A Current Snapshot of Institutional Repositories: Growth Rate, Disciplinary Content and Faculty Contributions

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to examine current institutional repository (IR) content in order to assess the growth and breadth of content as it reflects faculty participation, and to identify successful strategies for increasing that participation. Previous studies have shown that faculty-initiated submissions to IRs, no matter the platform, are uncommon. Repository managers employ a variety of methods to solicit and facilitate faculty participation, including a variety of print marketing tools, presentations, and one-on-one consultations. METHODS This mixed method study examined faculty content in IRs through both a quantitative analysis of repository content and growth rate and a qualitative survey of repository administrators. Repositories using the Digital Commons repository platform, hosted by Berkeley Electronic Press, were examined in the fall and winter of 2013-2014 to assess the disciplinary scope of faculty content (n=107) and to measure the growth rate of IR content (n=203). Repository administrators at 205 institutions were surveyed to investigate what methods they used to facilitate faculty participation and their perceptions about the effectiveness of these methods. RESULTS Mean and median growth rates of IRs have increased since measured in 2007, with variance depending upon size and type of academic institution and age of the IR. Disciplinary content in IRs is unevenly distributed, with the Sciences predominantly represented. IR administrators remain actively involved in the submission process and in the promotion of their IRs. Personal contact with individuals or groups of faculty is the most used and successful interaction method. CONCLUSION Though IR growth rate has increased, the growth is not consistent across all IRs and does not yet pose a challenge to traditional models of scholarly publication. The rising amount of faculty content in IRs indicates faculty are increasingly willing to participate in the IR movement. However, faculty involvement may be more passive than active

Promoting Your Scholarship: Jumping into Virtual Commons and SelectedWorks

Virtual Commons is Bridgewater State University’s open-access repository for the scholarly works, research, publications, creative activity, and reports produced by the faculty, students, and staff of BSU and its collaborative partners. SelectedWorks is an additional repository platform for individualized web pages that showcase faculty scholarship and activities. Coordinated by the Maxwell Library, Virtual Commons and SelectedWorks promote the discovery, dissemination and preservation of BSU’s intellectual capital. Learn how you can contribute to the repository and gain the benefits of participating: greater visibility, discoverability, retrievability, and dissemination of your scholarly works and output. Both Virtual Commons and SelectedWorks can enhance your profile and relevance on campus and beyond

QR Codes on Campus

This session will provide a description and overview of QR (Quick Response) Codes and their emerging popularity. We’ll cover current uses of QR codes, how to create them, and how to deploy them. Most importantly, we’ll address why we should be following this growing trend and how we can integrate their usage in an academic setting (library, campus, classroom)

Points saillants du rapport préliminaire sur le statut des étudiantes graduées en histoire au Canada

Dans le cadre du congrès des Sociétés savantes tenu à Victoria en Colombie- Britannique, on nous a demandé de participer en tant que groupe de femmes étudiantes à une séance de discussion portant sur la place de la femme dans la profession d’historien

Highlights of the Preliminary Report on the Status of Women as Graduate Students in History in Canada

As a group of women students, we were presented with an opportunity last fall to begin investigating the status of women as graduate students when we were asked to participate in a panel session on women in the historical profession for the Learned Societies Conference in Victoria, B.C

Systematic screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions: Still debatable

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Assessing people's ability to drive has become a public health concern in most industrialized countries. Although age itself is not a predictive factor of an increased risk for dangerous driving, the prevalence of medical conditions that may impair driving increases with age. Because the implementation of a screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions is a public health issue, its usefulness should be judged using standardised criteria already proposed for screening for chronic disease. The aim of this paper is to propose standardised criteria suitable to assess the scientific validity of screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions, and identify potential issues to be clarified before screening can be implemented and effective.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Using criteria developed for screening for chronic diseases and published studies on driving with medical conditions, we specify six criteria to judge the opportunity of screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions. This adaptation was needed because of the complexity of the natural history of medical conditions and their potential consequences on driving and road safety. We then illustrate that published studies pleading for or against screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions fail to provide the needed documentation. Individual criteria were mentioned in 3 to 72% of 36 papers pleading for or against screening. Quantitative estimates of relevant indicators were provided in at most 42% of papers, and some data, such as the definition of an appropriate unsafe driving period were never provided.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>The standardised framework described in this paper provides a template for assessing the effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of proposed measures for screening for unsafe driving due to medical conditions. Even if most criteria were mentioned in the published literature pleading for or against such a screening, the failure to find quantitative and evidence-based estimates of relevant indicators provides useful insight for further research.</p