders, authors, preprint servers, publishers, libraries, repositories. Or the numerous tools seeking to add value through search, discovery, annotation, or analyses. So many of these organizations contribute along the way but often important details get mistyped, misrepresented, or missed out entirely.
What if we could make it easy to include as much information as possible? All the basic stuff but also license info, funding/grant data, ORCID iDs, organization IDs, clinical trial data, and–along the way–corrections and retractions? What if it was a simple case of entering once, and watching that work–with clean and “complete” metadata–grow and get added to, permeating through other systems, contributing to research throughout the world?
It’s in the hands of many.
A group of organizations from all over the world (including Crossref, DataCite, ORCID, OpenAIRE, California Digital Library, Wikimedia, OCLC among others) have come together to rally the community around this critical issue in scholarly communications: sharing richer metadata. Working together we can build on existing efforts to make research more discoverable.
We will seek input from the relevant audiences, to share user stories about the journey that metadata takes, and to help prioritise goals and tactics for a new metadata advocacy campaign called Metadata 2020. Metadata 2020 is a campaign that is bigger than just one organization or sector, but a collective responsibility shared by us all.
3.2 Digital Humanities Clinics – Leading Dutch Librarians into DH
Wilms, Lotte* (1); Cock, Michiel (2); Companjen, Ben (3)
1: KB, National Library of the Netherlands, Netherlands, The; 2: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; 3: Leiden University
In 2015, an initiative was started to set up a Dutch speaking DH+Lib community in the Netherlands and Belgium, based on the example of the American communal space of librarians and others to discuss topics “Where the Digital Humanities and Libraries meet”. At the initial meeting it became apparent that most participants were there to learn more about digital humanities (DH) and were not (yet) in the situation where they were able to offer expertise on the subject. On the administrative level, the directors of the libraries participating in the consortium of Dutch academic libraries (UKB) also expressed the wish that librarians become more fluent in DH.
The National Library of the Netherlands (KB), the University Library of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Centre for Digital Scholarship at Leiden University Libraries therefore joined forces to develop a set of clinics on DH for librarians.
The aim of these clinics is to provide basic methodological competencies and technical skills in DH, for a diverse group of library employees, consisting of both subject and technical librarians with basic technical skills. The content of these sessions should enable them to provide services to researchers and students, identify remaining gaps in knowledge or skills that they could address by self-directed learning and (perhaps) to automate their daily library work.
In order to design this curriculum we follow a four step approach with a Working Out Loud- principle:
- Desk research about what being a DH librarian entails;
- Identify possible subjects, based on personal experience, a comparison of existing teaching material related to DH (e.g. Programming Historian, Library Carpentry and the TaDiRAH taxonomy of research activities;
- Get feedback from researchers on possible subjects, based on the knowledge and skills they feel librarians need;
- Get feedback from librarians on possible subjects, based on already known gaps in their knowledge and skills.
With these in hand, we will design the curriculum of clinics, based on the method of ‘constructive alignment’(7. Our plan is to organize a maximum of 6 clinics, each one full day. Each day starts with one or more lectures by researchers, that address the conceptual knowledge needed. The afternoon sessions will be devoted to the hands-on training of skills, following the Library Carpentry model as much as possible.
In this paper we will present the curriculum and offer the lessons learned from both the design process and the first clinics. We welcome discussion about our efforts and the possibilities of applying this in other contexts.
3.3 Capturing the Transitional Moment: Greek Humanities Research and Open Access
Sichani, Anna-Maria* (1); Souyioultzoglou, Irakleitos* (2)
1: University of Ioannina / Huygens ING, Netherlands, The; 2: Panteion University of Athens / National Documentation Centre (EKT)
Constantly producing high-quality research outputs, the scholarly community of Greek Humanities researchers stands as an interesting case study to trace the evolution and identify the challenges of Open Access in scholarly publishing. While the community is using a minority language and is linked to a print-based publishing culture, current economic and viability issues make the future of Greek Humanities publishing more precarious than ever and, therefore, ask for a more decisive shift towards Open Access publishing models. We claim that even if Open Access is now becoming a commonplace among scholarly communication stakeholders (e.g. librarians, publishers, funders etc.), researchers should be equally engaged in the transition from the subscription-based print paradigm and place themselves at the very epicenter of such initiatives and discussions. Moreover, researchers need to understand that what is at stake is the communication and distribution of their own research outputs in an accessible, fair, ethical, engaging and inclusive way.
Using three well-represented Humanities disciplines (History, Literary Studies and Anthropology) as case studies, this paper presents an infrastructure research aiming to map the reception, application and challenges of Open Access publishing models within the Greek Humanities research community. Our research is based on a twofold empirical survey: on the one hand, using a quantitative approach, we document the ‘publishing demographics’ (the current status quo) of Greek Humanities journals; on the other hand, through an anonymous questionnaire, we attempt a qualitative assessment of the familiarization of Greek Humanities researchers with Open Access in journal publishing.
Our research is willing to critically engage with the findings of these surveys, and to further discuss challenges and options for grassroots initiatives for full Open Access to scholarly outputs We argue that Open Access in scholarly publishing and communication should be viewed and embraced as a common, shared path among librarians, publishers, academic institutions and, mainly, researchers in order to work towards a more fair and sustainable future for Humanities scholarship.
4.1 Applying Bourdieu’s Field Theory to MLS Curricula Development
Wien, Charlotte Nordahl*; Dorch, Bertil Fabricius*
The University Library of Southern Denmark, Denmark
Our research question is: How can adequate education in Library and Information Science be provided for subject specialists in research libraries under constant change?
Research libraries may be one of the places where imprints of the transition from industrial society to knowledge society are most evident. In order to keep up, the library profession has had to incorporate numerous new disciplines and has become a highly specialized area with its own Ph.D. program. But while developing the curricula within the discipline of library and information science (LIS), the training programs for the subject specialists of the research libraries tend to have been neglected in Denmark.
Until the turn of the millennium, a subject specialist in a Danish research library would typically start their career by applying for a vacancy in connection with a subject specialist’s MA or Ph.D. specialization. This is illustrated in the value compass below:
- Specialist Theorist
- Practitioner Generalist
The vertical axis reflects the anticipated level of education in relation to handling different functions within the library. The horizontal axis reflects the degree of idealism vis a vis pragmatism in relation to handling the tasks in the library. The hypothesis is that the subject specialist previously found him or herself in the upper part of the compass, while the librarians would be placed in the lower part. Obviously, this created a field of tension between the subject specialists and the librarians.
A useful tool in understanding and explaining fields of tension is Bourdieu’s Field Theory. It explains the structures in a given social world (i.e. a library), including the power struggles inside: These struggles are about how to obtain the positions that give the most prestige. No field is ever static since struggles for the power to decide exactly what is associated with power and what is not persist. With the upgrading of LIS the librarians have moved upwards on the vertical axis and thereby challenge the subject specialist’s position. At the same time developments within the academic world have brought about an undermining of the role of the subject specialists.
And as the research libraries are in a rapid state of flux, it is no longer clear which positions provide maximum prestige in a modern research library. Therefore, we do not think that a single streamlined educational offer is the answer to our research question. Instead the point is that today’s competence needs are individualized.
Taking this into account University Library of Southern Denmark has begun collaboration with The Department of Design and Communication at University of Southern Denmark, and The Royal School of Library and Information Science (RSLIS). We have developed a curriculum for a flexible Master’s program, where the students compose an individual portfolio. The first students will enroll in the autumn 2017. In our paper, we will discuss the applicability of field theory to Library and Information Science curricula development in more depth and will present our curricula in more depth to illustrate our points.
4.2 Getting You Fit for the Open Age! The FOSTER+ Open Science Trainer Bootcamp
Grant, Friedel*; Imming, Melanie
LIBER, Netherlands, The
Librarians are increasingly finding themselves charged with developing and delivering support and training for open access and research data management. There are still knowledge gaps on best approaches to training researchers and academic staff and there is a need for new training materials. The FOSTER+ project will reduce duplication of effort across European libraries by ensuring that librarians charged with providing training on open access, open data and data management and open science have access to a wide range of high quality, customisable materials that can be easily reused.
