In other words, ScholarSphere development and testing continue unabated since the release of the service in September 2011. From this point on, the footer will denote which version of ScholarSphere you're accessing. The version number will be linked to a page in the ScholarSphere site, providing a list of the features new to the service.

In developing v1.3.0, our team has focused in particular on things users can do to customize their research and social-networking presence in ScholarSphere, particularly via the user's profile page. For example:

• We now have a list of users who have logged into ScholarSphere, which you can access by clicking on the "View users" button on your profile page. The number on the right tells how many files the user has deposited into the service.

• Want to keep up to date with colleagues whose works are in ScholarSphere? Just like in FB, Twitter, and G+, you can follow them. Click on a name in the user list to get to a user profile page, and in the upper right side, you'll see a "Follow" button to click on and begin following the colleague.

• Users can also highlight their research for their profile page. You do this via "my dashboard," where there's now a trophy icon for highlighting such research. The icon turns gold when clicked on for highlighting, and you can highlight up to five files:

• The highlighted research then gets listed on your profile page and linked to the ScholarSphere records for them:

• Users can also provide their social networking handles, such as for Facebook, Twitter, and Google+:

• College of Agricultural Science Library Committee
• Commonwealth Campus Libraries (http://www.libraries.psu.edu/psul/locations/ccl.html) at its fall 2012 meeting
• Faculty Senate Committee on Research
• IT Leadership Council
• IT Pro Roundtable
• Penn State Harrisburg library
• Records Management Summit, organized by University Archives and held annually
• University Health Sciences Council

In addition, notification updates - e.g., after a user has saved metadata in the Descriptions form - now happen without having to refresh the browser; specifically, the wand icon, which appears on the dashboard after metadata has been saved, goes away when processing is complete.

Features very close to completion include one-time URLs and deposit by proxy:

When I served as Institutional Repository Coordinator at Duke University, one frequently asked question I received was "What is an Institutional Repository?" My stock answer was that it was an access and discovery platform for Duke faculty and student scholarship as well as born digital institutional records.  The follow-up question almost always had to do with preservation of the content; that answer was usually a referral to a list of preferred formats for deposit.

As we head towards the launch of Penn State's IR, ScholarSphere, these questions now loom large for us. My stock answer at Duke also applies for ScholarSphere as it will offer access and discovery for faculty and student scholarship. ScholarSphere is also built on a robust platform that allows for flexible preservation services. So what is the baseline for content preservation offered by ScholarSphere?

First, all content made available on ScholarSphere will have redundant back-up. All files deposited will get a SHA-1 (Secure Hash Algorithm) checksum which is essentially a digital "fingerprint" in the form of a string of characters that can be generated for any digital file. If the file changes in any way that digital signature will change, indicating the alteration. In addition, ScholarSphere uses FITS (File Information Tool Set) to identify, validate, and extract technical (and some descriptive) metadata from the file, identifying the file type, version, and other information that helps us manage the file. Regular fixity checks will be run against the files to check for changes, such as file corruption. Beyond this initial level of preserving the file for access and discovery, additional preservation services are in the planning stages.

What might these additional preservation services entail? Depending on the Library's commitment to the files submitted, we may look at normalizing files into standard formats to facilitate the migration of files as formats become obsolete, such as migrating all Word files (such as .docx) to a format like PDF/A, the ISO standardized version of Portable Document Format (PDF). A higher level of preservation would be to preserve both the source file and the normalized copy. For some scholarly works such as certain types of data sets, preservation or emulation of the software used to create the files may also be needed to carry the content forward through time.

The main drivers for the adoption of additional preservation services such as these will be policy and resources. Each of the services listed above requires increasing amounts of resources (staff, expertise, and IT tools) to accomplish. Just as we have policies that guide us in the building and preserving of analog collections as well as limited resources to implement those policies, the same is true with the digital content collected for ScholarSphere. Policy can also help creators make informed decisions with regard to technologies and formats used for their work, which could potentially ease the amount of resources required and enhance the longevity of scholarly content. As ScholarSphere evolves, the Library will be prepared to suggest best practices with regard to different documentary types and file formats.

Nearly a year ago I joined Digital Library Technologies (DLT) as their project manager and relocated to Paterno Library. I'd like to state that I really enjoy working in the Library. I've been deliberate about assimilating into the Library family by participating in events and functions and, well, it's been fun. It has also enabled me to meet many of the 'customers' that will be involved with my projects.

