UoL Library Blog

Develop, debate, innovate.

Archive for the ‘Leicester Research Archive’ Category

Top LRA Items for November 2011

Posted by gazjjohnson on 5 December, 2011

Here are the most accessed items on the LRA in November 2011

  1. Financial Development, Economic Growth and Stock Market Volatility: Evidence from Nigeria and South Africa Ndako, Umar Bida
  2. High Performance Work Practices: Work Intensification or ‘Win-win’? Sparham, Eimer et al
  3. The propagation of VHF and UHF radio waves over sea paths Sim, Chow Yen Desmond
  4. Social inclusion, the museum and the dynamics of sectoral change Sandell, Richard
  5. Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’ Madge, Clare et al
  6. Ethics and Plagiarism – helping undergraduates write right Willmott, Christopher J.R. et al
  7. Introducing undergraduate students to scientific reports Willmott, Christopher J.R. et al
  8. The List of Threatening Experiences: a subset of 12 life event categories with considerable long-term contextual threat Brugha, Traolach S. et al
  9. Measuring the efficiency of European airlines: an application of DEA and Tobit Analysis Fethi, Meryem Duygun et al
  10. Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences Preston, Carolyn C. et al

An interesting split with the top half of the table being mainstays from recent months, but with the lower half all being new materials. Notably the articles by Chris Willmott (et al) had been actively marketed by the academic this month, with links back to the LRA as the primary access route. Notably, fewer theses than in recent months are also seen in the table.

Don’t forget you can follow all the new additions to the LRA on twitter – UoLLRA.

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Research Support | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

Top LRA Items for September 2011

Posted by gazjjohnson on 5 October, 2011

Here they are, the most heavily accessed articles on the LRA from the past month (and with a newly added article topping the list as well).

  1. Reflective Social Portfolios for Feedback and Peer Mentoring (Cann, Alan James et al)
  2. Financial Development, Economic Growth and Stock Market Volatility: Evidence from Nigeria and South Africa (Ndako, Umar Bida)
  3. The propagation of VHF and UHF radio waves over sea paths (Sim, Chow Yen Desmond)
  4. High Performance Work Practices: Work Intensification or ‘Win-win’? (Sparham, Eimer et al)
  5. Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences (Preston, Carolyn C. et al)
  6. Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’ (Madge, Clare et al)
  7. Social inclusion, the museum and the dynamics of sectoral change (Sandell, Richard)
  8. The electrodeposition of composite materials using deep eutectic solvents (El ttaib, Khalid)
  9. Creative industries and cultural development: still a Janus face? (Gibson, Lisanne)
  10. Measuring the efficiency of European airlines: an application of DEA and Tobit Analysis (Fethi, Meryem Duygun et al)

And don’t forget you can follow all the new additions to the LRA on twitter – UoLLRA.

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Research Support | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

LRA: Top research items for August 2011

Posted by gazjjohnson on 5 September, 2011

As always here’s the summary of the top accessed items on the LRA for the month of August 2011:

  1. Fault Tolerant Sliding Mode Control Schemes With Aerospace Applications (Alwi, Halim)

Posted in Leicester Research Archive | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Event review: Repositories and CRIS- Working Smartly together

Posted by gazjjohnson on 20 July, 2011

Yesterday I attended, along with Steve Loddignton (Research Support Office) and Stuart Wood (ITS), an event hosted by the RSP in their native Nottingham. The theme of the day was to take a look at the overlap in working, activities and priorities between repository managers and staff, and those working in the research offices. It was also a chance to meet with staff from the various repository software groups and CRIS suppliers too.  For us this was a useful chance to finally meet our Symplectic technical guru in the flesh, and to put a few more questions to him!

Despite being pitched to the two main groups, there were certainly a few more repository folks there on the day than research managers. That said there were enough from both camps to make for an effective dialogue and exchange of experience.  From my point of view I found it invaluable to attend in partnership with my two colleagues; each of us was able to get something different from the day.  For my own part it was a rewarding opportunity to see that Leicester is actually a good example of how to work closely on CRIS and repository activities; although I will admit we pale in comparison to the best practice example exemplified by Glasgow’s Enlighten.

The session from Simon Kerridge, speaking on behalf of ARMA that introduced the day was a valuable insight into the working life of a research manager.  I was pleased to see that they consider interactions with the repository to be third priority, behind HR and finance alone, which was most heartening.  For my own part I especially value the close working relationship the LRA team has establishing with our RSO over the years, and hope that through working together on IRIS that it will continue to develop.

