From Transaction to Collaboration: Scholarly Communications Design at UConn Library
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
1 gefällt mir•142 views
A joint presentation to the Coalition for Networked Information Spring membership meeting in April 2017. This discusses our research project to propose a new approach to the scholarly creation process and reward system, and understand how libraries fit into this new environment.
![Ask Questions, Explore Opportunities
• UConn Library mission:
create a “culture of learning and
exploration [in a]
multidisciplinary hub of activity”
• A community, inspirational, and
inventive space that is home to
all
• At the intersection of content
and research.]()
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ähnlich wie From Transaction to Collaboration: Scholarly Communications Design at UConn Library
Ähnlich wie From Transaction to Collaboration: Scholarly Communications Design at UConn Library (20)
Mehr von Greg Colati
Mehr von Greg Colati (15)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
From Transaction to Collaboration: Scholarly Communications Design at UConn Library
- 1. From Transaction to Collaboration: Scholarly Communications Design at UConn Library Martha Bedard, Vice Provost Holly Phillips, Assistant Vice Provost Greg Colati, Assistant University Librarian UConn Library
- 2. Ask Questions, Explore Opportunities • UConn Library mission: create a “culture of learning and exploration [in a] multidisciplinary hub of activity” • A community, inspirational, and inventive space that is home to all • At the intersection of content and research.
- 3. Shifting Landscape of Research and Expression Research • Digital is preferred • Collections are data that can be manipulated • Shareable, reusable, and interoperable information resources Expression • From print to multi-modal • Visualization is storytelling • Shifting publishing models • Changing reward systems
- 4. The Shifting Landscape and the Library • Informs our interest to collaborate in new ways • Question the nature of what it means to be a library and a librarian • Question the traditional rewards system
- 5. Building a culture of collaboration • Collaborative workflows • Equitable labor hierarchies • Multi-modal expression • Testing collaborative spaces • Persistence of the scholarly record Projects are not the only product
- 6. • Combines multiple mental models of knowledge creation • Participatory from the beginning • Individual participation may be based on official skill set, content knowledge, network knowledge
- 7. • Design based • Inquiry driven • Collaboration first rather than a series of handoffs • Close, equitable communication among equal partners
- 8. • Begins with a team of people and an inquiry- focused prompt posed externally by Greenhouse Studios • Puts people and collaboration at the center of the process, rather than the needs of a particular faculty researcher.
- 9. Expected Outcomes The Product is a community of interdisciplinary collaborators comprised of faculty, librarians, designers, developers, students, and others at UConn along with colleagues from the publishing community and other institutions.
- 10. • UConn Library in 2017 • Master Plan / Purposeful Path • Integration of Scholarly Communications Design • Greenhouse Studios • Scholars’ Collaborative • Research Services
- 11. Assessment • Roles • Did team roles change during the project? • How did librarian roles inform the process? • Culture • Did librarians internalize the process? • Does participation disrupt the ‘handoff’ culture? • Service • Does the design process change service offerings and at what level? • Are specialized scholarly communication design techniques generalizable?
- 12. Assessment • Space • Did collaborative space and furniture assumptions change? • Technology • Which technology became the most important for the team? • Can the Library scale its offerings for numerous multi-modal projects? • Other questions? • What does success look like? • Does this experience inform structural, organizational, development changes?
- 13. Your turn… • Roles • Culture • Service • Space • Technology • Other questions?
- 14. Follow our Progress UConn Library http://lib.uconn.edu Greenhouse Studios http://greenhousestudios.uconn.edu
Hinweis der Redaktion
- My colleagues and I are here to discuss with you our evolving approach to creating new scholarly output through extensive collaboration and a design studio model
- "why are we embarking on this design approach as active collaborators and only supporters. We are appreciative of Mellon funding the projects, so why is the library contributing staff, space, funding for tech, etc. 1. At the core is to We are taking additional steps to become We are at the intersection of content and research. Our mission / strategic framework puts us on and Purposeful Path regarding the library's role in scholarship
- Martha: this is your slide We are all scholars in the academy. Scholars exist to learn and share with a broad community.Never is this more so than now. Scholarly Communication is shifting from solely print monograph and journal issues containing articles to an environment where access to digital content is preferred. In a digital world collections contain data and pieces of information that can be selectively shared, reused, and remixed. The modes of expression are changing as collections disaggregate. Our users have the ability to express scholarly research in a variety of multi-modal methods.Visualization, which has a long history,can be performed more easily and with greater effect than ever before. The change is leading to the desire for more ways to communicate off the written page. All of our systems must and will catch up.
