Digital Libraries and Institutional Repositories Breakthroughs in Research and Practice

do so, UF librarians undertook new DH activities as opportunities to fundamentally enrich and improve existing, seemingly more traditional work, including collection development, library

Institutional Repositories: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice

Information Resources Management Association

USA

Tel: 717-533-8845

Fax: 717-533-8661

E-mail: cust@igi-global.com

Web site: http://www.igi-global.com

Copyright © 2020 by IGI Global All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Cataloguing in Publication Data

A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.

The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.

For electronic access to this publication, please contact: eresources@igi-global.com

Names: Information Resources Management Association, editor

Title: Digital libraries and institutional repositories : breakthroughs in

research and practice / Information Resources Management Association

editor

Description: Hershey, PA : Information Science Reference, [2020] | Includes

bibliographical references and index | Summary: “Digital libraries and

institutional repositories addresses new methods, practices, concepts,

and techniques, as well as contemporary challenges and issues for

libraries and university repositories that can be accessed

electronically It also addresses the problems of usability and search

optimization in digital libraries” Provided by publisher

Identifiers: LCCN 2019042255 (print) | LCCN 2019042256 (ebook) | ISBN

9781799824633 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781799824640 (ebook)

Subjects: LCSH: Digital libraries | Institutional repositories

Classification: LCC ZA4080 D537 2020 (print) | LCC ZA4080 (ebook) | DDC

027 dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019042255

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019042256

Information Resources Management Association, USA

Associate Editors

SteveClarke,University of Hull, UK

MurrayE.Jennex,San Diego State University, USA

Ari-VeikkoAnttiroiko,University of Tampere, Finland

Editorial Advisory Board

SherifKamel,American University in Cairo, Egypt

InLee,Western Illinois University, USA

JerzyKisielnicki,Warsaw University, Poland

AmarGupta,Arizona University, USA

CraigvanSlyke,University of Central Florida, USA

JohnWang,Montclair State University, USA

VishanthWeerakkody,Brunel University, UK

Adebayo, Oyeronke /Covenant University, Nigeria 227,393

Ahmed, Toufiq /Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Nomi, Japan 532

Aidi, Nurafida /Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia 441

Alteri, Suzan A./University of Florida, USA 1

Aregbesola, Ayooluwa /Landmark University, Nigeria 142

Bakare, Abdullahi A./Kwara State University, Nigeria 272

Beetseh, Kwaghga /University of Agriculture, Nigeria 202

Bhat, Nazir Ahmad/Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir, Srinagar, India 566

Chaiyasoonthorn, Wornchanok /Faculty of Administration and Management, King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Bangkok, Thailand 185

Chemulwo, Monicah Jemeli/St Paul’s University, Kenya 305

Chigwada, Josiline Phiri/Bindura University of Science Education, Bindura, Zimbabwe 520

Chung, Ada Chi Wai/Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong 45

Colmenero-Ruiz, Maria-Jesús /Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain 166

Dhamdhere, Sangeeta N./Modern College of Arts, Science and Commerce, India 550

Dili, Noraisah /Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia 441

Dinsmore, Chelsea S./University of Florida, USA 1

Eyiolorunse, Toluwani /Landmark University, Nigeria 142

Fagbohun, Michael Opeoluwa/Covenant University, Nigeria 227

García-Peñalvo, Francisco J./GRIAL Research Group, Department of Computer Science, Science Education Research Institute (IUCE), University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain 423

González-Pérez, Laura Icela/Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education, Monterrey, Mexico 423

Hamzah, Umi Amneezatun/Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia 441

Hawley, E Haven/University of Florida, USA 1

Hoskins, Ruth /University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa 454

Huang, Chen /Zhejiang University, China 67

Idachaba, Joy Asibi/University of Agriculture, Nigeria 202

Idiegbeyan-Ose, Jerome /Covenant University, Nigeria 356

Ifijeh, Goodluck /Covenant University, Nigeria 356,393 Iglesias, Edward /Stephen F Austin State University, USA 59

Ilogho, Julie /Covenant University, Nigeria 356

Itsekor, Victoria /Covenant University, Nigeria 227

Iwu-James, Juliana /Covenant University, Nigeria 356

Izuagbe, Roland /Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria 393

Jefferson, Rebecca J W./University of Florida, USA 1

Karmakar, Ranjan /Chakdaha College (Affiliated to University of Kalyani), Chakdaha, India 261

Kisar, Sailendra /Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia 441

Kowalsky, Michelle /Rowan University, USA 99

Lihitkar, Ramdas /Government College of Science, India 550

Long, Xiao /Peking University Library, China 78

Mahan, David Ezekiel/National Veterinary Research Institute, Akure, Nigeria 383

Masrich, Fatin Amirah Amirah/Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia 441

Minson, Valrie Ila/University of Florida, USA 1

Muhammed, Malisa /Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia 441

Nwokocha, Nwanne Mary/Covenant University, Nigeria 227

Oguntayo, Sunday /Landmark University, Nigeria 142

Okocha, Foluke /Landmark University, Nigeria 142

Olawoyin, Olajumoke /Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria 393

Oswal, Sushil K./University of Washington, USA 123

Otike, Japhet /Moi University, Kenya 342

Owolabi, Sola /Landmark University, Nigeria 142

Oye, Peter Olorunlake/National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies, Kuru, Nigeria 383

Oyeniyi, David Ajibola/Federal University Technology Akure, Akure, Nigeria 383

Patel, Dimple /Central University of Himachal Pradesh, India 474

Pina, Pedro /Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra, Portugal 291,324 Rahman, Md Mukhlesur/Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Nomi, Japan 532

Ramírez-Montoya, María-Soledad /Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education, Monterrey, Mexico 423

Rao, Madhava /ARAI, India 409

Rao, Yan /Wuhan University Library, China 24

Sahu, Mahendra Kumar/Gandhi Group of Institutions, Gunupur, India 216

Sharma, Chhaya /American Center, India 88

Shirahada, Kunio /Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Nomi, Japan 532

Suksa-ngiam, Watanyoo /The Center for Information Systems and Technology (CISAT), Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, USA 185

Tapfuma, Mass /National University of Science and Technology, Zimbabwe & University of KawaZulu-Natal, South Africa 454

Taylor, Laurie N./University of Florida, USA 1

Thakur, Deepti /Indian Institute of Advance Study, India 474

Upev, Michael Terver/University of Agriculture, Nigeria 202

Walker, Ben /University of Florida, USA 1

Xue, Helen F./Zhejiang University, China 67

Yao, Boyue /Peking University Library, China 78

Yusuf, Felicia /Landmark University, Nigeria 142

Yuvaraj, Mayank /Central University of South Bihar, India 500

Zhang, Yaolei /Wuhan University Library, China 24

Preface xi

Section 1 Development and Digital Transformation Chapter 1

LibraryCollaborativeNetworksForgingScholarlyCyberinfrastructureandRadicalCollaboration 1

Laurie N Taylor, University of Florida, USA

Suzan A Alteri, University of Florida, USA

Valrie Ila Minson, University of Florida, USA

Ben Walker, University of Florida, USA

E Haven Hawley, University of Florida, USA

Chelsea S Dinsmore, University of Florida, USA

Rebecca J W Jefferson, University of Florida, USA

Chapter 2

TheConstructionandDevelopmentofAcademicLibraryDigitalSpecialSubjectDatabases 24

Yan Rao, Wuhan University Library, China

Yaolei Zhang, Wuhan University Library, China

Chen Huang, Zhejiang University, China

Helen F Xue, Zhejiang University, China

Chapter 6

TheConstructionandDevelopmentoftheAcademicDigitalLibraryofChineseAncient

Collections 78

Xiao Long, Peking University Library, China

Boyue Yao, Peking University Library, China

Institutional,Legal,andAttitudinalBarrierstotheAccessibilityofUniversityDigitalLibraries:ImplicationsforRetentionofDisabledStudents 123

Sushil K Oswal, University of Washington, USA

Chapter 10

Demographics,Socio-EconomicandCognitiveSkillsasBarrierstoInformationSeekingina

DigitalLibraryEnvironment 142

Felicia Yusuf, Landmark University, Nigeria

Sola Owolabi, Landmark University, Nigeria

Ayooluwa Aregbesola, Landmark University, Nigeria

Sunday Oguntayo, Landmark University, Nigeria

Foluke Okocha, Landmark University, Nigeria

Toluwani Eyiolorunse, Landmark University, Nigeria

Watanyoo Suksa-ngiam, The Center for Information Systems and Technology (CISAT),

Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, USA

Chapter 13

UsabilityofDigitalResources:AStudyofFrancisSulemanuIdachabaLibraryUniversityof

AgricultureMakurdi 202

Michael Terver Upev, University of Agriculture, Nigeria

Kwaghga Beetseh, University of Agriculture, Nigeria

Joy Asibi Idachaba, University of Agriculture, Nigeria

Michael Opeoluwa Fagbohun, Covenant University, Nigeria

Nwanne Mary Nwokocha, Covenant University, Nigeria

Victoria Itsekor, Covenant University, Nigeria

Oyeronke Adebayo, Covenant University, Nigeria

Section 3 Digital Rights and Copyright Issues Chapter 16

Section 4 Institutional Repositories Chapter 22

ManagementofInstitutionalRepositories(IR)inDevelopingCountries 356

Jerome Idiegbeyan-Ose, Covenant University, Nigeria

Goodluck Ifijeh, Covenant University, Nigeria

Juliana Iwu-James, Covenant University, Nigeria

Julie Ilogho, Covenant University, Nigeria

Chapter 23

InstitutionalRepositoriesinUniversitiesinNigeria:DesirabilityandProgress 383

Peter Olorunlake Oye, National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies, Kuru, Nigeria

David Ajibola Oyeniyi, Federal University Technology Akure, Akure, Nigeria

David Ezekiel Mahan, National Veterinary Research Institute, Akure, Nigeria

Chapter 24

InstitutionalRepositoriesandLibrariesinNigeria:InterrogatingtheNexus 393

Goodluck Ifijeh, Centre for Learning Resources, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Oyeronke Adebayo, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Roland Izuagbe, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Olajumoke Olawoyin, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Fatin Amirah Amirah Masrich, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

Noraisah Dili, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

Umi Amneezatun Hamzah, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

Malisa Muhammed, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

Nurafida Aidi, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

Sailendra Kisar, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

Chapter 28

VisibilityandAccessibilityofIndigenousKnowledgeonOpenAccessInstitutionalRepositoriesatUniversitiesinAfrica 454

Mass Tapfuma, National University of Science and Technology, Zimbabwe & University of KawaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Ruth Hoskins, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Section 5 Open Access and Electronic Resources Chapter 29