It was also interesting to participate in the session facilitated by the RePOSIT project, once again looking at advocacy but also crucially interactions between the repository and research manager communities.  Personally events such as yesterday are vital so that we can all better understand the needs and challenges each face, along with our own especial priorities.  Steve and myself did take away quite a few ideas for communication and advocacy to the University of Leicester community that we will be feeding into the IRIS Communication plan for the coming month.  I’m looking forward to this chance to get out into our wonderful Leicester research community and demonstrate how IRIS can make their lives easier, and how the LRA can enable their research to be more widely read, cited and reused.

The other excellent talk that stuck home was from Valerie McCutcheon of Glasgow university’s research office.  It really did give a fantastic example of how a research office and repository team can unite over a core system.  She showed even where working practices may differ how the centralisation of the management of research data and publications can make for a smooth operation.  It also offers a greater possibility for development of new enhancements for the academic community established in partnership, rather than in isolation.  personally I believe it’s a model I think both the Library and our Research Office should look to emulate in many aspects.

There were other sessions, along with the chance to catch up with other repository managers working with Symplectic too, but for me these sessions were the ones that I came away thinking about.  This was a truly excellent day and my thanks the RSP for organising it, and all the speakers for their input to it.

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Open Access, Research Support | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Leicester Research Archive: Top items June 2011

Posted by gazjjohnson on 5 July, 2011

Here I am again with the list of the most frequently accessed items on Leicester’s research publications repository during the month of June 2011.

  1. How can autistic intelligence be recognised and accommodated within an inclusive education framework? (Jacobs, Barbara Helen)
  2. Evaluating Repository Annual Metrics for SCONUL (Johnson, Gareth James)
  3. The propagation of VHF and UHF radio waves over sea paths (Sim, Chow Yen Desmond)
  4. ‘You’ve gotta love the plastic!’ An ethnographic study of Ultimate Frisbee in the UK (Griggs, Gerald Michael)
  5. Measuring the outcomes and impact of learning in museums, archives and libraries: the Learning Impact Research Project end of project paper (Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean et al)
  6. Consuming Underwear: Fashioning Female Identity (Tsaousi, Christiana)
  7. Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’ (Madge, Clare et al)
  8. Financial Development, Economic Growth and Stock Market Volatility: Evidence from Nigeria and South Africa (Ndako, Umar Bida)
  9. Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences (Preston, Carolyn C. et al)
  10. Teaching presentation skills to undergraduates: Students’ evaluations of a workshop course. (Colman, Andrew M.)

Nice to see a few new titles appearing again this month, along with some continuing popular items.  In terms of countries that have been accessing Leicester’s research only a little change.

  1. United Kingdom
  2. United States
  3. India
  4. Germany
  5. Australia
  6. China
  7. Canada
  8. Italy
  9. France
  10. Malaysia

Posted in Leicester Research Archive | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Symplectic User Group Conference 2011

Posted by gazjjohnson on 25 May, 2011

This Tuesday saw me down in London once again (a whole 4 days since my last trip down for CILIP Council) for the Symplectic User Conference 2011 at Hamilton House – so here are my notes – apologies for any typos as I was typing these on my knee! 

The day was split in two with talks in the morning and workshops in the afternoon.  Daniel Hook kicked off the day by announcing that Symplectic had partnered with Digital Science to work in the open science community.

Hamilton House, London - venue for the dayThe first speaker was Lorna Mitchell of the Brunel University talking about the BRUCE project.  She mentioned BRAD (their Symplectic Elements) and repository BURA (which coincidentally I helped formally launch back in 2006).  They have linked BRAD and BURA together, although they noted that this was a longer process than they expected.  They both a mandate, of which many academics remain unaware, but also a OA publishing fund for researchers to bid to for OA publishing.

BRUCE was a JISC funded project.  Their aim was to facilitate the analysis and reporting of research information from existing data sources, using a CERIF framework. It brings together a lot of different sources of information from across the university system and generates bespoke reports based on them.  While the focus is often the REF, there are other university management areas of interest for the outputs.

The next speakers (Sarah Mallory, Rachel Proudfoot and Nicola Cockarill) spoke about the RePosit project (I’m on the expert group for this one).  The aim of the project was to increase the engagement with repositories to generate more content for them.  A lot of the focus was on advocacy but also to engage with the repository community as well.  The project has 5 HEI and one commercial partners, using one CRIS and 5 different implementations.  The question they asked was does simplifying the process of deposit increase the level of ingest for the IR.  At Queen Mary part of their problem was low visibility, and so their engagement with stakeholders aimed to get them up the agenda.  Embedding it within college strategies was key in this respect.

