The AIMS project has released their white paper, which has some great reading on the issues and challenges facing institutions as they embrace the avalanch of born digital content. From the e-mail release:
AIMS (Born-Digital Collections: An Inter-Institutional Model for Stewardship) was a two year grant generously funded by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. It ran from October 2009-September 2011. An international collaboration of partners from the University of Hull (UK), Stanford University, Yale University, and the University of Virginia as lead, AIMS had several main goals, among them:
1. Develop a methodology for the support and stewardship of born-digital materials
2. Foster and enhance the digital archivist community
3. Process over a dozen collections that had born digital content.
4. Create and disseminate a white paper that outlines our findings and work
To that end, I am pleased to announce the successful conclusion of both the grant and the white paper. The white paper is an expression of our methodology for supporting and stewarding born digital materials. The participants used their experience in processing collections with born digital content as the groundwork for our shared (rather than singular) approach. As such, it highlights decision points and practice. It is meant to introduce and expose readers to the issues of born digital stewardship, not necessarily solve every possible contingency since this is an evolving challenge for us all. We have articulated practices that are informed by archival principles that we hope will have a broad reach to our readers.
This document should be considered as a framework to guide good practice in terms of archival tasks and objectives necessary for success.
Call For Participation
The Management of Scholarly Identity
A CNI Workshop
April 4, 2012 (following the CNI Spring Member Meeting)
Sheraton Inner Harbor Hotel
10AM - 3PM
The Coalition for Networked Information (CNI) is hosting an invitational workshop for organizations actively involved in developing systems, services, databases, standards or policy frameworks addressing author identity management within the academy and the scholarly communication systems. The purpose of this workshop is to understand and coordinate developments in historically independent spheres that involve the management of authorial identity, publication histories, and other parts of academic biography (for example, grants awarded to faculty); in the new digital scholarly communications environment there is at least potential convergence among many of these activities. A particular focus of the workshop will be to identify work that can help information to move more effectively across the many different silos in this area. Here are some of the relevant threads:
A number of proposals for author identifiers have now largely coalesced into the ORCID initiative, which remains very much a work in progress; there are also international standards efforts (which seem to have rather different objectives) under development. This work is not yet well connected to the increasingly widely deployed campus identity management efforts employing Shibboleth and organized under InCommon.
It has become clear that authors need to take control of their personal bibliographic record, and that this record is increasingly important as input to tenure and promotion (through the use of both long-standing and new measures of scholarly impact); this record lives in a number of systems, including Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Microsoft Research Academic, to name only a few. The mechanisms to make authenticated corrections to this record are very poor, and such changes do not automatically propagate from one system to another. A variety of other systems - research library institutional repositories, research management information systems, faculty social networking systems, and others - also need feeds of personal bibliographic records as they evolve.
Universities and other organizations are starting wide scale deployment of a new generation of research management systems and faculty profile management systems (often migrating from ad-hoc, locally developed systems to the adoption of common platforms like Kuali Coeus and Vivo) that involve management of faculty biographies and bibliographies, and need to be able to cross institutional boundaries for a number of purposes. As a byproduct, we also have emerging
opportunities to create new kinds of dictionaries of national biography for research communities.
In order to have a productive discussion, the size of the workshop is limited. Prospective participants should contact CNI Associate Director Joan Lippincott (Joan@cni.org) as soon as possible with a few paragraphs on their interests and relevant work that they are doing in this area; unless otherwise requested, these will be shared with other participants and become part of the public conference report that CNI will prepare. Selected attendees will be asked to give brief presentations based on these submissions.