ManagingOpenAccess(OA)ScholarlyInformationResourcesinaUniversity 474

Dimple Patel, Central University of Himachal Pradesh, India

Deepti Thakur, Indian Institute of Advance Study, India

Chapter 30

ImpactofDiscoveryLayersonAccessingE-ResourcesinAcademicLibraries:ACaseStudyofCentralUniversityofBihar 500

Mayank Yuvaraj, Central University of South Bihar, India

Sangeeta N Dhamdhere, Modern College of Arts, Science and Commerce, India

Ramdas Lihitkar, Government College of Science, India

Withtherolethattheyplayinthemanagementanddisseminationofinformation,librarieshavebeenexpectedtokeeppacewithrecentrapidchangesintechnology.Thesechangesencompasseverythingfromtechnologiesavailabletotheusersoflibraryservicestothetechnologiesusedtomanagephysicalanddigitalresources.Often,repositoriesarecreatedoradaptedtofittheneedsoflibrarieslookingtomanagetheircontent,bothphysicalanddigital,throughasingleinterface

Theserepositoriesarealsoessentialforthecollaborativeeffortsoflibrariesorinstitutionshopingtosharetheirinformationwithotherinstitutions.However,theopenstandardsofrepositoriesandtheeaseofaccessthattheyallowtotheinformationstoredtherecanraiseethicalquestionsandconcerns.Copyrightandfairusepoliciesandconsiderationsareasessentialtothecreationanduseofthesere-positoriesasthetechnologyandinterfaceitself

Whiletechnologicaladvancementshaveallowedlibrariesandinstitutionsgreateraccessandeasierdisseminationoftheinformationthattheyrequire,store,andoffertousers,thetechnologiesusedbytheseinstitutionsmustbeadvancingatthesamerate.Additionally,ethicalconsiderationsmustbemadethatprotectintellectualpropertyrightswhileallowingfortheeaseofaccessthatinstitutions,suchaslibraries,havealwaysbeenabletooffertotheirusers

Theeverchanginglandscapesurroundingthediverseapplicationsofdifferentscientificareascanmakeitverychallengingtostayontheforefrontofinnovativeresearchtrends.ThatiswhyIGIGlobalispleasedtoofferthisone-volumecomprehensivereferencethatwillempowerlibrarians,ITtechni-cians,academicians,researchers,andstudentswithastrongerunderstandingofdigitallibrariesandinstitutionalrepositories

Thiscompilationisdesignedtoactasasinglereferencesourceonconceptual,methodological,andtechnicalaspects,andwillprovideinsightintoemergingtopicsincludingbutnotlimitedtocontentmanagement,libraryscience,openaccess,webanalytics,andinformationsharing.Thechapterswithinthispublicationaresuretoprovidereadersthetoolsnecessaryforfurtherresearchanddiscoveryintheirrespectiveindustriesand/orfields

Digital Libraries and Institutional Repositories: Breakthroughs in Research and Practiceisorganized

Thefollowingparagraphsprovideasummaryofwhattoexpectfromthisinvaluablereferencesource:Section1,“DevelopmentandDigitalTransformation,”opensthisextensivereferencesourcebyhigh-lightingbestpracticesforthedevelopmentofdigitallibrariesandaddresseschallengesthatlibrariesfacewhentransformingtodigitalcontent.Thefirstchapterinthissection,“LibraryCollaborativeNetworksForgingScholarlyCyberinfrastructureandRadicalCollaboration,”authoredbyProfs.LaurieN.Taylor,SuzanA.Alteri,ValrieIlaMinson,BenWalker,E.HavenHawley,ChelseaS.Dinsmore,andRebeccaJ.W.JeffersonfromtheUniversityofFlorida,USA,examinestheleveragingofnewtechnologicalop-portunitiesbylibrarians.Followingthischapteris“TheConstructionandDevelopmentofAcademicLibraryDigitalSpecialSubjectDatabases,”byProfs.YanRaoandYaoleiZhangfromWuhanUniversityLibrary,China,whichprovidescomprehensiveresearchondatabasebuildingandmaintenance.Anothernoteworthychapterwithinthissection,“CostIssuesinDigitalizationandPreservation:ACaseStudyofaSmall-ScaleMusicLibrary,”writtenbyProf.AdaChiWaiChungfromtheUniversityofHongKong,HongKong,exploresstrategiesforthepreservationofinformation.Alsoincludedwithinthissectionisthechapter“InsourcingandOutsourcingofLibraryTechnology,”byProf.EdwardIglesiasfromStephenF.AustinStateUniversity,USA,whichexaminesthemovefromin-houselibrarysystemstooutsourcedsystems.Anotherchaptercontainedwithinthissection,“TheChinaAcademicDigitalAssociativeLi-brary(CADAL),”authoredbyProfs.ChenHuangandHelenF.XuefromZhejiangUniversity,China,providescomprehensiveresearchonthecollaborationandresourcesharingofmajoracademiclibrar-ies.Oneoftheclosingchapters,“TheConstructionandDevelopmentoftheAcademicDigitalLibraryofChineseAncientCollections,”writtenbyProfs.XiaoLongandBoyueYaofromPekingUniversity,China,exploresdatabasemanagementandsharingamongcollaborativeinstitutions.Anotheroneoftheclosingchaptersinthissection,“DigitalInitiativesoftheIndianCouncilofWorldAffairs’Library,”byProf.ChhayaSharmafromAmericanCenter,India,examinesthetransitionfromatraditionalacademiclibrarytoadigitalacademiclibrary.Thefinalchapterinthissection,“AnalysisofInitialInvolvementofLibrariansintheOnlineVirtualWorldofSecondLife,”authoredbyProf.MichelleKowalskyfromRowanUniversity,USA,explorestechnologyuseoflibrariansandtheprovisionofonlineresources.Section2,“DigitalInclusion,Accessibility,andUsability,”includeschaptersonequityassuranceandeaseofaccesstoinformationresourcesandservicesaswellasapplicationsthatenhanceuser-friendliness.Thefirstchapterinthissection,“Institutional,Legal,andAttitudinalBarrierstotheAccessibilityofUni-versityDigitalLibraries:ImplicationsforRetentionofDisabledStudents,”writtenbyDr.SushilOswalfromtheUniversityofWashington,USA,examinestheimpactofaccessibilitybarrierstodigitallibrar-iesondisabledstudents’abilitytosucceed.Followingthischapteris“Demographics,Socio-Economic,andCognitiveSkillsasBarrierstoInformationSeekinginaDigitalLibraryEnvironment,”authoredbyProfs.FeliciaYusuf,SolaOwolabi,AyooluwaAregbesola,SundayOguntayo,FolukeOkocha,andToluwaniEyiolorunsefromLandmarkUniversity,Nigeria,whichfeaturescutting-edgeresearchontheimportanceofdemographicandsocio-economicinfluencesoninformationseekinginadigitallibraryenvironment.Anotherchaptercontainedwithinthissection,“DiscussiononDigitalInclusionGoodPrac-ticesatEurope’sLibraries,”writtenbyProf.Maria-JesúsColmenero-RuizfromtheCarlosIIIUniversityofMadrid,Spain,examinesthesocialroleofdigitallibrariesasagentstopromotedigitalinclusion.Anothernoteworthychapterwithinthissection,“Users’AcceptanceofOnlineLiteratureDatabasesinaThaiUniversity:ATestofUTAUT2,”byProf.WornchanokChaiyasoonthornfromKingMngkut’sInstituteofTechnology,ThailandandProf.WatanyooSuksa-ngiamfromClaremontGraduateUniversity,USA,examinesonlineliteraturedatabasesasanessentialresourceinhighereducationsettings.Oneoftheclosingchapters,“UsabilityofDigitalResources:AStudyofFrancisSulemanuIdachabaLibrary

Section3,“DigitalRightsandCopyrightIssues,”presentscoverageonintellectualpropertyissuesthatlibrariesfaceasmoreoftheirservicesbecomedigital.Thefirstchapterinthissection,“Develop-mentandManagementofDigitalLibrariesintheRegimeofIPRParadigm,”byProf.RanjanKarmakarfromChekdahaCollege,India,featurescutting-edgeresearchonthemanagementandethicsofdigitallibrariesandthechallengesanonlinesystemcanfaceinrelationtointellectualpropertyrights.Anotherchapterpresentedearlywithinthissectionis“DigitalLibrariesandCopyrightofIntellectualProperty:AnEthicalPracticeManagement,”byProf.AbdullahiBekarefromKwaraStateUniversity,Nigeria,whichexaminestheethicalmanagementofdigitalcollectionsincompliancewithcopyrightrequirements.Thischapterisfollowedby“CopyrightIssuesintheContextoftheDigitalLibrary,”authoredbyProf.PedroPina,PolytechnicInstituteofCoimbra,Portugal,whichexaminestheroleoflibrariesincultureandknowledgeasintermediariesbetweencreatorsandreaders.Anothernoteworthychapterwithinthissection,“ManagingIntellectualPropertyinDigitalLibrariesandCopyrightChallenges,”authoredbyProf.MonicahJemeliChemulwofromSt.Paul’sUniversity,Kenya,examinesdigitalpreservationanddisseminationstrategiesforlibrarycollections.Oneoftheclosingchapterswithinthissection,“DigitalLibraries,CopyrightLimitations,andAccessforPurposesofSubsequentAcademicPublishing:StillStandingontheShouldersofGiants?”writtenbyProf.PedroPinafromPolytechnicInstituteofCoimbra,Portugal,providescomprehensiveresearchoncurrentlegislationregardingdigitalcopyrightfromtheperspectiveofthepublicinterestinscientificresearch.Thefinalchapterinthissection,“LegalConsid-erationsofProvidingInformationinSupportofDistanceLearningbyDigitalLibrariesinUniversitiesinKenya,”authoredbyProf.JaphetOtikefromMoiUniversity,Kenya,featurescutting-edgeresearchonthelegalchallengeslibrariansfacewhenmanaginguniversitylibraries

