Re: Success Rate of the First of the Self-Archiving Mandates: University of Southampton ECS

From: Arthur Sale <ahjs_at_ozemail.com.au>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:54:24 +1000

As a matter of interest the Australian research assessment (RQF) refuses to
allow its assessors to look at any metadata whatsoever, but insists that
every assessable item must be in an institutional repository (even articles
in open access journals), and assessors link direct to them.

Someday, between the UK and Australia, they'll get it right. In the meantime
we may have the better compromise here, since it encourages deposit, in
which metadata is the by-product.

Arthur Sale
University of Tasmania, Australia

> -----Original Message-----
>
> So a better contemporaneous record for deposits, but you are unlikely
> to find a high percentage of full texts for those deposits because
> SOuthampton, like many repositories in the UK, is highly influenced
> by the National Research Assessment Exercise (whose cutoff date is
> next month). The processes imposed on the repository by the funding
> councils force high metadata quality, DOIs, ISSNs and submission of
> *printed outputs*, but eschews (to all intents and purposes) PDFs and
> all manifestations of electronic publication. The story is more
> complex than that, but the upshot is that UK repositories engaged in
> supporting the RAE have to concentrate on metadata deposit over and
> above full text deposit. Suffice to say that we are all looking
> forward to revisiting these deposits in the new year!
> --
> Les Carr
> University of Southampton
Received on Wed Oct 03 2007 - 11:33:46 BST