(1) You want to fill your repository? Mandate deposit.
(2) You want a repository that is not a "mess"? Mandate deposit.
(3) You want your work to be maximally visible to google? Deposit it
in your repository.
(4) You want it on your website too? Export it from your repository.
(5) You want to generate a CV? Generate it from your repository.
(6) You want to generate annual reports? Generate them from your repository.
(8) You want rich usage and impact metrics? Generate them from your repository..
(9) You want to keep repositories empty? Rely on harvesting their
contents from google.
(10) You want grounded advice on how to fill a repository? Ask someone
who has done it, and knows.
Stevan Harnad
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 12:27 PM, leo waaijers <leowaa_at_xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Dear Paula,
>
> So far the replies to your question came mainly from repository managers.
> May I offer an answer that a researcher gave me some months ago in an
> interview. The interviewee was professor Lex Bouter, a prolific medical
> author and the incumbent Rector of the VU University Amsterdam. After his
> complaints about repositories (“It’s all such a mess”) and Sherpa Romeo (“No
> researcher is going to get enthusiastic about that.”) I asked him, “How can
> things be made easier when it comes to filling the repositories?”
>
> His answer: “Scientists increasingly have their own personal website. The
> easiest way for them to organise their CV is to ensure that that personal
> page is properly set up. You can arrange that by uploading everything that a
> search engine discovers about a writer – anywhere – to a clickable list and
> then offering it to the writer with the instruction "Click what you want to
> have on your personal website." That selection will then be sent to his
> website automatically and with a little program like "Publish or Perish” you
> can immediately assign the h-index to his oeuvre. You can then harvest all
> those personal websites for your university's repository. That way, they
> will be high-quality repositories. That's the kind of service that we need
> to progress towards. If SURF (the Dutch counterpart of JISC. L.W.) can
> arrange that in cooperation with the libraries, then you will have something
> worth communicating. Then there won't be any problem convincing scientists!
> It'll also make it very easy to produce annual reports and collect material
> so that institutes can carry out self-assessments.”
>
> Hopefully, this answer offers some food for thought. The whole interview
> with Lex Bouter and interviews with other Dutch top scientists and rectors
> about Open Access may be found at
> http://www.openaccess.nl/index.php?option=com_vipquotes&view=quotes&id=1&Itemid=91
>
> Leo Waaijers.
>
> Paula Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Apologies in advance for lengthy e-mail - looking for a few words of advice
> & wisdom to throw this way.
>
> I am the repository officer here at Newcastle University. We have an
> in-house built research management system recently launched and a open
> access research repository (also written in-house, not a proprietary piece
> of software).
>
> We have an automatic feed of bibliographically checked records from the
> research management system to our repository, thus our numbers of bib
> records are ticking up nicely, and I recognise the value of this in itself -
> lots of data for people to reach the item should them wish to. However, the
> numbers of full text records are low - around 10% of our total.
>
> I know this is a problem across the repository community, but I wonder if it
> is something others are struggling with & considering right now.
>
> I think perhaps the stage we are it is looking for a 'strong encouraging
> statement' from University management.
>
> I'm not sure how much support for a mandate there would be (or even the
> appetite for it within the library) but at the same time, the numbers
> depositing are low - it almost seems self-fulfilling.
>
> Having brought my concerns up within the library and the people responsible
> for the research management system, I am tasked with writing a paper for the
> University Research Committee. It sounds like I am asking you to do my work
> here, but I just wanted to get a feel for how you persuaded your wider
> University to get behind this - if you have done - (aside from the usual
> wider access, increased impact, REF etc). Maybe there isn't anything & its
> just a long hard slog - which would be reassuring in its own way!
>
> Apologies for such a long e-mail, and I do appreciate your time.
>
> Many thanks
> Paula
>
> ********************************
> Paula Fitzpatrick
> E-Repository Officer
> Robinson Library
> University of Newcastle upon Tyne
> P.Fitzpatrick_at_newcastle.ac.uk
>
> 0191 222 7627
>
> http://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/
> ********************************
>
>
>
> ********************************
> Paula Fitzpatrick
> E-Repository Officer
> Robinson Library
> University of Newcastle upon Tyne
> P.Fitzpatrick_at_newcastle.ac.uk
>
> 0191 222 7627
>
> http://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/
> ********************************
>
>
>
>
Received on Mon Mar 22 2010 - 02:57:37 GMT