Section4,“InstitutionalRepositories,”discussescoverageandresearchperspectivesoninstitution’sdigitalrepositories.Thefirstchapterinthissection,“ManagementofInstitutionalRepositories(IR)inDevelopingCountries,”authoredbyProfs.JeromeIdiegbeyan-Ose,GoodluckIfijeh,JulianaIwu-James,andJulieIloghofromCovenantUniversity,Nigeria,examinesthemanagementofinstitutionalrepositoriesindevelopingcountries.Followingthischapteris“InstitutionalRepositoriesinUniversitiesinNigeria:DesirabilityandProgress,”authoredbyProf.PeterOlorunlakeOyefromNationalInstituteforPolicyandStraegicStudies,Nigeria;Prof.DavidAjibolaOyeniyi,FederalUniversityTechnologyAkure,Nigeria;andProf.DavidEzekielMahan,NationalVeterinaryResearchInstitute,Nigeria,examinesacademicinstitutions’useandadaptationofvirtualrepositories.Anothernoteworthychapterwithinthissection,“InstitutionalRepositoriesandLibrariesinNigeria:InterrogatingtheNexus,”writtenbyProfs.GoodluckIfijeh,OyeronkeAdebayo,RolandIzuagbe,andOlajumokeOlawoyin,CovenantUniversity,Nigeria,examinesadministrationpracticesusedbylibrariansinacademiaforinstitutionalrepositories.Alsoincludedwithinthissectionisthechapter“UseofInstitutionalRepositoryforInformationDis-

Section5,“OpenAccessandElectronicResources,”discussescoverageandresearchperspectivesontheprevalenceofopenaccessandtheuseofvariouselectronicdatabasesandresources.Thefirstchapterinthissection,“ManagingOpenAccess(OA)ScholarlyInformationResourcesinaUniversity,”authoredbyProf.DimplePatelfromCentralUniversityofHimachalPradesh,IndiaandProf.DeeptiThakurfromIndianInstituteofAdvanceStudy,India,examinesopenaccessmodels,support,andman-agementinacademicinstitutions.Thischapterisfollowedby“ImpactofDiscoveryLayersonAccess-ingE-ResourcesinAcademicLibraries:ACaseStudyofCentralUniversityofBihar,”writtenbyProf.MayankYuvarajfromCentralUniversityofSouthBihar,India,whichexaminestheimplementationofinstitutionale-resourcesasalternativesolutionstocommercialdiscoveryservices.Anothernoteworthychapterwithinthissection,“AdoptionofOpenSourceSoftwareinLibrariesinDevelopingCountries,”byProf.JosilinePhiriChigwadafromBinduraUniversityofScienceEducation,Zimbabwe,providescomprehensiveresearchontheadoptionofopensourcesoftwareinlibrariesindevelopingcountries.Alsoincludedwithinthissectionisthechapter“ValueCo-CreationinArchivalResources:Explor-ingtheFeatureofNationalArchivesofBangladesh(NAB)’sOpenAccessProject,”writtenbyDrs.MukhlesurRahman,ToufiqAhmed,andKunioShirahadafromJapanAdvancedInstituteofScienceandTechnology(JAIST),Japan,whichexaminesacasestudyofTheNationalArchivesofBangladeshanditsdifferentaspectsfromavalue-creationperspective.Oneoftheclosingchapters,“CommercialandOpenAccessIntegratedInformationSearchToolsinIndianLibraries,”authoredbyProf.SangeetaN.DhamdherefromtheModernCollegeofArts,ScienceandCommerce,IndiaandProf.RamdasLi-hitkarfromtheGovernmentCollegeofScience,India,exploressingle-userinterfacesusedbylibrariestoaccesselectronicresourcesbothwithinandoutsideofthelibrary.Thefinalchapterinthissection,

“ImpactofElectronicInformationResourcesontheMindsetofResearchers,”byProf.NazirAhmadBhatfromSher-e-KashmirUniversityofAgricultureSciencesandTechnologyofKashmir,India,as-sessestheimpactofelectronicinformationresourcesonaspectsofresearchactivity

Althoughtheprimaryorganizationofthecontentsinthisworkisbasedonitsfivesections,offeringaprogressionofcoverageoftheimportantconcepts,methodologies,technologies,applications,socialissues,andemergingtrends,thereadercanalsoidentifyspecificcontentsbyutilizingtheextensiveindexingsystemlistedattheend

Development and Digital

Transformation

Library Collaborative Networks Forging Scholarly Cyberinfrastructure and

Radical Collaboration

Laurie N Taylor

University of Florida, USA

Suzan A Alteri

University of Florida, USA

Valrie Ila Minson

University of Florida, USA

do so, UF librarians undertook new DH activities as opportunities to fundamentally enrich and improve existing, seemingly more traditional work, including collection development, library scholarly councils, collaboration among libraries for print and digital collections, outreach and instruction, and more.The overall chapter shows how collaboration to support integrating DH with existing operations, can support aligning DH with existing needs and using DH to extend and build into new areas specifi-cally by working with and from librarians’ existing skills and expertise In doing so, the chapter shows librarians are critically important collaborative partners for DH activities As Maron and Pickle explain

in “Sustaining the Digital Humanities” factors for success and good practices in the Digital Humanities includes “Invest in people” and “Knit deep partnerships among campus units” including the libraries (2014, page 49-50) Further, DH activities are critically important for librarians for growing skills and, importantly, because DH activities present opportunities that are directly relevant to all academic library concerns in the digital age, and for coming needs with the age of big data By focusing on specific projects, this chapter shows how collaboration among many librarians for DH resulted in measurable benefits Included with the different projects covered are reviews of different ways of setting up collaborative team activities for best capitalizing on all expertise for project success, and for the longer-term needs associated with transforming positions, roles, and ways of working The end of the chapter concludes with a set of recommendations and considerations for undertaking DH successfully for specific projects, for longer-term success with changed roles for librarians and changed ways of working, and for how DH can inform and support data management needs, with librarians in the humanities having vital informa-tion and expertise to share in developing sustainable data management programs

The chapter begins with a brief overview of digital collection development in the UF Libraries to show how the infrastructure developed with and for librarians, scholars, archivists, and many others The UF Libraries began digitizing for preservation in the early 1990s, building to today with over 800 digital collections representing over 30 million files for UF and partner institutions, and numerous digital

scholarship and DH projects (UF Digital Humanities Projects, 2015; UF Digital Collections, 2015)

UF’s digital collection development success was made possible through the close collaboration among subject, functional, and technical specialist librarians, along with partners from many fields By 2010, the UF Libraries had centralized servers in UF’s state-of-the-art data center, gaining all the benefits of cloud computing without the risks associated with external agencies

The UF Libraries continue to build on this robust core, developing full socio-technical supports (people, policies, technologies, communities) for digital scholarship and DH, especially with the creation of the

DH Library Group—a librarian-focused group to complement the campus-wide DH Working Group—to focus on library needs for inclusion and support or DH with the majority of participants being librarians

UF librarians built from this foundation, developing innovative new projects and services, all the while working to further innovate and extend on activities, especially through new opportunities with DH The overview of this process illuminates the importance of contributions from and collaboration with librar-

ians for individual DH projects and for DH at scale, as part of the overall scholarly cyberinfrastructure

in the age of big data This chapter focuses on several specific projects which are DH projects and are also simultaneously part of the programmatic work in developing scholarly cyberinfrastructure Using specific examples, this chapter shows how DH activities can support: faculty development and reskilling and upskilling for librarians as they share expertise and blend roles (blending subject, functional, and technical expertise) while on collaborative DH teams; closer collaborative relationships with librarians and scholars for the shared subject area; opportunities for multi-institutional collaboration on analog and digital collection development that support core, traditional work and enables new opportunities; and more Specific projects covered include: an internal grant project to create a Scholar’s Council for the Baldwin Library of Historical Children’s Literature, developing the responsibilities and roles using

a DH project for application and testing; the Centers of Excellence model for collaborative analog and digital collection development which further emphasizes excellence and expertise with specific subject librarians; digital scholarship and digital humanities contributions to create scholarly context for digital libraries as with the Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) and the Jewish Diaspora Collection; col-laboration among communities with their collections; and examples of new collaborative teams that provide foundational support for many projects

The case study example of UF, with connections to parallels from other institutions and tive programs is particularly useful because UF is among the nation’s most academically diverse public universities with 16 colleges and more than 200 research, service and education centers, bureaus and institutes UF’s Libraries form the largest information resource system in the State of Florida, and are one of the largest library systems in the United States Within UF’s Library Systems, the humanities are served from several physical libraries Humanities support includes Subject Specialist Librarians, various blended functional, technical, and subject specialists, teams (e.g., Data Management/Curation Task Force, Digital Humanities Library Group, etc.), and more UF’s size and comparably lower funding demand collaborative and innovative approaches, as well as approaches that leverage capacity whenever possible This chapter explains the internal collaboration across many different groups within the librar-ies, with external groups at UF including the DH Working Group, and their relation with external groups including the new Florida Digital Humanities Consortium (FLDH), which officially launched in 2015

collabora-BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW

One of the early digitization projects by the UF Libraries was the Caribbean Newspaper Imaging ect (CNIP) proposed in 1994 The proposed grant included digitization of newspapers from microfilm, creation of indexes and abstracts, and plans to “publish and market the converted images in optical disk format” (UF Libraries, 1994, page 1) even given the limitations of life-expectancy for the optical disk format because the digital format could lead to new opportunities:

Proj-Development of electronic collections and connectivity in the 1990s can engender tremendous energy

to create new collection development efforts, resource sharing, and access programs The conversion

of microfilm, through digitization, into a computer file which can be distributed through an electronic network is a technology which potentially solves problems Libraries face in providing effective access and interdependency programs (UF Libraries, 1994, page 3)

Even in the initial, exploratory stages for digitization, before the Internet was a fully viable option for the delivery of digitized library content, the UF Libraries oriented towards the opportunities for new collection development efforts, resource sharing, and access programs with digitization Thus, the UF Libraries focused on leveraging technology in service to library mission and goals for providing access

to materials and for building collaborative programs to further grow library community networks in service to shared goals

The UF Libraries continued to utilize and build upon technologies for digitization, opening the Digital Library Center in 1999 and launching the UF Digital Collections in 2006 (Taylor & Landor, 2014) In

2006, the UF Libraries also outlined a vision for ongoing growth of the digital collections (Kesse, Haas,

& Sullivan, 2006) The vision for ongoing growth included strategies to build from technologies for digitization services into value-added activities that utilized technologies in service of library activities, including investigating and building support for using digital resources for teaching and research, as well

as new supports for libraries, as with integrated statistical reporting, branding support for institutional content, broad metadata support, building infrastructure to support relationships with vendors to grow digital collections, and devising and adopting methods to build collections and experience In doing so, the UF Libraries were following what Vinopal and McCormick (2013) have explained as “first-of-kind” projects that require custom supports where the supports for that project are useful for many projects and thus are part of building the appropriate infrastructure This is as opposed to “one-of-a-kind” projects which only support a specific project and do not contribute to shared supporting infrastructure

