The Department of the Library of the College of Staten Island is recruiting a Web Librarian.

Here's an excerpt from the ad:

As a member of the Library's Technology Team and Reference Services, responsibilities include developing web-based resources that support and promote academic programs and services (i.e. curricular materials, informational materials, guides, tutorials, workshops), coordinating and promoting the use of course management systems (Blackboard); supporting the Library's programs for information technology and research by developing web-based instructional materials; participating in the activities of the Center for Excellence in Learning Technology (CELT) that supports faculty courses and programs. Instructional design abilities preferred. Reports to the Chief Librarian.

JISC has released JISC Digitisation Programme: An Overview of Projects.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The JISC Digitisation Programme was launched in 2004, with funding of £10m divided between six projects. This was followed by a second phase, worth £12m, for 16 projects running from 2007 to 2009.

The collections capture a wide variety of aspects of UK life, from cabinet papers to first world war poetry, radio news to East End music hall, political cartoons to British borders, and in a diverse range of media, including sound, film, images, journals, newspapers, maps, theses, pamphlets and cartoons. . . .

For those involved in learning and teaching, these collections provide high-quality, rights-cleared material to download and adapt in lecture hall, seminar room, library or hall of residence. Again, placing the collections together allows new avenues to be opened up. Students exploring the visual arts can study the drawings, sketches and paintings from the Pre-Raphaelite Resource Site and then listen to artists' own opinions on their work and lives via interviews in the Archival Sound Recordings.

Recently, Dorothea Salo posted a self-proclaimed rant, "Just Say No to Maverick-Manager Jobs."

Her topic was maverick institutional repository manager jobs, but I was struck by some similarities to what might be called for want of a better term "maverick digital project manager" jobs. These jobs can be at different levels in the organization and they can have different titles. Their key characteristic is that they have no direct reports, and consequently they rely on other units to provide critical support. Beyond this, they may have some or all of the below characteristics:

• They may have a very broad scope of responsibility (e.g., digitization, digital preservation, digital repositories, ETDs, and scholarly communication) yet have no real authority.
• They may have no direct control over key technical resources, such as servers.
• They may have no dedicated, regularly budgeted funding.
• They may report to a superior who does not have an adequate background to understand or manage a digital project operation.
• Regardless of stated qualifications, they really require not only an alphabet soup of specific technical skills, but also a broad technical background and a variety of non-technical skills, such as a significant understanding of copyright issues.
• They may represent a wish by the library to make progress in this area, not a real commitment by the library to do so.

Of course, by their very nature, digital projects must cross departmental and divisional lines, and cooperation is essential. The problem with the above support scenario is that, no matter how well intentioned, library staff in other units have their own complex and time-consuming responsibilities, and those responsibilities must be their day-to-day priority. (This can be especially tricky when needed support crosses divisional lines.) Moreover, on an individual basis, their interest in involvement in digital projects may vary considerably and their ability to participate, if interested, may wax and wane with their workload, not with project timelines.

Lack of a dedicated budget may result in digital projects being funded (or not) dependent on the ever changing fiscal circumstances of the library and the constantly shifting priorities of administrators. To some degree this is always true, but it is typically easier not to fund a non-budgeted operation than to eliminate or reduce a budgeted one. Digital projects can be seen as icing on the cake, not the cake itself.

Digital projects are expensive, and, the deeper the library gets into supporting them, the more expensive they become. For example, simple Web strategies that were adequate for a few digital exhibits are no longer adequate as the number of digital objects multiply, requiring digital asset management systems or other more complicated strategies. Digital preservation issues that could be initially ignored come to the fore. The library doesn’t need to put high-level human and technical infrastructure in place on day one to make progress, but it does need to recognize the fiscal implications that a long-term commitment entails and be willing to support planned growth.