Building on the existing FOSTER portal and training materials, FOSTER+ will develop more advanced-level and discipline-specific materials that build capacity for the practical adoption of Open Science and promote a change in culture. Over 50 training events will be delivered. FOSTER+ will develop a multi-module Open Science Toolkit, covering key topics such as responsible research and innovation, research data management, software carpentry, text and data mining, reproducible research and open peer review. E-learning courses will be delivered for each module via the Learning Management System and materials will be made available to support face-to-face training delivery.
Especially interesting for librarians is the Open Science Trainer Bootcamp, organized by LIBER, one of the partners in FOSTER+. This bootcamp will convene a cohort of trainers with high multiplier potential and equip them to deliver courses within their institution/disciplines. After the bootcamp, the trainer network will be incentivized to add new content to the portal and run more innovative events via gamification tools. Enhancements to content maps and learning structures will enable individualised learning pathways to be recommended to users, and digital badges will be assigned to reward completion. The bootcamp is a key example of the FOSTER+ train-the-trainer approach: it will support individuals capable of replicating and multiplying the training within their institutions and communities. Intermediaries such as librarians, administrators, and research infrastructures are key contacts to reach out to the research community and deliver the infrastructure needed to support Open Science.
4.3 The Perks and Challenges of Drawing Maps and Walking at the Same Time – Lessons learned by Stockholm University Library Management
Hellmark Lindgren, Birgitta*; Widmark, Wilhelm*
Stockholm University Library
To manage and live with change has become an inevitable skill for all of us who work in the library sector. It does not matter whether you are a specialist or a generalist or what role or function you have.
Looking five years back in time, several changes has taken place at Stockholm University regarding the library. The needs of our users have changed, our structural place in the organization, our premises, our assignment, our service offers as well as the kind of competence we need, have changed. The only thing that has remained unchanged is our budget.
The purpose of this paper is to summarize important changes the library has undergone and conclude our lessons learned so far. What have we done and why, ranging from the shift to user driven acquisition and the merge of digital and printed resources to a large investment in infrastructure for scholarly communication and open science. What challenges have we had with our different approaches of catalyzing change? What is the outcome so far?
The objective of this paper is to reflect on the changes we have understood as necessary to pursue during the last five years and from that conclude what we believe is the way forward. The understanding of what has taken place at the library during the last five years is based on workshops in the management group.
Conclusions we will elaborate on are several. One concern the importance of accepting that change is challenging and takes time, and sometimes we need to slow down and sometimes we need to speed up and the challenge is to know what is appropriate in a certain situation. Another is that change is possible without extra funding if we reorganize and adjust according to an outside and in perspective, a third is the importance of a good dialogue with the university management and a common understanding of needs and priorities, a fourth is that trying out on a small scale often is more efficient than surveys of long duration. A fifth conclusion is that a clear direction does not equal a detailed plan and the conviction that every consequence cannot be foreseen in detail. Rather we believe in drawing the map while walking, with its perks and challenges.
16.30-17.30: Knowledge Café: LIBER Roadmap
20.00-23.00: Conference dinner
Thursday 6 July 2017
09.00-11.00: Parallel sessions
5.1 The Empires of the Future are the Empires of the Mind’ [Winston Churchill]: Defining the Role of Libraries in the Open Science Landscape
Ayris, Paul* (1); Ignat, Tiberius* (2)
1: UCL, United Kingdom; 2: Scientific Knowledge Services, Switzerland
Open Science represents a potential revolution in the way that research is undertaken, disseminated and curated. The paper will look at the main elements of the Open Science workflow – conceptualization, data gathering, analysis, publication, review – and the characteristics of that workflow – citizen science, open code, open access, pre-prints, alternative reputation systems, science blogs, open annotation, open data, open lab books/workflows, data-intensive approaches.
Having established the baseline for Open Science approaches, the paper will look at the impact of open science in 4 areas of activity, identify the current role of the Library in each and the potential the Library has to contribute to this agenda going forward. The four areas which the paper will address are open access and new publishing models, research data management, the European Open Science cloud and citizen science.
In the area of open access, libraries have customarily engaged in the payment of APCs (article processing charges) and in establishing open access repositories. The paper will look at activity in one of the most active UK open access teams at UCL and then examine future publishing models. In particular, it will show universities might themselves subvert the current monograph model by offering publishing services from university libraries.
In research data management, the outputs and outcomes of the EU-funded LEARN project will be analysed. These will dwell on research data management policy, best practice case studies, executive briefings and the findings of a survey looking at the level of preparation for RDM in research organisations across the globe. The paper will look particularly at the future role for libraries in the research data space, which the LEARN project is identifying, and suggest that research data management in the context of open science re-defines the role of the Library in research support and the research workflow.
The European open science cloud (EOSC) has the potential to put Europe at the forefront of open science developments. As a member of the high level EOSC Expert Group, the principal speaker will analyse the main drivers behind the recommendations for the development of the cloud and the future role for libraries in sustaining this revolutionary development.
Citizen science is part of citizen engagement in science and research. We observe a growing interest of citizens to contribute to a better society. In conjunction with newly-available technologies, a world of opportunities opens for research institutions. The paper will map existing experiences and recommendations from research intensive organizations and we will then present a blueprint for the roles of the library in this landscape with Guidelines for best practice.
The paper will conclude by analysing the challenges which open science presents. Rooted in the research workflow, the paper will identify the impact which open science is having on libraries and identify future roles that they can adopt in their institutions, both to support and also to help lead open science implementation.
5.2 How to Reach a Wider Audience with Open Access Publishing: What Research Universities can Learn from Universities of Applied Sciences
Woutersen-Windhouwer, Saskia* (1); Kuijper, Jaroen (2)
1: University of Amsterdam, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 2: Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Wibautstraat 2-4, 1091 GM Amsterdam, The Netherlands
In Amsterdam, the libraries of the research university (UvA) and the university of applied sciences (AUAS) work closely together. In this cooperation, differences between these institutions become particularly clear when we look at the aim and implementation of open access policies. Here, we show what research universities (RU) can learn from the open access policy of a university of applied sciences (UAS).
A fundamental difference between a RU and UAS is that research at the latter is mainly practice-based and demand-driven. Whereas researchers at a RU primarily transfers their results to fellow scientists, a UAS transfers its results mainly to professionals and enterprises. These target groups of a UAS are becoming more important for the RU as well, in the search of co-financing by enterprises and other stakeholders, to fulfil their valorisation requirements. In the Netherlands, the latter includes a government initiative to democratize the research agenda by means of a National Research Agenda, in which all citizens could propose research questions.
Recently the library of UvA/AUAS has written a plan on open access based on the FAIR-principle (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) for the AUAS. The plan has been approved by the Executive Board, and will be executed by the Library, the Centres for Applied Research, the Legal Affairs and the Education and Research Office. The reason that this ambitious plan to go for 100% open access (with an open access fund, a new AUAS ‘Open’ series, and a mandatory deposit in the repository) could be approved, is that in general there is not a strong (scientific) publication tradition at the AUAS. That is in contrast with the RU where publish or perish and academic freedom form an essential part of the publication tradition. At the AUAS, researchers and boards quickly became enthusiastic about open access.
Researchers at the AUAS find it most important that output of their research will be optimally accessible, disseminated and reused by professionals, enterprises, scientists, schools and other stakeholders, etc. To facilitate this, authors can easily register and upload their research output (ranging from manuscripts to games) in the current research information system (CRIS) combined with a repository. The CRIS then disseminates the results to all kinds of platforms. Because the AUAS is copyright owner of the output of its employees, all products will be granted a CC-BY license and can easily be reused. In addition, a layman summary (both in English and Dutch) and keywords will also be provided in the CRIS to ensure that the research is truly accessible to a wide audience, including non-experts.
With the AUAS plan, not only financial and legal barriers to access have been removed, but also the language barrier. This makes the research output FAIR to the primary target group of the product, but more importantly, it enables interaction between the AUAS and a broad audience, consisting of researchers from other disciplines, and a wide range of professionals, enterprises, civil servants, schools and citizens.
5.3 Risk Aversion Narrows the Future of Libraries
Vigen, Jens* (1); Antelman, Kristin* (2); Nietzold, Alexander* (3)
1: CERN, Switzerland; 2: Caltech, United States; 3: Tind Technologies, Norway
Librarians like to believe that we are a source for innovation, but where is our innovation in the services we provide to the scientific community? Are we perhaps not as innovative as we think we are?
