Tag Archives: Australian National University

VALA2018 Session 1 Missingham

vala conf home button
vala peer reviewed

Cinderella Collections come to the digital humanities ball

VALA2018 CONCURRENT SESSION 1
Tuesday 13 February 2018, 12:00 – 12:30

Roxanne Missingham

Australian National University

Ingrid Mason

AARNet

Please tag your comments, tweets, and blog posts about this session: #vala2018 #s3

Read the paper and view the video of the presentation on the VALA2018 GigTV channel here:
Icon
VALA2018 Session 1 Missingham Paper 721.04 KB
Icon
VALA2018 Session 1 Missingham Video 0.00 KB
Abstract

When the Cinderella Collections reports were released, in 1996 and 1998, 256 university museums and collections in Australia were identified as needing investment to aid in transforming research and teaching. Digitisation then was a functional extension of access to physical collections; however, 20 years on, a new paradigm for digitisation is emerging. This new paradigm is driven by strategic pragmatism and scholarly coherence through collaboration in digital scholarship, redefining collections “as data”, and in the use of new technologies and methodologies.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License.

 

VALA2002 Session 3 Blackall

VALA2002
vala peer reviewed

Rethinking Information Literacy in Higher Education: the Case for Informatics

VALA2002 CONCURRENT SESSION 3: e-literacy
Wednesday 6 February 2002, 11:55 – 12:30
Persistent URL: http://www.vala.org.au/vala2002-proceedings/vala2002-session-3-blackall

Chris Blackall

Australian National University

Please tag your comments, tweets, and blog posts about this session: #vala2002

Icon
VALA2002 Session 3 Blackall Paper 45.88 KB

Abstract

This paper discusses the implications and problems of the Information Literacy Standards published by the Council of Australian University Librarians in 2001. Its focus is on the difficulties implementers of university-based information literacy programs increasingly face as they attempt to ‘integrate’ or ‘embed’ information literacy in subject curricula as suggested by the Standards. The most central of these difficulties are the political dangers facing library teachers/educators as they attempt to expand into the academically controlled areas of curriculum design and teaching. This paper suggests that an inclusive model of ‘informatics’ can help overcome such barriers to program implementation.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License.

 

VALA2000 Session 4 Barry

Persistent URL: http://www.vala.org.au/vala2000-proceedings/vala2000-session-4-barry

Document delivery – an idea whose time has gone?

VALA 2000 CONCURRENT SESSION 4: Document Delivery
Wednesday 16 February 2000, 15:10 – 15:40

Tony Barry

Library Affiliate, Australian National University Library
http://anulib.anu.edu.au


VALA Peer Reviewed Paper

Please tag your comments, tweets, and blob posts about this session: #VALA2000

Icon
VALA2000 Session 4 Barry Paper 38.76 KB

Abstract

With the advent of new ILL and document delivery technologies it might seem that finally libraries are bringing their practices in this area into a successful focus. Networked and automated solutions to a long term controversial but cooperative activity are at hand. But we are also seeing the rise of technologies which may bypass and marginalise libraries. Some are –

  • Preprint/reprint servers
  • Self publishing by authors
  • The threat of end use access to article level databases by end users linked to micro payments

What role do libraries have as direct end user access grows? The paper explores these ideas. The paper will explore how libraries could cope with these developments.

VALA2010 Session 3 Kingsley

VALA20120The advocacy and awareness imperative: a repository overview

VALA 2010 CONCURRENT SESSION 3 – Repositories
Tuesday 9 February 2010, 10:50 – 11:20
Persistent URL: http://www.vala.org.au/vala2010-proceedings/vala2010-session-3-kingsley

VALA Peer Reviewed PaperDanny Kingsley

Manager, Scholarly Communication and ePublishing, Australian National University
http://www.anu.edu.au

Please tag your comments, tweets, and blog posts about this session: #VALA2010

  • Icon
    VALA2010 Session 3 Kingsley Paper 49.57 KB
  • Icon
    VALA2010 Session 3 Kingsley Presentation 114.19 KB

Abstract

Populating institutional repositories poses a significant challenge. This paper provides an assessment of awareness and advocacy techniques that have been used in established institutional repositories in Australia and internationally. In summary, a repository policy is essential. Mandates work better than simply recommending repository use. It helps to make depositing as easy as possible and sort out copyright, by providing staff to work with the academics. Contacting academics individually is more effective than printed publicity material. The repository is more useful to the academic if it relates to their regular workflow.

VALA2008 Session 3 Kingsley

VALA2008Repositories, research and reporting: the conflict between institutional and disciplinary needs

VALA 2008 CONCURRENT SESSION 3: Repositories
Tuesday 5 February 2008, 11:55 – 12:30
Persistent URL: http://www.vala.org.au/vala2008-proceedings/vala2008-session-3-kingsley

VALA Peer Reviewed PaperDanny Kingsley

PhD Scholar, Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, Australian National University
http://www.anu.edu.au

Please tag your comments, tweets, and blob posts about this session: #VALA2008

Icon
VALA2008 Session 3 Kingsley Paper 80.24 KB
Icon
VALA2008 Session 3 Kingsley Podcast 12 MB

Abstract

In Australia, research reporting is considered a way to increase awareness of and support for opening up accessibility to research outputs. This paper explores the fundamental differences between disciplines, which extend beyond publishing outputs. Most crucially, the information-seeking behaviour of a disciplinary cohort will determine the likelihood of individuals voluntarily embracing repositories. The RQF is likely to fail to open access to Australian research. There is an inherent conflict between the needs of the institution and those of academics’ ‘invisible colleges’, as institutional repositories exist to serve the institution and funding bodies, rather than the individual.