JISC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES

‘Electronic Theses’ FAIR Project

Final Report

Project

|Project Acronym | |Project ID | |
|Project Title |‘Electronic Theses’ |
|Start Date |1st July 2002 |End Date |30th September 2004 |
|Lead Institution |The Robert Gordon University |
|Project Director |Dr. Susan Copeland |
|Project Manager & contact details |Dr. Susan Copeland |
| | |
| |The Robert Gordon University |
| |The Georgina Scott Sutherland Library |
| |Garthdee Road |
| |Aberdeen, AB10 7QE |
| | |
| |Tel. 01224 263453 |
| | |
| |e-mail s.copeland@rgu.ac.uk |
|Partner Institutions |The University of Aberdeen |
| |Cranfield University |
| |The University of London Library |
| |The British Library |
| |(The University of Glasgow – Workpackage 6b only) |
|Project Web URL |http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/e-theses.htm |
|Programme Name (and number) |FAIR Programme |
|Programme Manager |Rachel Bruce / Balviar Notay |

Document

|Document Title |Final Report |
|Reporting Period | |
|Author(s) & project role |Dr. Susan Copeland: Project Manager |
| |Andrew Penman: Research Assistant |
| |Richard Milne: E-Services Librarian |
|Date |31.01.05 |Filename |RGU_Final_Report.doc |
|URL | |
|Access |■ Project and JISC internal |■ General dissemination |

1 ‘Electronic Theses’ Project

1st July 2002 – 30th September 2004

2 Final Report

[pic]

[pic]

3

4 Dr. Susan Copeland

Project Manager

5 Andrew Penman

Research Assistant

6 Richard Milne

E-Services Librarian
Table of Contents

Acknowledgements Executive Summary

1. Background 6 1. Early Developments in the UK 6 2. The International Context 6
2. Aims and Objectives 7 1. Phase 1 Aims and Objectives 7 2. Phase 2 Aims and Objectives 7
3. Methodology 9 1. Overall Approach 9 2. Description of Methodology 9
4. Implementation 11 1. Questionnaire 11 2. Software Evaluation 11 3. Metadata Selection 13 4. Project Website 13
5. Output and Results 14 1. Technical 14 1. Infrastructure 15 2. Software 15 3. Metadata 16 2. Legal and Administrative 16 3. Cultural 17 4. Dissemination 18
6. Outcomes 20 1. Value 20 2. Impact 21 3. Transferable Aspects 21
7. Conclusions 22
8. Implications 22
9. Recommendations 23
10. References 24
11. Appendices 25 A. Glossary 25 B. UK Metadata Core-set 26 C. Conferences and Publications 28

7 Acknowledgements

The ‘Electronic Theses’ project was funded by The Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and was undertaken as part of the ‘Focus on Access to Institutional Resources’ (FAIR) Programme.

The project was led by a team at The Robert Gordon University comprising Dr. Susan Copeland (Project Manager), Andrew Penman (Research Assistant) and Richard Milne (E-Services Librarian).

Thanks are due to the representatives from the four original partner institutions, and from the team at the University of Glasgow who joined the project for Phase 2, for their input and achievements. Thanks are also due to the ‘Theses alive!’ project team at the University of Edinburgh for their collaboration and willingness to share expertise. Assistance and encouragement from the following individuals was particularly appreciated:

Anthony Troman and Heather Porter (The British Library)
Christopher Pressler and Emma Robinson (The University of London Library)
Simon Bevan (Cranfield University)
Sheona Farquhar and Christine Miller (The University of Aberdeen)
William Nixon and Morag Greig (née Mackie) (The University of Glasgow)
John MacColl, Dr. Theo Andrew and Richard Jones (The University of Edinburgh)

Support from JISC proved invaluable and the opportunity to learn from other project teams at joint Programme events ensured that duplication of effort was kept to a minimum and project outputs were used to maximum effect.

Feedback on the use of DSpace software as the basis for an electronic theses collection/institutional repository through the organisation of focus groups by Professor Dorothy Williams, Dr. Simon Burnett and Linda Webster at Aberdeen Business School provided a useful evaluation of this aspect of the project output. Feedback from the representatives of Higher Education institutions and national organisations who attended the ‘Electronic Theses’ seminars at Senate House in January 2004 and The British Library in September 2004 also proved useful.

The project team is grateful to members of the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) who have provided support and encouragement, as well as practical advice, from their own experiences of introducing the concept of electronic theses and dissertations.
Executive Summary

The ‘Electronic Theses’ Project was funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) as part of the Focus on Access to Institutional Resources (FAIR) Programme. The project was led by The Robert Gordon University and supported by members of the project consortium: The British Library, The University of Aberdeen, Cranfield University, and The University of London Library.

Phase 1 of the project, which took place from July 2002 to July 2004, aimed “to evaluate a wide range of existing practices and methods of e-theses production, management and use against a set of criteria in order to produce recommended models for use within the UK information environment”. Phase 2 of the project, which took place from October 2003 to September 2004 and involved representatives from the ‘Daedalus’ project at The University of Glasgow, aimed to test many of the theoretical findings of the project in a working environment. Full details of the project’s aims and objectives are available on the project website at http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/e-theses.htm

The project team made use of the work relating to e-theses that had been undertaken already in countries such as the USA, Canada, Australia and Germany (and publicised by the ‘Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations’). Examples of best practice were identified and selected models were evaluated with a view to adopting or adapting them for use within the UK information environment. Other developments of potential relevance, such as the emergence of new software, were also monitored.

Following an evaluation of various pieces of software (based on the criteria of availability, sustainability, interoperability and suitability), ‘DSpace’ and ‘EPrints’ were recommended for use when establishing an e-theses collection. After considerable debate, the project team reached agreement on a standard set of metadata elements which are of key importance when describing the content of e-theses repositories. (This metadata core-set can be viewed on the project website).