The three previous blog posts focus on the repository services platform, which is the project I am currently managing. From the project manager seat, I'll share my perspectives, insights and experiences, and offer a roadmap for what to expect in the coming months. At minimum, my goal is that your takeaway is a better understanding of my project manager role in the repository services project.

In January of this year, staff from DLT and the Libraries began meeting with librarians who agreed to serve as repository services stakeholders. However, my project manager duties began in October 2011.  Between October 2011 and January 2012, several planning meetings were held to identify and articulate details such as business needs; project goals; what will and will not be included in the project; and an estimated timeline. We identified technical requirements and project staffing, documented roles and responsibilities, and drafted a preliminary communications plan. My job is to get the right people at the table to have these discussions, clearly define the project, and secure staff resources. This planning work is beneficial throughout the project, but more importantly, it defines the work for those staffing the project. It is clear to them what this project is delivering and when it will be done.

The project is in full-swing and we are now executing and monitoring the work -- activities that I oversee, coordinate, and report on. My eye is currently on:

• Building the infrastructure that will support the application and the functionality being built by the development team
• Demonstrating application functionality to our stakeholders and soliciting their feedback
• Working with the sponsors on selecting a name for the application (to be revealed soon!)
• Selecting the user interface design
• Planning for and conducting testing
• Establishing a broad marketing and communications stratey
  

Having a dedicated project manager to oversee the tasks I just described ensures that those responsible for performing the work are free to do just that. Without a project manager, one or more of these staff would be charged with planning and managing project activities in addition to building and delivering a product. Each detracts from the other, and the quality of the overall product is at risk.

The win for me is that I am part of a dynamic team that is pumped to deliver a product desired by our customer. This is a demanding project, but I am working with scores of people that are excited about what we're doing. They have shown their commitment by becoming involved in project meetings. They offer feedback, share their expertise, ask questions, and provide answers. They are meeting and planning with their customers for use of the coming service. Our technical team is working equally as hard and is excited to provide a product that meets current and future needs. To assist in this endeavor, they are delving into technology communities to discover and use best practices and establish collaborative relationships. And, we have sponsors that are engaged and available to assist when needed. As a project manager, what's not to love? This team is driven and I'm thrilled to be a part of it.

Here's what we're planning for the next several months:

• Apr-May: Stakeholders will review and provide feedback on application functionality
• Apr-May: Usability and accessibility testing strategy established
• Apr-May: Broad marketing & communications plan established
  
• May: Coding for ingest, dashboard, search results, public search and manage files functionality completed
• May-Jun: Production infrastructure is available
• Jun: Usability and accessibility testing and pilot user testing performed
• Jul-Aug: Final testing, marketing & communications tasks completed
• Sep: Beta Release of the <insert new name here> will be available

Project progress is routinely available at the Program Sigma Website and Program Sigma Brown Bag Lunches. You'll undoubtedly be learning more when the broader marketing and communications efforts are underway. And, if you have questions about my project manager role, I'd love to hear from you.

"We need to understand how they do research, how they use our current resources, why some of them don't use the library, and what they want from the library that they're not currently getting." ~ Meredith Farkas, from "What Do They Really Need?", posted in her blog, Information Wants To Be Free, December 13, 2010.

"Librarianship is a people profession." ~ Emma Cragg and Katie Birkwood, from "Beyond Books: What It Takes to Be a 21st-Century Librarian," in The Guardian, January 31, 2011.

At Penn State Libraries, we've been busy working with Digital Library Technologies (a division of the University's Information Technology Services) on developing a repository services platform, which we aim to have in production in fall 2012. For this platform we are leveraging existing technology and infrastructure that's been developed and shared through the Hydra and Fedora communities. (You can find out more about the Libraries' program of repository service projects here.) As we do this, we are engaging our liaison librarians to help us determine what our users want. Liaison librarians work directly with faculty and students. They respond to research inquiries through a variety of venues, striving to be where their users are. Liaison librarians are our lifeline to faculty and students - whom we all serve.

In the last few years, moreover, we in Scholarly Communications Services and Digital Curation Services have been consulting with our librarian colleagues and their faculty on a range of service inquiries. The following are a few examples of what we've discussed in these consultations: 

• the publication of grey literature (including faculty papers and reports and various types of student research)
• services for developing dynamic bibliographies and indexes that leverage aspects of social networking activities (such as crowdsourcing the addition and verification of entries)
• the need for thematic portal environments to enable sharing of research and teaching materials
• services for preserving and making available collected oral histories that are products of faculty research
• web archiving services
• services for managing, and providing access to, data sets generated from research in a range of disciplines

In other words, our faculty and students have been telling us "what they want from the library that they're not currently getting."

