Computer Network Security and ARL Libraries

This article will review current recommendations for computer security practices for staff computing, summarize current practices in US Association of Research Libraries and propose further areas to explore

Use of Discovery Tools in ARL Libraries

Libraries provide discovery tools as a means to bring together resources that will assist researchers in locating the best sources for their information needs. As the Web evolves and user expectations for library resources change, librarians are questioning the effectiveness of these tools and are considering if libraries should explore other options that could provide a similar or better user experience. Survey invitations were e-mailed to academic libraries that were members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) to investigate current trends in the use of discovery tools at their institutions. Twenty-five of the 112 libraries responded. The survey results point to areas where improvements are most needed

University of Nebraska-Lincoln DigitalCommons: Statistical Report, August 2018

To: Deeann Allison, Director, Media & Repository Services, UNL Libraries I am pleased to transmit the following statistics report on the UNL DigitalCommons, http://digitalcommons.unl.edu The DigitalCommons is the “institutional repository” for UNL. It’s function is to gather the intellectual output of the university for online public access. It was established in 2005, and now holds 99,000 papers, making it the 3rd largest in the United States, trailing only the University of California system (190,000) and the University of Michigan (120,000). It recently surpassed 50 million downloads, and is the nation’s current leader in that category. Alexa.com reports that the repository is the most visited subdomain of unl.edu, representing 15% to 18% of all internet traffic. The following schedules are attached: I. History of growth (13 years) Growth of contents has been steady at around 6,000 annually. Contents and downloads shown here are UNL free public access only; i.e. they do not include ProQuest’s collection of 14,000 UNL dissertations (which are free to this campus & subscribing institutions only). Download numbers reflect changing interactions with search engines. II. Distribution of contents and usage across series (50) : This schedule lists the 50 most popular series, July 2015 – June 2018, by downloads, and then by number of papers and annualized average per paper. These 50 series represent 36% of the contents and 63% of the downloads. There were approximately 950 series overall, with 19,583,432 downloads over the period. III. Downloads by other educational institutions (115) We are able to trace about 25% of downloads to a network. The following are the most frequently downloading networks and their types. IV. Downloads by continent: July 2016‐‐June 2018 V. Downloads by country (28) Between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2018, these 28 countries each received \u3e0.5% of geolocated downloads. Note that 59% of downloads are international. VI. Most popular paper by country (10) The DigitalCommons platform is hosted and maintained by bepress in Berkeley, California; they were purchased last year by Elsevier. The repository is operated and administered locally by UNL Libraries faculty and staff: Paul Royster, Sue Gardner, Margaret Mering, and Linnea Fredrickson

University of Nebraska-Lincoln DigitalCommons: Statistical Report, August 2018

To: Deeann Allison, Director, Media & Repository Services, UNL Libraries I am pleased to transmit the following statistics report on the UNL DigitalCommons, http://digitalcommons.unl.edu The DigitalCommons is the “institutional repository” for UNL. It’s function is to gather the intellectual output of the university for online public access. It was established in 2005, and now holds 99,000 papers, making it the 3rd largest in the United States, trailing only the University of California system (190,000) and the University of Michigan (120,000). It recently surpassed 50 million downloads, and is the nation’s current leader in that category. Alexa.com reports that the repository is the most visited subdomain of unl.edu, representing 15% to 18% of all internet traffic. The following schedules are attached: I. History of growth (13 years) Growth of contents has been steady at around 6,000 annually. Contents and downloads shown here are UNL free public access only; i.e. they do not include ProQuest’s collection of 14,000 UNL dissertations (which are free to this campus & subscribing institutions only). Download numbers reflect changing interactions with search engines. II. Distribution of contents and usage across series (50) : This schedule lists the 50 most popular series, July 2015 – June 2018, by downloads, and then by number of papers and annualized average per paper. These 50 series represent 36% of the contents and 63% of the downloads. There were approximately 950 series overall, with 19,583,432 downloads over the period. III. Downloads by other educational institutions (115) We are able to trace about 25% of downloads to a network. The following are the most frequently downloading networks and their types. IV. Downloads by continent: July 2016‐‐June 2018 V. Downloads by country (28) Between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2018, these 28 countries each received \u3e0.5% of geolocated downloads. Note that 59% of downloads are international. VI. Most popular paper by country (10) The DigitalCommons platform is hosted and maintained by bepress in Berkeley, California; they were purchased last year by Elsevier. The repository is operated and administered locally by UNL Libraries faculty and staff: Paul Royster, Sue Gardner, Margaret Mering, and Linnea Fredrickson

Discovery Investigative Group (DIG) Report, December 2016

This report is a response to the following charge from project sponsor DeeAnn Allison: Develop a working definition of the purpose and scope for a discovery tool that includes a description of what it should accomplish. How will it help scholars connect with information? The charge included a request to answer seven questions: 1. What content should be included and why? 2. What functions or search capabilities should be included? 3. What social media enhancements should be included? 4. How can it be structured to help both novice and advanced researchers? 5. Can you identify a “perfect” tool? If not, which ones are better and why? 6. Should we abandon Encore? Why or Why not? 7. What is the relation, or non-relation to Google products? Is a discovery tool just a variation of Google? Should it be? Over the course of the Fall 2016 semester, DIG committee members, comprised of seven Libraries faculty who voluntarily participated, met frequently to discuss the charge and determine how to best answer each question. Our answers were ultimately informed through a combination of reviewing the current literature, investigating peer institutions’ search tools, soliciting feedback from our library colleagues through a library-wide survey, and the committee members’ own insights. The responses to each of the following questions are a reflection of the consensus of the DIG committee members