From 1994-2006, the UF Libraries undertook many digitization and digital collection building projects and worked to develop the socio-technical (people, policies, technologies, communities) infrastructure within the UF Libraries and a shared scholarly cyberinfrastructure across UF and with many distributed partners One of the key programs that began during this time was the Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) Building from the initial core emphasis on shared goals for libraries and the mission and role

of the UF Libraries, the UF Libraries became a founding partner and the technical host institution for dLOC in 2004 (dLOC, 2015; Wooldridge, Taylor, & Sullivan, 2009) With dLOC:

The Digital Library Center at UF provided the technical expertise necessary to advise the development

of the digital collection The [dLOC] partners developed a model in which the cultural and national patrimony would be united online, but the items and the rights would remain with the contributing partner […] The organizational structure defined in the by-laws, the project’s four-year work plan and clear evaluation tools have facilitated the project’s continued success (Wooldridge, Taylor, & Sullivan,

2009, pp 36-37)

dLOC emphasized bringing together many experts within libraries—and beyond libraries—to ensure the optimal development of the socio-technical infrastructure for library needs and goals dLOC pres-ents a model wherein digital library development and digitization activities are done in a collaborative manner with shared governance to support library needs and goals for access, preservation, shared and collaborative collection development, technological development, and capacity and community building among library communities as well as for next steps for collaboration with researchers and teachers for developing digital scholarship resources, digital humanities projects, data curation

The dLOC model served libraries by demanding that technology support and serve the immediate and ongoing needs for libraries as well as the larger goals, which included that technology support growing library communities The dLOC model directly led to the development of the SobekCM Open Source Digital Repository Software (Sullivan & Taylor, 2014; Taylor & Sullivan, 2014; SobekCM, 2015):

The real-world complexities of the Caribbean ecosystem led to collaborative creation of the Digital brary of the Caribbean (dLOC, www.dloc.com) The variety, complexity, and diversity of needs across dLOC’s many partners directly supported the development of the SobekCM Open Source Software (http:// sobekrepository.org) Being parallel to and intertwined with the development of dLOC, the SobekCM software relies on user-focused development SobekCM has developed in collaboration with dLOC’s institutional, scholarly, publishing, and other communities, as well as in collaboration with other groups and systems Currently, the dLOC and SobekCM communities are expanding with new technologies and communities to meet data needs (Sullivan & Taylor, 2014)

Li-The socio-technical approaches again are key, with the technology for the digital library being oped with librarians for library and community needs such that the technology serves as a framework, network, and meshwork to support thriving growth of the communities of practice for libraries and their connected communities Further, by taking a socio-technical approach, the SobekCM Open Source Software, dLOC, and other collaborative digital library programs and activities were able to flourish technically by engaging the user community for defining the functional and non-functional requirements,

devel-as with needs for scalability, interoperability, sustainability, edevel-ase of use for different user groups and needs including digital library production, digital scholarship creation and publication, and more The demands for non-functional requirements as with sustainability and reliability also supported the UF Libraries in collaborating more broadly within UF This included moving the previously internally hosted and administered web servers to the UF central IT supported campus data centers, which are private cloud infrastructure with all of the benefits both of cloud technologies for redundancy and up-time and

of hosting and support through an academic institution with shared mission and goals

The robust socio-technical infrastructure allowed the UF Libraries to thrive in terms of productivity and impact for the digital library systems and UF Digital Collections In part because of the highly vis-ible and highly successful status of the UF Digital Collections, the UF Libraries were invited to join the Research Computing Advisory Committee when UF created Research Computing to:

[P]romote institutional partnerships and technologies resulting in “radical collaboration” – mentally new partnerships of faculty, IT and computational specialists across UF and beyond Radical collaboration will support the next generation of inquiry – insuring that UF researchers will effectively compete for resources, using data and information resources to extend human knowledge and capability (UF Research Computing Advisory Committee, 2011)

funda-Partnership with UF Research Computing, a major institutional infrastructure provider, has allowed the UF Libraries to further extend, promote, and connect with scholars and other user communities who are core communities for the libraries, and to broaden the perception of the roles, activities, and capacities of the libraries as a collaborative partner for Digital Humanities (DH), digital scholarship, data curation, and related activities

Along with specific projects, programs, and technologies, the UF Libraries developed the critical human and administrative infrastructures to optimally support DH and related activities The UF Librar-ies began a program of implementing the administrative frameworks to support a thriving culture of collaboration within the libraries This framework recognized and built upon the expertise and impor-tance of librarians, archivists, and curators, including procedures which officially instituted the Liaison Librarian as the primary contact for all digital scholarship, DH, and data curation projects and activities (Taylor, 2013) Under this framework, the Liaison Librarian can be the primary and only contact, or may draw upon a larger team in the libraries, including functional experts as with the Curator for the Digital Collections and Digital Scholarship Librarian However, it is important to note that the Liaison Librarian is the primary and core, required member of the team Thus, the UF Libraries reaffirmed the centrality and significance of librarians, librarianship, libraries, and collaboration for DH This follows other findings on DH frameworks For example, in “Facilitating Communities of Practice in Digital Humanities: Librarian Collaborations for Research and Training in Text Encoding,” Green explains DH

as a community of practice, where collective learning takes place in a domain through engagement on

an enterprise, with skills and knowledge shared and learned within the community:

Each of the communities in digital humanities has relatively well defined engagement among members developed through scholarly symposia and social media networks, research collaborations that enable the community to progress as a whole, and active sharing of research methodologies and skills through members’ writing and published documentation Text encoding is a highly focused subfield of digital humanities that is well suited to be a case of a community of practice given its rich history in the origins

of humanities computing and the well-developed scholarly communications infrastructure developed by the Text Encoding Initiative Consortium It is also a scholarly network that presents a strong case study

of the role of librarians in building learning environments that enable scholars to become members of its community of practice The ways in which librarians have developed training initiatives and research collaborations for their scholarly communities around the methods of text encoding can reveal how they facilitate the entrance of scholars into the constellation of communities of practice within digital humanities, as well as their own role in sustaining the communities (Green, 2015)

Green’s article focuses on text encoding specifically, with the framing of the importance of ians as part of DH communities of practice also true for other shared domains and activities, including digital collections and digital libraries

librar-With this wealth of resources in terms of the socio-technical infrastructure including supports for an active community of practice, UF librarians began the more complex work of utilizing and growing the existing structure to support particular projects, programmatic needs, and strategic growth for the future The more complex activities have taken many forms, including developing specific projects, models and ways of working, and growing the human infrastructure with communities of practice

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER

Because the UF Libraries focused on the critical role of libraries and librarians for digitization and other digital initiatives, leveraging those activities in service to the mission and goals of the libraries, librar-ians at UF were ideally positioned for new opportunities that developed from digital activities, including

DH Importantly, UF also created the foundation and context for librarians to pursue new opportunities from the digital, to have those opportunities enrich, inform, and improve existing activities in collection development, library scholarly councils, library collaborations for print and digital collections, outreach, instruction, and more The projects and activities presented in this chapter provide examples for other library and digital humanities collaborations in terms of best practices for establishing collaborative teams, training and skill development for librarians, developing stronger collaborations and collabora-tive communities within and beyond libraries, and identifying needs and projects within libraries that also enable new opportunities.

Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC)

The Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) has already been introduced in this chapter because dLOC was both an early project that the UF Libraries participated in and because dLOC was a foundational project in terms of laying the groundwork for best practices and goals for how to develop collaborative digital library programs As explained on the dLOC website:

The Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) is a cooperative of partners within the Caribbean and circum-Caribbean that provides users with access to Caribbean cultural, historical and research ma- terials held in archives, libraries, and private collections dLOC comprises collections that speak to the similarities and differences in histories, cultures, languages and governmental systems Types of collections include but are not limited to: newspapers, archives of Caribbean leaders and governments, official documents, documentation and numeric data for ecosystems, scientific scholarship, historic and contemporary maps, oral and popular histories, travel accounts, literature and poetry, musical expressions, and artifacts.

The Digital Library of the Caribbean’s (dLOC) diverse partners serve an international community of scholars, students, and peoples by working together to preserve and to provide enhanced electronic ac- cess to cultural, historical, legal, governmental, and research materials in a common web space with

a multilingual interface dLOC’s partners collaborate with scholars and teachers for promoting and performing educational outreach on Caribbean Studies, developing new works of digital scholarship, and pursuing other research and teaching initiatives.

The amount of open access content available through dLOC surpasses many commercial Caribbean collections […] dLOC now provides access to 2 million pages of content related to the Caribbean and has registered a cumulative total of 36 million page views (“About dLOC,” 2015)

Goals for dLOC over the past decade have evolved as dLOC’s contents and community have grown dLOC’s growing content highlighted the need for greater contextual materials to support access to and understanding of the content Libraries and archives often develop and support intellectual access to materials by providing context through finding aids, instruction, guides, exhibits, and other contextual supports In working on dLOC, librarians recognized the need to collaborate with scholars in order to create intellectual access and context for materials:

Many of the materials in dLOC are of critical importance for specific research areas However, because

so many of the materials in dLOC are unique, access has been restricted, with unique items often in mote archives and with additional restrictions on access to ensure they are preserved These restrictions create a fundamental lack of access that, in turn, restricts the research possibilities for these materials Placing the materials online removes the first of those fundamental obstacles to access However, the materials do not exist within the realm of scholarly communications and discourse until they are con- nected to scholars and those communities and networks In order for these sorts of unique materials to

re-be part of the research foundation, curation in terms of context-creation is necessary (Taylor, Betancourt, & Wooldridge, 2013)

Vargas-Processes to support these goals including the need to create context led to library and scholar munity collaborations This, in turn, created new contextualizing resources as with online exhibits, curated online edited editions, teaching guides, collaboratively taught courses with student research on and contributed to dLOC, and other collaborative activities and products This also created new relation-ships for future collaborations and grew the community of practice, as Rogers and Wooldridge explain:

com-The true test of value of the dLOC content is demonstrated by growing relationships with researchers and educators that create an environment conducive to new digital humanities collaborations As more content becomes available online, the opportunities for collaboration and innovation in scholarship expand dLOC in effect serves as a virtual digital humanities center (2011, p 5)

Processes to build dLOC as a collaborative digital library also simultaneously supported dLOC as a center for developing the community of practice with libraries and librarians serving as core collabora-tive partners in digital scholarship and DH for creating scholarly context for digital libraries as part of the community of practice

For lessons learned and outcomes, dLOC demonstrates the value and importance of mission ment with the core library missions for collaboration on DH activities, to ensure that the new activities build from and support the core library collaborative goals Further, dLOC exemplifies the importance

align-of an explicitly defined model for shared governance dLOC’s shared governance model defines a laborative committed to digitization for access, preservation, and building towards future opportunities, including dLOC’s role in terms of building capacity and community among all partners Thus, dLOC’s model includes both governance and a framework for building and sustaining a community of practice, which is a critical need for supporting collaboration on DH

col-The UF Libraries applied lessons learned and outcomes from dLOC in undertaking all subsequent activities for developing digital libraries, digital collections, and digital scholarship In turn, and in fol-lowing best practices for DH, the UF Libraries shared new learnings and findings from other projects with dLOC as part of supporting and enriching the community of practice

Isser and Rae Price Library of Judaica and the

Jewish Diaspora Collection (JDoC)

Following the successful example with dLOC, the Isser and Rae Price Library of Judaica at the UF Libraries actively incorporates digital collections and leverages DH tools and methods in order to build and promote its collections and create new partnerships The Judaica Library’s digital collections were

first established in 2008 with the “Jewish Theology” collection, comprising 27 items In 2010, these materials became a sub-collection of a larger “Price Library of Judaica Digital Collection” dedicated to the digital preservation of the broader scope of the library’s materials That same year, the Judaica Library was fortunate to receive its first manuscript archive, the personal papers of Reverend Benjamin Safer, the first Rabbi of Jacksonville, Florida In order to satisfy the donor that the collection would receive wide attention, the curator, contrary to normal accession practices, promised that parts of the collection would be digitized before they were processed and that those materials would be used to form a unique digital sub-collection whose contents would be contextualized by the provision of a landing page and narrative (“The Reverend Benjamin Safer Digital Collection”).

