1 / 13

University of Huddersfield Repository

The University of Huddersfield is developing a digital repository to enhance research visibility and accessibility. This project, led by Eileen Hiller, aims to create a centralized archive for researchers' outputs, including published papers, artworks, and theses. The repository will improve access to information, increase the impact of research, and facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration. The team is focused on establishing transparent processes and embedding this initiative into the university's research culture, with phases set for implementation starting in 2006.

cian
Télécharger la présentation

University of Huddersfield Repository

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. University of Huddersfield Repository A digital collection of the research output of the university, available on Open Access over the internet Eileen Hiller Technical Services Manager Computing & Library Services

  2. Benefits to the Researcher • Improved access to information • Increased impact of the researcher’s work • A central archive of their research output • Standardised biographical details • Raised awareness of colleagues’ work • Develop interdisciplinary approach

  3. Benefits to the University • RAE 2008 • Contribute to national research output • Publicity for university research • Raise the profile of the university • Marketing – attracts students/researchers • Benchmark against competitors

  4. Institutional Repository Project GOAL ‘To establish a working institutional repository which is transparent and becomes embedded in the research and scholarly communication culture of the university’

  5. Project Plan • Objectives • Critical success factors • Timescales • Project team • Reporting

  6. Project objectives – Phase 1 Material suitable for availability on open access to be deposited from 2008, e.g. • published papers • non textual research outputs- artworks, music, electronic databases • textual material supporting non textual outputs e.g. exhibition catalogues • Postgraduate theses registered with the research office

  7. Project objectives – Phase 2 Material available on restricted access, e.g. • Pre-prints • Raw data • Digital learning objects • Master’s level dissertations • Undergraduate theses

  8. Project Timescales • Jan 2006 Establish project team/agree project plan • Feb/July 2006. Definecontent/devise policy document/ approach research committee/ identify hardware and software/ evaluate software /calculate costs/ report on procurement to CLS Senior Management Team • Sept/October Customise software/ Devise process for administration of deposit • Oct 2006 Report to University Research Committee • Oct /Dec Pilot Promote to schools/Choose champions within schools/Roll out training • Jan 2007 Evaluate pilot/ report to university management • Feb2007 Roll out to rest of university/continue with advocacy • Nov 2007 RAE submission

  9. Project Team • Project Manager: Eileen Hiller, CLS, (Technical Services Manager) • Project Co-ordinator: Ian Jennings, CLS (Electronic Resources Coordinator) • Systems/ Technical Advisors: Brian Hackett (Head of C & IT); Dave Pattern (Library Systems Manager); Imteyaz Azmi (Client Consultant) • Academic/Subject Librarians: Pamela Armitage; Celia Poole, Lisa Balman • Research Office; Ian Pitchford • Chair University Research Committee: David Taylor (HUMS) • Academic Staff: APPLIED SCIENCES; Paul Humphreys ART & DESIGN: Paul Atkinson EDUCATION: James Avis, Cheryl Reynolds HUBS: Chris Cowton HUMAN & HEALTH: Nigel Parton

  10. Progress • Consultation • Policy • Champions • Choice of software • Proposal to Research Committee

  11. What’s next? • Advocacy • Customise software • Devise process • Pilot • Evaluate • Implement

  12. References Antelman, K. (2004) ‘Do Open-Access articles have a greater research impact?’ College and research libraries, 65(5), 372-382 http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/staff/kaantelm/do_open_access_CRL.pdf

  13. ? Any Questions

More Related