Jump 20 years forward. Virtually all scientific research is open access. It is unimaginable that researchers do not archive and share their data and software. The quantity of digitally-born assets, including citizen-created content, has exploded; it is supported by global infrastructure linked to networks of tools tailored to individual research communities. Journals still exist but articles have become complex, interlinked communications that include text, data and software, and are mined by semantic algorithms more than read by humans.
In the future libraries will have stopped doing much of what we are doing today. We keep up with the most promising trends in scholarly communications. We deploy realistic strategies to enable researchers to be successful, especially when those green shoots of innovation spring up in our own institutions. We look at everything we do through the lens of the expectations and behaviors of our users, be they scientists or citizens with information needs.
What should libraries be doing in 2017 to be meaningful partners for authors and readers, and our institutions, in this world? Do we feel confident that we be able to respond nimbly as these changes come along if we continue along our current path? What are the barriers we must overtime to become that kind of library?
Libraries are weighed down by significant ballast we carry from our print past. The Integrated Library System, and its print- and process-centric workflows and mindset, is a major culprit. It holds us back at a time when platforms based on modern web technologies that manage complex digital objects and are designed around how researchers work today are already available. Certainly, these will change over the next 20 years, but that does not mean libraries can simply afford to hold back until things are “settled” and the “perfect” solution has come along. Bringing these platforms into the library in place of the old-school ILS can serve as a catalyst for library staff to think differently, spend less time on lower-value work, and see the library first of all through their users’ eyes. Developing relevant skills, cultivating engagement, and building our future credibility within our institutions, can all happen now.
Innovation cannot be limited to a few cutting-edge institutions. If libraries of all sizes and types do not want to be pushed aside from their centuries-long role in the research and education enterprise, we can–and must–take greater risks, begin to live in the future.
This paper will feature two “visitors from the future,” the CERN and Caltech libraries. We will share our initiatives, each informed by a researcher-first mindset and employing tools and collaborations undertaken in partnership with TIND (CERN spin-off). We believe the steps CERN and Caltech have taken to begin to build our libraries of 2035 can serve as relevant, even inspiring, models for others.
6.1 Knowledge Exchange Consensus: Monitoring of Open Access Publications and Cost Data
Svendsen, Michael (1); Thomasen, Christian H.* (2)
1: Royal Danish Library, Denmark; 2: Knowledge Exchange, Denmark
Background: Knowledge Exchange (KE) has in recent years actively been focusing on activities of monitoring Open Access (OA). KE consists of six European organisations working together to support the development of digital infrastructure to enable open scholarship. As a result of two international workshops held in 2015 and 2016 both challenges and solutions to monitoring of OA publications and derived cost data were addressed, and a series of practice-based recommendations are now formed as the “Knowledge Exchange Consensus on monitoring of OA”.
Purpose and method: In a changing landscape towards increasing OA publishing, it has become necessary for universities and at an aggregated national and international level to monitor OA publications and cost data related to different types of business models in the publishing market. Furthermore, a standardised monitoring of OA publishing and costs is a prerequisite for sustainability of institutional budget allocations in times of economic restraints.
The purpose of increased international cooperation in the workshops was achieved through a mixed qualitative method of status reporting from KE country partners laying the baseline for setting up breakout groups to discuss selected topics in depth with the purpose of highlighting the monitoring needs of:
- quality in collecting data from sources
- efficiency in monitoring workflows
- aggregation of data via usage of standards
- alignment across the policy landscape
Objective: With these workshop series KE has set a clear goal of pushing towards more transparent exchange of metadata of OA and cost data. The long-term goal to successfully increase fairer OA publishing relies on transparency of data from publishers, institutions and countries in order to gain an economic review of the Total Cost of Publication (TCP). In pushing for transparency and shared optimization of OA monitoring the workshops has delivered a concordant objective of recommendations that can influence evidence based policy making, helping streamline economical spending and promoting better outcomes of negotiations with publishers.
Conclusions: Metadata standards and common definitions of OA publications are crucial and do exist. When new standards are needed they should be added to existing protocols. Policies and agreements should require publishers to deliver data in ways that make the workflows open and transparent. Repositories or CRIS’s should be used as sources for monitoring.
When monitoring OA cost data accounting systems and repositories should be interoperable so that cost data at all levels can be easily retrieved. Data should be open and shareable, thus the DOI becoming a key tool. Publishers should be required to enter the needed data such as license, DOI, corresponding author and APC in the publication metadata as well as in the publications themselves. Such requirements should be settled in contracts with the publishers avoiding non-disclosure regulations at all time.
A transparent overview of the TCP is a key concept and it’s important for consortia as well as for HEI to be able to dissect costs of publishing carefully, underlining that the APC does not cover all costs of publication.
6.2 COUNTER Standards for Open Access: The Value of Measuring/the Measuring of Value
Greene, Joseph W.*
University College Dublin, Ireland
In an environment seemingly obsessed with metrics, impact, visibility and returns-on-investment, there exist no standards for quantifying and directly measuring the value of openly accessible materials. It is tautological to say that the value of Open Access (OA) is in making scholarly and scientific research more accessible. Yet the measurement that is given the most attention is the OA citation advantage. But this is a proxy measure, a measure of one of the many effects of OA, controversial in its intimation that citation can always be equated with value. If the value-add of OA is its added accessibility, then the measuring of accesses is the measure of its value. There is nothing controversial about this: if an OA item has been downloaded one hundred times, it has been accessed one hundred times. Whether pored over or instantly discarded, the item has been accessed in a way that it would not have been had its access been restricted: the end user is given the choice of deciding whether the paper is of value. Access gives this choice; this is where OA’s value lies. The problem is that every publisher, host, software platform, aggregator, statistical package and individual instance or combination measures usage—primarily downloads—differently. Up to 85% of open content usage can be attributed to non-human ‘users’: computer programs that crawl the web for content for variously legitimate and nefarious purposes. Recently, Project COUNTER convened a group of volunteer experts to address the problem, with a view to creating a set of standards for measuring usage that can be applied by any provider of openly accessible content. These standards will make it possible for publishers and other content hosts to give comparable usage statistics for open access content, equivalent to existing COUNTER reports used daily by e-resource librarians for cost-per-click analyses and journal selection and deselection. Such a measure is a crucial but absent variable in the formula for determining the sustainability of different strands of the scholarly communication infrastructure. Since it is being implemented by Project COUNTER, the only standards-setting organisation of its kind, and includes members from several large publishers, OpenAIRE, members of the DSpace, EPrints and Digital Commons development teams, data from Open Journal Systems, IRUS-UK, and others, the effects have the potential to be far reaching.
6.3 Science Belongs to Everyone – Open Access Measures in Helsinki University Library and the Finnish Literature Society 2014-2017
Alén, Niklas* (2); Kuusela, Marjo* (1)
1: University of Helsinki, Finland; 2: Finnish Literature Society, Finland
Open access in all of its forms is well established in Finnish academia. On a national level open access has been recognized as an important publishing practice by the Ministry of Education and Culture in its Open Science and Research Initiative. Most Finnish universities have their own institutional repositories, and many domestic scholarly journals have successfully transformed themselves to open access publications. The only part of the scholarly publishing ecosystem clearly lagging behind is monograph publishing. To remedy this situation the Helsinki University Library – implementing the University’s strategic plan 2017-2020 to make research results accessible to the academic community and society at large – and the Finnish Literature Society (SKS) have launched multiple programmes independently and in consort.
In our paper we aim to bring forward the publisher’s and the library’s points of view in open access monograph publishing in the Finnish context. We will take a closer look at the library’s motives, challenges and workflow as well as finding sustainable practices for managing open access books by libraries. We will also examine open access monograph publishing through the lens of a publisher, the Finnish Literature Society.
The SKS is a learned society founded in 1831. It is also Finland’s largest scholarly publisher in the field of the humanities. The SKS Open Science -project began its work in November 2014. It produced a report on open access monograph publishing in the national and international context in 2015. After the report the SKS launched its open access programme in 2016 as one of the first publishers in Finland.