The project website contains information on a range of aspects relating to the production of e-theses and the creation of an e-theses collection. Recommendations are made regarding the approach that could be taken towards advocacy work, details are provided about how university regulations may have to be changed to accommodate e-theses, and a sample thesis submission form is available. A sample workflow diagram highlights the stages involved in the process from the submission of an e-thesis to the examination of the work.

The project team recommended that, where possible, individual H.E. institutions should create their own e-theses collections (as part of, or in parallel with, an open access institutional repository that also contains e-prints and other research output). The project also recommended the establishment of a national e-theses collection maintained by The British Library (which would meet a range of needs at national level, including issues relating to preservation).
1. Background

1.1 Early Developments in the UK

In recent years, access to abstracts, journal articles, conference proceedings and book chapters in electronic format have become commonplace. Researchers have come to expect simple, speedy access to a wide range of information from any location at any time. Expectations relating to the production and use of theses and dissertations have proved no exception to the rule.

In the UK, microfilm or paper copies of most recent doctoral theses are currently available through the British Library’s British Thesis Service or from individual Higher Education institutions. However, for some time it has been recognised that the availability of digital full text theses could improve this situation significantly. In the mid 1990s, the University Theses Online Group (UTOG) was established with a view to encouraging such developments. The findings of a UTOG survey1 (funded by The British Library and JISC) confirmed that developments in this area should be pursued and in 2001, on behalf of UTOG, Edinburgh University Library completed an e-theses pilot project. The work undertaken by UTOG suggested that, in future years, an increasing number of individuals might choose to make their theses available electronically, via the web, but that, without some degree of guidance, future developments could be fragmented and an opportunity to create a national framework could be lost.

1.2 The International Context

A significant number of universities in other countries have made doctoral and masters level theses available in digital format, and organisations such as the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech.) have seen usage levels rise dramatically as a result2. As universities increasingly operate at global level, it is becoming more important for the research output of UK institutions, and the work of individual UK scholars, to be publicised and made accessible internationally. 24/7 access to PhD theses produced in the UK would make a major contribution towards this goal. Some individual universities, the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD)3 and UNESCO4 have produced guidelines and web pages containing advice about Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs), but there is a considerable amount of variation between the methods used by different organisations. The ‘Electronic Theses’ Project aimed to evaluate existing practices of e-theses production, management and use against a set of criteria in order to produce recommended models for use within the UK information environment. The project also aimed to liaise with other relevant JISC funded projects (notably, ‘DAEDALUS’5 and ‘Theses Alive!’6) in order to avoid duplication of effort and to ensure that there was a unified approach towards the production of recommendations relating to the creation of use of e-theses in the UK.

8 2. Aims and Objectives

2.1 Phase 1 (July 2002 – July 2004)

The main aim of Phase 1 of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project was:

“To evaluate a wide range of existing practice and methods of e-theses production, management and use against a set of criteria in order to produce recommended models for use within the UK information environment”.

The objectives for Phase 1 of the project were: • To identify examples and recurrence of relevant best practice which could be adopted throughout the UK information environment. • To evaluate a comprehensive selection of methods, which are used internationally to create, store, organise, manage and access electronic theses. • To liaise with members of the ‘DAEDALUS’ and ‘Theses Alive!’ project teams to ensure co-ordination within the E-Theses Cluster. • To produce a model, or models, of e-theses production, which could be recommended for converting paper-based theses into digital format. • To produce a model or models, of e-theses production which could be recommended for creating born-digital theses in a format that allows increased opportunities for authors to express their research in more dynamic and media-rich ways. • To produce a set of guidelines for the storage, organisation and management of the above collections. • To produce models for access arrangements to the above, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of centralised, federated, distributed or individual collections. • To attend relevant conferences and organise a seminar for the purposes of networking, sharing expertise and disseminating research findings.

2.2 Phase 2 (October 2003 – September 2004)

Additional funding was received from JISC for a period of 12 months from October 2003 in order to allow the theoretical findings from Phase 1 of the project to be tested in a working environment.
The main aim of Phase 2 of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project was:

“To demonstrate the generic nature of the e-theses models identified in Workpackage 5 of the original project as both independent repositories and as part of a broader virtual research environment (VRE)”.

The objectives for Phase 2 of the project were:

• To create an e-theses archive hosted using EPrints software. • To create an e-theses archive hosted using DSpace software. • To develop a web-based interface. • To assess the difference between the capabilities of the EPrints and DSpace archives from the point of view of installation, administration and usage. • To identify preferred methods of embedding audio-visual resources and interactive material within the main file. • To identify preferred methods of delivery of e-theses at institutional and national level.

Throughout the duration of the project the aims and objectives remained as stated in the original plans.

9

3. Methodology

3.1 Overall Approach

The project team was aware from the outset that a significant amount of work relating to electronic theses had already been undertaken in the USA, Canada, Australia, Germany and various other countries. Therefore, the approach to the project initially involved the identification of examples of good practice of e-theses production, management and use. The selected models were then evaluated with a view to adopting or adapting them for use within the UK information environment. Gaps were identified (for example, the lack of a single recommended metadata core-set) and relevant software developments were kept under review (new products were assessed and compared with those that were already used in e-theses repositories).

2. Description of Methodology

- Identification of International Examples of Best Practice
Within the first 3 months of the project, the relevant websites of every member of the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) were viewed and assessed against a set of criteria in order to identify examples of international best practice (http://www.ndltd.org).

- Identification of ongoing work in the UK
In order to be aware of any ongoing research and development work relating to e-theses within the UK, a brief questionnaire was circulated on the lis-SCONUL mailing list in early December 2002.

