160 likes | 306 Views
Session 2. Preservation Policy Overview & Assessment: Case Study Indiana State University. Digital Preservation at Indiana State University. Wake Up Call, LSTA Digitization Grant 2006-2007 Digital Preservation Summit, May 2008 ISU Digital Preservation Group, September 2009
E N D
Session 2 Preservation Policy Overview& Assessment: Case StudyIndiana State University
Digital Preservation atIndiana State University • Wake Up Call, LSTA Digitization Grant 2006-2007 • Digital Preservation Summit, May 2008 • ISU Digital Preservation Group, September 2009 • Digital Preservation Planning for ISU Workshop, December 2009 • Economic Woes, January 2010 • MetaArchive Cooperative Membership, June 2010 • ISU Digital Preservation Group Reconvenes, October 2010 • More Economic Woes • Successful Ingest of ETDs, August 2011
Scope: Indiana State University • Library & University Archives • Academic Units: Deans & Faculty • Administrative Units: Registrar • Communications & Marketing • Office of Information Technology: CIO
Selection Criteria: Indiana State • Currently driven by various initiatives • ETDs • Grant generated assets • Unique cultural documents & images • Everything else (all of which is of the highest importance according to the creator)
Defining Your Digital Assets: Indiana State • Informal survey conducted by units • Not a complete representation of all digital assets • Not all units participated in survey • Lack of consistency in data submitted • Wide array of file formats • Stored everywhere imaginable
Strategies: Indiana State • Presented DRAMBORA as a strategy • Overall reaction • Too complicated • Too much work • Will require library working with unit
Operating Principles: Indiana State • The Library will comply with the standards and best practices as they develop • The Library will participate in the development of these standards to the best of its ability • The Library is committed to the interoperability of its digital assets
Roles & Responsibilities:Indiana State • Library providing leadership • Academic units in need of preservation of digital assets • IT focused on tech support not sustainability
Metadata • Library Digital Initiatives = Dublin Core • Little or no metadata available for digital assets in academic units
Permissions & Access: Indiana State • The Silo Approach • Digital assets stored on a variety of servers • Servers maintained by different departments • Assets stored on hard drives, flash drives, CDs with no backup • Permissions and access limited • Depends on who “owns” the hardware or storage media
Distributed Responsibilities: Indiana State • Library decides to join the MetaArchive Cooperative • To preserve ETDs • Culturally significant items • Grant generated assets
Economics & Sustainability: Indiana State • Presentation to DP Group about MetaArchive Cooperative membership • Discussion of long term funding • Agreement that digital preservation is a university wide issue and needed to be part of the university’s operating budget
Challenges: Indiana State • Performing risk assessments across academic units • Vast amount of digital assets being created • Convincing stakeholders that not everything should be saved • Involving OIT in the process • Staff resources • Funding
Outreach & Education: Indiana State • Lyrasis Digital Preservation workshop for members of DP Group • In house presentations and discussions • Packets of information for deans and faculty
Policy Statement: Indiana State • Library’s strategic goal to leverage its Special Collections contains commitment to digital preservation • University strategic goal calling for increase in faculty research grant proposals
Summary Statement: Indiana State • The ISU Library has taken a leadership role • The Library seeks to involve the campus • Timing, Politics and Demonstrated Success • Strategic Thinking and Flexibility • Administrative Support • The Process Continues