In December of 2015 the SKS and the Helsinki University Library began a pilot project to have 30 titles by Helsinki University scholars published in open access. The success of the library-publisher co-operation led to the development of the Aleksandria library consortium pilot. Aleksandria is an innovative funding mechanism for Finnish language scholarly monographs. It works very much along the lines of the international Knowledge Unlatched-consortium, but it’s adapted to fit the Finnish context.
Throughout the pilot projects the stakeholders’ concerns related to OA monograph publishing have been explored. Our practical goal is to lower the barriers and facilitate OA publishing in Finland. For libraries OA monographs still represent tributaries rather than main stream, and the pilot’s goal is to accrue know-how and annex OA monographs from a separate silo to the library’s regular metadata and discovery work flows. New competencies needed by librarians were also mapped: informing authors of agreements, funder requirements, CC-licenses, OA-metrics, dissemination and discovery.
During the pilot projects we also organize workshops (e.g. Books, Libraries and Open Access) concentrating on OA monograph funding models, discoverability, usage and metrics and library’s role in OA monograph field.
7.1 Text and Data Mining : Making the Most of a Copyright Exception
Roche, Julien* (1); Johnson, Rob (2)
1: University Lille 1, France; 2: Research Consulting, UK
Background: The European Commission’s proposals for a digital single market are likely to see the introduction of a mandatory copyright exception for text and data mining in public research. Under this new copyright regime, academic librarians will have a crucial role to play in advising researchers on their rights and supporting them in accessing the content they need.
Paper aims: This paper will share the results of a qualitative study of TDM researchers, librarians and infrastructure providers working in the UK, France and beyond. The UK introduced a copyright exception for TDM in 2014, and France in 2016, and the lessons learned from these early adopters are now highly relevant to the rest of Europe, as widespread implementation of a copyright exception for TDM draws ever closer.
Method: The study was completed by Research Consulting, a UK-based consultancy, on behalf of the ADBU, the French association of directors and senior staff in university and research libraries. It was comprised of the following elements:
- Desk-based review of relevant literature and legislation in the UK, France and at European level.
- Case study identification and development. 70 potential contributors were identified over the course of our work. 55 of these individuals were approached formally to request their input, and 25 were interviewed as part of the final study.
- Validation of findings. The draft findings were shared with a further 10 TDM specialists in the UK, France and US to validate the findings, and ensure that they present a balanced picture of the current environment for TDM.
Results and conclusions: The study found that uptake of TDM remains low in the UK despite the introduction of a copyright exception some two years earlier. Both the UK and France, and by extension the rest of Europe, face common challenges in making the most of a copyright exception, which can be summarised as follows:
- Achieving legal clarity
- Delivering access to content
- Developing infrastructure
- Enhancing skills and support
- Providing incentives for TDM
The study identified a key role for academic librarians in enabling greater uptake of TDM by public researchers, and makes a number of recommendations on how they and other stakeholders should respond to the introduction of a copyright exception.
Study update: Study was delivered end of 2016. Paper will also give an update regarding legal context in Europe and in France (decrees to be published).
7.2 Fostering New Open Access Initiatives: UCL Press: the First Fully Open Access University Press in the UK
UCL Press, United Kingdom
When UCL Press (University College London) launched in June 2015 it was the first university press in the UK to launch with a fully open access model. UCL is a leading global research institution, ranked 7th in the world by the QS World University Rankings, and it supports a strong open access position in its policies and infrastructure. Its flagship initiative in this area is UCL Press, which publishes scholarly monographs, textbooks and journals, disseminated as open access PDFs on a number of platforms including its website, UCL Discovery (institutional repository), JSTOR and OAPEN; in enhanced browser-based editions; and in print for sale through traditional retail channels.
Since launching it has published 26 books and seven journals in many subject areas but principally archaeology, architecture and urban studies, anthropology, history and media studies. In 2017, it will publish around 40 books and it has plans for further expansion in 2018, such is the demand for open access publishing from UCL academics. UCL funds UCL academics to publish open access books and journals with the Press and the majority of its authors are from UCL. UCL Press also publishes non-UCL authors, who are charged a Book Processing Charge. The Press’s six staff are all publishing professionals with backgrounds in scholarly and institutional publishing.
The global impact achieved by the Press in its first 18 months or so of publishing activity have exceeded all expectations: UCL Press books and journals have been downloaded over 190,000 times in over 200 countries. The most downloaded book is “How the World Changed Social Media” by Daniel Miller et al, which has been downloaded over 60,000 times since publication on 1 March 2016.
Based on its success so far, UCL Press now plans to develop its textbook publishing programme further, working closely with the university’s Open Educational Resources strategy. UCL’s OER initiatives and UCL Press’s textbook publishing plans were recently highlighted in LERU’s position paper on “Excellent Education in Research-Rich Universities” (Feb 2017), the only one of the 23 LERU universities to have their OER activity featured in the paper.
An open access press requires funding from the institution and a commitment to the open science agenda at a senior level; the resulting benefits and global impact for the institution’s research are undeniable. Based within UCL Library Services, UCL Press delivers many of the strategic goals of the library and the wider institution, and benefits from library infrastructure and initiatives. All UCL Press outputs are hosted in UCL Discovery, which is managed by UCL Library Services. The CEO of UCL Press is also the Pro-Vice Provost of UCL Library Services, who leads on wider OA initiatives at the institution and at national policy level. UCL’s open access services, including the Press, are led by the UCL Library Services Assistant Director (Support Services).
By embedding itself at the heart of institutional activity and delivering UCL’s scholarly research to a global audience, UCL Press represents a new open access publishing model whose experience can serve other institutions.
7.3 LibChain – Open, Verifiable and Anonymous Access Management
Cabello, Juan; Janacik, Peter; Janßen, Gerrit; Jungnickel, Tim*; Mühle, Alexander
TU Berlin, Germany
Current contracts between academic publishers and research libraries are based on subscription models, granting patrons of a library almost unlimited access the digital publications of a single publisher. Unfortunately, pricing models often do not correspond to the usage of the publishers’ content. As a consequence, several German research libraries canceled their subscription of Elsevier’s publications.
In this paper, we present LibChain, a decentral, verifiable and anonymous access management based on blockchain technology. LibChain envisions a novel procedure to access digital media from different publishers through a library. With the LibChain service, the library stores every request of a digital publication directly in the blockchain, making it an anonymous but verifiable source for publishers to provide access to the user. The decentral blockchain architecture enables new access models for digital media and allows fairer and more accurate pricing models based on the usage.
LibChain unleashes the full potential if multiple libraries cooperate to create trustworthy usage metrics or share the access to digital publications. As a design principle of the underlying blockchain technology, no mutual trust is required to generate verifiable transactions. We explicitly promote open access publications in our system design by providing verifiable usage metrics among distributed libraries and enable anonymous compensations and donations. In addition to a fully described programming interface for established publishers, we provide a standalone toolkit for conferences and smaller research institutes. Hence, small groups of authors can easily contribute to the LibChain universe and act as their own open access publisher.
The implementation of our research prototype is based on the open source blockchain framework ethereum. The key advantages of LibChain are: First, it provides a distributed, failure tolerant mechanism for free, open and anonymous access to content that can be used out-of-the-box by anyone. Second, it is compatible to conventional business models, where publishers sell their content for a predefined price. This compatibility is aimed to accelerate the adoption of LibChain by maximising network-external value by integrating the open access and payed publication segments. Third, LibChain provides a reliable way to measure the impact of content and realise payments, since due to its blockchain core, all interactions with LibChain can be verified. Fourth, LibChain balances the access to information relevant to content providers and the privacy needs of users. Given these advantages, LibChain has the potential to accelerate the shift to an open access publication model that provides a robust, distributed content exchange mechanism and substantially higher utility than conventional models to all involved parties.
8.1 Open Science is Built on Trust…How about our Library Organisation?
van Otegem, Matthijs*
Erasmus University Rotterdam, Netherlands, The
As we move into open science the nature of the library changes. As a consequence our library organization should change as well. In a knowledge economy trust is a key ingredient: it is a pillar in the open science movement. To be successful in open science, we need to incorporate trust in our library culture. At Rotterdam university library we took up the challenge.
