Digitizing Items from Special Collections: The USU Approach
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•257 visualizações
Clint Pumphrey and Andrew Wesolek discuss a pilot project at Utah State University to integrate special collections materials into the Institutional Repository
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Digitizing Items from Special Collections: The USU Approach
Semelhante a Digitizing Items from Special Collections: The USU Approach (20)
Mais de Andrew Wesolek
Último
Último (20)
Digitizing Items from Special Collections: The USU Approach
- 1. Digitizing Items from Special Collections: The USU Approach Presented by Clint Pumphrey and Andrew Wesolek May, 2012
- 2. A University with Two Systems Digital Commons– Our Institutional Repository CONTENTdm– Our Digital Library Never the twain shall meet!
- 3. New Faculty Andy + Clint + Cheryl =
- 4. A New Approach: Decision Tree for Placement in IR versus Digital Library (1) Is item created or issued by USU faculty, staff, student, or dept.? Yes No (2) Is there an existing Digital Library Collection into which it fits? No Yes (3) Is there a functionality advantage to putting in CONTENTdm? No Yes object metadata metadata object Deposit into Put into Digital Metadata in both platforms Institutional Repository Library Collections
- 5. Pilot Project: Joel Ricks What Special Collections sent to the IR in the past How the Joel Ricks collection is different Why we chose the Ricks collection for the IR
- 8. Possible Projects for the Future Kenneth Brewer, O.W. Israelsen, George Clyde Selecting Special Collections material for the IR: potential challenges
- 9. Takin’ it to the Streets This project is part of a broader effort to market our electronic resources to the people of Utah Ricks is a good Starting point because of his focus on Cache Valley History Presentations to Stevens-Henager College and the Cache Valley Library Association
Notas do Editor
- Digital Library– To broaden access to our unique resources in our Special Collections and Archives Digital Commons– To capture, preserve, and provide access to the intellectual capital of the University. Original approach: SCA stuff goes into the Digital Library, while faculty publications go into the Digital Commons
- Here we can describe the collection, how and why we chose it, and how we plan to integrate the whole system—note that we have nothing in the digital library yet. We have the framework in place, and we are working on identifying some of his most important artifacts. You might talk about how you chose the Joel Ricks Collection, why it was a good fit for this new process, etc.Here I wanted to talk a little about what Special Collections sent to the IR in the past—extension publications and yearbooks are the two main types I’m familiar with. I think that the Ricks collection is different from previous efforts in that it is not a university publication, but a professor’s personal papers. I will talk a little bit about who Joel Ricks was and what is contained within his collection. I think it will be interesting to note that we do have some of Ricks’s materials in the Digital Library: they are typed transcripts that he made of journals. Of course we chose the Ricks collection because Ricks was a USU professor, his collection is relatively small, it had some good documents related to local history, and we had clear copyright to the items we wanted to scan.
- I think she said we might have live internet for the presentation, but I put some screenshots in anyway. We can get rid of them or add more if you want. This is a useful image of the landing page.
- A good example of the kinds of documents we wanted to put out there.
- Here I thought I’d talk about some of the collections that we’ve discussed using for future IR projects. Maybe talk about each one and why it fits into our decision tree. We don’t have to actually go through with any of them, but thought it might be good to show some examples. Then use those examples to talk about the potential challenges we’ll face selecting documents from these collections. I’m mostly thinking of the effort it will take to find documents that are produced by the USU faculty member, are of some interest to the general public, and have not been published in some other form. From my perspective, that’s the most difficult part of this process.
- A survey of our end users suggests that nearly 40% of visitors to our repository are not affiliated with higher education. As the Land Grant Institution of Utah, it is important that we engage the citizenry and make our resources available to them. It’s too early to judge the success of these presentations, but the number of daily visitors leapt from an average of about 615 to 865 the day of the Stevens-Henager presentation and 918 the day of the CVLA presentation.