For this reason we are keen to create services people want. We invited 27 librarians to serve as stakeholders for the platform project, and 21 24 accepted.* We have representation from arts and humanities, business, communications, computer science, digitization and preservation, earth and mineral sciences, education, engineering, geospatial information services, information science, life sciences, physical and mathematical sciences, social sciences, and special collections and archives. While currently our stakeholders are all based at University Park, Penn State's main campus, we intend to engage our colleagues at the campus libraries, particularly as test users are needed to try out iterations of the platform. We also view this set of stakeholders as an initial layer of users. In time we will ask stakeholders, including campus librarians, to recruit faculty and students, our core users, to help test the platform prior to its release in fall 2012.

What else are we asking of our stakeholders? We have asked that they attend a weekly meeting (to which they can send an alternate in their stead, as conflicts arise) to provide feedback on iterations of the platform. We already have screen shots of interfaces, provided by a web designer we've contracted with, as launch points for discussion. 

In addition, we've asked stakeholders to provide use cases, or user scenarios, in order to kick off a series of conversations about services. (Some of these are sketched out in the bulleted list above.) Our developers have a features list, divided into the categories "Must Have," "Should Have," and "Could Have," to which we are mapping aspects of these use cases and beginning to discern commonalities across them. In addition, we have a "Features Wish List," where we are documenting additional features that arise in these discussions. We may not be able to fulfill all stakeholder requests with this year's release of the platform, but they will all be documented nonetheless to inform future services development. 

Also, our applications team lead, digital library architect, sys admin, metadata librarian, digital collections curator, and project manager are in the same room as our stakeholders - listening to them, asking questions, taking notes. This is something we've had success doing before. Take a look at the poster we presented at Open Repositories 2011, in which we described building a community of practice during an earlier prototyping project.

As our project progresses, we'll use future posts to report on other aspects of services development, such as tiered services (how do we define a tier of service?); levels of access (what are our users' basic expectations for access to online content?); and content strategy issues. 

Our initial stakeholder conversations have been invaluable. Each of us is learning what is important to the other in his or her role in the Libraries - i.e., what is at stake for each of us in this project. But what is most crucial: we're learning what faculty and students want, and we're learning more about their research practices. This common understanding bodes well for developing the services they need, and that they will use.

*Since the initial publication of this blog post, we have received confirmation from three additional librarians who were invited that they'll be joining the stakeholders group!

The charge is outlined below and we hope to have a program to put in place in the Fall of 2011.

Collections Assessment Program Team

Sponsor:

Lisa German, Assistant Dean for Technical and Collections Services; Library Assessment and Metrics Council

Background:

Goal 2 of the strategic plan states that "[w]e will develop excellent collections and information resources in support of scholarship and research worldwide, while promoting new models of scholarly communication based on the developing Cyberinfrastructure".  How do we know that we are developing the best, most useful, and most cost-effective collections? Are we accelerating the transformation from a print to an electronic collection? Are we being responsive to the needs of our users? Are we ensuring that students and faculty at all Penn State locations have the collections resources they need in the formats that they desire?

Charge:

To develop an ongoing program for collections assessment that will answer the following questions:

1. Are our collections, both print and electronic, effective in meeting the teaching and research missions of the University?
2. Is our collection diverse and interdisciplinary?
3. What is the level of user satisfaction with our collections?
4. How will our program remain agile, flexible, and adaptable to changing needs and priorities?
5. How do we ensure that we leverage the collections of our consortial partners, that is, how to we incorporate collections such as HathiTrust into the definition of "our" collection?

Membership:

• Henry Pisciotta, chair
• Robert Alan
• Becky Albitz
• David Brenner
• Nan Butkovich
• Greg Crawford
• Nonny Schlotzhauer
• Ann Snowman
• David Van de Streek
• Alan Shay, new Data analyst

Timeline:

Progress report - March 15, 2011

Progress report to use to respond to the Core Council report - April 15, 2011

Discussion with colleagues - Summer 2011

Begin implementation - Fall 2011

Deliverables:

A report to the Libraries administration and the Library Assessment and Metrics Council that details:

1. What types of data will be collected (qualitative/quantitative/user focus/collections focus)?
2. Who should collect the data (centralized/decentralized)?
3. How should the data be used (budgeting/purchasing decisions/preservation and digitization priorities/decaccessioning)?
4. What kind of support is needed for collections assessment activities (staffing/systems)?
5. What is the appropriate timeline for assessment (where to start/how regular/by location)?
6. How do we incorporate assessment activities regarding our collections into the Libraries' culture?