Plymouth  rolled out their SE alongside their repository (PEARL) – but noted it was tricky in terms of time.  Not for the first time we head about how much of a time sink setting up crosswalks between SE and the repository has been too; something I know will occupy a lot of my time in the coming months.  Plymouth are considering moving to a self-deposit model, as they feel this mirror the model of staffing and library service.  However, noted that speaking with other repository managers Emma noted that there were various concerns to address.  Their advocacy was met with mixed reception, some were very enthusiastic.  For others though they struggled to see where it fitted in with their research outputs.  However, illuminating academics with the knowledge of how restrictive (or not) publishers in their sector are with open access is a role all subject librarian staff should be very experienced and engaged with.  Highlighting metrics of downloads and demonstrating that students want or indeed expect to be able to download their local academics research from the repository, important for keeping student experience levels high.

The third case history was from White Rose Repository Online (Leeds, Sheffield and York) where a similar experience to Leicester, 25% engagement from academics even after a protracted advocacy campaign including direct email contact.  Awareness of WRRO was generally low.  Making deposits as easy as possible was a major point, as academics are simple creatures with time poor lives.  They also suggested that there is a need to build a community of interest in CRIS related systems, not solely within Symplectic but across the IR, research support and IT environment.

Next up was Jonathan Breeze talking about research data management, from more of an IT and data life cycle POV.  Researchers think a lot about their data but how do you keep it or even what do you keep.  Research funders are increasingly expecting or requiring data as well as publications to be shared, and curated for long-term access.  Ownership of data is unclear, even within the institutions let alone whom or how this will be captured and stored.

Finally for the morning Peter Murray-Rust made a call for open bibliographies.  He declined to use PowerPoint or PDF on the grounds that they “Destroy information”.  He went on to say that we should use volunteers to gather bibliographic data rather than paid for systems.  He spoke a lot about community performing the data gathering or aggregation functions, but I must confess that while he raised some interesting points practically I think a lot of what he talked about was aspirational rather than functional.  Most academics I’ve worked with over the years have very little interest in collating the literature, they’re more focussed on their own area of research and outputs.  What Peter was suggesting was certainly laudable, and may have worked in the isolated examples he suggested but one has only to look to the Arts or Social Sciences to see where the technical knowledge or awareness may prevent many academics from engaging with his one.

After a sandwich free (but tasty) lunch we broke into two groups for workshops.  The one I was at looked at new REF functionalities for Symplectic, which as I’ve yet to have much hands on experience; and given this is more the research office’s forte, left me a bit flat.  Then we went into groups to discuss where the problems with REF submission functionality in Symplectic will be.  Again, somewhat out of my area of knowledge so not something I felt informed enough to contribute to.

All in all there was a lot to talk about with the other delegates on the day, and I especially benefitted from conversations with a number of my fellow repository managers; focussing on the implementation side of Symplectic Repository Tools.

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Research Support | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Countries accessing the LRA (2009-2011)

Posted by gazjjohnson on 9 May, 2011

Following a conversation with a fellow repository manager on Friday about countries using our research, I did a bit of quick and dirty analysis on the LRA, taking a data range of 1/4/2009-30/4/2011.  Here’s the top 20 countries using us, and the percentage of the overall accesses they make up.

  1. United Kingdom (39.72%)
  2. United States (12.84%)
  3. India (3.13%)
  4. Germany (2.64%)
  5. Australia (2.41%)
  6. Canada (2.35%)
  7. China (2.23%)
  8. Italy (1.51%)
  9. France (1.48%)
  10. Malaysia (1.44%)
  11. Netherlands (1.29%)
  12. Japan (1.06%)
  13. Iran (1.05%)
  14. Spain (1.04%)
  15. Greece (0.94%)
  16. Turkey (0.89%)
  17. Hong Kong (0.82)%
  18. Ireland (0.82%)
  19. Indonesia (0.77%)
  20. Taiwan (0.75%)
  • The top 10 make up 69.7% of all accesses to the LRA mounted research over that time.
  • The top 20 make up 79.2% of all accesses to the LRA mounted research over that time.

I don’t know whether to be delighted or distressed that the bulk of accesses come from the UK.  It’s good that the research is getting read here, but so much depends these days on overseas researchers making use of the research we publish.  Other repository managers reading this – how does this compare to your own repositories? Similar? Completely different?

And for any Leicester folk reading this – are these the countries that we’d expect to be using our research?  Of course, we are always limited by the materials that academics send us, and I’m well aware there are many, many gaps in our collections that I’d be only too keen to fill!