Discovery Investigative Group (DIG) Report, December 2016

This report is a response to the following charge from project sponsor DeeAnn Allison: Develop a working definition of the purpose and scope for a discovery tool that includes a description of what it should accomplish. How will it help scholars connect with information? The charge included a request to answer seven questions: 1. What content should be included and why? 2. What functions or search capabilities should be included? 3. What social media enhancements should be included? 4. How can it be structured to help both novice and advanced researchers? 5. Can you identify a “perfect” tool? If not, which ones are better and why? 6. Should we abandon Encore? Why or Why not? 7. What is the relation, or non-relation to Google products? Is a discovery tool just a variation of Google? Should it be? Over the course of the Fall 2016 semester, DIG committee members, comprised of seven Libraries faculty who voluntarily participated, met frequently to discuss the charge and determine how to best answer each question. Our answers were ultimately informed through a combination of reviewing the current literature, investigating peer institutions’ search tools, soliciting feedback from our library colleagues through a library-wide survey, and the committee members’ own insights. The responses to each of the following questions are a reflection of the consensus of the DIG committee members

Media and Repository Support Unit, University of Nebraska–Lincoln Libraries, Annual Report July 2018–June 2019

Increasingly, libraries are recognizing the importance of providing access to the research output of their universities. In a June 10, 2019, news release from the provosts of the Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA) titled “Sustaining Values and Scholarship” (available at https://tinyurl.com/yyu94aa9), they state, “The Big Ten Academic Alliance will continue its advocacy for a sustainable and open ecosystem of publication. . . . Collectively, our institutions’ more than 50,000 faculty are supported by over $10 billion (2017) in research funding, and our institutions have similarly invested significantly in our capacity to further our missions to advance knowledge. Together, we produce roughly 15% of the research publications in the United States.” This commitment to open information is reflected in the mission of the Media and Repository Support (MARS) unit of the UNL Libraries. We support the creation and preservation of the scholarly accomplishments of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln by providing an infrastructure for disseminating information and scholarship through Digital Commons (articles, reports, journals, books, and more), Luna (multimedia projects), and Rosetta (data) as well as by providing equipment that students and faculty can check out to capture video and digital images. Through our efforts, the intellectual contributions of UNL are provided, when possible, as open access to disseminate information to as wide a community as possible. We provide advice and consult with researchers and students on scholarly communication issues surrounding open education resources, copyright, options for rights management, publication, and preservation of information in coordination with other faculty and staff in the Libraries. We maintain close contact with staff from Archives & Special Collections to ensure that nondigital information is not overlooked in preservation plans. Faculty within the unit have developed close relationships with the UNL Office of Research, faculty across our campus, and colleagues at the other University of Nebraska campuses (through the University of Nebraska Consortium of Libraries, UNCL)

UNL Libraries Deposit Programs

The University of Nebraska–Lincoln Libraries offers several avenues for preserving and providing access to digital and physical research materials. This document outlines the four main avenues for depositing materials with UNL Libraries. Although there are separate repositories with specific missions—Archives & Special Collections, DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska–Lincoln, UNL Data Repository, and UNL Image & Multimedia Collections—all work together toward the goal of preserving the intellectual and creative output of the university and to make our contributions discoverable to state, national, and international communities. This document describes the operations of each repository. The Libraries policy is to publish, or provide online access to, materials (1) when the Libraries holds copyright, (2) when the copyright holder has granted the Libraries permission for online publication, or (3) when the Libraries do not hold copyright but may manage access behind a firewall. The University Libraries is committed to preserving and providing access to the full range of in-tellectual contributions of the faculty and staff at UNL for the benefit of current and future gen-erations. All members of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln are encouraged to deposit content with UNL Libraries. Materials deposited in our institutional repositories are historical and not all historical events confirm to current standards of civility. As such, they may contain racial or sexual stereotypes that are inappropriate by today’s standards. They have been retained in order to fully represent the materials in their original context. All members of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln are encouraged to deposit content with UNL Libraries. Content can be nondigital items supplied to Archives & Special Collections or digital content deposited in the Data, Image & Multimedia Collections, Digital Commons repositories, or University Archives

Managing the life-cycle of data

Prepared as part of an ACRL Course What You Need to Know about Writing Data Management Plans this document provides an overview of the components for managing data. Data management includes four areas: discovery, preservation, access, and security

Information Portals: The Next Generation Catalog

Libraries today face an increasing challenge: to provide relevant information to diverse populations with differing needs, while competing with Web search engines like Google. In 2009 the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) Libraries joined with other libraries and Innovative Interfaces as development partners to design a new type of discovery tool. Information portals as a concept best supports the research and instructional needs of our communities by organizing and presenting information that incorporates licensed databases, text, multimedia, and other relevant sources. The discovery tool under examination by UNL, Encore, integrates searches of the catalog, locally created full-text and image sources, and articles from licensed databases, with navigation options that facilitate narrowing and expanding search results. This information portal development is an ongoing process with the goal of providing a tool that is as easy to use as Web search engines but preserves the quality that library users expect. This article explores the requirements for an information portal and describes the challenges UNL faced when implementing Encore. Statistics from the initial implementation are presented, along with recommendations for future usability studies to evaluate where additional improvements should be mad