Questionnaire for Planning Only
(PO) Respondents

Informed Consent Form

(See appendix B for Informed Consent Form.)

Please answer the remaining 30 questions with the one IR in mind that offers the widest array of services to the most people and greatest number of constituencies (e.g., faculty members, students, staff, administrators, guests) in your institution’s learning community. Please feel free to message Soo Young Rieh (rieh@umich.edu) with your questions or concerns.

A.        Getting Started: Timelines, Funding, Benefits, and Needs Assessment

1.         How long has your institution been involved in IR planning? Please enter the number of months.

2.         How much longer is your institution likely to continue IR planning before making the decision whether or not to implement an IR? Please enter the number of months.

3a.       How important are these anticipated benefits of IRs to your institution?

VI*

SI

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

A boost to your institution’s prestige

Better service to contributors

Better services to your institution’s learning community

New services to learning communities beyond your institution

Maintaining control over your institution’s intellectual property

Capturing the intellectual capital of your institution

Contributing to the reform of the entire enterprise of scholarly communication and publishing

A reduction in the amount of time between discovery and dissemination of research findings to scholarly communities

An increase in citation counts to your institution’s intellectual output

Exposing your institution’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels

An increase in the accessibility to knowledge assets such as numeric, video, audio, and multimedia datasets

Providing maximal access to the results of publicly funded research

A solution to the problem of preserving your institution’s intellectual output

An increase in your library’s role as a viable partner in the research enterprise

Reducing user dependence on your library’s print collection

Longtime preservation of your institution’s digital output

Other (Please specify in question 3b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

3b.       If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

4.         What is the likelihood that your institution will conduct a needs assessment prior to making a decision about implementing an IR?

Very likely

Somewhat likely

Somewhat unlikely

Very unlikely

No opinion

Don’t know

5.         Has your institution conducted a needs assessment for an IR?

Yes

No

Don’t know

6a.       How important are the results of the following investigative activities in terms of influencing your institution to initiate planning activities for an IR?

VI*

SI

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

Results of your institution’s needs assessment

Learning about successful implementations at comparable institutions

Learning about successful implementations at a wide range of academic institutions

Learning about available expertise and assistance from a library consortium, network, group of libraries, etc.

An analysis of a thorough literature review of IRs

Learning from reports of other institutions’ IR planning, pilot testing IR software, and implementation activities to date

Using other institutions’ operational IRs

Demonstrating operational IRs to my institution’s decision-makers

Demonstrating IR metadata harvesters such as OAIster and Google Scholar to my institution’s decision-makers

Waiting for a critical mass of IR implementation at comparable institutions to happen

Waiting for a critical mass of IR implementation generally to happen

Better digital preservation techniques

Other (Please specify in question 6b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

6b.       If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

B.        People Involved in IR Planning

7a.       How active were people in these positions in terms of leading the charge to get involved with IRs at your institution?

VA*

SA

SI

VI

NO

DK

NA

Staff at a library network, consortium, or other affiliated group

Your institution’s president or chancellor

Your institution’s vice president or provost

Faculty governance, e. g., faculty senate, faculty senate assembly, etc.

Your institution’s chief information officer

Your institution’s archivist

Faculty members generally

A faculty member in particular

Library director

Assistant library director(s)

Library staff member(s)

Graduate student (s)

Undergraduate student(s)

Other (Please specify in question 7b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VA=Very active, SA=Somewhat active, SI=Somewhat inactive, VI=Very inactive, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

7b.       If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

8.         Who is the individual leading IR planning at your institution? (Choose one only.)

A faculty members in a particular college, department, or school

Your institution’s chief information officer

Your institution’s archivist

Library director

Assistant library director

A library staff member

No committee or committee chair has been appointed

Other (please specify)

9.         If a committee is involved with IR planning, identify the positions of other people on this committee. (Choose all that apply.)

Staff from the office of the president or chancellor

Staff from the office of the vice-president or provost

Staff from the office of the chief information officer

Staff from your institution’s legal office

Your institution’s chief information officer

Your institution’s archivist

Library director

Assistant library director

Library staff member(s)

Archives staff

A faculty member in particular

Graduate student(s)

Undergraduate student(s)

Committee members have not yet been appointed

Other (please specify)

10.       How many people are involved in IR planning?

11a.     What percentage of the responsibility for an operational IR do you think should be given to various campus units? (Percentages must add up to 100%.)

% Your institution’s central administration

% Your institution’s library

% Your institution’s central computing unit

% The office of the chief information officer

% Your institution’s archives

% Various academic colleges, departments, and schools

% Other (Please specify in question 11b below)

11b.     If you provided a percentage for “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

C.        Contributors to the IR

12.       If you could foretell the future, who will be authorized contributors to your institution’s IR? (Choose as many as apply.)