- Martha The shifting landscape of research and expression taps deeply into the roots of libraries and librarianship. Instead of librarians as primarily bibliographers learning and collecting within specific disciplines or performing primarily transactional assistance at specific points in the research lifecycle, the library/librarian is an essential part of the collaborative team. Our reward systems continue to change, whether Librarians are faculty who need research output or Librarians who's"Reward" is defined as number of instruction sessions, reference consults, etc. we need to question this reward system.
- One of our responses was to collaborate with outside the library groups: School of Fine Arts/Digital Media and Design Humanities Institute And challenge everyone to share the creative process from the beginning. Includes Faculty, staff, grad students, undergrads. Technologists, archivists, information specialists, content knowledge experts. Disrupting the handoff model, where functional support is called in at certain points in the process to serve the needs of the "PI" usually a faculty.
- Process combines a number of mental models gathered during the Mellon Funded research grant. How do different creators think about the creative process? What so they share in common? Participatory from the start, challenges the "handoff" model.
- As we developed the design process, certain things rose to the top: -Collaboration first, Collective strategy Multi-modal does NOT mean it is biased toward digital projects But, Seek acceptance of non-print products for reward-PTR, etc. What are the boundaries of "scholarly?" Flattening the hierarchy of participation. Disrupting the solitary researcher, "handoff" model of scholarship
- The current model adheres to a design inspired iterative model with some important principles: Inquiry focused prompt posted externally: Impact or value of VR in scholarly expression. Moving images as a scholarly expression Paid particular attention to the LANGUAGE of the process. Rejected multiple labels as biased toward a discipline, or a process. Often found ourselves slipping back into comfortable habits of thought: "Mike's project" rather than the VR project. Highly dependent on who is in the room… how does this affect scholarship? How does this process alter the product and the people involved?
- Holly: For the Library this means changing the nature of the “handoff” culture where the people step in when their expertise is required. We shift roles from collection and reference interactions to engaged production of new scholarship.
- Holly: Similar to the expected grant outcomes, we expect that GS is the tip of the triangle. What we learn in GS distributes throughout the library. Recall that the GS will be located in the middle of our Inspiration floor. Through a major master plan remodel and close adherence to our Purposeful Path we are developing an idea creation / maker space, a visualization studio, and enhancing computing and technology capabilities on the floor. We are creating a “third space” where interdisciplinary collaboration can occur and the process of producing digital scholarship is visible. Therefore we want to make it accessible to all UConn community members. The GS process will generate tools and techniques as well as identify researcher needs not met by the necessarily scoped GS. Immediately adjacent to GS will be the Scholars' Collaborative space. This area is managed by our Digital Scholarship Librarians and is home to workshops, networking, and general consultation on scholarly communication design. It is the intent that the two units collaborate and share the same technology infrastructure and staff expertise. Further, as the Greenhouse Studios rotates through projects and Scholars' Collaborative continues to grow expertise, we expect the design process and collaboration-first approach to permeate through the organization and inform or future space, technology, and service delivery.
- Greenhouse Studio assessment will focus on the efficacy and adoption of design based, inquiry driven, collaboration first methodology. Evaluation of institutional and hierarchical barriers will reveal the deeply embedded faculty / staff / researcher / production roles. For example, outside payment for grant work is common while applying this to staff is complicated by union rules. Other examples, welcoming hiring, purchasing, etc from ”other department”. Operating on grant time vs university time. Do librarians who aren’t participating in the process understand what GS is and how it can inform or translate to traditional library activity? Do we change what we offer?
- Greenhouse Studio assessment will focus on the efficacy and adoption of design based, inquiry driven, collaboration first methodology. Evaluation of institutional and hierarchical barriers will reveal the deeply embedded faculty / staff / researcher / production roles. For example, outside payment for grant work is common while applying this to staff is complicated by union rules. Do experiences in the GS environment translate to more typically transactional library activities?
- Lead group in question period