[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: D-Lib article about Cornell's Institutional Repository

In the same issue of D-Lib is an article about an innovation in Institutional Repositories I think will may go a long way to address the issues pointed to in Davis& Cnnolly's article. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march07/sugita/03sugita.html

I had a small part in this work- the bulk of the credit should go to our collaborators in Japan. Basically, they looked at how scholars were accessing information and realized that incorporating content from institutional repositories into institutional linking services was a crucial step in making the repositories meaningful to faculty members.

not even a detour if you're going there anyway!


Worth a detour:


D-Lib Magazine
March/April 2007
Volume 13 Number 3/4

ISSN 1082-9873
Institutional Repositories
Evaluating the Reasons for Non-use of Cornell University's Installation of
DSpace, by

Philip M. Davis
Cornell University
<pmd8@cornell.edu> (corresponding author)

Matthew J. L. Connolly
Cornell University


Problem: While there has been considerable attention dedicated to the
development and implementation of institutional repositories, there has
been little done to evaluate them, especially with regards to faculty

Purpose: This article reports on a three-part evaluative study of
institutional repositories. We describe the contents and
participation in Cornell's DSpace and compare these results with
seven university DSpace installations. Through in-depth interviews
with eleven faculty members in the sciences, social sciences and
humanities, we explore their attitudes, motivations, and behaviors
for non-participation in institutional repositories.

Results: Cornell's DSpace is largely underpopulated and underused by
its faculty. Many of its collections are empty, and most collections
contain few items. Those collections that experience steady growth
are collections in which the university has made an administrative
investment, such are requiring deposits of theses and dissertations
into DSpace. Cornell faculty have little knowledge of and little
motivation to use DSpace. Many faculty use alternatives to
institutional repositories, such as their personal Web pages and
disciplinary repositories, which are perceived to have higher
community salience than one's affiliate institution. Faculty gave
many reasons for not using repositories: redundancy with other modes
of disseminating information, the learning curve, confusion with
copyright, fear of plagiarism and having one's work scooped,
associating one's work with inconsistent quality, and concerns about
whether posting a manuscript constitutes "publishing".

Conclusion: While some librarians perceive a crisis in scholarly
communication as a crisis in access to the literature, Cornell
faculty perceive this essentially as a non-issue. Each discipline
has a normative culture, largely defined by their reward system and
traditions. If the goal of institutional repositories is to capture
and preserve the scholarship of one's faculty, institutional
repositories will need to address this cultural diversity.