ScholarWorks System Requirements Survey

48 Total responses

Questions Asked:

• Does your campus have an institutional repository (IR)?
  • Yes: 34
  • No: 3
  • I don't know: 11
• Is your campus IR in DSpace & hosted by the Chancellor's Office?
  • Yes: 24
    • If your campus has an IR hosted on the Chancellor's Office DSpace instance, what feature(s) of the platform do you find essential and would need retained in the new platform?

• • • • Self-submittal of ETDs by students.
      • Handle system; configurable collection pages; streaming capabilities
      • Our IR content is primarily ETDs, along with a small number of print materials (course catalogs, yearbooks, etc.) from Archives and Special Collections. The basic features of the DSpace platform, including uploading files and metadata entry, are all that we need at this point in time. Staffing limitations currently constrain what goes into our IR.
      • image display, communities
      • So far all we have developed is a digital thesis repository. we would like to do a lot more. I guess the most important thing for the objects we have in there is to maintain the Handle addresses.
      • ETD self submission by students Ingest of archival masters for digital preservation.
      • I work with a shared repository (Visual Collective) that requires ability to download images yet not allow public access; quality thumbnail views, ability to search and retrieve using controlled search terms.
      • Workflows for managing submissions, user generated submissions, DNS entries for local URLs, integration with CAS/Shibboleth/LDAP for authentication, some preservation tools, batch uploads, linkage to Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics so we can do demographic analytics
      • Handles - sorry we've publicized them with over 1000 alums... Digital preservation services (glacier or better)
      • ?
      • DSpace; Preservation and CSU hosted environment BePress Digital Commons; search engine optimization, editorial workflow, selected works, etc.
      • Granular permissions for communities and collections. This is currently missing from the shared instance of Dspace, but was available in the past. The ability to control some aspect of the templates and styling is useful. Streaming video Embedded image viewer
      • Central maintenance, application of updates, system-wide standards/indexing and discovery mechanism, and ongoing development.
      • KW search; self-submission; multiple collection levels
      • searchable database
      • The student collections with a profile are very nice. The Cal Poly Pomona campus has also been able to create journal templates for programs. This is a very nice feature that further highlights the students work. Lastly, having a permanent url is the best feature, which students can link to their CV, resume, LinkedIn, or even social media.
      • Communities - Must be able to organize and access items through multiple hierarchies based on origination (e.g. Department/College > Creator) Facets.
      • We need a platform for digital preservation, but I am not aware of any features specific to DSpace's implementation of this basic IR functionality that wouldn't be found on any other modern platform.
      • A fairly wide range of possible file types. Good search-ability.
      • None!
      • List of published & unpublished works by faculty
      • The Chancellor's Office DSpace known as the Visual Collective will host the Art Department's collection of digital images of art work. We would like to retain all of the features in the new platform, except for the slide kiosk on the main page. Essential features include, batch uploading data and image files, thumbnail page view of multiple works, item view page with a slightly larger image, full text record, browsing by keywords, zooming and downloading images.
      • My colleague, Eugene Turner, says that nine of our published articles are on the ScholarWorks platform. We wanted the articles on this platform so that they could be easily accessed by students and faculty. However, I have not used ScholarWorks.
      • The authorization function of the current platform is good.
      • - The info page showing an abstract and link to the full work. - The various filter capabilities (i.e., by community, by author, by program, by date issued). - The ability to search by key word. 

• • • If your library has an IR hosted on the Chancellor's Office DSpace instance, what functions have you found most frustrating?