We want to be flexible, open, digital and entrepreneurial, but our current organizational models do not fit this need. We have moved from an inward looking, task-oriented organization into a result driven culture, but this does not seem to be the solution. We managed to get great projects done in a short time. Yet, people in libraries do not work for carrots and sticks: they are in the library field because they feel it is worthwhile to commit themselves to this cause. If we continue our result driven approach we would drive out the soul of our organization.
How would our organization look like if we would build it entirely on trust?
In Rotterdam we started this journey. First of all, we put the cause central in our vision rather than tasks or results. We trust our colleagues to be committed and capable to do what is needed and what is right. Our colleagues can decide which projects contribute best to our cause, they can decide about the means -time, budgets- needed. They have all the information needed for decisions at hand, as we do not have any confidential information (except for information that legally cannot be shared). And then they can decide for themselves. Decisions are made, also by the director, when at least three relevant colleagues have been consulted for advice. We are totally flexible: you have a job… but that does not mean you have work. People can take the role they think is needed and they aspire. This has released a lot of energy: you can bring your entire self to work when you feel that what you do is right and meaningful. I wish we would all have this experience and I want to share it with you.
8.2 OER Librarians Facilitating Open Science
van Wijngaarden, Hilde*
University of Amsterdam, Netherlands, The
Universities supporting open science choose to share their research results, data and publications, but also embrace the fundamental principle of ‘open’ as a core value of science. With this core value comes open education. Although less often focused on, open education is actually the third pillar of open science, next to open access and open data.
To organize the third pillar, libraries are a powerful facilitator. On the one hand because they have proven to be successful advocates of open access and open data and can promote and lobby for open policies for education as well. The other strength of the library to support open education is their ability to facilitate the required practical processes to adopt open educational resources. Practical support actually derives naturally from traditional supporting roles of the library, on copyright, information discovery, information literacy skills and curation of information.
When a teacher sets up his reading list, very often the library is involved, checking reading rights, advising on open alternatives and helping to prevent copyright violations by teachers sharing articles with their class. Once the librarian and teacher start talking on impossibilities, they move on to discuss possibilities: how to share and use open educational materials? The OER librarian is born.
And then the OER librarian starts expanding his library core competency of discovery towards educational resources. What is out there? What can be reused? In close contact with the teacher, librarians can help find more than books to study, they can identify suitable open courses, knowledge video’s and kinds of other materials to (re-)use. Setting up a portal to search and find OER is a logical next step.
Librarians are teachers themselves, teaching information literacy skills and all kinds of other trainings. In this role the librarians teach and train about open education and as teachers themselves, they can use their own experiences when helping others. What is involved in sharing OER? What is keeping us from using each other’s materials? That experience helps the librarian to help teachers going ‘open’.
The library manages collections, keeps information safe, findable and reusable. More and more, they are doing that for educational materials as well as for publications and data. Starting practical within the closed environment of the university, just being efficient in saving work for reuse the next year, an educational repository is set up. That repository could then be used for opening up, and the library helps making the materials findable.
The OER librarian is a known concept in the United States, but in Europe, this role of librarians still has to be further developed. In the Netherlands, a working group of librarians supporting education works on defining the role and facilitates knowledge sharing to enhance the support for open education. With the growing recognition of the importance of excellent education in research intensive universities, research libraries start to focus more and more on education support. And then it is obvious, that for a librarian, that education should be open.
8.3 Growing a Culture for Change at The University of Manchester Library
The University of Manchester Library, United Kingdom
Growing a culture for change at The University of Manchester Library In 2013 The University of Manchester Library embarked on an ambitious new strategy to effectively serve students, researchers and the community. The Library’s Leadership Team began to realise that if the organisation was to deliver its ambitious strategy, a programme of culture change would be required to develop the required behaviours and skill-sets across the Library’s 300 plus staff. For the strategy to be achieved, the Library had to increase self-awareness of behaviours that could act as a barrier to change, whilst providing an engaging environment where the motivations and drivers for change in strategic direction are understood. We will explore the innovative tactics employed by the organisation to achieve these two objectives, along with the challenges, successes and lessons learned throughout the process.
Culture change and the ‘Five ways of working’
Using innovative digital and face-to-face channels, the Library engaged its entire workforce in the development of a set of values known as ‘Five ways of working’ to underpin a new culture. We will share details of the tactics used to embed the ‘Five ways of working’ across the Library, ensuring they remained front of mind and staff continued to ‘live’ the values day-to-day. Discover how, through a fresh and innovative approach to surveying staff behaviours and motivations, the Library has been able to evaluate the progress made on its culture change journey and refocus efforts at an organisational and local level two years after beginning the process.
Developing an engaging approach to strategic planning
Having identified that staff felt distanced from the current strategy and struggled to link their day-to-day roles to the Library’s strategic objectives, it was clear a fresh and more engaging approach to strategic planning was required. The Library successfully engaged staff at all levels of seniority to help shape its new strategy by contributing to the planning process from the beginning. We will share the tactics employed to sustain engagement which resulted in over 50% of staff actively contributing throughout several months of detailed planning. Discover how this holistic approach to the strategic planning process and evolving culture change resulted in higher engagement and increased understanding of Library and University strategy.
11.30-12.15: Plenary session 2
Kathleen Shearer has been working in the areas of open access, research data management and digital libraries for many years. Shearer is the Executive Director of COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories), an international association of repository initiatives that was launched in October 2009. COAR is located in Gottingen, Germany and has a membership of over 100 institutions worldwide from 36 countries in 5 continents. COAR has been developing a model for sustainable scholarly communications based on a global network of open access repositories and has also been actively promoting the role of libraries in the future of scholarly communication.
Shearer is also a consultant for several other organizations. She has been a Research Associate with the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) since early 2000. She was instrumental in the launch of the Portage Research Data Management Network in Canada and contributed to the development of the recently released CARL Scholarly Communication Roadmap. She is also a Partnership Consultant with the US-based Association of Research Libraries (ARL), providing expertise to the Association about international activities and scholarly communication. Shearer has also done extensive work for the Canadian federal government and research funding agencies including a project to develop metrics and indicators framework for open science.
12.15-12.45: Sponsor Strategy Slot
12.45-13.00: Poster presentations
14.00-15.00: Panel discussion
16.15-16.30: Poster presentations
16.30-17.45: Meeting of Participants
20.00-22.00: Conference reception and Conference photo
Friday, July 7
09.00-10.30: Parallel sessions
9.1 Digital Repository as a Platform for Innovation – the Case for Europe PMC
Levchenko, Mariia*; McEntyre, Johanna
EMBL-EBI, United Kingdom
Digital repositories have become an important cornerstone in the complex landscape of scholarly communications. However, they are often viewed as a primarily data storage facility, thereby limiting the range of their potential use cases. Moving away from the idea of a digital repository as a static content provider towards an information hub linking different types of digital resources could help researchers to cope with the growing wealth of scientific knowledge. In this presentation, we want to share our experience in developing Europe PMC (europepmc.org), a global open digital archive for biomedical literature, as a platform for innovation.
Europe PMC operates as a designated repository for the open access publication policies of 27 international life science funders. Europe PMC participates in the PubMed Central International – the network of archives that share locally deposited content. We view literature as a bridging mechanism for the wider research infrastructure, connecting publications, data and metrics. Europe PMC started as a repository, but has since transformed to a community platform open for new developments.
We have developed several mechanisms to enable community-driven contributions. The External Links service allows sites hosting related information or tools to link out from articles in Europe PMC to their websites. This service is open to databases citing the life science literature, repositories that hold full-text content, resources providing lay audience summaries, etc. Such crosslinks create a net of knowledge, combining publications, datasets, patents, theses, and teaching materials, and allowing the user to easily navigate the content following their research workflow.
In addition to External Links we have set up a platform for text miners to share their outputs with the wider scientific audience. This platform is based on a new tool, called SciLite, which allows text-mined terms to be displayed as an overlay on research articles. SciLite makes it easier for Europe PMC users to scan articles for key concepts and identify relationships between them. Text-mined annotations provide deep links with related data, enriching articles with structured information. We believe that algorithms and applications developed by the text mining community will add significant value to the content and spawn innovative approaches to interact with the scientific literature.
The core mission of Europe PMC is to build open, full-text literature resources and support innovation by engaging users, enabling contributors and integrating related research data. We envision the future, where an open full-text article becomes a platform itself, seamlessly combining all associated information and helping to transform this information into knowledge.