- Information gathering from conferences/liaison meetings
To keep abreast of relevant developments and progress being made by key NDLTD members, the project team attended conferences relating to electronic theses and dissertations, the Open Access Initiative (OAI) and Digital Libraries (as listed in section 5.4 of this report).

- Liaison with other ‘FAIR’ Project teams
Project staff attended various events organised by JISC which provided an opportunity to liaise with colleagues involved with other FAIR projects. Periodic meetings were arranged with representatives from ‘DAEDALUS’ and ‘Theses Alive!’ at the universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh respectively. This liaison ensured that there was no unnecessary duplication of work and that key gaps were filled. It also ensured that the findings from the projects were disseminated to the academic community in a coordinated fashion.

- Software evaluation and testing
The project team identified relevant standards (e.g. OAI-PMH) and reviewed potential sources of software, in particular those described in the Open Society Institute’s guide to institutional repositories software.7 After EPrints and DSpace were identified as the most relevant pieces of software, the project team installed them on a server at RGU and tested them accordingly. The project team also liaised with staff at the University of Southampton and MIT (where the products had been created) to ensure that there were appropriate development plans for the software for the future.

- Agreement on a metadata core-set
Representatives from all of the members of the three theses-related JISC projects met at RGU to discuss and identify a metadata core-set.
The proposed set was subsequently discussed at a FAIR cluster meeting and highlighted at the E-Theses seminar in London. Feedback on the draft set was taken into consideration when producing the final version of the core-set.

- Consideration of legal and administrative issues
Where relevant developments were being undertaken by other FAIR project teams, such as the creation of a legal briefing paper for e-theses by Dr. Andrews of the ‘Theses Alive!’ project, the ‘Electronic Theses’ project team liaised closely.
The needs of students, administrators and research committees were identified and met through the process of putting forward proposed revisions to university guidelines and forms and following these proposals through the university committee structure..

- Dissemination of the project recommendations
The findings of the ‘FAIR’ e-theses projects to date were announced to approximately sixty delegates who attended a seminar on the subject at The University of London Library in January 2004. Feedback from the delegates led to further work and refinements to the project recommendations and guidance notes over the next eight months. The final results of the project were then put forward as recommendations to the Higher Education (H.E.) community at a seminar at the British Library in September 2004. Publications and conference papers, as detailed in section 5.4, provided a means of ensuring that the project findings were publicised to a broad audience.

4. Implementation

4.1 Questionnaire

After the initial research into current pilots and established ETD programs, a questionnaire was distributed via the lis-SCONUL mailing list. The questionnaire was deliberately brief to ensure that a good level of feedback was achieved. The main aim of the questionnaire was to identify interest levels within the UK H.E. environment, to see where development work already existed, and to identify those who were keen to become involved in future work in this area. The following key questions encapsulated these issues:

1) Is your Library/Institution currently utilising or developing a system for the production and management of electronic theses?

2) Would you consider doing so if a suitable national model and guidelines are provided?

Over the course of a week, 27 replies were received from UK H.E. institutions. Only 5 respondents had a pilot scheme in progress or due to commence. However, the vast majority were keen to receive guidance and indicated that they would consider establishing a system if a national model was provided. 19 of the respondents also offered additional comment regarding the topic which provided a very useful insight into the diversity of cultural, technical, administrative issues that concerned institutions.

2. Software Evaluation

Once the initial research and identification of examples of international best practice was complete, the project team had a greatly improved knowledge of the subject and this served to benefit the next stage of evaluation.

The project team identified several software systems currently utilised as the basis of digital repositories. They then endeavoured to identify which of the these packages would be most suited to meet the needs of an electronic theses collection.

Consideration and evaluation of the various systems was centred on several key factors:

• Availability • Sustainability • Interoperability • Suitability

Availability
Although a large variety of software packages are available for content and document management, the project team reduced the potential number by only considering those that are available in Open Source form. The latter has the advantage of eliminating software acquisition cost, thereby encouraging uptake. Open Source material allows for full customisation and modification to suit individual institutions. All prerequisite and core software had to be available freely for download via the Internet and had to be able to run across a broad selection of platforms, namely UNIX, Linux and possibly Windows.

Sustainability
In terms of sustainability, the search was for evidence that the software would benefit from dedicated and continuing development from both the creators of the product and an enthusiastic and knowledgeable community of users who could provide feedback and create add-on packages. (An example of the latter that emerged over the course of the FAIR Programme, was the ‘Tapir’ software developed at the University of Edinburgh8).

Interoperability
To allow for the emergence of a model that incorporated individual repositories, a federated or distributed structure, or a centralised/national hub, the important factor of interoperability had to be addressed. This was achieved by ensuring that selected software could utilise and comply with the current Open Archives Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) standard. This essentially allows distributed repositories to ‘talk’ with each other – i.e. to search and harvest content remotely using a shared metadata schema.

Suitability
Suitability was an important factor in the selection process. To encourage administrators to adopt the software it was important that the user interface would be intuitive and efficient. Likewise, to encourage students to use the system with ease, it was essential that the selected software had a simple and effective front end.

When the project began in 2002, Virginia Tech’s ‘ETD-db’ was the most frequently used software for e-theses specific repositories, especially amongst east coast institutions within the United States. However, various software developments had taken place since the release of this resource and the investigation of potential alternative solutions highlighted two other products of particular relevance.

The project team was aware from the initial stages of the research that a significant number of established e-print repositories had been setup utilising ‘EPrints’ software developed at the University of Southampton (http://software.eprints.org). The project team appreciated that the universities that were starting to create collections of e-prints might well be amongst the first to create collections of e-theses. To avoid the need to install and maintain separate software for e-theses it would clearly be advantageous if EPrints software could be used for both types of resources. The EPrints software was therefore tested for its suitability for organising and accessing full text e-theses.

