18 · Survey Results: Executive Summary
One respondent commented on the need for a local
framework “for preservation and access with a flexible
and extensible metadata model” that “would take ad-
vantage of best practices and allow for assessment and
interoperability and exchange with other archives and
institutions.” Another noted the need for centralized,
coordinated, or standardized approaches to “more
systematically engage in assessment, especially.”
Successes and Challenges
The survey data show that a significant number of
research libraries are actively engaged in outreach, as-
sessment, and efforts to integrate locally curated digi-
tal collections into research and teaching. However,
many of these efforts are ad hoc (as time allows or
in preparation for grant proposal development) or
opportunistic (using web logs because they are avail-
able) instead of being tactical or strategically aligned.
The current challenges are rapidly changing, and
many libraries reported that they will develop plans
or policies to better support these activities in the next
three years.
A number of respondents commented that more
programmatic efforts on outreach, promotion, and
integration are hampered by content that is currently
held in different, separate platforms and by discon-
nected access and preservation processes. These ob-
stacles can be overcome by de-siloing digital collec-
tions, by integrating support for them within overall
collection development and management policies
and guidelines, and by adding socio-technical sup-
ports and frameworks of people, policies, and tech-
nologies that are oriented toward supporting next
step activities.
To overcome obstacles from disconnected systems
and practices, a number of libraries reported creating
new cross-cutting committees and groups to help
lead the needed activities (e.g., Digital Humanities
Library Group, Data Management/Curation Task
Force, Assessment Planning Task Force, Strategic
Planning Task Force). Perhaps most interestingly, a
number of libraries also reported leveraging existing
infrastructure for new projects and curatorial needs.
For example:
“Research projects that take advantage of our
repository infrastructure use the same systems
and tools as locally curated digital collections, al-
lowing the potential for cross-project discovery
and reuse.”
“We are revamping our repository infrastructure
to be able to offer a more robust curatorial archi-
tecture for preservation and showcasing of digital
research and scholarship.”
“Because of the strong centralized infrastructure,
the libraries are able to support new activities as
part of the regular Curator and Collection Manager
duties, and are able to add new technological sup-
ports for new activities as first-of-kind supports,
instead of one-of-kind, which again improves the
centralized infrastructure for all involved and
which supports the libraries as the central con-
necting hub and community for collaborative work
and for new activities with digital scholarship.”
Respondents’ comments also showed the benefits
of a socio-technical approach for the full data lifecycle
of digital collections. As one explained:
“There is a reciprocal relationship between new
services/initiatives and digital collections. The
former helps us to identify subjects or disciplines
in need of curated digital collections and bring
in opportunities and funding, etc. to support the
work to be done. The latter are testimonials of the
value of new services/initiatives and help identify
areas of work needing adjustments.”
Conclusion
ARL member libraries that have robust and long-
standing digitization programs are now grappling
with the issues of ongoing curation of their digital
collections in support of scholarship. These collections
have grown into significant and substantive resources,
yet they can languish without continued effort. The
current challenges reported by respondents show the
need for integrated and systematic approaches, and
the successes reported by other respondents show the
clear and significant benefits from integrated socio-
technical practices, including de-siloed systems and
platforms, integrated tools that build-upon robust
repository infrastructures, and policies and groups
Previous Page Next Page