Agree with you both .. there shouldn't be a divide in what we are trying
to achieve .. it's just that we are starting from different technologies
.. the expertise and advocacy of the IR staff is required just as
before.. just that maybe we do [eventually] converge to one system ??
My original posting, I confess, was a little tongue in cheek ;) to start
the debate .. but the issue is important and we are already getting the
questions of why do we need two systems .. my response is that they are
actually part of one virtual system (which is why we have the two linked
at St Andrews) and I do expect them to become one physical system in the
future .. whether this is a CRIS subsuming the IR or an IR becoming
CERIF-Compliant doesn't really matter as long as the data is structured
and meets the relevant metadata standards .. and is OAI-PMH compliant,
and so on and so forth ...
Anna
Talat Chaudhri wrote:
> Yes, I agree! But I was cautious because I know that others see a
> functional divide that we'd tend to think is closing.
>
>
> Talat
>
> On 22/06/2010 16:00, David Kane wrote:
>> Thanks Talat,
>>
>> I think that it stands to reason that each shall develop the
>> functionality of the other. It is much more likely in the near term
>> for CRISs to start offering archiving functionality. It just makes
>> sense to me. If I were a research director, would I not want to
>> manage one system rather than two? I see the repository functionality
>> becoming obsolete/subsumed into the CRIS.
>>
>> For the large number of institutions that do not yet have a CRIS, some
>> kind of push in the direction of CERIF-compliance from the main
>> repository developers would seem to be essential for them to hold
>> their own. I realise that it would need funding.
>>
>> David.
>>
>> On 22 June 2010 15:21, Talat Chaudhri<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> I've seen two broad opinions on this:
>>>
>>> (1) CRISs and repositories offer different yet related functionality,
>>> and
>>> are thus complementary. (Clearly, not all information in a CRIS that
>>> is used
>>> to manage research from project inception to publication and other
>>> outputs
>>> needs to represent the institution in the public-facing repository,
>>> and some
>>> might be inappropriate or sensitive in some cases: commonly so in the
>>> case
>>> of financial and staffing information, personal details and so on, that
>>> would be kept for internal purposes.)
>>>
>>> (2) CRIS systems could/should be able to offer granular control over
>>> what
>>> the public sees. Thus they effectively can or could incorporate a
>>> repository
>>> already, hiding all of the other information that should not be
>>> displayed on
>>> the Web. This is a more integrated approach than the previous one, and
>>> perhaps a more "ideal" approach.
>>>
>>> I'd suggest that an institution that already has a working repository
>>> will
>>> naturally have a different perspective to one that has not, since the
>>> CRIS
>>> debate is comparatively newer than the repository question. All of
>>> these are
>>> specialist content management systems of one kind or another, in this
>>> case
>>> limited to publications but elsewhere addressing the needs of other
>>> types of
>>> resources too. It very much depends, from a purely practical
>>> perspective, on
>>> what systems are already being maintained, and on the costs involved.
>>>
>>> One ultimately needs to look at the needs of the institution in
>>> question, as
>>> they serve different parts of the sector and correspondingly have
>>> certain
>>> differences in terms of managing funding and research. Ultimately,
>>> however,
>>> the same overall processes are occurring everywhere. There are a
>>> number of
>>> valid ways that systems can be usefully put in place to support these in
>>> practice. The point has already been made by Stevan and Anna that
>>> what CRIS
>>> systems do for research should not replace a policy/strategy approach
>>> on the
>>> part of individual institutions in making sure that their research
>>> outputs
>>> are provided to the public who fund them. This is what funding bodies
>>> increasingly ask for, and is therefore what institutions will need to
>>> provide, irrespective of the approach chosen.
>>>
>>>
>>> Talat
>>>
>>> On 22/06/2010 14:02, David Kane wrote:
>>>
>>>> If we ourselves are unclear as to the relative merits of CRISs and/or
>>>> OA repositories, then it is likely that university research
>>>> departments may be the same.
>>>>
>>>> I can see a time when the functionality of the OA repository will be
>>>> offered by CRIS vendors, managed by the research offices in all
>>>> universities.
>>>>
>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>> David.
>>>>
>>>> On 22 June 2010 13:05, Robin
>>>> Beecroft<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Why CRIS value "as opposed to an OA policy"? Surely the most
>>>>>> telling figure will be CRIS value *in conjunction with an OA
>>>>>> policy* (as
>>>>>> Keith Jeffery has been advocating for years)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I did not mean 'opposed' in the sense of 'either/or'...