Processes for developing the digital collections and DH evolved iteratively As the curator undertook digital activities, feedback and responses pointed to new opportunities and informed approaches for the next steps For example, the curator quickly realized that ensuring timely global access to historically significant primary source materials of this nature would assist greatly in outreach and collection building Indeed, further donations relating to the history of the Jewish community in Jacksonville, Florida soon followed The Jewish community of Jacksonville was the first such group in the state and yet its story had been overshadowed by the focus on communities in south Florida Realizing that there was a clear gap in the history of Florida Jewry, an important narrative which itself is under-researched, the curator sought to promote these new materials more widely by creating an online exhibition which linked back

to the digital objects The Safer Collection was viewed 122 times in January 2012 but three months later,

following the launch of Jewish Jacksonville (2012), this figure had more than quadrupled To date, the

online collection has been seen by over 2900 visitors to the website

The number of queries about items in the digital collection pertaining to Florida Jewish history likewise rose rapidly, as well as requests that more items relating to this subject be made available Realizing that the Judaica Library could play an important role in providing the resources for much-needed research into Florida Jewish history, the curator applied for a grant from the Library Services and Technology Act

(LSTA) to convert the long-standing Florida Jewish newspaper, The Jewish Floridian, from microfilm

into digital format and to form the first collection of a new ethnic newspapers database The database was heavily promoted by the grant team to faculty and students on campus, and off campus to members

of the public at museums and public libraries, genealogical society meetings and through webinars The

sub-collection Florida Jewish Newspapers (2012), of which The Jewish Floridian was the main feature,

was supplied with a landing page and narrative, online tutorials and slide presentations contextualizing

the collection were also embedded within that page The Jewish Floridian newspaper has since proved

our most popular digital title with over 2 million views recorded to date

These accomplishments were key to our recent successful application for a National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Challenge Grant Entitled “Repositioning Florida’s Judaica Library: Increasing Access to Humanities Resources from Florida, Latin America and the Caribbean Communities,” the grant will create a $2 million endowment fund to enable the acquisition of materials from these regional areas and the building of a collaborative digital database, the Jewish Diaspora Collection (JDoC) The NEH review panel was especially enthusiastic about UF’s intention to model JDoC on the proven excel-lence of the Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) model The Jewish Diaspora Collection (JDoC) will form a collaborative digital collection and community network focused on resources from Florida, Latin America and the Caribbean The collection will promote greater knowledge and understanding of under-researched topics such as the impact of the Jewish diaspora on migration and settlement patterns,

cultural and religious identities, linguistics, education, politics, slavery and civil rights, trade, commerce, and land development JDoC’s first collections will include materials aggregated from the main Judaica site that pertain to Florida, Latin America and the Caribbean.

New materials are also being identified for JDoC, like the set of oral histories from El Salvador recently transcribed and translated by UF graduate, Genesis Lara Lara’s work on these histories has resulted in

a further donation of materials from El Salvador and the discovery that members of that community are now living in Miami and willing to provide additional testimonies The collection will be discussed at this year’s Latin American Jewish Studies Association annual conference, and it signifies an important first step in providing Jewish resources from under-studied areas in Central America The collection will be given context and patrons greater guidance to the subject matter covered by these interviews by employing simple DH tools such as the provision of a landing page and narrative, as well as the addition

of a timeline and genealogical chart

JDoC, like its ideological “parent” dLOC, will present a framework for collaboration that focuses on the preservation and sharing of cultural heritage materials using digital technologies as well as on build-ing the community of practice through the work to digitize and share materials An example is the Hunts Bay Cemetery project (2015) which will host the research materials (inventories, catalogs, photographs)

of the Caribbean Volunteers Expedition working to document the historical data captured in the 17th

-19th century Jewish tombstones of Jamaica The Hunts Bay Cemetery collection is being created within dLOC which, with its well-recognized support structure and governance model, will provide greater visibility and presence for the project until JDoC becomes a better established entity However, the col-lection will be aggregated to JDoC where it will serve as a model for attracting other similar projects

As these research materials are mounted online, the Judaica curator will search for other materials from Jamaica to digitize in order to complement and enhance this resource The research group is aiming to develop the site into a fully-fledged DH project by adding narratives, mapping and timeline features.Thus, this important first partnership for JDoC, leveraged through association with dLOC, will assist the Judaica Library in its mission to acquire more materials from these regions by providing a model for further outreach In addition, by leveraging simple DH methods and applying them to such collections, the Library will demonstrate how resources such as these can be enhanced to enrich the user experience.Importantly, the Judaica Diaspora Collection builds outward from the unusual configuration of area studies within a special collection administrative structure at UF The Price Library of Judaica manages physical holdings of print, manuscript and archival materials in the Special and Area Studies Collections Department Area studies collections have been most closely associated with library materials essential for the study of the people, politics and culture within geographic boundaries, such as national borders

or world regions Yet Judaica is a good example of a collecting area that often spans multiple locations

in a library Lisa R Carter and Beth M Whittaker note the complexities of where to locate Judaica assets

in their analysis of distinctive collections such as those at UF:

By their nature, Jewish studies materials can be anywhere At the same time, special collections libraries sometimes find themselves, despite collection development policies and the best of intentions, becoming

a home for library materials that fall outside their collecting area, but just happen to be old, fragile, or otherwise vulnerable In this way, area studies librarians can be purposefully explicit in their collection building, whereas the special collections curator must manage the realities of providing specialized custody (Carter & Whittaker, 365)

The placement of area studies collections within a department accustomed to handling materials that do not circulate or that challenge placement elsewhere within the library opens opportunities for assembling complex collections Special collections have a high capacity for acquiring materials that reflect lived experience, and they provide a sense of place and fixity to digital collections – even as digital collections themselves are a type of special collection.

Oral history projects, ephemera such as calling cards or “grey literature,” and the occasional emonial flag help to flesh out the texture of everyday life beyond the books or photos associated with

cer-a community Rcer-are books, ncer-arrcer-ated trcer-anscripts, litercer-ary mcer-anuscripts, community orgcer-anizcer-ationcer-al records and artifacts more easily form a cohesive whole in special collections, with their clustering providing a ready cross-section of materials from which to form a digitization project A virtuous cycle develops, with donors providing exceptional materials to an institution as they feel a high level of “fit” between the institution’s understanding of community experience and digitization providing access, and the ability

to share access to one’s history through links to online reproductions That ability to establish context for specific items can be reassuring to donors who seek to entrust a narrative, rather than just an object,

to a repository

Lessons learned and outcomes again include the alignment of digital library and DH activities with core library mission and goals Further, lessons learned reinforce that best practices include both overall mission alignment as well as organizational structure and unit alignment for undertaking collaborative digital projects The Judaica Collections and JDoC build on the context and supports provided by area studies and special collections, drawing from unique holdings to build collaborative digital projects and,

in turn, leveraging the digital activities to continue to grow the physical holdings This also reinforces the value of iterative development where one activity is performed and then results are reviewed to inform and support future activities For the Judaica Collections, the initial digital collections were built from UF’s holdings alone Based on the responses to those collections, the curator recognized the importance

of participating in a community of practice for collaborative digital collection and DH activities, which informed and led to the creation of JDoC

Panama Canal Museum

The mobility of diaspora communities challenges traditional notions of area studies, just as online cess to physical collections presents a new way of considering what comprises a “special collection.” In

ac-2012, the George A Smathers Libraries at University of Florida absorbed holdings of the Panama Canal Museum into its Special and Area Studies Collections Established by former residents of the American Zone in the Panama Canal, the museum documented a double diaspora The majority of those involved in the museum were Americans who had formed a strong identity through life experiences working, raising families and going to school in the Canal Zone After the United States ceded control of the Panama Ca-nal to the government of Panama over two decades at the end of the 20th century, most of the American

“Zonians” departed, with many settling in Florida or gathering annually in that state for Panama Canal reunion societies The Panama Canal Museum was a community-based museum focused on telling the story of people who lived and worked in the Panama Canal Zone during its American construction and management Achieving stability for a community museum proved difficult

Goals and process for this collection were tightly coupled together, with the process informing what was possible and how to pursue goals Discussions between museum organizers and UF occurred for three years before finalization of the merger In total, more than 16,000 items came to the Libraries, from

print such as books, newspapers and ephemera to art and photographs The Libraries, the Center for Latin American Studies, and the Samuel Proctor Oral History Program at UF participated in the integration of the museum’s physical assets into the Special and Area Studies Collections Department The partnership created the Friends of the Panama Canal Museum to advise on continued, shared promotion of holdings With a major grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the Libraries funded processing

of archival collections, oral histories, digitization and a series of campus-wide events marking the niversary of the opening of the American-era Panama Canal in 1914 Ingest of so many artifacts–from

an-a weighty bran-ass bell to more than-an an-a thousan-and han-and-stitched decoran-ative textiles–chan-allenged the Libran-aries