• • • • Coonstant bugs. Things not working properly. Having to make changes again and again, and then finding out that you have to make them AGAIN. Embargoes sometimes don't work.
      • Workflow screens for self-service
      • Unexpected error messages received when I'm logged in and trying to navigate the site--they don't prevent me from doing what I need to do, but I usually have to return to the home page to get where I'm trying to go.
      • the time it takes to upload an item, search time, searching
      • The inability to customize easily the look and feel of the site. To create new submission templates. To build out the structure.
      • very clunky to use. Not easy to customize system is not intuitive for students/faculty no faculty profiles statistics are difficult to get for specific items bugs that were once fixed pop up again and again System is often slooooow
      • quality of thumbnail images, frequent downtime. Unsatisfactory page formatting, ability to display image descriptions in user-friendly way
      • The architecture of the system is constraining in that you have to define an absolute home or collection to content. Item mapping is problematic and doesn't always work. Statistics are poor (we're using GA to report almost everything). Metadata export is poor - sometimes we want to batch download metadata fields to analyze for instance our upload history and we can't do that currently. UI is clunky and outdated. Layout is not responsive.
      • Customizing is difficult in the current environ.
      • Lack of video capabilities. I wish the statistics feature would work better.
      • lack of editorial workflow and features; cross-CSU discoverability not well mapped.
      • Lack of control over the document submission templates for each Dspace community. Some steps (e.g. assigning license) are confusing and not very meaningful for most submissions. Lack of ability to set limited permissions for some users by the community has been frustrating. Currently limited permissions can only be set by Aaron to the collection level.
      • Limited access to maintenance/development crucial for addressing local interests, lack of support and communication.
      • Need to request user login from admin in order to self-submit; cannot stream videos/objects within the browser
      • The sign up system in order to upload items.
      • It is difficult for the students to understand the need to create a log in for Dspace. It would be better if the log in was integrated with their student campus id and password.
      • Clunky thumbnails and results display. More flexible element names that are meaningful to users, while maintaining Dublin Core mappings.
      • 1. DSpace is two versions behind the current release. 2. No batch file upload and difficult batch metadata upload. 3. No decent API. 4. It is hard to customize metadata for a project. 5. Bitstream urls are not truly persistent. 6. The image conversion to JPEG 2000 works inconsistently. 7. Accomplishing some tasks requires going through the Chancellor's Office.
      • None, I'm happy with the current Scholarworks. I cite it all the time.
      • The complete lack of administrative access [e.g. not even being able to delete a community!] Inability to supervise staff output, Lack of test environment, slow and clunky interface.
      • Links to, or copies of, publications Inconsistent results from different ways of searching Near invisibility of the service
      • The most frustrating feature of the Visual Collective is the quality of the thumbnails. Also, the Visual Collective has mostly been in a testing phase and we would like to move beyond so that we can keep our material here. It would be helpful to have training material or directions on how to use the Visual Collective in one place and up to date.
      • Because I have been fully retired for eight years and am no longer active in research and publication. I have yet to use this DSpace. But because I still believe our articles are relevant to other researchers, I'm hopeful that a good searchable DSpace could make our articles more accessible for students, faculty, and the public.
      • Too many things must be done centrally by the Chancellor's Office. Hope some can be done locally. Details are given in question 3. The current IR can't work with authority records.
      • - That I can only see about 10 results per page and have to click page next multiple times to get to the middle or end of a large collection of materials.

• • • If your campus has an IR hosted on the Chancellor's Office DSpace instance, what additional features, functions, and functional improvements would you like to see in a new IR platform?
      

• • • • Better image display, ability to handle captioned streaming media. Faculty profiles! Publishing journals!

• • • • More readily accessible stats

• • • • Though we are currently not adding video or audio materials to our IR, a simplified means of doing so would be welcome, since we hope to increase the variety of content in the IR down the road.

• • • • better search features, more flexibility, customization, ability to handle multiple formats

• • • • Ability to handle multi-media files. to develop new collection themes. to do more local administration of site.

• • • • better display for graphics faster! faculty profiles almetrics cooked in! better statistical reporting

• • • • Ability to create different levels of permissions for downloading and for sharing access to data for modifying records. High quality thumbnail size images.

• • • • Item based structure would be fantastic because it would solve architecture and item mapping issues. More reliable statistics that we could compare to our GA stats would be good. Easier export of metadata. Improved, responsive UI.

• • • • easier customization/ workflows better handling of images

• • • • Better search capabilities.

• • • • Editorial workflow for books, journals, and conferences; plus faculty profile pages, and eportfolio integration.

• • • • Customizable collection templates. It would be nice to be able to customize the record display for each community/collection.

• • • • CO help desk to ensure timely communication and support.

• • • • See above. Also, system-guided accessibility checking/editing, and faculty profiles!

• • • • Conference hosting

• • • • The greatest block to students posting their work is faculty buy-in. There are a lot of reservations about what can be put online based on publication rights, etc. I would recommend their be an "education" platform to help faculty and students understand that they can still publish work in journals and the repository is a benefit to showcase their research project. The Cal Poly Pomona Library has been able to communicate this well person-to-person. However, I think the perception is out there among the campus community that there is a risk to publishing their work in the repository. Further, I think that the better integrated Bronco Scholar is with university supported productions such as Portfolium is important.

