Cross-institutional Repository Assessment:

A Standardized Model for Institutional Research Assessment

Robert H. McDonaldIndiana University

Charles ThomasInstitute for Museum and Library Services

OutlineI. IntroductionII. The Need to Measure & CompareIII. New Candidate FrameworksIV. Representing New MetricsV. Future Evolution of Institutional

Repositories and Evaluation

Institutional Assessment Needs

"We have found a remarkable shortage of clear, accessible information about crucial aspects of American colleges and universities...this lack of useful data and accountability hinders policymakers and the public...and prevents higher education from demonstrating its contribution to the public good.“

A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education (2006) – U.S. Department of Education

Institutional Repositories: A Silver Bullet?

"An institutional repository concentrates the intellectual product created by a university's researchers, making it easier to demonstrate its scientific, social and financial value. Thus, institutional repositories complement existing metrics for gauging productivity and prestige...this demonstration of value can translate into tangible benefits, including the funding...that derives in part from an institution's status and reputation."

Raym Crow (2002). The Case for Institutional Repositories.

Repositories Vary In• what they contain; • who funds and administers each; • underlying legal, social and policy

infrastructure for each repository; • who contributes to the repository; and • motivations for contributing, whether

they be mandates, disciplinary cultural norms, or other incentives

Current Repository Categories• Institutional• Disciplinary • Other (preservation, publishers, etc.) • How do you tell the difference? • How do you know who contributes what

to which?

Need to Evaluate IRs• How do we evaluate IRs?• Institutional, disciplinary, etc. exist for

different purposes, probably need different evaluative frameworks

Need to Evaluate IRs• We can’t just measure our IR as a stand-

alone phenomenon,• We need to be able to compare IRs• We also need to evaluate IRs for their

utility in overall Institutional Assessment

Library Assessment Needs• 20th Century vs 21st Century

– Moving Beyond Silos of Knowledge– Facilities are not an adequate measuring

stick– Qualitative and Quantitative Measurement

Principles are Required

Frameworks for IR Evaluation• Proudman, V. (2008). The population of

repositories.– Policies;– Organization;– Mechanisms and influences for populating repositories;– Services;– Advocacy & communication;

– Legal issues

Frameworks for IR Evaluation• Westell, M. (2006). Institutional repositories:

Proposed indicators of success – Repository mandate; – Integration with institutional planning; – Funding model; – Relationship with digitization centers; – Interoperation; – Content measurement; – Promotion; – Preservation strategy

Frameworks for IR Evaluation• Kim, H. H. and Kim, Y. H. (2007). An evaluation model

for the national consortium of institutional repositories of Korean universities. – Content (Diversity, Currency, Size, Metadata) – System and network (Interoperability, Use of help services like FAQ

and Q&A) – Use, users and submitters (Use ratio, User satisfaction, Submitter

satisfaction, User/Submitter support) – Management and policy (Budget, Staffing, Library awareness of Open

Access and related issues, Copyright management, IR Marketing, Institutional support, Policies and procedures in place, Diversity of archiving methods)

What Are We Seeing?• Lots of Case Studies• Many Qualitative Evaluative Criteria• Tips, Best Practices for Good Repositories• Not Much Quantitative Data –Warning,

Administrators Love Numbers!!!

Library Assessment Needs“Key Aspects of collaborative relations may be described only in qualitative terms in the future.”*

– Cross-Institutional Shared Digital Collections

– Intra-Institutional IR Collection Building IR Assessment Institutional Research Assessment

*From Reshaping ARL Statistics to Capture the New Environment (2008) – Kyrillidou

So How Do We Mix Qualitative/Quantitative?

The Color Palette MetaphorAbsence of color = Absence of Foundations for Success-indication of early forming or orphan IR

The Color Palette MetaphorWhite = max combo of entire spectrum=Ideal IR with full suite of necessary support

The Color Palette MetaphorShades of Gray or other color attributes indicate a rising IR

Future Evolution• Institutional Measurement• Institutional Research a role for Libraries• Libraries as Publisher

From Educause Review 43(1)

Administrative ERP Stack

Fusion or Data Mining• Where does the .EDU stack

come together for analysis?• Can the library play a role in

this analysis?• Needed for owned and

leased assets

Intra-Institutional Assessment

IRStats

Digital Measures – Activity Insight

U Penn Data Farm

Layers of Assessment Comparison• International Comparison• National Comparison• National Accreditation• Regional Accreditation• State and Regional

Collaboration/Funding• Internal Collaboration/Funding

Missing Link• IR Assessment

– Quantitative– Qualitative– Viable or Useful Mixed Visualizations

CONTACT INFORMATION• Robert H. McDonald

– mcdonald@sdsc.edu– AIM/mcdonald@sdsc.edu– Skype/rhmcdonald

• Chuck Thomas– chas.thomas@gmail.com