9.2 A Comprehensive Approach Towards the Curation of Born Digital Material by Leiden University Libraries
van Duijn, Mart*; Sesink, Laurents*
Leiden University Libraries, Netherlands, The
One of the central tasks of Leiden University Libraries is to preserve academic heritage: the objects and the results of scholarship created through the centuries and everything related to the history, culture and traditions of the university. The library has more than four hundred years of experience in managing publications and archives of Leiden scholars, mostly written or printed on paper. The digital turn, however, has forced us to rethink our strategies and to update our skills. We are confronted with a multitude of heterogeneous born digital materials, coming from different scholarly processes such as research, publication and communication. These developments pose serious challenges to our existing library infrastructure. Furthermore, Open Science will change the way researchers work and will affect the role of the academic library considerably. Therefore, we need to act.
Leiden University Libraries is currently in the process of formulating a policy on born digital materials, to create a workflow that will enable us to manage this material effectively and to select or to develop services for the long term storage and accessibility of these objects. A challenge is to maintain the integrity and authenticity of the materials in such a way that the digital objects can be presented in context through our online library catalogue, facilitating the access to these objects as well as possible. Our aim is to ensure that born digital academic heritage can be visible, usable and sustainable, in compliance with the guidelines of the Dutch national strategy for digital heritage. These guidelines demand a research infrastructure which is open and participatory, and which scales to the needs of users in the research, archive, libraries and heritage domains, in step with international standards for trusted digital repositories.
To be able to manage the disparate forms of digital academic heritage (publications, research data and software, websites, email, etc.) it was necessary, firstly, to develop a typology of born digital materials. We have devised a model which describes the different types of objects, together with the different domains in which they function (research, general library collections, heritage collections). Subsequently, we linked the different object types to relevant applications and to service providers to curate these objects. This model interestingly revealed that, at present, specific types of applications or services are not fully equipped yet to serve our purposes. Using this model as a basis, we are able to evaluate our approach and assess the selected preferred service providers through a series of pilot projects. At the moment, for example, we are collaborating with a Leiden professor who seeks to secure his paper and digital archive after his retirement, and who turned to Leiden University Libraries for preservation.
In this paper, we will discuss the comprehensive approach followed by Leiden University Libraries, the object type/domain model, domain architecture and the various challenges that emerge from the aim to manage born digital material more generally.
9.3 Considerations on Data Repositories as a Backbone for Open Science and Open Research
ZBW – Leibniz Information Center for Economics, Germany
In recent years, repositories for uploading, publishing, archiving and sharing data and code have emerged, with Zenodo perhaps the most popular one among researchers. The service is primarily used across different domains by individual researchers to promote their research work, while institutional repositories and comparable ‘official’ infrastructures as default platforms for managing data may have found some respect, but still do not work on a broad level. The reasons for reluctance with publishing and sharing data are manifold, but apart from any individual, ‘cultural’ or disciplinary idiosyncrasies, today’s infrastructure for enabling and supporting Open Science and Open Data still lacks some basic ‘features’ to be provided across different disciplines:
- Search and discovery of research output in terms of data, software, codebooks and provenance. In particular, aggregators and service providers for distributed, locally generated and managed research output face difficulties with tracking and indexing research results beyond traditional publications. For instance, there is no common solution for indexing and searching data, while the whole process of notifying and synchronizing incoming metadata is yet not supported well enough, but still heavily dependent on protocols like OAI-PMH. Another issue is the transdisciplinary approach towards discovery of research output, which normally is conducted by means of semantic integration of descriptive metadata, but which is hard to achieve across different domains. Here, a geolocation based approach may be more promising, with the majority of data contributions already providing structured metadata on this. One may also build on provenance information, which is both cross-disciplinary and ubiquitous enough to enable an overall discovery of and access to both data and tools processing that data.
- Integration of research data with authority data and other external sources. While researchers focus on their work, they should be supported best with its integration into existing information systems maintained by libraries and related organizations. Although this issue is already addressed by CRIS systems and scholarly identifier systems like ORCID, it is still an open task to relate a researcher’s output to his or her identity or to different taxonomies, which can help to categorize this output across different domains.
- Integration with existing research workflows. Services like Zenodo are still very much attached to the traditional system for scholarly publishing: they require extra metadata for generating a persistent identifier, and they need data files plus README file and further documentation, all of them often collected and provided as a ZIP file. Since this works fine from the point of view of publishing a researcher’s results, the straightforward consumption of this output is limited to relatively small amounts of data to be processed by local desktop programs, while normally there is no link to the infrastructure by which the dataset was originally created. Moreover, the data may contain ‘groomed’ data, so researchers might require the raw data to reproduce the same or different results, the latter as a general indicator for scientific progress
Against this background, the talk will outline requirements towards a network of distributed data repositories, which are accessible for different communities.
10.1 From Open Access to Open Data: Collaborative Work in the University Libraries of Catalonia
Alcalá, Mireia* (12); Anglada, Lluís* (12); Besson, Carme* (2); Casaldàliga, Anna* (4); Coromines, Gisela* (10); Estupinyà, Eva* (6); Fàbregas, Rosa* (2); Labastida, Ignasi* (1); Losada, Marina* (4); Montanyà, Mercè* (9); Nonó, Brigit* (5); Padrós, Rosa* (8); Paris, Lidón* (11); Reoyo, Sandra* (12); Rius, Josepa* (7); Ros-Blanco, Laia* (10); Rovira, Anna* (3); de la Vega, Ricard* (12)
1: Universitat de Barcelona; 2: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; 3: Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya; 4: Universitat Pompeu Fabra; 5: Universitat de Girona; 6: Universitat de Lleida; 7: Universitat Rovira i Virgili; 8: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya; 9: Universitat de Vic-Universitat Central de Catalunya; 10: Universitat Ramon Llull; 11: Universitat Jaume I; 12: Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya
Since 2014 the university libraries of Catalonia have been working with the Libraries and Documentation Area of the University Services Consortium of Catalonia (CSUC) to support research through a working group (GTSR). The group focuses on open access, institutional and disciplinary repositories, ORCID and the Catalan Research Portal, and since 2015 it has given special priority to research data management (RDM). The aim is to help researchers with projects in the Horizon 2020 programme to meet the requirements of the Open Research Data Pilot, because the amount of European funds obtained for university projects is significant and shows a positive trend.
The starting point for work on RDM was the completion of a specific course for library staff and a prospective survey sent to researchers from the participating universities with H2020-funded projects. The survey confirmed the lack of knowledge of data management among researchers and the GTSR has therefore focused in the last year on three main areas: providing support for the drafting of data management plans (DMPs), making recommendations on data repositories, and drafting a framework agreement for a policy on open access to research data.
For the support in the drafting of DMPs, we developed a guide on what a DMP should include according to the guidelines of the H2020 framework programme, which includes the FAIR principles and is accompanied by selected examples from several real DMPs. This guide is available in text format and is included in the online tool “Research Data Management Plan” (www.dmp.csuc.cat), an adaptation of the DMPOnline tool of the Digital Curation Centre.
Pending evaluation of the possibility of creating a consortial data repository, we have created recommendations to support researchers in selecting a repository for their research data. The document provides sources for consulting disciplinary repositories (directories, publishers’ recommendations, etc.) and information on multidisciplinary repositories (a comparative table showing the type of data allowed, the file size, the associated licenses, the cost of depositing, etc.)
Finally, we developed a framework agreement for open access to research data supported by the vice-rectors for Research of the Universities of Catalonia, who have agreed to adopt policies at their universities within a year.
The RDM support services at each university have begun to offer advice on developing a DMP, selecting a subject or institutional repository, copyright, licences and citing data. The services also offer training and carry out activities aimed at raising awareness among the academic community. All these actions are now being monitored.
10.2 Museum Libraries as Change Agents in the Era of Data Science
Rinaldo, Constance* (1); Smith, Jane* (2); Kalfatovic, Martin* (3)
1: Ernst Mayr Library, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, United States of America; 2: Head of Library and Archives, Natural History Museum Cromwell Road London SW7 5BD; 3: Associate Director, Digital Programs and Initiatives Division/Program Director, Biodiversity Heritage Library Smithsonian Libraries
The purpose of this talk is to describe how natural history museum libraries and archives have embraced digitization and technology to meet the needs of scientists who rely on content that spans historical and modern time to complete their research. The Museum of Comparative Zoology Ernst Mayr Library of Harvard University (MCZ), Smithsonian Institution Libraries, and the Natural History Museum, London (NHM) will serve as the primary use cases described in this presentation.