Faculty members

Graduate students

Undergraduate students

Research scientists

Librarians

Archivists

Your institution’s administrators

Your institution’s press

Your institution’s news service

Your institution’s central computer services staff

Academic support staff

External contributors

Other (please specify)

13.       Who do you think will be the major contributor to your institution’s IR? (Choose one only.)

Faculty

Graduate students

Undergraduate students

Research scientists

Librarians

Archivists

University and college administrators

Computer services staff

Academic support staff

Other (please specify)

14.       If your institution eventually does make the decision to implement an IR, how easy do you think it will be to get faculty to contribute to the IR?

Very easy

Somewhat easy

Somewhat difficult

Very difficult

No Opinion

Don’t know

Not applicable

15.       If your institution eventually does make the decision to implement an IR, how easy do you think it will be to get other members of the learning community to contribute to the IR?

Very easy

Somewhat easy

Somewhat difficult

Very difficult

No opinion

Don’t know

Not applicable

16a.     Why do you think members of your institution’s learning community will contribute to an IR?

VI*

SI

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

To boost the particular scholar’s prestige

To boost your institution’s prestige

To contribute to the reform of the entire enterprise of scholarly communication and publishing

To reduce the amount of time between discovery and dissemination of research findings to scholarly communities

To increase citation counts to the particular scholar’s oeuvre

To increase citation counts to your institution’s intellectual output

To encourage other scholars to provide open access to their intellectual output

To expose the particular scholar’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels

To expose your institution’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels

To place the burden of preservation on the IR instead of on individual faculty members

To increase the accessibility to knowledge assets such as numeric, video, audio, and multimedia datasets

To provide maximal access to the results of publicly funded research

To solve the problem of preserving your institution’s intellectual output

To increase the library’s role as a viable partner in the research enterprise

To reduce user dependence on your library’s print collection

Other (Please specify in question 16b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

16b.     If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

D.        Digital Content for the IR

17a.     What digital content recruitment methods do you think will be most successful at your institution?

VS*

SS

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

Volunteer contributions

Publicity about the IR in campus newspapers

Presentations by staff responsible for the IR at departmental and faculty meetings

Personal visits by staff responsible for the IR to faculty and administrators

Staff responsible for the IR working one-on-one with early adopters

Word-of-mouth from early adopters to their colleagues in the faculty and staff ranks

Publicizing the IR during reference interactions in libraries and archives

Systematic review of faculty, staff, center, and departmental web sites for potential contributors by staff responsible for the IR

Institution-wide mandates regarding mandatory contribution of certain material types, e.g., doctoral dissertations, master’s theses, faculty preprints, etc.

Other (Please specify in question 17b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VS=Very successful, SS=Somewhat successful, SU=Somewhat unsuccessful, VU=Very unsuccessful, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

17b.     If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

18.       Check all the types of digital materials you are planning to allow authorized contributors to submit to your institution’s IR.

Preprints

Working papers

Books

Journals

Journal articles

Maps

Interview transcripts

Sound recordings of interview transcripts

Software

Software documentation

Video recordings of performances

Blogs

Interim and final reports to funding agencies

Raw data files that result from faculty research projects

Raw data files that result from doctoral dissertation research

Raw data files that result from master’s thesis research

Raw data files that result from senior thesis research

Written papers or transcripts of conference presentations

Conference presentations (e.g., summaries, abstracts, notes, outlines, remarks, etc.)

Committee meeting agenda and minutes

Committee meeting documents, e.g., budgets, reports, memoranda

Your institution’s course catalogs

Your institution’s newspapers

Your institution’s alumni publications

Faculty senate agendas and minutes

College, departmental, and school alumni publications

Regent, trustee, board meeting agenda and minutes

Course syllabi, class notes, handouts, outlines, assignments prepared by faculty, lecturers, teaching assistants, and other professional teaching personnel

Other learning objects such as simulations, models, software demonstration files, images, video prepared by faculty, lecturers, teaching assistants, and other professional teaching personnel

Doctoral dissertations

Master’s theses

Senior theses

Graduate student eportfolios

Undergraduate student eportfolios

Class notes, outlines, assignments, papers, and projects prepared by graduate students

Class notes, outlines, assignments, papers, and projects prepared by undergraduate students

Other (please specify)

19.       Who will be responsible for managing the IR’s intellectual property rights? (Choose all that apply.)

Contributors’ academic or service unit

One chosen academic unit

One chosen service unit

IR staff

Library staff

Archives staff

Staff from the office of the chief information office

A company that our IR is outsourcing

Other (please specify)

E.        Speculating on Your IR’s Future

20a.     How likely are each of the following to be your next steps on the road to IR implementation as a direct result of your IR planning?