Publicity about another potentially useful piece of software, DSpace, led the project team to investigate its suitability. DSpace (http://www.dspace.org) was developed jointly by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the Hewlett-Packard Company. It uses a different set of pre-requisite software to EPrints but it is broadly similar in terms of core functionality.

4.3 Metadata Selection

The project team considered it important to recommend a standard set of metadata elements for use when describing the content of ETD repositories. It was appreciated that individual institutions may choose to include additional descriptors, but the core-set was to be made available as a basis. It was considered essential that the core-set should meet the needs of any national ETD repository that could be established within the UK in future, and consideration was given to the relationship between the metadata core-set for ETD collections and that used within more extensive research repositories established by individual institutions.

The Dublin Core element set was examined for elements that would be appropriate for describing ETDs, and it was compared with other schemas such as ETD-MS and the Theses and Dissertation Mark-up DTD. In order to allow for maximum interoperability with other repositories and with other non-ETD materials within the same repository, it was decided to use standard Dublin Core elements wherever possible. Following detailed discussions with representatives from the ‘Electronic Theses’ project consortium, and the ‘Theses Alive!’ and ‘DAEDALUS’ projects, an initial draft of core elements was formulated.

This draft core-set was discussed with representatives from other research projects in the FAIR Programme. It was also presented at the ‘Future for UK Theses’ seminar at the University of London Library in January 2004. It became clear from the discussions and feedback from these events that it was essential that any metadata set should be a ‘good fit’ with the metadata used in broader research repositories. Consequently, the recommendations published by the ‘ePrints UK’ project regarding cataloguing guidelines and the use of metadata were checked in order to ensure compatibility. The agreed version of the metadata set has been integrated into the TAPIR submission system that the ‘Theses Alive’ project has developed for use with DSpace ETD repositories.

4.4 Project Website

An ‘Electronic Theses’ website was created three months into the project as a means of disseminating information, making documents available, and promoting forthcoming events. It was updated at intervals and it currently contains sections on the following:

• Project Information (e.g. aims, objectives etc…) • General ETD information (e.g. definitions, workflow aspects, advocacy and publicity) • Regulations (e.g. submission and ownership issues) • Guidelines (e.g. software, metadata, formats and support) • FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions relating to ETDs and their production) • Links and Contacts

The site is available at http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/e-theses.htm

The website will be continually updated as developments from the JISC funded ‘EThOS’ project emerge throughout 2005-06.

5. Output and Results

1. Technical

After assessing the software relevant to digital repositories, the project team considered ‘DSpace’ and ‘EPrints’ the most appropriate for e-theses. The choice between the two is likely to be influenced by other developments within institutions relating to institutional repositories i.e. if pre/post/e-print collections are already established (or in development), based on one of the above pieces of software, it would be preferable to use the same arrangement for e-theses.

During Phase 1 of the project, Cranfield University used the DSpace software to create its own institutional repository, which included ETDs, ultimately exposing that collection to OAI harvesters and Google. To date, Cranfield have approximately fifty theses stored within their repository.

A recommended metadata core set has been identified by the project team, in collaboration with the other JISC funded e-theses projects. It is recommended that institutions establishing e-theses collections make use of this - and the supplementary material that will be developed on an ongoing basis i.e. suggested forms of metadata for additional fields such as those relating to embedded audio-visual materials that may be desired by some institutions. (Guidance on the inclusion of embedded audio-visual material is provided on the ‘Electronic Theses’ project Web pages).

10

11 5.1.1 Infrastructure

The project recommends that where possible, individual H.E. institutions should create their own collection of e-theses. This may form part of, or be in parallel with, an open access institutional repository that also contains e-prints. The establishment of an institutional repository would allow institutions to keep their research output organised in a central collection and many could establish such a repository very quickly.

Where institutions operate on a federal basis, current arrangements regarding the deposit and storage of theses can be adapted to accommodate PhDs in electronic format. (An example of this would be the liaison between The University of Wales and the National Library of Wales. Discussions with the latter have led to their participation in the new JISC funded ‘EThOS’ project - to ensure that the specific needs involved in such arrangements are taken into account in future developments).

The ‘Electronic Theses’ project recommends that copies of e-theses from both individual and federal institutions should also be kept in a national collection maintained by The British Library. Smaller institutions that cannot afford the costs of establishing and maintaining their own collections should still provide the BL with copies of their PhDs in electronic format where possible. The existence of a national collection would reduce concerns relating to preservation and migration issues that could arise if the infrastructure was dependent upon individual institutions making their own arrangements.

5.1.2 Software

Upon completion of the initial software evaluation the project installed and tested the selected systems. After due consideration, the project concluded that the DSpace and EPrints software systems were most suitable for UK institutions to use for their own ETD repositories.

DSpace v1.1.1 (with Tomcat as a standalone server) and EPrints v2.2.1 were both installed on a Solaris 9 platform. Installing the two repositories concurrently allowed a good comparison to be made across a variety of issues. A small selection of ETDs were placed on each system to ensure both solutions were comparable for the effective storage of documents incorporating multimedia objects.

Using internal RGU funding, the DSpace installation was then enhanced with further tools and information relevant to researchers to create the basis of a potential ‘Virtual Research Environment’ (VRE). Research staff from the Department of Information and Library Studies undertook an evaluation of the VRE using test groups of researchers from a cross-section of subject areas. This evaluation was based around three areas – ‘Navigation and functionality’, ‘Identity and purpose’, and ‘Collaboration and sharing’. The study was useful in informing RGU project staff on the relative merits of the features of the VRE as seen by research staff, and the project team was greatly encouraged when the report concluded that “the VRE had great potential and [users] did see the potential benefit to be gained by having such a tool providing a cohesive package for research support”. Feedback from members of the focus groups who tested the VRE indicated that DSpace, with its structure based on user communities and collections, was a good choice of software for making e-theses available alongside e-prints and other research materials.