>>>>> I meant to ask about the relative value. If the consensus is that
>>>>> the two
>>>>> are equally valuable and equally important, that is instructive. If
>>>>> the
>>>>> opinion is that one is not really important if it comes without the
>>>>> other,
>>>>> or one will have a very significant impact with or without the other,
>>>>> that
>>>>> is also interesting. I am interested if the community feels that
>>>>> one is
>>>>> more
>>>>> crucial than the other. I do not see them as being in opposition.
>>>>> Robin
>>>>>
>>>>> ——————–
>>>>> Robin Beecroft – Research Communications Consultant
>>>>> www.linkedin.com/in/robinbeecroft
>>>>>
>>>>> Searchlighter – enlightened thinking on information environments
>>>>> www.searchlighter.org
>>>>>
>>>>> 17 Nicholas Road, Bristol BS5 0LX, UK.
>>>>> Tel/Fax: +44 (0)117 902 4506. Skype: searchlighter
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22 June 2010 12:28, Anna Clements<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Absolutely, Stevan .. the two are not in opposition but need to work
>>>>>> together .. the CRIS puts the content in the IR in a richer context.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As can be demonstrated by our own setup in St Andrews .. we've had
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> link between CRIS and OAR for several years .. but without a push
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> Senior Management [whether mandate, resource, or whatever] have seen
>>>>>> little
>>>>>> full text content [although over 17000 bib only records].
>>>>>> That is now changing .. both because of funder mandates but also from
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> ground up as academics begin to see their peers elsewhere quoting
>>>>>> download
>>>>>> stats etc for their papers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anna
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stevan Harnad wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Robin Beecroft wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anna poses an interesting issue with regard to Denmark's place
>>>>>>>> at the
>>>>>>>> tip of
>>>>>>>> the citation league.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=41
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2083
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does anybody have any thoughts concerning the relative value of
>>>>>>>> a CRIS
>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> opposed to an OA policy with regard gaining a high impact rating
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> institution's research?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why CRIS value "as opposed to an OA policy"? Surely the most telling
>>>>>>> figure will be CRIS value *in conjunction with an OA policy* (as
>>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>> Jeffery has been advocating for years).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stevan Harnad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Robin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ——————–
>>>>>>>> Robin Beecroft – Research Communications Consultant
>>>>>>>> www.linkedin.com/in/robinbeecroft
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Searchlighter – enlightened thinking on information environments
>>>>>>>> www.searchlighter.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 17 Nicholas Road, Bristol BS5 0LX, UK.
>>>>>>>> Tel/Fax: +44 (0)117 902 4506. Skype: searchlighter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22 June 2010 08:59, Anna Clements<akc -- st-andrews.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Has anyone else seen this week's THE with a league table for
>>>>>>>> most cited nations [based on TR Data]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=41
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2083
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not sure what all the factors are but I do find it very
>>>>>>>> interesting that Denmark tops the rankings but, as we
>>>>>>>> heard at
>>>>>>>> the euroCRIS conference at beginning of the month Denmark has
>>>>>>>> only recently agreed a national strategy on OA .. although
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> have had a CRIS [Pure] at their Institutions for several
>>>>>>>> years
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anna
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anna Clements
>>>>>>>> Project Manager and University Data Architect
>>>>>>>> University of St Andrews
>>>>>>>> Business Improvements
>>>>>>>> Butts Wynd Building
>>>>>>>> St Andrews
>>>>>>>> Fife KY16 9AD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> akc -- st-andrews.ac.uk
>>>>>>>> 01334 462761
>>>>>>>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/business-improvements
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anna Clements
>>>>>> Project Manager and University Data Architect
>>>>>> University of St Andrews
>>>>>> Business Improvements
>>>>>> Butts Wynd Building
>>>>>> St Andrews
>>>>>> Fife KY16 9AD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> 01334 462761
>>>>>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/business-improvements
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland : No
>>>>>> SC013532
>>>>>> The University of St Andrews is committed to sustainable practices
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> preservation of the environment ñ please do not print this email
>>>>>> unless
>>>>>> absolutely necessary!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr Talat Chaudhri
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Research Officer
>>> UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, Great Britain
>>> Telephone: +44 (0)1225 385105 Fax: +44 (0)1225 386838
>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask] Skype: talat.chaudhri
>>> Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/t.chaudhri/
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Anna Clements
Project Manager and University Data Architect
University of St Andrews
Business Improvements
Butts Wynd Building
St Andrews
Fife KY16 9AD
[log in to unmask]
01334 462761
http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/business-improvements
The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland : No
SC013532
The University of St Andrews is committed to sustainable practices and
the preservation of the environment ñ please do not print this email
unless absolutely necessary!
|