Making Institutional Repositories Work -

. .

Résumé :
Quickly following what many expected to be a wholesale revolution in library practices, institutional repositories encountered unforeseen problems and a surprising lack of impact. Clunky or cumbersome interfaces, lack of perceived value and use by scholars, fear of copyright infringement, and the like tended to dampen excitement and adoption.This collection of essays, arranged in five thematic sections, is intended to take the pulse of institutional repositories-to see how they have matured and what can be expected from them, as well as introduce what may be the future role of the institutional repository. Making Institutional Repositories Work takes novices as well as seasoned practitioners through the practical and conceptual steps necessary to develop a functioning institutional repository, customized to the needs and culture of the home institution. The first section covers all aspects of system platforms, including hosted and open-source options, big data capabilities and integration, and issues related to discoverability. The second section addresses policy issues, from the basics to open-source and deposit mandates. The third section focuses on recruiting and even creating content. Authors in this section will address the ways that different disciplines tend to have different motivations for deposit, as well as the various ways that institutional repositories can serve as publishing platforms. The fourth section covers assessment and success measures for all involved-librarians, deans, and administrators. The theory and practice of traditional metrics, alt metrics, and peer review receive chapter-length treatment. The fifth section provides case studies that include a boots-on-the-ground perspective of issues raised in the first four sections. By noting trends and potentialities, this final section, authored by Executive Director of SPARC Heather Joseph, makes future predictions and helps managers position institutional repositories to be responsive change and even shape the evolution of scholarly communication....

Biographie:
Burton B. Callicott is a reference librarian at the College of Charleston, where he is cochair of the institutional repository committee and oversees faculty contributions, training for faculty/student access, and manages workflow.

David Scherer is the scholarly repository specialist at Purdue University, USA where he oversees the primary institutional repository of the university, Purdue e-Pubs, and serves as a representative for the Purdue Libraries Publishing Division.

Andrew Wesolek is the head of digital scholarship at Clemson University. In this role he leads the university’...

Sommaire:
Burton B. Callicott is a reference librarian at the College of Charleston, where he is cochair of the institutional repository committee and oversees faculty contributions, training for faculty/student access, and manages workflow.

David Scherer is the scholarly repository specialist at Purdue University, where he oversees the primary institutional repository of the university, Purdue e-Pubs, and serves as a representative for the Purdue Libraries Publishing Division.

Andrew Wesolek is the head of digital scholarship at Clemson University. In this role he leads the university's scholarly communication outreach, education, and infrastructure initiatives, including Clemson's institutional repository, TigerPrints.