3. Metadata

The ‘Electronic Theses’ project consortium, ‘Theses Alive!, and ‘DAEDALUS’ reached agreement on a metadata core-set. This core-set is available on the ‘Electronic Theses’ project WebPages and is attached to this report as appendix B.

5.2 Legal and Administrative

The project highlighted the key legal and administrative issues that need to be taken into account when establishing an e-theses repository.

Legal

Consideration of copyright and intellectual property rights (IPR) is essential, both by those establishing e-theses repositories and those providing the content. This is a difficult area, however some recent developments have resulted in the provision of more information and advice.

Firstly, the ‘Intellectual Property and Electronic Theses’ JISC Legal Information Service briefing paper (by Dr. Andrew of the ‘Theses Alive!’ project) contains relevant guidelines and highlights the rights and responsibilities of the different parties involved.

Secondly, there has been a general culture change in the way in which e-theses legal matters are addressed in terms of the need for students to have an understanding of IPR issues. Previously, legal issues were seen as a barrier to presenting student work on the web. However, more recently, they have been seen to present an opportunity for students to gain an understanding about relevant legal rights and responsibilities which can be beneficial to their future careers.

Through discussions with research supervisors, the Electronic Theses project received some expressions of concern regarding the possibility of material from e-theses being plagiarised by others. Such concern was eased once those supervisors were made aware that if such material is published on the web, it is in fact easier to detect such plagiarism – particularly through the use of detection software (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=plagiarism_detection).

Administration

When an institution is establishing an e-theses repository, the administrative processes must be considered and implemented according to the specific needs of that institution. The workflow, from the submission process through to mounting content on the repository, can be a complex process and it will vary from one institution to another. The Cranfield University workflow chart, which is on the project website at http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/etds/workflow.html, serves as an example.

Assessing the workflow process will indicate the resources required to establish and maintain an e-theses repository; resources from IT hardware to staffing (for software maintenance, advocacy, metadata ingest, etc.) Acquiring the necessary funding may depend on presenting an effective Business Case. The project WebPages provide information about the key issues that need to be addressed when creating a ‘Business Plan’ to persuade senior management to provide the resources necessary to establish an e-theses repository. (http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/etds/business.html)

Institutional policies and procedures may have to be amended to allow for these new processes, and relevant research committees may have to endorse such changes prior to implementation. Advice on the submission process may require updating, as may the deposit declaration signed by students. RGU’s own regulations are presented on the project web site as an example
(http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/regulations/spec.html). So, too, is a sample deposit declaration form (http://www.rgu.ac.uk/library/regulations/Research_Student_Declaration_Form.doc)

Depending on the institution, the administrative issues highlighted may take some time to have approved. Early and effective advocacy can greatly benefit this process.

5.3 Cultural

It is recommended that institutions establishing an e-theses repository begin advocacy work at an early stage - and continue this in parallel with technical developments to ensure that content is available once the software is installed.

The project team recommends that different approaches to advocacy work are adopted for separate market segments since groups within Higher Education have different priorities. The four key groups distinguished are: students, academic staff/researchers, University senior management, and librarians. Each group attaches different levels of importance to issues such as the ability to express research results in more creative ways, ease of access to the content of theses and the promotion of a University’s or an individual’s research output. The project WebPages highlight the key advantages to the different market groups and the project recommends that advocacy work is varied to take these issues into consideration.

12 5.4 Dissemination

Internally at The Robert Gordon University

Within RGU there has been considerable support for the work of the project team and articles about developments have appeared periodically in internal newsletters and magazines.

Nationally

• Project web site The project website which was established at www.rgu.ac.uk/library/e-theses.htm at an early stage is still being updated. Further information will be added throughout the duration of the JISC funded ‘EThOS’ project in which RGU is now engaged.

• Press Release An article about the ‘Electronic Theses’ project appeared in the ‘Times Higher Education Supplement’ in October 2002 as the result of a telephone interview with the project manager.

• Flyer A publicity leaflet about the electronic theses project was produced and distributed at relevant conferences such as the Open Archives Forum, 2nd Workshop, December 2002.

• Online Discussion list E-THESES-UK email list: This list was set up after the first project seminar in January 2004 to provide a common area to disseminate information on e-theses within the UK and to promote events and ideas. The list is intended to be used over future months as unified UK progression continues in this area with further funding and interest from JISC. Access to the list is available via the project website or via the JISCmail website directly.

• Program and Cluster Meetings Project representatives attended all FAIR programme and cluster meetings that took place between July 2002 and September 2004.

• Seminars organised by the ‘Electronic Theses’ project team

‘Electronic Theses - A Future for UK theses’ A Seminar held at the University of London Library 22nd January 2004 This event was held to obtain feedback from the library and academic community on the findings and proposed recommendations of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project at this stage. Representatives from the ‘Daedalus’ project, the ‘Theses Alive!’ project, JISC, and the ‘UK Council for Graduate Education’ (UKCGE) were also invited to give presentations to ensure that the information being provided at national level was co-ordinated. The event generated high levels of interest within the UK and was fully booked within the first week of being promoted.

‘Electronic Theses - The Next Stage’ A seminar held at the British Library, London 27th September 2004 This event was planned to coincide with the end of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project and to provide an opportunity to disseminate the project findings and recommendations. As with the previous seminar, presentations were also given by members of the Glasgow and Edinburgh e-theses projects and a representative from JISC. A speaker from the University of Southampton provided input from the academic staff point of view. The event attracted approximately 100 delegates from throughout the UK.

