29 June 2007
25 June 2007
Pick 'n' Mix: Flora
Labels: collections of the month
23 June 2007
I thought she'd left...
Labels: events
17 June 2007
Pick 'n' Mix: Beside the seaside
Labels: collections of the month
15 June 2007
Arts and Humanities: research patterns and needs
I attended a very stimulating, thought-provoking and exhausting event yesterday, to discuss the possible implementation of an e-information infrastructure for arts and humanities. It was organised by the Research Information Network (RIN) and Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). E-information infrastructures include all kinds of digital content resources and the infrastructure than underpins them.
The day was so full, and covered so much, that it is difficult to summarise. A number of projects were presented, including Research Portals in the Arts and Humanities (RePAH), Gathering Evidence: Current ICT use and Future Needs for Arts and Humanities Researchers, Peer Review of Digital Resources and Log Analysis of Internet Resources (LAIRAH). I thought I would just list some of the key points that were made, areas that were discussed and general conclusions reached. This is not a comprehensive record of the discussion but just my impression of the points that came up:- The arts and humanities research community is diverse heterogeneous and complex and so it is very difficult to characterise and to come up with a set of needs and wants.
- The question was raised as to whether we can really talk about an arts and humanities community at all
- Libraries and archives play a critical role but the library focus will need to extend beyond books and journals
- Institutional repositories will come to play a key role
- We are not really clear where we are at present in terms of the research landscape, let alone where we are going. There is currently no clear direction.
- We would benefit from a clear map of resources available and the various organisations that provide data, advice and support
- We do not think enough about issues of re-usability of resources
- Interoperability is of paramount importance
- Sustainability is a key issue. We do not continue to care for, update and generally make the most of many research outputs. Not enough attention is paid to the benefits of a project after the funding has finished
- Evidence of use and evidence of value are different things, and should be treated separately. We do not have enough information about either, especially evidence of value
- The gathering and analysis of evidence is key
- An e-information infrastructure must be user-driven, though it was acknowledged that users do not always know what they want or need (and cannot predict what might be available to them in the future)
- Amalgamated resources are hugely important
- Researchers will take up and use digital resources when they are readily available
- It may be that we don’t need more resources but we need to enhance and connect together what we have to make them more effective
- Levels of skill in arts and humanities computing vary widely
- The European Digital Library was started at the same time as YouTube: which one has been the most successful..?
- It is worthwhile to look at ‘resource curation’ rather than focusing on resource creation, encompassing how data is used and how the infrastructure enables reuse
- Social infrastructure is just as important as technical infrastructure
- It is important to remember that scholarship is often integral to actual resource creation
- A good, well designed website is a key part of a quality, well-used resource
- Whilst we may have data on resource discovery, access and even use to some extent, we do not know the outcome and impact of use of the resource
- Some projects may be intellectually sound but have a shaky technical foundation: the technical foundation should be seen as a integral part of the project
- Exciting ‘blue skies’ projects often get filtered out in the applications for funding when they may actually lead to more innovation and have greater impact.
- It is important not just to think about resource discovery but also supporting researchers beyond this. Sometimes discovery is just the beginning (the easy part).
- It would be useful for scholarly journals to review relevant resources. Resource providers might think about asking editors to review their resources.
- Personally managed work environments may be a useful way forward, reflecting the ways in which researchers work. This requires greater interoperability from service providers.
- Funding for an e-information infrastructure is, of course, a major issue. However, it is worth noting that there is a great deal currently available, but it is not joined up and people are not necessarily connected to it.
- A federation of digital humanities centres may be the best way forward
- The infrastructure will inevitably continue to be highly distributed and within that we need a clear picture of the roles and responsibilities in service provision, processes and support
- There is no such thing as a 'lone researcher' (This was the general conclusion of those round the table: collaboration can take many forms and maybe in the arts and humanities it is different from the strong structures and formal collaboration in the sciences but there is still collaboration - researchers do not work in isolation.)
11 June 2007
Pink 'n' Mix
Labels: collections of the month
10 June 2007
Creating a well-used resource for the arts and humanities
Labels: arts and humanities, digital preservation, digital resources, dissemination, reports, sustainability
08 June 2007
Farewell
04 June 2007
Sharing made simple
Labels: web2.0
01 June 2007
Syllabub extraordinary
Labels: collections of the month
New and personal insights into archive collections
At the recent Data Standards Group meeting of the Society of Archivists, Jon Newman from MLA London gave a talk on a current project that he is working on called Revisiting Archive Collections. This project involves recataloguing archives whilst, at the same time, increasing community awareness of and engagement with archives. The intended outcome is to add value, creating more relevant archive descriptions, whilst at the same time reaching new audiences and maybe getting archivists to think differently about approaches to cataloguing and about the audiences they are trying to reach.
Focus groups of diverse groups of people, generally unfamiliar with archives, were set up in three different London institutions. They were asked to look at and provide feedback on specially selected archives that were chosen because they might resonate with the groups, having relevance to their lives and experiences. For example, a Tanzanian women's group was commenting on photographs and manuscripts relating to Tanzania and a group of cleaners and security staff, many of west African origin, were looking at Somalian and Nigerian material. The groups gave feedback through questionnaires, and the project is looking at adding this feedback to the archive descriptions in some way, either to the catalogue descriptions or to the index terms or as new associations or observations about the archive.
This approach does raise questions surrounding issues of reliability, authenticity, whether archivists should moderate or authenticate information provided by users, and intellectual property rights (the possibility of contributors claiming the ownership of their feedback). There are also questions about how exactly to integrate the information into the descriptions and finding aids.
The traditional view of archivists being the gatekeepers is to some extent challenged by this approach, but it surely can only be a good thing to recognise the value of expertise held within the community and work with the community to draw this out and use it to benefit others. It certainly does appear to have been very successful in providing new insights into archive materials from the perspectives of those who have a real and personal connection with the materials.
The sustainability of this type of project is uncertain. Jon Newman pointed out that the project depended on a well chosen selection of archives that were engaging and would resonate with the focus groups. It may not be practical from a funding and resource perspective to undertake this sort of project routinely, but there might be value in repositories carrying similar activities out intermittently, as this kind of approach helps to engage new audiences, provide new insights and furthermore it may change the approach that the archivist takes to thinking about, researching and cataloguing archives.
Image: Pics4Learning
Labels: cataloguing audiences community