VL*

SL

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

Your institution terminates its investigation of IRs

Your institution seeks a partner institution(s) to share in an IR

Your institution seeks funding for the next step of investigation of IRs

Your institution supports implementation of an IR software package

Your institution widens the scope of its investigation into IRs

Your institution waits for a consortium, network, group, etc., to implement an IR

Other (Please specify in question 20b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VL=Very likely, SL=Somewhat likely, SU=Somewhat unlikely, VU=Very unlikely, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

20b.     If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

21.       What is the likelihood that your institution will pilot test one or more IR software package(s) prior to making a decision about implementing an IR?

Very likely

Somewhat likely

Somewhat unlikely

Very unlikely

No opinion

Don’t know

22a.     What is the status of these IR policies?

NP*

D

I

DK

NA

Determining what is acceptable content

Defining collections

Determining who is authorized to make contributions to the IR

Restricting access to IR content

Acceptable file formats

Identifying metadata formats and authorized metadata creators

Charging for IR services

Formulating a privacy policy for registered IR system users

Licensing IR content

Updating IR content

Withdrawing IR content

Providing access management services

Preserving IR content

Revising IR policies in the future

Authorizing external contributors

Intellectual property

Other (Please specify in question 22b below)

* Key to abbreviations: NP=No policy; D=Drafted; I=Implemented; DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

22b.     If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

23a.     To what extent do you think the following are likely to inhibit your ability to deploy a successful IR?

VL*

SL

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

Making members of your institution’s learning community aware of the IR

Contributors’ lack of knowledge about how they can benefit from IRs

Encouraging faculty to submit digital content to the IR

Convincing faculty that the IR will not adversely affect the current publishing model

Absence of campus-wide mandates regarding mandatory contribution of certain material types, e.g., doctoral dissertations, master’s theses, faculty preprints, etc.

Contributors’ concerns about the difficulty using the IR system to contribute digital content to the IR

Inability of contributors to formulate quality metadata

Contributors’ concerns about intellectual property rights for digital materials

Inadequacy of the IR system’s digital preservation capabilities

Difficulties in long-term preservation of digital files

Lack of on-campus technical expertise in IR systems

Supporting all ongoing costs of an operational IR

Competing for resources with other priorities, projects, and initiatives

Other (Please specify in question 23b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VL=Very likely, SL=Somewhat likely, SU=Somewhat unlikely, VU=Very unlikely, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

23b.     If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

24.       To what extent will an IR affect your institution’s ability to build relationships between the IR and other on-campus repositories (e.g., archives, student services, library systems, digital asset management systems, electronic course management systems, digital libraries)?

A big positive effect

A moderate positive effect

No effect

A moderate negative effect

A big negative effect

A combination of positive and negative effects

Don’t know

No opinion

Not applicable

Other (please specify)

25a.     How likely is it that funding for your institution’s implementation of an IR will come from these sources?

VL*

SL

SU

VU

NO

DK

NA

Special initiative supported by your institution’s central administration

Special initiative supported by your institution’s library

Special initiative supported by your institution’s central computer services

Special initiative supported by your institution’s archives

Special initiative supported by academic colleges, departments, and schools

Regular budget line item for your institution’s central administration

Regular budget line item for your institution’s library

Regular budget line item for your institution’s central computer services

Regular budget line item for your institution’s archives

Regular budget line item for academic colleges, departments, and schools

Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s central administration

Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s library

Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s central computer services

Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s archives

Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s academic colleges, departments, and schools

Grant awarded by an external source

Grant awarded by an internal source

Other (Please specify in question 25b below)

* Key to abbreviations: VL=Very likely, SL=Somewhat likely, SU=Somewhat unlikely, VU=Very unlikely, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

25b.     If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

F.         Identifying You and Your Institution

26.       Please identify your position at your institution. (Choose one only.)

President or chancellor

Staff in the office of the president or chancellor

Vice president or provost

Staff in the office of the vice president or provost

Chief information officer

Staff in the office of the chief information officer

Archivist

Archives staff

Library director

Assistant director of library public services

Assistant director of library technical services

Assistant director of library information technology

Library staff

Other (please specify)

27.       What is your connection to your institution’s IR?

28.       Please identify your institution.

G.        Follow-up information

29.       How can the MIRACLE Project assist you regarding IRs?

30.       If you would be willing to volunteer for follow-up questions via phone or email, please add your name and email address and we will contact you in the near future:

Name

Email

Thank You! If you have questions, please message Soo Young Rieh (rieh@umich.edu) at the MIRACLE Project. Thank you for your responses.
https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub140/appendc/
www.clir.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-47
143826
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:75ZUWPHF7UAOP7CJRJDRYCGQXLBNDWQ7
<urn:uuid:3d53053b-9c40-4dc7-aa9b-d861f156f808>
2019-11-15T18:52:54Z
104.237.148.184
text/html
sha1:DZ2DSJYDDTJTDT4VAGL5US5D6K4FOO5J
<urn:uuid:15111e46-8b49-4570-abb0-24e03fed3bf2>
https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub140/appendc/
response
<urn:uuid:3589afcd-27e3-4657-907f-0b997e323daa>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-47
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-211.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/