Adequate supervision is a tricky issue because digital projects are based on complex technologies, yet they entail many key non-technical factors. Consider the institutional repository. As has been noted elsewhere with some regularity, the technical part, no matter how difficult, is the easy part. Faculty attitude change and motivation, copyright policies and compliance, providing decent metadata, and so on are the hard part. Supervisors may not need to be high-level technical experts, but they need a baseline understanding of relevant technical and non-technical issues and, most importantly, a genuine interest in and commitment to digital projects as well as a willingness to learn. Unless the maverick digital project manager reports to the head of the library, his or her supervisor must be an effective advocate for digital projects to his or her superiors to facilitate adequate support.

Those hiring maverick digital project managers may have a poor grasp of the necessary skills required or have a desire to hire on the cheap, resulting in understated or vague job requirements in recruitment ads. Consequently, new hires may quickly find themselves in deep water. Advanced technical and other sorts of training, if available and funded, can help with some aspects of this problem, but, since maverick digital project managers are without mentors, not all of it. Realistic expectations by supervisors are critical in this case, but can't be counted on.

Few things are as deadly to maverick digital project managers as the vague, but poorly informed, wish of a few administrators to make progress (often rapid progress) in the digital area that it is motivated by a desire to get on the digital bandwagon, rather than by a genuine interest in and considered concern for development in this area.

So, maverick digital project managers of the future, good luck. I'm not going to tell you not to do it, but I advise keeping your eyes open, asking incisive interview questions so that you know what you are in for, and having an good exit strategy.

The University of Chicago has adopted an electronic-only dissertations policy.

Here's an excerpt from "Implementing Electronic Dissertations at the University of Chicago":

Motivated by the Provost's call to University units to reduce costs, the Library is critically examining many of its processes and procedures including those of the Dissertation Office. We have concluded that eliminating the requirement for paper dissertations and moving to an electronic-only format offers the University and its students significant potential for ongoing cost savings as well as for improved service. The Provost, Deputy Provost for Graduate Education, and the Deputy Dean of Students for Student Affairs have reviewed this change and endorse it. . . .

With Summer 2009 Convocation graduates the University will begin using a web-based interface for online submission and review of dissertations developed by UMI Dissertation Publishing. Coupled with this change, though operationally distinct from it, the University and the Library will stop accepting and archiving dissertations on paper and rely on electronic access via the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database while archiving a PDF copy of each future dissertation to guarantee permanence.

In "Orphan Works Legislation and the Google Settlement," Paul Courant discusses the possibility of legislation that would extend the treatment of orphan works in the Google Book Search Copyright Class Action Settlement to anyone.

Here's an excerpt:

But there is an obvious solution, one that was endorsed at the Columbia meeting by counsel for the Authors Guild, the AAP, and Google: Congress could pass a law, giving access to the same sort of scheme that Google and the BRR have under the Google Settlement to anyone. And they could pass some other law that makes it possible for people to responsibly use orphaned works, while preserving interests for the missing "parents" should they materialize. Jack Bernard and Susan Kornfield have proposed just such an architecture to "foster" these orphans. Google has also made a proposal that would be a huge improvement.

A new report from the Publishing Research Consortium, Journal Authors' Rights: Perception and Reality, says that less than 10% of publishers permit self-archiving of the publisher PDF file in any repository and less than 50% permit deposit of the submitted and the accepted article version in a disciplinary archive.

Here's an excerpt:

However, when it comes to self-archiving, although 80% or more allow self- archiving to a personal or departmental website, over 60% to an institutional repository, and over 40% to a subject repository, in most cases this is only permitted for the submitted and/or accepted version; use of the final, published version for self-archiving is very much more restricted.

The Digital Scholarship .com mirror site was migrated to a new server over the weekend. Expect some rough spots for the next few days.

See "Digital Scholarship Publications Overview" for information about the different Digital Scholarship servers and feeds.

The Dr. John Archer Library of the University of Regina is recruiting an Associate University Librarian, Client Services and Technology

Here's an excerpt from the ad:

The Associate University Librarian, Client Services and Technology has broad oversight of and provides leadership in reference and research services, access services, library systems and in the development of strategic plans related to these areas. The Head of Research Services, the Head of Access Services and Systems, and the Data Services Librarian report to this position. The individual in this position consults routinely and works closely with the University Librarian, the Associate University Librarian for Collection Services and Assessment, the Library Administrator, all direct reports, and the Library Executive Committee to carry out the position's responsibilities.