• • • • Insert-able graphic widgets such as carousels to promote new additions, initiatives, events, etc. Advanced search. Collapsible communities info so users can get community level data on collections. Search all communities. when the number of communities mount, community lists are less useful.

• • • • 1. A more modern interface. 2. A good API (and ability to serve content using the International Image Operability Framework (IIIF): http://iiif.io/)

• • • • I can't think of any.

• • • • I would like to see us move away from the current multi-tenant model and allow each campus have complete control over its own IR instance. Or, if we must continue with the current model move away from a third party hosted/administered platform.

• • • • Fix frustrations mentioned above

• • • • Additional features would include a way that users can store images in a group that could also be downloaded, so that they, faculty, could curate their own collections for teaching. Preserving embedded metadata in the image files is also an important feature. If the data could be written to the image file upon download that would be fantastic. Otherwise, preserving the data that is embedded in the image file is essential.

• • • • I would want articles searchable by title, author, and key words by the public.

• • • • Authority control: allow maintaining controlled vocabulary locally; can work dynamically with authority records Cataloging tools: allow batch manipulate records locally; allow setting up multiple templates locally, allow creating macros/shortcuts for data entry locally, etc. UI: allow customization of user interface Discovery: more accurate search, allow multi-page search, better navigation, image tools available Statistics: allow monitoring and printing data and use statistics locally; allow sending email reports Storage: allow uploading large files locally

• • • • - Ability to see, say, 50 results per page rather than 10ish.

• • No: 9
• If your IR is not hosted at the Chancellor's Office DSpace, what platform(s) does your library use for archiving IR materials? 
  
  • DSpace: 1
  • bePress/Digital Commons: 8
  • ContentDM: 1
  • Islandora: 2
  • Hydra: 0
  • Omeka: 0
  • Other: 1
• If your IR is not hosted in the Chancellor's Office DSpace instance, does your IR make use of any external devices or services?
  
  • No external devices or services: 3
  • External archival storage: 3
  • External streaming service: 2
  • I'm not sure: 3
  • Other: 1
• What item types are collected in your IR?
  • Electronic theses/dissertations: 29
  • Faculty publications: 27
  • Campus journals, newspapers, newsletters: 22
  • Faculty datasets: 10
  • University Archives documents: 19
  • Images: 14
  • Audiovisual media: 17
  • Undergraduate research: 18
  • Other: 7
• How do you interact with your campus's IR?
  
  • I am in charge of IR collection development: 9
    
  • I import, create, modify or export records to/from IR collections: 17
    
  • I use the IR collections in my Library Instruction: 3
    
  • I use the IR collections for non-Library instruction: 4
    
  • I use the IR collections for research: 10
    
  • I am a contributor to IR collections: 15
    
  • Other: 10
• If the replacement IR platform included faculty author profiles, what features are important for your needs?
  
  • Faculty-focused collections: 22
    
  • Department-focused collections: 19
    
  • Faculty curation: 19
    
  • Ability to link via DOI or other standard to restricted-access publications: 22
    
  • Other: 9
• Is your library's IR platform currently integrated (exchanging data and/or files) with other systems used by your library or campus?

• • No
  • Omeka content as well.
  • Linked to Xerxes only. We haven't crosswalked metadata for the catalog yet.

• • Proquest Dissertations and Abstracts+
  • Linked with our catalog.
  • Yes: indexed by Xerxes. Also, doing a manual export of DC data and crosswalk to MARC via Marcedit. I guess it would be nice if that could be automated, too!
  • This has not occurred yet at Cal Poly Pomona. I think it would be very helpful to make sure integration of different university supported platforms is a high priority.
  • Not to my knowledge, but possibly.
  • I do not know, but I suspect it is difficult because of DSPace'spoor API functionality.
  • Don't know
  • I don't know. I wish it would be so integrated.
  • unknown
  • I do not know.