More details about the above seminars are available from the project website.

Internationally

• Members of the project team gave presentations and provided posters at international conferences as listed below. • The project manager was elected to the Board of the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) at their meeting in Kentucky in June 2004. She attended the subsequent meeting in Washington D.C. in November 2004 and used the opportunity to update Board members on ETD activities in the UK.

Details of conferences where members of the project team gave presentations and papers are available in Appendix C.

Details of publications resulting from the project are also available in Appendix C.

6. Outcomes

6.1 Value

Members of the project team were pleased with the extent to which they were able to meet the aims and objectives identified at the outset of the project. Their approach was flexible enough to incorporate new ideas and developments as they arose through the course of the work. However, time limits were placed on certain elements of the Workpackages to ensure that progress was made and deliverables achieved by the end of the project. At the conclusion of the project, the team identified the next stage of the work needed to implement a co-ordinated national scheme for dealing with the provision of electronic theses.

The main aim of the project was achieved i.e. a wide range of existing practices and methods of e-theses production, management and use were evaluated against a set of criteria and models for use within the UK information environment were recommended. The aim of the second phase of the project was also achieved i.e. practical testing took place with DSpace and EPrints software to ensure that the packages were suitable for both independent e-theses, e-prints and other research material.

The key objectives of the project were also met:

• Examples of existing ETD good practice were identified and aspects adopted for the UK model. • Existing and newly emerging software was evaluated for suitability and recommendations were made. • The ‘Electronic Theses’ project team liaised with members of the ‘Daedalus’ and ‘Theses Alive!’ project teams to ensure that there was a co-ordinated approach to the developmental work and the dissemination of results. • The project guidelines include basic advice on embedding audio-visual resources and interactive material in e-theses, but more development work is needed in this area as the opportunities and possibilities for novel approaches increase. • Guidelines and example university regulations were made available on the project Website to encourage others to make use of the project recommendations and the experiences gained by the project team. • In addition to providing advice on the establishment of individual e-theses repositories, the project team recommended that a national UK collection should be established.

2. Impact and Benefit

Interest in the project, and the speed at which places were booked by delegates attending the two London seminars, indicates the relevance of the topic to librarians, academic staff and university administrators. The results of the project are already having an impact on teaching, learning and research communities as • Supervisors consider the ways in which students can convey their research results in different formats. • Students seek I.T. advice to take advantage of the opportunities that are now available. • Researchers, requiring access to information, ask if selected PhD theses are available electronically. • University management encourage publicity relating to their institutions research output. • Librarians plan to provide an improved service, and look forward to saving shelf space and staff time storing and retrieving paper copies of theses.

To date, the benefits of making theses available in electronic format have concentrated on academic institutions. However, as the quantity of content increases, other user groups such as commercial organisations, the voluntary sector, and the public in general, are also likely to benefit.

3. Transferable Aspects

Various successful aspects of the project, and the approach taken towards achieving the aims and objectives, could be applicable to other related or broadly similar projects. In particular, the project team would highlight the following as beneficial:

• Involvement in programme and cluster meetings organised by JISC to keep abreast of related developmental work. • Close liaison with related JISC funded projects to ensure a co-ordinated approach to eliminate unnecessary duplication of work, and to avoid gaps in coverage. • Agreed duplication of work with other projects where independent approaches could result in different solutions. (An example of this, with regard to the e-theses project, was the separate approach to evaluating potential software. In this case the findings of the three projects were broadly similar – which added weight to the final recommendations of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project). • The organisation of seminars to disseminate the results of the project. (In the case of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project, the seminar held several months before the end of the project contained enough new material to be of interest to the H.E. community but also allowed time for feedback from the delegates to be acted upon prior to the conclusion of the development work. The seminar towards the end of the project provided a focus for the project team to identify the key findings of their work and to convey them appropriately.) • The creation of WebPages at an early stage in the project to help the project team to maintain an awareness of the progress made, the structure of the work, and the areas needing further attention. (The WebPages also encourage useful feedback from readers.) • Liaison with colleagues involved in related work at international level to obtain a different perspective on the project.

14 7. Conclusions

Project team members found working on the ‘Electronic Theses’ project to be an enjoyable and informative experience. Specific recommendations resulting from the project, such as use of DSpace and EPrints software, and the e-theses metadata core-set, can be adopted by individual institutions now to create ETD repositories. The recommendation that a national e-theses collection is established should prove helpful to The British Library when it is planning developmental work in this area. The opportunity to publicise the JISC funded work at international conferences has ensured that the UK now has a place alongside the countries which are at the forefront of ETD development (such as the USA, Canada, Australia and Germany).

Much of the experience gained on the ‘Electronic Theses’ project is relevant to the creation of broader based institutional repositories and it is hoped that future work in this area will benefit from the findings of the project. Members of the ‘Electronic Theses’ project consortium and the e-theses ‘cluster group’ have expressed an interest in maintaining liaison after the end of the ‘FAIR’ programme to support e-theses development work and to work together on future projects. RGU will continue to update the ‘Electronic Theses’ WebPages to reflect future developments and, through membership of the NDLTD Board of Directors, the project manager will continue to ensure that the UK work in this area is reflected at international level.

15 8. Implications

The amount of interest in the project, and e-theses generally indicates that there is a need for further work in this area. In particular, the project team is keen to support the development of an e-theses infrastructure at national level and to support the work of the JISC funded EThOS project. Further work is also needed to ensure that those creating and maintaining e-theses collections are fully aware of relevant copyright and IPR issues and how to address concerns in this area.

Once the above has been achieved it should be easier to attract the content for e-theses repositories. The attention should then, perhaps, focus more on the users of the material (encouraging use beyond academia, etc), and the students who are creating the theses (identifying what additional training is required as the possibilities for incorporating multimedia become more sophisticated, etc).