Natural history museum libraries embrace open access and open science principles; in fact many have participated in digitization designed to populate the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL). Additionally, museums are integrating specimen data from multiple collections and data links from literature to specimens. More than in any other field of science, researchers who use these museum libraries depend on the historical literature for the underpinnings of their research. The impact of the strategy to digitize content from the great natural history collections and share content for open access and responsible re-use has resulted in a global ‘biodiversity commons.’ that improves research methodology. The scholarly enterprise encompasses partnerships among libraries, scientists, citizen scientists and researchers in the digital humanities with the result that there are collaborative grant submissions, opportunities for data mining, data sharing and data linking. National memory collections, previously hidden in archives can be exposed, stories developed and museums can integrate old data into new analyses. For example, field notes from early scientists provide a vast array of data that can be used to describe climate or show relationships of scientists with their peers in art, history and government. The accessibility of print collections and archives as they are digitized enables greater exploitation by non-scientists as well as scientists.
An unexpected result of digitization is that new socioeconomic questions arise–when can digital surrogates replace physical collections? If print collections are dismantled once there is an acceptable digital copy, is anything lost? Many objects are readily available as a digital surrogate and this allows us to think more flexibly about what we do with the physical material although in museum library settings, there is value in the physical object (book, specimen) even if it has been scanned.
Co-location of museum specimens and the literature describing them can be better achieved with the digitization of both sorts of objects; however there is a loss of information if the physical objects are discarded. Physical objects contain information–chemistry, construction and other features that are elements for research, some yet undefined. Has the science embedded in museums become history? Library materials are physical things that have become objects of study along with the content that is more readily mined in a digital form. The sensory perceptions of specimens cannot be conveyed (yet) via digital versions.
Physical objects reflect social history and are elements of cultural heritage that may be compromised if only the digital surrogates exist. In effect, the museum itself becomes a database that incorporates physical and digital objects each with their own characteristics.
10.3 Let’s Talk about it: Data Conversations as an Approach to Facilitating Open Data and Sustainability
Schwamm, Hardy*; Khokhar, Masud
Lancaster University, United Kingdom
Funders and policy makers view Open Research Data as “the next step in achieving the UK’s open science ambitions”. (UK Concordat on Open Research Data 2016). Implementing Research Data Management (RDM) best practices is a crucial step towards that goal.
Libraries are under constant pressure to facilitate these policy changes and have allocated staff and resources to advocacy, data publishing and compliance monitoring. However, based on our analysis the current efforts and expenditure are not sustainable. We need to change practices and embed RDM in researchers’ workflows.
This position paper describes the approach taken by Lancaster University Library to facilitate Open Data in a sustainable way. Early in 2017, the Library initiated Lancaster Data Conversations, a “community of practice” for researchers from all disciplines to share their experiences of collecting, managing and sharing research data.
Data Conversations have three main aims: Firstly, to engage researchers by giving them a platform to present their “data stories” and learn from their peers. Secondly, to facilitate cross-disciplinary research by bringing people from different backgrounds together, and thirdly, to set the foundations for a cultural shift by embedding effective RDM practices at early career or postgraduate student level. This culture change is needed so that Lancaster University Library will be able to provide a sustainable RDM support service.
This paper presents our experience of the Data Conversations event, our plans for further community developments, and ways in which we will continue to provide opportunities to embed effective research data management practices in research lifecycle.
11.1 Adoption and Integration of Persistent Identifiers in European Research Information Management
Bryant, Rebecca*; Dortmund, Annette*
OCLC, United States of America
Research institutions throughout Europe are engaged in research information management (RIM, sometimes known as Current Research Information Systems or CRIS) practices to aggregate, curate, and utilize information about the research conducted at their institutions. These efforts are rapidly scaling nationally and transnationally, as advancing technologies, standards, and networked information offer new opportunities for interoperability and discoverability. Team members from OCLC Research are collaboratively examining this evolving ecosystem in conjunction with LIBER, specifically investigating the adoption and integration of persistent identifiers (PIDs) and their role not only for disambiguation but also their current and future use for supporting interoperability in research information management.
Our research study is a close examination of research management practices in three national contexts: Finland, Germany, and the Netherlands, selected because they demonstrate useful parallels as well as differences that represent a host of emerging practices in research information management in Europe. In each of these countries, there is evidence of concerted efforts to develop shared research information management infrastructure operationalized at a group, regional, or national level. Through a series of semi-structured interviews with practitioners and stakeholders within universities, national libraries, and collaborative ICT organizations, we are developing three robust case studies of national RIM infrastructure as well as specific examples of RIM practices and PID integration. This project is intended to extend and complement existing research on institution-scale implementations of RIM in European research institutions, and provide university and research library leaders with useful insights on emerging practices and challenges in research management at institutional, group, national and even transnational scales.
In our presentation, we will share the findings of our research, including our improved understanding of emerging interoperability concerns and the incentives to adopt persistent identifiers for researcher names, publications, and organizations. We hope that our research will inform our collective understanding of how institutions, nations, and the broader transnational community is collecting and managing complex information about the relationships between researchers, institutional affiliations, research funders, and their affiliated research outputs.
11.2 The GND initiative 2017-2021: Developing a Backbone for the Web of Cultural and Scientific Data
Kett, Jürgen; Hartmann, Sarah*
German National Library, Germany
Combing data beyond the boundaries of systems and domains is the major concern of the linked data movement. One serious problem for the semantic web is dealing with reliability: Can the data be trusted and do processes exist that guarantee a high data quality? Of the same importance is sustainability: Is a resource stable enough to be citable, or will it be gone at some point? These questions are of special importance in the context of research, where citability is essential, and for higher-level services that are based on this kind of data. While it is not necessary for every dataset to provide a maximum degree of reliability in order to be useful, we believe that in the heart of the linked data web a reliable and stable core is needed, a backbone of trust, and that cultural heritage institutions are in a unique position to provide parts of this core: connecting their local knowledge bases could lead to a huge graph of cultural and scientific information that is both reliable and persistent.
Especially authority files like the “Gemeinsame Normdatei” (GND) make up the perfect bridges and stable anchors for cross-domain connections. Various museums, archives, research organizations and other partners outside the library domain (like Wikipedia) already contribute to the GND and it is widely connected to diverse datasets and collections all over the world. But there is still much to be done to implement our vision of a cross-domain cloud-based interlinking platform. The organization, rules, services and infrastructure around the GND need a complete revision to deal with the quickly growing network and to reconcile the requirements of the heterogeneous domains and disciplines. Further challenges are the strengthening of the support for the management and visualization of semantic connections, the integration into global data generation processes, as well as the utilization of improvements in the area of data analysis and machine learning (datamining). Together with the GND partners, the German National Library will start an initiative to move the GND to the next level. By 2021, the GND is to be gradually modernized, reorganized and expanded. In this lecture, we will line out the key opportunities and challenges and the highlights of our approach.
11.3 TIB AV-Portal: Semantic Content Mining with Semi-Automatic Metadata Editing
Saurbier, Felix* (1); Waitelonis, Jörg (2)
1: German National Library of Science and Technology (TIB), Germany; 2: yovisto GmbH, Germany
The German National Library of Science and Technology (TIB) constantly aims to promote the use and distribution of its collections. To meet these goals, the TIB consequently foregrounds semantic web technologies, which ensure interoperability of metadata, allow for advanced methods of information retrieval (e.g. semantic and cross-lingual search), and improve the ease of access to library holdings. Accordingly, the TIB publishes its extensive metadata on scientific videos provided by the TIB AV-Portal as linked open data. This data is expressed in the standardised Resource Description Framework model (RDF) and comprises both of authoritative and automatically extracted metadata.
The latter is generated through different algorithms analysing (1) superimposed text, (2) speech, and (3) visual content of the portal’s videos. In addition, the analytical results are mapped against common authority files and knowledge bases via a process of automated named entity linking (NEL) to facilitate reuse as well as interlinking of information.