In "Google & Books: An Exchange," Paul N. Courant, Ann Kjellberg, J. D. McClatchy, Edward Mendelson, Margo Viscusi, Tappan Wilder et al. have commented on Robert Darnton's "Google & the Future of Books," and Darnton has replied.

Here's an excerpt:

[Darnton] Monopolies tend to charge monopoly prices. I agree that the parallel between the pricing of digital and periodical materials isn't perfect, but it is instructive. If the readers of a library become so attached to Google's database that they cannot do without it, the library will find it extremely difficult to resist stiff increases in the price for subscribing to it. As happened when the publishers of periodicals forced up their prices, the library may feel compelled to cover the increased cost by buying fewer books. Exorbitant pricing for Google's service could produce the same effect as the skyrocketing of periodical prices: reduced acquisitions of monographs, a further decline in monograph publishing by university presses, and fewer opportunities for young scholars to publish their research and get ahead in their careers.

The Council on Library and Information Resources has released Copyright and Related Issues Relevant to Digital Preservation and Dissemination of Unpublished Pre-1972 Sound Recordings by Libraries and Archives .

Here's an excerpt:

This report addresses the question of what libraries and archives are legally empowered to do to preserve and make accessible for research their holdings of unpublished pre-1972 sound recordings. The report's author, June M. Besek, is executive director of the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts at Columbia Law School.

Unpublished sound recordings are those created for private use, or even for broadcast, but that have not been distributed to the public in copies with the right holder's consent. Examples include tapes of live musical performances or of interviews conducted as part of field research or news gathering. Such recordings may find their way into library and archive collections through donations or purchase. Some may be the only record of a particular performance or event, and therefore may have considerable cultural and historical significance. The rights for use of unpublished recordings are distinct from those for use of commercial sound recordings, which are made with the authorization of rights holders and are intended for reproduction and sale to the public.

Using examples of specific types of sound recordings, the Besek study (1) describes the different bodies of law that protect pre-1972 sound recordings, (2) explains the difficulty in defining the precise contours of the law, and (3) provides guidance for libraries evaluating their activities with respect to unpublished pre-1972 sound recordings.

Columbia University is recruiting a Digital Repository Assistant.

Here's an excerpt from the ad:

Assists Digital Repository Coordinator with acquiring digital objects (including texts, images, audio, video, websites, and datasets in a variety of digital formats) from Columbia University faculty, staff, and students by following-up with departmental and individual contacts to ensure timely delivery or self-deposit of materials; assists with managing the process of reviewing and tracking digital object collections. Both by hand and in batch processes, deposits digital objects into various online storage locations, including the Columbia University Libraries/Information Services research repository (Academic Commons); helps develop more efficient workflow and procedures. Using a variety of tools, catalogs digital objects using standardized metadata schemas and controlled vocabularies. Provides training for departmental administrative staff and for individual faculty, staff, and students wishing to ingest materials themselves. When necessary, develops derivative versions of digital objects (e.g., PDF-A) that conform to best practices for long-term digital preservation. Performs quality control procedures both for individual and sets of digital objects and for the metadata records created for the objects; runs specified software checks on digital objects to ensure object safety (e.g., absences of electronic viruses) and integrity (e.g., completeness and accuracy). Assists with evaluating the display of digital objects and metadata in the repository; documents issues and anomalies; provide feedback to the technical team for improvements

UNESCO has released Digital Archiving of Audio Content Using WINISIS and Greenstone Software: A Manual for Community Radio Managers.

Here's an excerpt:

This self-instructional Manual describes:

1. the method of creation of digital archive with WINISIS software,
2. the creation of a web front-end for the above archives to make it easily usable and accessible over a local area network with GenIsisWeb software,
3. the creation of a CD-ROM library with WINISIS and GenIsisCD software,
4. the creation of a digital library of audio documents with Greenstone digital library software. . . .

The mechanisms described in this Manual can be used for managing not only audio documents, but also other types of digital documents such as text, PDF, HTML and video.