Posted in Leicester Research Archive | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Creative Commons and Open Access Repositories

Posted by gazjjohnson on 22 March, 2011

I had an email conversation with Gabi and Terese in our BDRA Dept yesterday, as a result of their recent blog post Opening the ‘doar’ to Open Research Archives.  Their question was “I assume the LRA policies don’t preclude a depositing author from allocating a Creative Commons licence to the article

An interesting question, and while Gabi and Terese are perhaps more interested in OER’s than IRRs it was something that the Copyright Administrator and I discussed for a few minutes.  As a repository manager I have a slightly different viewpoint on the copyright situation to my colleague, given that open access as a whole operates in a somewhat gray and uncertain rights environment (my team endeavour to make it as risk free and safe as we possibly can though!)

There are a very few items on the LRA, a thesis springs to mind as the only absolutely clear example we’ve had to date, where the depositor has expressly requested a CC license on the item. Now with a thesis this is a little more clear-cut as the text remains the IPR/(c) of the author.  On the other hand for the post-review/author’s final copy of a book chapter or article while the general understanding is that the IPR is retained by the author, I’d personally be a little more reticent to deposit into the LRA with a CC license appended as a matter of course.

Not that I wouldn’t consider it at all, but it would probably be something I’d need to talk over with the author and potentially the publishing body as well to make sure that all appropriate rights had been observed.  Not to mention picking the brains of my fellow UKCoRR members to see if any of them have any clearer views on the subject.

Conference papers are a little easier as my current understanding  suggests that unless the organising body explicitly gains the economic rights for publishing (e.g. you actually sign something that gifts the rights to the organising body or a publisher) that all rights remain with the author.  In which case they’d be quite able to place an appropriate CC license on their work in my personal opinion – although we’d still take it slow for the first few of them that come along!

So the short answer is: No our policies don’t preclude CC, but we’d need to consider any requests carefully.

Happy to hear what my repository manager colleagues across the country have to say on the subject!

Posted in Copyright & Course Packs, Leicester Research Archive, Open Access | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Most used items Leicester Research Archive: Feb 2011

Posted by gazjjohnson on 7 March, 2011

Here are the most used items in the Leicester Research Repository, the gateway to the University of Leicester’s research publications, for February 2011.

  1. The Impact of Labour Turnover: Theory and Evidence from UK Micro-Data (Garino, Gaia et al) (2381/4441)
  2.  
  3. The propagation of VHF and UHF radio waves over sea paths (Sim, Chow Yen Desmond) (2381/7444)
  4. Writing up and presenting qualitative research in family planning and reproductive health care (Pitchforth, Emma et al) (2381/309)
  5.  
  6. Female Fandom in an English ‘Sports City’: A sociological study of female spectating and consumption around sport (Pope, Stacey Elizabeth) (2381/8343)
  7. Social inclusion, the museum and the dynamics of sectoral change (Sandell, Richard) (2381/52)
  8.  
  9. Thomas C. Schelling’s psychological decision theory: Introduction to a special issue (Colman, Andrew M.) (2381/476)
  10.  
  11. The costs of Activity-Based Management (Armstrong, Peter) (2381/3645)
  12.  
  13. Teaching presentation skills to undergraduates: Students’ evaluations of a workshop course. (Colman, Andrew M.) (2381/537)
  14.  
  15. Financial Development, Economic Growth and Stock Market Volatility: Evidence from Nigeria and South Africa (Ndako, Umar Bida) (2381/8924)
  16.  
  17. Saint Christopher Wall Paintings in English and Welsh Churches, c.1250-c.1500 (Pridgeon , Eleanor Elizabeth) (2381/7964)

In terms of the countries using the LRA, there was no overall change in the top 10 just a bit of jockying for position.

  1. United Kingdom
  2. United States
  3. India
  4. Canada
  5. Germany
  6. China
  7. Malaysia
  8. France
  9. Australia
  10. Italy

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Open Access, Research Support | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

6000th Record added to the LRA

Posted by gazjjohnson on 25 February, 2011

6000 AwardCupSound the fanfares!  I’m delighted to announce that we’ve added the 6,000th record to the Leicester Research Archive this week. 

Since the LRA is currently growing at around 1,600 items a year thanks to the hard work of Rob, Margaret and Valérie I’d expect we’ll easily see the 7,000 record this year (and with the implementation of the IRIS project perhaps even the 20,000th record!)

Posted in Leicester Research Archive | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

RSP Winter School: Day 3

Posted by gazjjohnson on 14 February, 2011

You can read about Day 1 or Day 2 here.