But publishing data in ways, which ensure interoperability and machine readability, is only one aspect of the problem. For although there are rapid advances in the field of machine learning, content mining and automated metadata extraction still pose a significant challenge to libraries. This is mainly due to different qualities in primary materials and ontologies as well as inherent ambiguities, which may impede correct detection and linking with named entities. For example, the results of automated speech recognition strongly depend on sound quality and pronunciation. Accordingly, metadata extracted by algorithms still exhibits varying degrees of accuracy.
Therefore, the TIB is exploring novel ways to improve metadata, which both results from content mining and is provided as linked open data. To achieve this, a service combining direct user interaction with RDF-data and semi-automatic NEL is being developed and will be implemented in the TIB AV-Portal. On the one hand, this will allow for interactive editing, extension, and correction of the analytical metadata and enable staff and users to manually improve overall data quality. On the other hand, users will be provided with suggestions to support manual correction and expansion of the NEL results.
In our presentation, we would like to introduce a possible approach for such a service ensuring the publication of high quality and interoperable metadata. In the first part we will briefly discuss our experiences with data derived by content mining/NEL and stored as RDF-triples. Based on that, common challenges of semi-automatic procedures to improve data quality and user involvement will be highlighted in greater detail in the second part of the presentation. In the concluding part, we will present possible scenarios for implementing and integrating this kind of service into the TIB AV-Portal.
12.1 Is the Doctor in? PhD to Professional: Complementary Perspectives in Research Libraries
Warren, Eleanor*; McDermid, Kirstine; Andre, Deirdre
University of Leeds, United Kingdom
The role of libraries and librarians in supporting researchers is changing due to an evolving research environment. Changes in the scholarly communications landscape and in researcher skills development, as well as the emphasis placed on using bibliometrics to evaluate academic performance, have shifted the focus in many academic libraries, encouraging them to re-think how best to support their institutional research strategy. The challenge is understanding the needs of researchers and ensuring that research support librarians have the right skills to respond to these needs.
The 2011 report by the Research Information Network and Research Libraries UK identified the key characteristics of library provision required to support research in successful UK universities, with an emphasis placed upon the personal, professional and career development of researchers. In response, the University of Leeds, like many academic libraries in the UK and elsewhere, set up a dedicated research support team who have developed and diversified their skills to meet the broader support needs of the research community.
Expansion in numbers of PhD students in the UK in recent years has been accompanied by the professionalisation of researcher skills development, equipping students with transferable skills for careers outside, as well as inside, academia. Are the new generation of researchers therefore more suited to support the needs of other researchers than they have been previously? Can they offer a different, but complementary, skill-set and perspective, to library school graduates without research experience? Understanding the needs and, importantly, the behaviours, of researchers is integral to the provision of a successful library research support service, as demonstrated by the 2015 UK Survey of Academics (supported by RLUK). The peer-level support offered by library staff with research backgrounds, who can demonstrate a shared experience, understanding, and a personal enthusiasm for research, arguably has a role in developing stronger relationships between the library and the academy.
This paper surveys and discusses the changes in the skill-set, qualifications, and professional experience, of research support staff employed at Leeds University Library, and other UK research libraries. It explores whether the changes in library research support services and the development of specialist library teams has resulted in the recruitment of staff with different professional backgrounds, including researchers themselves. Analysing the findings, we consider what staff with a doctoral qualification can bring to a library research support team, and whether this is a reflection of a wider developing trend in research librarianship.
12.2 Essentials 4 Data Support : A Fine Course in FAIR Data Support
Verbakel, Ellen* (1); van den Berg, Boudewijn (2); Grootveld, Marjan (3)
1: 4TU.Centre for Research Data; 2: SURFsara; 3: DANS
This paper will examine how FAIR principles are integrated in a course for those involved in research data support, without naming them FAIR principles. The course in question is Essentials 4 Data Support which combines face-to face and online training.
Realising the European Open Science Cloud’ (the 2016 report from the Commission’s High Level Expert Group) stated the following: “The number of people [needing data] skills to effectively operate the EOSC is, we estimate, likely exceeding half a million within a decade”.
And in the same report: “well budgeted data stewardship plans should be made mandatory and we expect that on average about 5% of research expenditure should be spent on properly managing and stewarding data”.
These goals are highly ambitious. To meet these challenges a number of practical and well evaluated courses have been developed in the last years. An example of such a course is Essentials 4 Data Support, designed and developed by Research Data Netherlands (RDNL). This paper presents the FAIR principles and how the elements of these principles are incorporated in the course. For example: in the module on Data Documentation we focus on the metadata and what rich metadata means; in the module Citing Data and Data Impact, Persistent Identifiers are explained.
The authors will show that Essentials 4 Data Support is a FAIR course avant la lettre, teaching the FAIR principles before they were announced as such
12.3 Create a Culture of Innovation: A Student-Centred Innovative Programme in a University Library
University of Montana, U.S.A., United States of America
Academic libraries are leaders in embracing innovative ideas and implementing them to serve their faculty and students on college and university campuses. With rapidly changing information environment, it is imperative for academic libraries to create a culture of innovation and to frame library operations for value-added programs and services, and for continuing improvements through technologies and other tools.
The Libraries at the University of Montana in U.S. implemented a program, Student-Centered Innovative Projects, in fall 2012. The Program intends to offer the opportunities for all librarians, staff, and student assistants to think innovatively and to take a risk. The Program also provides funding resources for successful proposals to implement the innovative ideas. Since the inception of the Program, four cohorts with over 20 proposals were received, reviewed, funded, and carried out. The major elements of the Program include:
- A Working Group – Each year, the library dean appoints a Working Group to call for proposals on Student-Centered Innovative Projects. The Working Group reviews all applications, recommends the acceptable proposals, and collects the final reports for funded projects upon their completions. The proposals and final reports are posted in the library’s intranet for sharing with all at the library.
- Project Criteria and Guidelines – all librarians, staff, and student assistants are invited to propose and implement projects that contribute to students’ success. A successful proposal will be student-centered; have at least two direct and measurable outcomes enabling student success, and will meet requirements for online accessibility if it is a digital product.
- Funding –The library dean uses unrestricted gift funds to continuing support this program. Each year, this program was also reported to the library’s funding donors.
- Assessment – Each proposal is required to measure outcomes of the project,
- Marketing plans – The project proposer is responsible for developing its marketing/promotion plan.
- Initial benefits to the library – The Library has seen increased sense of thinking innovatively when designing new services for students; some library staff has grown into new roles and take high level responsibilities; several librarians also shared their experience on this program with the large library community through presentations and journal articles.
This presentation/paper will share the best practice from one academic library’s annual program, Student-Centered Innovative Projects which provides the opportunity for a broad participation from librarians, staff, and student assistants at the library, with a goal to create an organizational culture on innovation and to grow librarians and staff to meet new challenges in the rapidly changing information delivery environment.
- The participants will learn the major elements to start an innovative program, in a large or small scale;
- The participants will be able to design their own program, with some elements from this presentation, and based on the needs and resources of their own libraries;
- The participants will be able to explore other way to engage in innovative initiatives at their own libraries, based on the process and practices shared from this presentation.
11.00-13.00: Plenary session 4
Julia Reda was elected to the European Parliament for the Pirate Party in 2014. She is a Vice-Chair of her parliamentary group, the Greens/European Free Alliance. In the European Parliament, she serves as a coordinator for the Greens/EFA in the Committee on Internal Market & Consumer Protection (IMCO), as a member of the Legal Affairs (JURI) and Petition (PETI) Committees and was elected to the Enquiry Committee on the Emissions Scandal (“Dieselgate”). She co-founded the Digital Agenda intergroup. Her legislative focus is on copyright and internet policy issues. In 2015, she was responsible for the Parliament’s evaluation of the Copyright Directive.
Born in Bonn in 1986, Julia Reda was a member of the German Social Democrats for six years before joining the Piratenpartei in 2009 amidst a debate on internet blocking. She served as chairwoman of the party’s youth wing from 2010 to 2012 and is a founder of the Young Pirates of Europe. She holds an M.A. in political science and communications science from Johannes-Gutenberg-University Mainz, Germany.
More information to be announced
More information to be announced
13.00-13.15: Conference Closing Ceremony
13.15-14.30: Lunch & Farewell reception