In all aspects of the development work it will be important to consider e-theses alongside e-prints and other research output as part of a single institutional repository or a suite of aligned digital repositories.

16 9. Recommendations

The ‘Electronic Theses’ project team is delighted that JISC is continuing to provide funding for research and development work relating to e-theses and digital repositories. With regard to e-theses developments specifically, it would be advantageous if future UK work is tied closely to related international developments – as co-ordinated by the NDLTD.

10. References

1. Roberts, A. (1997), Survey on the use of doctoral theses in British universities, (British Library Research and Innovation Report 57), Edinburgh University Library, Edinburgh, available at: http://www.lib.ed.ac.uk/Theses/ 2. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/data/somefacts.html 3. http://www.ndltd.org/ 4. http://etdguide.org/ 5. http://www.lib.gla.ac.uk/daedalus/ 6. http://www.thesesalive.ac.uk/ 7. Open Society Institute. (2004), A guide to institutional repository software, 3rd ed., available at http://www.soros.org/openaccess/software/ 8. http://www.thesesalive.ac.uk/dsp_home.shtml

11. Appendices

Appendix A - Glossary…

BL British Library
CURL Consortium of Research Libraries in the British Isles
ETD Electronic Theses and Dissertations
EThOS E-Theses Online Service
FAIR Focus on Access to Institutional Resources (Programme)
HE Higher Education
IPR Intellectual Property Rights
IT Information Technology
JISC Joint Information Systems Committee
NDLTD Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
OAI Open Archives Initiative
OAI-PMH Open Archives Initiative - Protocol for Metadata Harvesting
URL Universal Resource Locator

Appendix B – UK Metadata Core-set

|Field Name |Comments |QDC Element.Qualifier |Populated By |
|Title |Full title, including any subtitle |title |student |
|Alternative Title |Other titles for the work, eg. |title.alternative (refinement) |student |
| |Translations or abbreviations. | | |
|Author |The author of the work as on the title |creator |student |
| |page. Separate the surname (or family | | |
| |name) from the forenames, given names or | | |
| |initials with a comma. Eg Smith, Andrew J.| | |
|Supervisor(s)/advisor |Thesis supervisor, other supervisors, and |contributor.advisor |student |
| |advisors. Format as for author. |(refinement) | |
|Subject keywords |Any keywords that the student or librarian|subject |student / |
| |feel belong in the metadata. Populated by | |institutional |
| |student for free text and librarian to | |librarian to verify |
| |verify and add full subject headings based| | |
| |on DDC, LCSH etc. as below | | |
|Abstract |Include translations in "repeatable" |description.abstract |student |
| |section. |(refinement) | |
|DDC |Dewey Decimal Classification headings as |subject.DDC (encoding scheme) |institutional |
| |assigned by librarian | |librarian |
|LCC |Library of Congress Classification |subject.LCC (encoding scheme) |institutional |
| |headings as assigned by librarian | |librarian |
|LCSH |Library of Congress Subject Headings as |subject.LCSH (encoding scheme) |institutional |
| |assigned by librarian | |librarian |
|MESH |Medical Subject Headings as assigned by |subject.MESH (encoding scheme) |institutional |
| |librarian | |librarian |
|UDC |Universal Decimal Classification headings |subject.UDC (encoding scheme) |institutional |
| |as assigned by librarian | |librarian |
|Institution. College. |Name of institution awarding degree; name |publisher |default - maintained |
|Department |of college; name of department, school or | |by institution |
| |centre. (Separated with full stops: eg. | | |
| |The Robert Gordon University. Faculty of | | |
| |Design and Technology. School of | | |
| |Computing) | | |
|Sponsors |Sponsor of student |contributor.sponsor |student |
| | |(refinement) | |
|Type. Qualification level. |Type = Thesis or dissertation (default on |type |student |
|Qualification name |system); Level = Diploma, Masters, | | |
| |Doctoral, Postdoctoral, etc (controlled | | |
| |look up list); Name = Specific degree | | |
| |(MPhil ,PhD, DPhil etc). (vocabulary | | |
| |controlled by individual institution, | | |
| |separated by full stops.) | | |
|Language |Primary Language (Controlled look up list)|language.ISO639-2 (encoding |student |
| |using ISO639-2 |scheme) | |
|Date of Award |Date degree awarded in format: YYYY-MM |date.issued (refinement) |student, |
| |(ISO8601) | |institutional |
| | | |librarian to verify |
|Citations |Citations to previously published sections|relation.hasVersion (refinement)|student |
| |of this thesis. Applies particularly to | | |
| |"thesis by publication". Possible problem | | |
| |enforcing any citation standard. | | |
|Included/Quoted work |References to other works |relation.references (refinement)|student |
|Rights |eg. Copyright/IPR statement regarding |rights |institutional |
| |rights management, or URI of Creative | |librarian |
| |Commons license. Possibility of a change | | |
| |in rights agreement after a specified | | |
| |time. | | |
|Identifier |ID for the object(s) |identifer.URL (encoding scheme) |system, student can |
| | | |optionally add IDs |
| | | |for alternative |
| | | |locations |
|File Format |File type for preservation information |format.IMT (encoding scheme) |system |
| |(For each of these there may be multiple | | |
| |files) | | |
|File Size |Size of file for preservation information |format.extent (refinement) |system |
| |and integrity checking (For each of these | | |
| |there may be multiple files) | | |

Appendix C – Conferences and Publications

Conferences where Project Team members gave presentations / papers)

ETD 2003 symposium. Berlin, Germany, 21 – 24 May 2003

7th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries. Trondheim, Norway, 17 – 22 August 2003

ETD 2004 Symposium. Lexington KY, USA, 3 – 5 June 2004

ETDs in the UK: incorporating best practice into a national model. JISC/CNI 2004 Conference. Brighton, 8 – 9 July 2004

Interlend 2004. University of Sheffield, Sheffield, 12 – 14 July 2004

An electronic future for University of Wales theses. Aberystwyth, 9 September 2004

OAForum 4th Workshop. In Practice, Good Practice: the Future of Open Archives. Bath, 4 – 5 September 2003

Forthcoming: Two members of the project team will give presentations at the UKCGE workshop on electronic theses that is scheduled to take place in London in March 2005.