So, too, did navigating community sensitivity about different narratives that academics constructed about life in the Canal Zone, focusing on multivalence in the experience rather than a common meaning and struggle often referred to by oral history narrators The stakes were high for museum organizers, who sought to document the final generation of Canal Zone residents, knowing that their experiences could not to be replicated but only transferred through artifacts and the stories surrounding those objects.Processing for the digital collection development and DH activities had heavy demands for both community engagement and efficiency As with the demands of a donor to the Judaica collection, mu-seum organizers prioritized digitization in the partnership as a method for documenting and sharing the materials they had gathered Item-by-item digitization highlighted the museum aspects of the collection, mirroring the artifact-level documentation of museum practices The Libraries focused digitization on the images and texts that can be accommodated most easily and quickly for online access through a searchable interface During the three-year grant, discussions between the Friends group and project staff suggested that with nearly one-tenth of the materials available online, the lack of an overall structure for hierarchizing materials made a large number of digital images less meaningful than many had hoped.Lessons learned from the Panama Canal Museum collection included realizations on different un-derstandings and expectations, and the critical importance of community collaboration for community collections In part, that realization represented a fundamental difference between museums, archives, and communities Of many items that a museum holds, few are displayed Each exhibited piece rep-

resents a moment or turning point in a discernable narrative In archives, the chief tenet of respect du fonds emphasizes the importance of placing all items within the larger structure of their creation and

use, as generated in the activities of a specific entity Constructed with the intention to document many experiences rather than arising out of one organization’s or individual’s activities, the Zonian museum represented an artificial collection intending to provide memory markers, within the context of the community’s own interpretation of those items Scholars expected to construct an interpretation of Zo-nian experience from multiple assets online and had experience in operating similar search interfaces Community members often felt confused by how Libraries staff promised that researchers would have access onsite and online to materials; to Zonians, seeing the familiar past was less research than passing

on memory Though full-scale digitization had been the goal and was shaped by the item-orientation of the community’s museum, an emphasis on initial archival processing would have discerned pathways through the thousands of artifacts more readily, aiding in the creation of metadata or clustering more similar to how the community wished to access the digital collection In the wake of the 2014 centennial celebrations of the Panama Canal opening that provided intense pressure for immediate digitization, the Friends and the Libraries have opened discussions about the role of processing and description in preserving community history, rather than expecting digital images to replicate a museum experience

Project Ceres: Projects as Process for Collaborative Programs

JDoC and the Panama Canal Museum both leveraged the dLOC Model to create major new digital library and DH programs Collaboration on digital libraries and DH programs may also take the form of small projects which build and enrich existing collaborative programs, and which are made possible by the existing community framework One example of this is a shared project on agricultural collections with

UF and the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI), an Historically Black College or University (HBCU) UVI was a founding partner of dLOC and the driving force behind dLOC’s creation and development.Processes for expanding collaboration among community partners are readily available because, with collaboration on dLOC, UVI and UF are in regular communication for collaborative activities as part

of a shared community of practice In 2014, the Center for Research Libraries (CRL) in collaboration with the United States Agriculture Information Network (USAIN) and Agriculture Network Information Center (AgNIC) offered financial support toward ongoing preservation and digitization of agricultural collections through a program called Project Ceres (Center for Research Libraries, 2015) As official USAIN members, UF was eligible to apply for funding for UF or collaborative projects With the community relationship in place, UF was able to quickly contact and collaborate with UVI to submit

a successful proposal for over $10,000 to digitize and make available print materials published from 1962-1988 and essential to the study of Caribbean History and Economics of Agriculture The project was separated into three clearly defined areas of contribution: digitization of materials, enhancement of metadata, and creation of a comprehensive bibliography of materials available for future digitization Within the funded project, UVI was responsible for the digitization and metadata enhancement, and UF for the development of the comprehensive bibliography

Lessons learned from this collaboration include the value of being involved in collaborative projects

in order to successfully undertake new collaborative projects This collaboration was made possible because of the existing UVI and UF relationship as dLOC partners and part of a shared community of practice Further, funds from this project supported UVI in purchasing new equipment for completion of this project as well as for future projects As with earlier examples which demonstrated the importance

of creating new projects as first-of-kind or as part of ongoing programs, this project similarly shows how a single project can be developed from and support the development of other projects as part of an overall program of collaborative library activities

Intra-Institutional Organizational Structures for Collaboration

With so many collaborative projects and programs enabling radical collaboration growing from zation and digital collection development, internal institutional structures are needed to support intra-institutional capacity and alignment for external collaboration For the UF Libraries, the UF’s Digital Library Center serves as a critical bridge for the UF Libraries and collaborative partners Prior to 2011, the UF Digital Library Center was a separate department, created over a decade earlier and growing as demands for digitization increased and with new demands being added, including for digital curation and DH support In 2011, the UF Libraries were developing plans for an offsite, statewide high-density storage facility, located in Gainesville, Florida and operated by the UF for the State University System (SUS) of Florida

digiti-Processes for planning for the new facility offered an opportunity to reflect on the structure of the UF Libraries From the planning process, the UF Libraries determined that co-locating storage operations, Conservation Department, and the Digital Library Center in the same facility would allow for greater efficiencies in workflows and for optimal alignment for internal operations, including as the internal operations connected to collaborative partners For example, one of the policies of the new facility was that only one copy of any item would be accepted as the statewide copy To support the single statewide copy policy and related needs for preservation and access, efficient digitization is essential Placing the Digital Library Center with storage and Conservation allows for efficient on-demand digitization of materials held in the facility In doing so, the full processing for physical and digital materials would

be supported, even when a single volume was too sensitive, deteriorated, or in demand to ship the only available copy to partners Further, placing the Digital Library Center together with storage allows for the efficient creation of shared physical and digital collections Rather than digitization as a one-off where files digitized would be done only to meet immediate needs, in cases where copyright permit-ted, UF can utilize the infrastructure of the Digital Library Center to meet digitization demands and to have all digitized materials then added to a shared Open Access digital collection for the shared holding facility The consolidation of services for storage, conservation, and digital collections supports broad considerations for enabling future growth with opportunities for strengthening the connections between physical and digital collections

Lessons learned on the process include the challenges of change management within an institution,

as well as the additional challenges for collaborative projects, which often include the need for new resources as part of the process of becoming more efficient Currently, economic challenges with the recession have delayed implementation on the new facility to bring together storage, conservation, and digital activities for efficient operations for managing and leveraging physical and digital collections together Other lessons learned include the value and importance of developing well defined plans and agreements for collaborative endeavors While funding has been delayed for the new facility, because

UF developed plans for the facility, operations, policies, and agreements, funding for an interim ity was secured in 2011 from UF and the University of Miami through a cooperative Memorandum

facil-of Understanding The interim, leased space includes storage, conservation, and digitization, with the interim facility utilized as efficiently as possible given the different demands required of these services.Challenges of change management within the institution included changes in collaboration within the institution In many instances, the staff involved had not previously worked closely together As the formerly different groups came together as part of the full Digital Services & Shared Collections Department, additional changes were needed in the organizational and leadership structure With the new group configured for collaboration together, and collaboration with external partners, there are new challenges with the move off campus for collaboration with on campus partners With the expectation that funding for the final facility will be approved in the next two years, there will be more challenges for which the experiences gained during this interim phase will be invaluable

Early outcomes include increased internal collaboration among storage, conservation, and tion, including closer alignment for digital preservation activities with the new organizational structure Early outcomes also include greater clarity for Liaison Librarians in performing collection management

digitiza-of their full collections, including both physical and digital materials held at UF, and collaborative lections with materials held jointly across the state in a single facility Importantly, student interns and other collaborative digital scholarship and DH projects that extend from the digital collections have

col-increased thanks to changes from the closer alignment of physical and digital collections For example,

a new internship format is in pilot where a scholar sponsors funding for a paid internship to perform digitization and digital curation of a set of research materials for inclusion in the digital collections as part of digital scholarship development

Centers of Excellence: Adding Nodes to Networks for Collaboration

As with changes to UF’s Digital Library Center, long-standing and core activities continue to be informed

by changes made possible with digitization, digital collections, and collaborative initiatives that extend from them As a regional member of the federal depository library program (FDLP), the UF Librar-ies retains materials distributed by the U.S government through the federal depository program and coordinates the activities of smaller FDLP partners in the state of Florida Building from the existing collaborative network for FDLP, individual institutions could volunteer to serve as Centers of Excellence for more actively collecting older physical materials, including digitizing materials when resources al-lowed In doing so, the new Centers of Excellence enriched the collaborative network by adding nodes

or centers focused on specific materials that would likely not be held by all institutions, and where each center would then be best position for next steps for those collections in terms of digitization, digital scholarship development, and other activities

In 2009, the UF Libraries established Centers of Excellence (COEs) for a number of federal agencies This project formed part of a 13-state initiative by the Association of Southeastern Research Libraries (ASERL) to develop and preserve collections of federal documents based on the federal agency that created the documents Each institution selected agencies for which they already held strong collections,

or which had been identified as being of particular interest to their community of users The tions committed to cataloging, preserving and, in the case of UF, digitizing as many documents by the selected agencies as possible

institu-Processes for this collaborative project included a fundamental change in nature of retrospective collection building by Regional depository libraries and an increase in the cataloging of government documents, thus improving accessibility to researchers The changed processes are significant because

of the strong and longstanding history of the overall network The foundation for the Federal Depository Library Program was established by Congress in 1813 which required that certain documents produced

by the government be made publicly available via distribution to libraries outside of government control Most Land Grant universities were established as depositories, along with many public libraries The Government Printing Office (GPO) was created and put in charge of the proto-FDLP by the Printing Act

of 1895 and the Depository Library Act of 1962 created and codified the FDLP as it is known today in Title 44, Chapter 19 of the US Code The 1962 Act set up a system of Regional depositories—generally one for each state, as well as “selective” depositories, usually two per congressional district, which were coordinated by the regionals The important thing to note here, is that Selective depositories chose or

“selected” to receive partial collections of materials from the FDLP and have the ability to withdraw that material after five years and with permission of their Regional Regional Depository Libraries

receive everything shipped by the depository program and may not weed, discard, or otherwise remove

that content from their holdings The materials technically remain government property Since Regional depositories only truly formed in the sixties, collections of material published prior to Title 44 are more scattered and depend on how much of a collection was retained prior to the establishment of the new rules