• • No, but we would like it to be.
  • Standalone homebuilt ETD submission workflow system
  • Only one - our IR is integrated with our faculty profile tool (both Bepress)
  • Only in the sense that the ETDs in the IR are all represented by MARC records in our library catalog that contain links to the electronic materials in the IR.
  • It is integrated with the library's Millennium catalog, and records within the IR are indexed in the Chancellor's Office SOLR index (and then returned as search results to our "Find Everything" interface). In addition, with bepress, scholar profiles, digital publishing and conference publishing systems are integrated with the IR.
  • DigitalCommons with Selected Works (one way street) No other current integrations that I'm aware of.
  • No. Except for linking theses records to the OPAC.
  • No actual integration, but we have done batch export/import of metadata that was previously kept as MARC records in our Voyage system and will be migrating some 
• Does your library or other campus unit have plans to integrate your library's IR platform with other systems used by your library or campus?

• • I don't know.
  • I do not know.
  • I do not know.
  • Hopefully, with Omeka or other display interface.
  • A standalon homebuilt faculty profile tool
  • Nothing beyond linking the materials in the IR to MARC records.
  • Besides the catalog and other traditional library platforms, we are interested in integrating web archives that we have begun developing with the IR. For the most part, at this early stage, we have only collected institutional web archives that would be appropriate for integrating with our Special Collections DAMS, but in the future we would plan to collect web archives of student work, and would be interested in integrating those student-created web archives with the IR.
  • We are in exploratory planning stages. Looking at Fedora and Hydra as well as completing implementation of Islandora for university archives content. Server costs for MetaArchive / preservation by our campus ITS will surge from $0 to over $75K next year due to charge-back policy just announced. This makes us interested in CO preservation solutions as a possibly cost-effective alternative.
  • We'd like to be able to use the IR for digital preservation and Omeka for display for our campus newspaper collection.
  • We will need to have access to an external streaming video platform when we get around to loading more of that content type, since BePress doesn't support it natively. We'll be interested in talking later this year about the possibility of housing that content in ScholarWorks.
  • Yes, eventually we'd like the repository content in the catalog. We also may include student submissions in Portfolium.
  • Looks like we shall have a Bee Press Digital Commons and a Scholarworks repository at least for the foreseeable future. I'm going to have to coordinate some sort of data exchange between them.
  • Not at this point.
  • Digital Commons - DSpace mirror uploads
  • Some talk of a campus website being used to collect syllabi, which could be directly uploaded to Dspace.
  • I hope the IR platform will integrate with the new library ULMS and ultimately also with the system the university selects for hosting assessment data.
  • I am not sure. I think this may be occurring and I am just not familiar.
  • No sure.
  • Don't know
  • Not that I know of. The main Library uses Digtial Commons as its IR. Special Collections uses Islandora, I believe.
  • Yes. We hope the IR can be integrated with Alma/Primo.
  • unknown

• Do you have any other comments?

• • We're currently engaged in retrospective thesis digitization for the IR, which has been and continues to be our primary focus (along with the addition of newly completed ETDs).
  • We currently provide access to campus journals, newsletters, newspapers, some University Archives documents through our IR, but we are in the process of moving those materials (except the newspapers) to our Special Collections and Archives DAMS in the next month or so.
  • We're very excited at SLO to contribute to the development of the Islandora alternative with Hydra in the wings down the line especially for display and discovery of digital images. Faculty profile service was initially of great interest to us but we also see ORCID as an alternative service of value to faculty.
  • I support this change.
  • I really hope to develop our IR presence and believe with new administrative changes and support we will be able to do so in the immediate future. I eagerly anticipate any upgrades and improvement you are considering.
  • Two campuses are over-represented on the ScholarWorks Planning & Advisory group. I would like see a broader representation of campuses on this committee.
  • Even though we currently use bePress/Digital Commons, I think that we would be open to joining the CSU in the future if the product met our needs. Thanks for gathering input.
  • The university online repository is a great tool for Cal Poly Pomona. We appreciate the library and their efforts to promote student and faculty work. The library has worked to make the repository functional and we hope that the next phase of development will further improve the online repository for all users and stakeholders.
  • When I initially responded to this resource, almost all of the material I submitted was rejected because of copyright protections. Since then, I've heard nothing about the resource prior to this survey. If no one knows about it, no one can use it no matter how good it gets.
  • We look forward to the new version of the Visual Collective.
  • I think the key value of any IR platform is to make complete publications accessible online to the public and a search function that permits searching by title, author, and key words.
  • No.