Details of Conference Papers and Presentations

COPELAND, S., 2003. E-theses developments in the UK. Next Steps - Electronic Theses and Dissertations Worldwide ETD 2003 symposium. Berlin, Germany, 21 – 24 May http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/etd2003/copeland-susan/PDF/index.pdf PENMAN, A., 2003. The ‘Electronic Theses’ project: a view from the consortium led by The Robert Gordon University. Next Steps - Electronic Theses and Dissertations Worldwide – ETD 2003 symposium. Berlin, Germany, 21 – 24 May http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/etd2003/penman-andrew/PDF/index.pdf BEVAN, S., 2004. E-thesis submission workflow issues, A Future for UK Theses. A Seminar at the University of London, London, 22 January http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon_SB.ppt COPELAND, S., 2004. Electronic Theses: the RGU Project. A Future for UK Theses. A seminar at the University of London. London, 22 January http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon_SC.ppt HARPER, D., 2004. The challenge of finding information in (long) e-theses. A Future for UK Theses. A seminar at the University of London. London, 22 January http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon_DH.ppt JONES, R. and MILNE, R., 2004. Metadata for ETDs. A Future for UK Theses A seminar at the University of London. London, 22 January

PENMAN, A. and MILNE, R., 2004. I.T. aspects. A Future for UK Theses A seminar at the University of London. London, 22 January http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon_AP_RM.ppt COPELAND, S., 2004. How can LIS professionals encourage academics to self-archive? Eprints UK Edinburgh workshop. Edinburgh, 14 May

COPELAND, S., TROMAN, A. and MILNE, R., 2004. Using international best practice to create a UK ETD national model. Distributing knowledge worldwide through better scholarly communication - ETD 2004 Symposium. Lexington KY, USA, 3 – 5 June http://www.uky.edu/ETD/ETD2004/abstract2.html#copeland PENMAN, A. and JONES, R., 2004. Developing DSpace for ETDs at The Robert Gordon University and The University of Edinburgh. Distributing knowledge worldwide through better scholarly communication, ETD 2004 Symposium. Lexington KY, USA, 3 – 5 June http://www.uky.edu/ETD/ETD2004/abstract2.html#penman COPELAND, S., 2004. ETDs in the UK: incorporating best practice into a national model. JISC/CNI 2004 Conference. Brighton, 8 – 9 July

COPELAND, S., 2004. Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). Are you Being Served?: Interlend 2004. University of Sheffield, Sheffield, 12 – 14 July

BEVAN, S., 2004, E-Thesis submission workflow issues. An electronic future for University of Wales theses. Aberystwyth, 9 September

COPELAND, S., 2004. Electronic theses: a central repository. An electronic future for University of Wales theses. Aberystwyth, 9 September

BEVAN, S., 2004, E-thesis submission – a case study, Electronic Theses – the Next Stage. A seminar at the British Library, London, 27 September http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon2_SB.ppt COPELAND, S., 2004. RGU project recommendations, Electronic Theses – The Next Stage. A seminar at The British Library. London, 27 September http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon2_SC.ppt HARPER, D., 2004. Intelligent document browsing using ProfileSkim software. Electronic Theses – The Next Stage. A seminar at The British Library. London, 27 September http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon2_DH.ppt MILNE, R. 2004. Metadata for ETDs, Electronic Theses – The Next Stage. A seminar at The British Library. London, 27 September http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon2_RM.ppt PENMAN, A., 2004. ETD Repositories using DSpace Software. Electronic Theses – The Next Stage. A seminar at The British Library. London, 27 September http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon2_SC.ppt TROMAN, A., 2004. A National Collection: A View from the British Library. Electronic Theses – The Next Stage, A Seminar at The British Library, London, 27 September http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/library/about/documents/Lon2_AT.ppt BEVAN, S., 2004. Focus on Access to Resources, ‘Travelling Librarian’ reception, West Virginia University, WV, USA, 14 October

Details of Conference Posters

COPELAND, S., PENMAN, A. and MILNE, R., 2003. RGU Electronic Theses Project. 7th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries. Trondheim, Norway, 17 – 22 August http://www.ecdl2003.org/posters/PandDECDL2003.pdf COPELAND, S., PENMAN, A. and MILNE, R., 2003. RGU Electronic Theses Project OAForum 4th Workshop. In Practice, Good Practice: the Future of Open Archives. Bath, 4 – 5 September

Journal Articles

COPELAND, S. and PENMAN, A., 2003. E-theses: recent developments and the JISC ‘FAIR’ programme. SCONUL Newsletter, 28,.pp39-42 http://www.sconul.ac.uk/pubs_stats/newsletter/28/ART14.pdf COPELAND, S. and PENMAN, A., 2004. Electronic Theses, ASSIGNation, 21 (3), pp30-32

COPELAND, S. and PENMAN, A., 2004. The development and promotion of Electronic Theses and Dissertation (ETDs) within the UK. The New Review of Information Networking. 10 (1), pp19-32

COPELAND, S., MILNE, R. and PENMAN, A. Electronic Theses: a JISC FAIR project. Relay (Forthcoming)

Further articles are in progress.