Goals and processes are tightly coupled for a project that builds upon and alters a program with such a long history One of the primary goals of the ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program (CFDP) was to develop enhanced Regional depository collections Rather than encouraging the Regional depositories to retrospectively collect all federal documents missing from their collections, it was decided distribute the collection load across the region This allowed libraries to focus on areas of particular interest, taking advantage of historical collection strengths and also put less pressure on limited (and precious) shelf-space Since one of the primary sources of retrospective content was the disposal lists

of selective libraries reducing their document collections, and since this process was largely carried out via spreadsheets, a database was developed, using IMLS funds awarded to ASERL in 2009, which al-lowed libraries across the region to post “needs”—agency titles they were seeking, and “offers”—content looking for a home The database also allows libraries to compare their document holdings against the holdings of other libraries in the region This allows for “gap analysis.” Libraries can load their record sets for the agencies they have claimed, or records for other agencies and the compare to see how “com-plete” their holdings for a given agencies are If they find titles held by other libraries, they can request the copy, if the owning institution is a selective, or a surrogate digital copy if a regional holds the title These additional features provided by the database are only possible because of the commitment of the institutions to cataloging their COE holdings

Outcomes from this collaborative project have wide impact Until recently, government documents represented one of the most truly hidden sets of materials held by libraries Often cataloged in the order they arrived in (shelf-list order) or by the government system of SuDoc number (Superintendent of Documents numbers), many institutions never really integrated their holdings into the regular catalog system This meant that researchers had to rely on the document librarians to guide them to the content they needed Since many document collections were held in closed stacks, they were even less accessible

By agreeing to catalog holdings, at least for their chosen COEs, and contribute those records to OCLC, the ASERL libraries have made a major contribution to the findability of government information This

in turn makes historic data more available for scholars to access

Outcomes from the role specifically of the UF Libraries included broader access for the digitized materials, and new resources added to shared digital libraries and collections, including the Panama Canal Museum collection The UF Libraries selected 21 sub-agencies of the department of Agriculture, the documents of the Panama Canal Commission (and related agencies), and the National Recovery Agency as initial Centers of Excellence collections UF committed to collect, catalog, preserve and digitize the publications of these agencies By creating digital collections, the materials are made freely available to researchers Because most of the materials were scanned with Internet Archive, the content was duplicated at archive.org and to HathiTrust, thus contributing to national collections, and creating multiple copies in an unofficial LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) system By making a variety

of derivatives available, researchers have the option of using PDFs for readability or using image files in either JPEG or TIFF format to zoom in on stray marks or to get an idea of paper quality All content is run through optical character recognition (OCR) software to make it full text searchable and the text files are available for researchers who wish to do text analysis The Center of Excellence framework supports all participants in the ramp up process from ensuring complete physical collections that are cataloged and preserved, through digitization, and through next steps for enabling new types of digital scholarship

Lessons learned from this project include the importance of collaboration and bringing the munity together for the development of new processes and resources, as with the new database for gap analysis, in a manner that draws on the expertise and workflow needs of the community Further, lessons learned include the center or node model for a means for leveraging existing community networks to create collaborative projects for shared goals and needs.

com-Collaboration on Scholars Councils for Library Collections

As with collaborative and consortial projects to develop the human and administrative structures for shared library activities, which then connect to scholars and other communities, other projects develop infrastructure specifically with libraries and scholars In order to develop the essential human and ad-ministrative structure necessary for projects in DH and digitization efforts to support DH projects, the Baldwin Library of Historical Children’s Literature received internal funding in 2013 from the George

A Smathers Libraries to plan and create a Scholars Council to position the Baldwin strategically in the children’s literature academic landscape and beyond In planning for the Council, the curator of the Baldwin sought to create the Council as the “vital link between the Baldwin Library and the larger scholarly community for research, teaching, and scholarly communication.” During the planning meeting, scholars from within UF and from outside the university and the field of children’s literature defined the role of the Scholars Council and its relation to the Baldwin Library, the roles for scholars involved in the Council, and formal library/scholar partnerships for future DH project development After the group defined the functions of the Council and the roles of scholars, attendees utilized these roles to test and evaluate a beta website for early American and British children’s literature and discuss the possibility

of applying for external funding to continue this digital project

Processes for creating and developing the Scholars Council included the planning meeting and the applied activity to have the Scholars Council evaluate the website Because communities of practice are defined by shared endeavors, having a shared endeavor was needed as part of the process to help forge the community identity While librarians and scholars for children’s literature share many common goals and practices, having a shared project that leveraged their unique contributions was an important part of the process Although the technical infrastructure for the beta site already existed due to the UF Librar-ies’ commitment to excellence and innovation in digital infrastructure and digitization projects, it was crucial to build the appropriate socio-level supports for the proposed digital project, and others in the future Attendees during the planning meeting (many of whom became official members of the Baldwin Library Scholars Council) evaluated the content and functionality of the beta website by focusing on de-sign, presentation, metadata, and the overall purpose of the early American and British juvenile literature digital project in small groups and reported to the larger group on concerns, suggestions for future DH projects with the digital collection, and how well the site functioned By developing a new community

of practice for children’s literature in special collections, the Baldwin Library at UF Libraries created

an innovative model of collaboration between scholars and libraries (as well as librarians) to capitalize

on all areas of expertise vital for the success of digital projects in the humanities

Outcomes for the Baldwin Scholars Council include developing and submitting a major tion grant proposal to the National Endowment for the Humanities in 2015 for the Early American and British Children’s Literature (EABCL) Digital Collection The EABCL proposal was made possible through collaboration with the Scholars Council to scope the needs and uses including DH projects and activities as part of the project, identify partners, and identify workflows for such a widely distributed

implementa-set of materials to build the shared collection in the manner needed for scholarly research and public engagement Lessons learned from the process of creating the Scholars Council include the value of having a shared project for all collaborators to take part, the value of bringing together diverse voices

in an inclusive framework that supports different perspectives for the enrichment of approaches and activities by the community, and the need for additional supports and human infrastructure frameworks

in order to bring different groups together successfully, as with the Scholars Council

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

As the specific projects covered in this chapter illustrate, collaboration related to the Digital Humanities (DH) and digital scholarship is socio-technical, requiring support from people, policies, technologies, and communities In order to support new collaborative teams and provide foundational support for many projects, the UF Libraries recognized the need for additional human and administrative infrastructures

to support people and communities Creating the human infrastructure included training to enrich and expand librarian skills, both by adding new skills and by better mapping and connecting existing skills with new technologies For example, librarian expertise in creating intellectual access through pre-online methods can also be extended to support search engine optimization (SEO) activities for increasing discoverability of research materials (Reboussin & Taylor, 2015) The needs for reskilling or upskilling relate to ongoing needs for evolving library education programs, where the library “profession is chal-lenged by its failure to incorporate technology as part of the curriculum at the time it became apparent that the future was technological” (Marcum, 2015, 7)

In addition to the needs for supporting skill development, DH and digital scholarship are collaborative endeavors, requiring collaborative practices and communities of practice In order to support collabora-tive practices and communities of practice, UF leveraged existing group activities and established new groups In 2011, UF had a campus-wide Digital Humanities Working Group with librarians as active participants In 2012, UF created the Data Management/Curation Task Force as another campus-wide group with librarians and representatives from other campus entities The activities and results of these two groups, alongside activities on specific projects, heightened interest in additional supports for li-brarians in regards to DH In 2014, the Digital Humanities Library Group began at UF, with the group focused on supporting concerns and needs of librarians in order to position librarians and the libraries

as full, active partners in DH activities (Taylor & Landor, 2014) The first major project of the Digital Humanities Library Group was to propose a pilot training project to support training and application

of new skills to a collaborative project The group was awarded a small grant and underwent a year of training and activities in 2014-2015 Thus, the group itself was part of the human infrastructure serving

as the community of practice and serving to support the training and skill development needs of the community From the work of this group, new collaborative activities with librarians, teaching faculty, and students have already emerged including librarians teaching DH tools, collaborating on research projects with researchers, and new research by librarians on DH

Future research into library collaboration for the DH and digital scholarship activities will be needed

to investigate the efficacy of different training programs for supporting skill development for individual librarians and the community of practitioners at any given institution and across institutions For ex-ample, members of the UF Digital Humanities Library Group were also actively involved in creating the statewide Florida Digital Humanities Consortium (FLDH) and involved in shaping ongoing activities

which extend and utilize the larger network As new groups emerge within individual institutions and across institutions, including large networks like the statewide Florida Digital Humanities Consortium, additional work is needed to blend, connect, and extend traditional library excellence for collaborative networks and community building in and with other external groups in the most successful manners, with DH offering many opportunities for this growth.

• Building from core, mission activities

• Utilizing and drawing upon excellence in digital collections, shared collections, and collaborative programs

• Conducting activities in an iterative manner by releasing new projects or conducting new ties, performing assessment, synthesizing assessment to inform next steps, and then repeating the process for continuous ongoing growth

activi-• Pursuing activities that balance community engagement to support the community desires for tive involvement as well as efficiency for undertaking technical processing

ac-• Pursuing activities to develop and implement technologies in a manner that also supports force development, competencies, and developing communities of practice within and across in-stitutions and institutional networks

work-• Developing shared governance models that support immediate individual institutional needs multaneously with collaborative community goals, and developing and utilizing technologies in support of those goals, in some cases resisting pressure to follow what existing technologies im-mediately support and designing new technologies when needed

si-• Providing mechanisms and communities for assessing impact and value for new programs to tinue to support changed roles for libraries and changed ways of working

con-• Investigating opportunities that build from and extend beyond existing library activities and even new DH collaborations

For UF, changed ways of working have led to innovative new digital scholarship programs including

the ARL Position Description (PD) Bank, which is a robust digital collection and community resource

system that simultaneously benefits local institutions in managing position descriptions and the larger library community in sharing, tracking, and predicting changes in library organizational structures and

employment The ARL PD Bank was developed in part from research and activities at UF with DH

Similarly, the UF Libraries are now partnering on data-related programs, as with the MassMine Project

to develop big social media data archiving and analysis tools for humanists and by humanists with the project being a recipient of a 2015 National Endowment for the Humanities Digital Humanities Start-Up Grant award For the MassMine project, the UF Libraries are collaborating with researchers directly and with UF Research Computing, with the MassMine project extending from existing collaborations on the

Digital Humanities and on Data Curation and Management For many reasons, including in part because

of the extensive DH collaborative activities, the UF Libraries are a recognized and respected leader for concerns related to data management and curation By undertaking collaborative projects that build on traditional areas of library excellence and collaboration with Subject Specialist Librarians, libraries create opportunities to grow in value while demonstrating value and positive impacts immediately, while also positioning for optimal future growth through collaboration among libraries and our many communities

REFERENCES

Carter, L R., & Whittaker, B M (2015) Area Studies and Special Collections: Shared Challenges,

Shared Strength Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 15(2) Retrieved May 15, 2015, from: http://muse.

jhu.edu/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v015/15.2.carter.html