See, it wasn't worth being there on a day like thisThe third and final day dawned a little grey, but there was little time to admire the scenery as we had to kick off before 9am in order to fit everything in.  The first session was from Ruth Murray-Wedster from Lucidus Consulting .  Ruth used to work for Intute, which was very noticeable as about half her opening section seemed to be an advert for the late and somewhat lamented service.  Thankfully the real meat of the session was a workshop, in small groups again, looking at metrics/KPIs and repositories.  As someone who keeps a fair amount of these (and whom will be working on them a lot this week) I was quite interested to see what other people are doing in this area.  In the workshop we looked at metrics we had been asked to keep by our stakeholders, those we felt offered an actual representative view of the repository activity and the challenges that prevent us from gathering some of these.

I suggested I would love to know how far people read through items in my repository, that something has been downloaded 500 times is one thing – but how far did they read? This is a stat that YouTube provides for your videos on the site, and is an excellent way to discover just how many of your viewers have engaged with the material.  In the same way the base metric of downloads tells me nothing about the interaction with the scholarly research; although short of locking the PDFs down to view only mode or the like on the LRA I’m unaware of how we’d measure this one.

I had a very interesting side discussion with Paul Stainthorp and Theo Andrews about our own use of Google Analytics, and just how deep we each delved (or didn’t) into the schmorgesborg of data that this provides.  Interestingly in many aspects each of our respective repositories seems to score similar values for, although the devil is very much in the details.  Our group agreed that many of the metrics that are demanded of us (last year’s SCONUL audit came in for particular criticism for being somewhat poorly thought out) are not especially representative of the level of impact or activity w.r.t. repositories; no doubt due to most of them being requested by those who were not familiar with the repository world’s working.  A definite need for those of us managing these resources to engage with these people more, or perhaps a lobbying/information role for both the RSP and UKCoRR.

After a break (and an advert for UKCoRR) we had the final two sessions of the morning.  Personally I would have reversed the order of these sessions as the final one from Amanda Hodgson on the Research Communications Strategy work from the CRC offered little content I’d not already gleaned from their website.  Perhaps when their work is more advanced this session might have more to offer.  However, the preceding session from Miggie Pickton (Northampton) on her project researching researchers through their data was more engaging.  Miggie even engaged us in a small workshop element as we looked at our own experiences, and tied in nicely to the sessions the previous day from Max and Mark.  it also tied into elements of digital preservation and curation, a topic no one talk had tackled but a recurrent theme in many.

Jackie brings the Winter School to a closeAnd so the Winter School came to a close.  It had been a highly valuable three days, in what can only be described as a first class venue (squeaking door aside), and a credit to Jackie and her team for putting it on.  My thanks to all the speakers and organisers!  At the very least I’ve taken away the thought that me and my team face a lot of the same challenges as other repository teams, even where their exact circumstances and working environments are different.  That alone brings a certain level of comfort.

What’s next? Well I’m hoping to read through the slides from the various speakers over the coming days again and perhaps pick up on one or two elements that I only half caught at the time, or that perhaps might spur me and my team on in our work in the coming year.

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Open Access | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

On the Road to IRIS: Modules & Testing

Posted by gazjjohnson on 3 February, 2011

IRIS is a name you’ll be hearing me talk a lot about this year on here and in the flesh.  It’s the name we’ve given to the prospective new research information management system that our Research Office, ITS and library teams are working towards implementing.  My involvement is naturally on the repository side of things, considering how the LRA will integrate with the new system. We’re in early days as of yet, and the inks not quite dry on the supplier contract yet so I can’t speak too much about that.

What I did want to blog about was the related LRA work we’re currently doing.  One of the long standing requirements for the IRIS project is to upgrade to DSpace version we currently use (1.4.2. fact fans) to something…a little more this decade (1.7).  An upgrade to the software has been something I’ve been trying to move towards for the past couple of years, and now we’re moving towards this at speed I couldn’t be happier.

It looks like we’re going to have a test instance of the platform up and running in the next few days, and so I’m starting to think about two critical things for the live system.  The modules that are essential for the way the modern repository needs to run, and the kind of testing that we need to put the test instance through so we can be sure it’s running sweet and dandy and fine as candy.  I’ve some ideas already, some from my repository wishlist others from ideas that have come to me while I’ve been talking with the other members of the IRIS team.

But naturally I’ll welcome suggestions from any readers of the blog or pointers to resources that I clearly should already know about testing DSpace…but clearly don’t!

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Open Access, Technology & Devices | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.