Center for Research Libraries (CRL) (2015) Project Ceres Funds Nine New Projects Center for search Libraries (CRL) Retrieved May 14, 2015, from http://www.crl.edu/news/project-ceres-funds-

Re-nine-new-projects

Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) (2015) About dLOC Digital Library of the Caribbean

Re-trieved May 5, 2015, from http://www.dloc.com/info/about

Florida Digital Humanities Consortium (FLDH) (2015) About FLDH Florida Digital Humanities Consortium (FLDH) Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://fldh.org/about/

Green, H (2014) Facilitating Communities of Practice in Digital Humanities: Librarian Collaborations

for Research and Training in Text Encoding The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 84(2) Retrieved July 15, 2015 from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/675332

Jefferson, R (2010) The Reverend Benjamin Safer Digital Collection In Isser and Rae Price Library

of Judaica Digital Collections Gainesville, FL: George A Smathers Libraries Retrieved May 5, 2015,

Keith, B W., Smith, B J., Taylor, L N., & Sullivan, M V., & the Association of Research Libraries

(2012) ARL Position Description Bank Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries Retrieved

May 5, 2015, from http://uflib.ufl.edu/arlpdbank/

Kesse, E., Haas, S., Sullivan, M., & Caplan, P (2006) Digital Futures Retrieved May 5, 2015, from

http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00078632/00001/pdf

Marcum, D (2015) Educating the Research Librarian: Are We Falling Short? Ithaka S+R Issue Brief

Retrieved May 8, 2015, from http://sr.ithaka.org/sites/default/files/files/SR_Issue_Brief_Educating_the_Research_Librarian050715.pdf

Maron, N., & Pickle, S (2014) Sustaining the Digital Humanities: Host Institution Support Beyond the Start-Up Phase Ithaka S+R Retrieved July 15, 2015, from http://www.sr.ithaka.org/sites/default/files/

SR_Supporting_Digital_Humanities_20140618f.pdf

Reboussin, D A., & Taylor, L N (2014) Improving Digital Collection Access with Simple Search

Engine Optimisation Strategies In T Barringer & M Wallace (Eds.), Disconnects: African Studies in the Digital Age (pp 78–108) Leiden: Brill doi:10.1163/9789004279148_006

Rogers, J., & Wooldridge, B (2011) Collaborative digital collections: Caribbean solutions for tive resource-building and successful partnerships Paper presented at the meeting of the International

effec-Federation of Library Associations and Institutions—Satellite Conference: Acquisition and Collection Development Section, St Thomas, Virgin Islands Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://www.library.mcgill.ca/ifla-stthomas/papers/rogers_2011.pdf

SobekCM Open Source Digital Repository Software (2015) SobekCM Digital Content Management System Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://sobekrepository.org/

Sullivan, M V., & Taylor, L N (2014) SobekCM’s Community Ecosystems & Socio-Technical Practices

Paper presented at Open Repositories 2014, Helsinki, Finland Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00019927/00001

Taylor, L N (2013) Library Liaison Teams for Data and Digital Scholarship Projects & Collections

UF Libraries: Digital Collection Development & Management Resources Retrieved May 5, 2015, from

http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00017119/00021/

Taylor, L N., & Landor, B (2014) Intertwingularity with Digital Humanities at the University of Florida

dh+lib: where the digital humanities and librarianship meet Retrieved April 16, 2015, from http://acrl.

ala.org/dh/2014/07/23/intertwingularity-digital-humanities-university-florida/

Taylor, L N., & Sullivan, M V (2014) The Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC) and the SobekCM

Open Source Software: Socio-Technical Communities & Collaboration Digital Library Federation (DLF) Contribute Section Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://www.diglib.org/archives/5692/

Taylor, L N., Vargas-Betancourt, M., & Wooldridge, B (2013) The Digital Library of the Caribbean

(dLOC): Creating a Shared Research Foundation Scholarly and Research Communication, 4(3) Retrieved

May 5, 2015, from http://src-online.ca/src/index.php/src/article/view/114/246

UF Digital Humanities Working Group (2015) UF Digital Humanities Projects UF Digital Humanities

Working Group Retrieved July 15, 2015, from http://digitalhumanities.group.ufl.edu/dh-uf/dh-projects/

UF Libraries (1994) Converting and distributing indexed and abstracted digital images of microfilmed Caribbean newspapers (CNIP): Grant Proposal Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://ufdc.ufl.edu/

Re-Vinopal, J., & McCormick, M (2013) Supporting Digital Scholarship in Research Libraries: Scalability

and Sustainability Journal of Library Administration, 53(1), 27–42 doi:10.1080/01930826.2013.756689

Wooldridge, B., Taylor, L., & Sullivan, M (2009) Managing an Open Access,

Multi-Institu-tional, International Digital Library Resource Sharing & Information Networks, 20(1-2), 35–44

doi:10.1080/07377790903014534

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Big Data: Big data refers to research data in the data age, wherein data has the potential to be

ana-lyzed and utilized in the aggregate Big data refers to the data itself, methods, approaches, larger teams, teams with more varied expertise, and overall greater complexity

Digital Humanities: The Digital Humanities, digital humanities, digital Humanities, and DH refer

to the set of practices, activities, approaches, concepts, and communities related to the humanities in and for the digital age The annual Day of DH is an international event people define their work and roles in relation to defining DH and what it means to them For libraries, a particularly useful way of conceptualizing DH includes DH in relation to digital libraries Where digital libraries often focus on digitization and digital curation to make materials available and usable digitally, DH is what comes next Other definitions of DH that are particularly productive emphasis that the “digital” is a temporary addition, signally a time of change with the attendant opportunities for those changes, and where the humanities are the significant and sustaining part of the term

Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC): dLOC is a socio-technical system, being a digital library,

community of practice, community network and hub, digital humanities and digital scholarship ing platform, and a community and organizational framework for growth and change The dLOC model for building digital libraries in manners that also build communities and build into new opportunities is one that dLOC partners and others are leveraging in support of new project and programmatic activities

publish-Florida Digital Humanities Consortium: Beginning officially in 2015, “The publish-Florida Digital

Humani-ties Consortium is a collective of institutions in the State of Florida that seeks to promote an understanding

of the humanities in light of digital technologies and research” (FLDH, 2015) The conversations that led to the development of FLDH came from the mix of librarians, scholars, and other shared community members who attended the unconference THATCamp-Florida in 2014 Many of the representatives in attendance, and many of the founding members of the Steering Committee and Executive Council draw from their backgrounds and professional roles in digital libraries and digital collection development to extend into next steps with the community through FLDH

SobekCM: The SobekCM Open Source Digital Repository Software was initially created and

devel-oped by the University of Florida and partner institutions The software is now in use by many tions around the world, with a full community framework for developers, users, librarians, and scholars, and with independent companies supporting and contributing to the software as well as institutional contributors The SobekCM software is an example of collaboration with librarian expertise for user needs and library functions resulting in a digital library, digital humanities, and digital scholarship tool for use by the broader community

institu-Socio-Technical: Technologies are sometimes misunderstood simply as tools without context

Be-cause technologies are used, the contexts, purposes, and connections for the usage of technologies are significant The non-technology related aspects of technological use are stronger and more significant factors in whether a technology is successful in supporting the goals it is designed to support, and in whether or not the technology is truly useful Technologies in libraries are socio-technical in that the value, usefulness, impact, and importance of technologies are determined by the people, policies, and technologies surrounding any one technology, and the overall context with other technologies, people, and policies within which the technology is deployed

This research was previously published in Technology-Centered Academic Library Partnerships and Collaborations edited by Brian Doherty, pages 1-30, copyright year 2016 by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).

THE ORIGIN OF CALIS SPECIAL SUBJECT DATABASES

Looking at the collection and subject characteristics of academic libraries nationwide, an important part of Chinese academic library digital resource construction involves fully exploring, processing, and releasing the unique or rare resources of colleges and universities in constructing a digital special subject database CALIS Special Subject Databases is an important sub-project of the China Academic Library

& Information System (CALIS) Throughout the continued construction and development of Phases I,

II and III, a large number of special subject databases have been built These databases, which are

con-The Construction and Development of Academic

Library Digital Special Subject Databases

venient, practical, and advanced in technology, have distinct subject characteristics, local characteristics, and national characteristics, and they facilitate research, teaching, and national economic development These databases are not only important resources for colleges and universities in supporting the devel-opment of key disciplines, but they have also formed unique digitized special subject collections for China’s higher education.

In January 1999, the CALIS Special Subject Databases project was officially launched in order to facilitate the construction of key disciplines, and to explore digital resources construction in academic libraries The principles of the project include: instilling Chinese characteristics, regional characteristics, and specialties of higher education; keeping close relations with disciplines construction of Project 211, which is a project of National Key Universities and Colleges, initiated in 1995 by the Ministry of Edu-cation of the People’s Republic of China with the intent of raising the research standards of high-level universities and cultivating strategies for socio-economic development (Wikipedia, 2015); promoting teaching, scientific research, and the development of national economy; and constructing the Special Subject Databases with a standard work basis, scale, and amount of data The specific goal of building

25 special subject databases was established in April of that year As of November 2000, those 25 cial subject databases began to take shape, and online services became available The project provided significant practical experience, established a number of construction specifications and technical stan-dards, set up the initial framework and platform of the entire system, and allowed for the exploration of carrying out the construction of digital special subject resources on a national scale Thus, the enthusiasm

spe-of domestic academic libraries to carry out database construction is at an unprecedented high, and the concept of co-construction and the sharing of resources of digital special subject databases is deeply rooted in the project (Zhou, Xie, Hong, Rao, & Liu, 2006)

CONSTRUCTION SCHEME AND MANAGEMENT MECHANISMS

OF CALIS SPECIAL SUBJECT DATABASES

Construction Scheme

The fundamental purpose of the CALIS project is to use advanced techniques to create and integrate global academic information resources based on the guiding ideology of co-construction and sharing, and to promote extensive utilization of these resources Based on this guiding ideology, the CALIS Special Subject Databases project established the construction principles of scattered construction, uni-fied retrieval, resource sharing, and national service Academic libraries with discipline advantage and characteristic resources are encouraged to be actively involved Standard and function requirements are unified, and a unified platform will be built for public retrieval Full texts without intellectual property rights are required for all cooperative-building databases The contents protected by intellectual property rights are required to provide full texts through document delivery service

The construction of CALIS Phases I and II mainly focuses on discipline characteristics, including required information for interdisciplinary and frontier subjects of certain key subjects or particular projects, or resources able to reflect the characteristics of higher education; local characteristics, includ-ing resources with certain regional and historical characteristics, or closely related with local politics, economy, and cultural development; and collection features, including unique collections or scattered resources that are difficult to use