RePosit Skype conference call no. 7 

28th April 2011, 11:00am–12:15am 

Present: Lizzie Dipple (Symplectic), Rachel Proudfoot (Leeds), Nicola Cockarill (Plymouth), Ian Tilsed (Exeter) , Gill Still (Leeds), Jodie Double (Leeds). 

Apologies: Ellie James (Keele), Sarah Molloy (QMUL), Jill Evans (Exeter), Bo Middleton (Leeds). 

Chair: Lizzie Dipple 

Minutes: Lizzie Dipple 

Agenda 

1. Survey

2. Posters/postcards

3. RSP dissemination event

4. Google group discussions/blog posts

5. How is the advocacy/training actually going so far?

6. Task list review

7. AOB

1. Survey

NC and the survey group haven’t had any other feedback by email except from LD. RP gave her feedback during the call:

• Can Q.2e about whether deposited for self come earlier on? Agreed.
• Is it OK that Q.2a has conflated views on the process with motivations for deposit? Do we want to capture more detail of motivations as a core question rather than just in the institutional-specific questions? Agreed to expand Q. 3 with more options and make it relevant to both depositors (why they did deposit) and non-depositors (what might make them deposit in the future).
• Looking at the project plan, RePosit said we’d ask about when is the best time to deposit in the researcher’s life cycle. Can this be added to the survey or captured elsewhere? Institutional questions cover the timing, but most users only know the deposit route via Symplectic. Agreed to find this out informally talking to people in advocacy/training sessions to avoid making the survey too complex  and also to avoid creating unrealistic expectations for users.

ACTION: LD to set up sheet in spreadsheet log of advocacy/training sessions to log any feedback on this point.

ACTION: LD to explain in project report why this information wasn’t formally elicited in the survey.

ACTION: GS to make changes to the survey based on discussions and put back in Google docs for review.

ACTION: All to review final survey document.

There was also discussion about the incentive prizes. Having five possible prizes sounds like a greater incentive, but want to make sure one winner from each HEI. Therefore can do local publicity around winner. Also need to do a follow-up email to all respondents to say who won (possible legal requirement). How long should the survey run, and when should it start? Agreed to start survey in mid May, and run until end of June – to allow time to collate responses within the project timescale.

ACTION: All to send details of BOS contacts to NC/GS

ACTION: Representative from each HEI to set up survey w/c 16th May

2. Posters/postcards

We discussed GS’s concerns about only having URLs and no explanation of what the academic is supposed to do on the posters. The consensus was that the description alongside that URL (e.g. ‘Login to PEARL at’ for Plymouth) is so locally specific that it needs to fall in the customisable bottom section of the poster.

ACTION: LD to ask SM and EJ to get the files from their designers.

ACTION: SM to ask designer to expand the space for the URL to two lines (if possible)

3. RSP dissemination event

RP gave an update on the latest news. The date is set for Tuesday 19th July and RSP have booked the venue in Nottingham. They’ve provided a draft timetable and the keynote speaker is from ARMA. RePosit has been given a 1½-hour slot before lunch (probably for a ½-hour presentation and 1-hour break-out session). It’s up to us to decide on the content. In the afternoon there are talks about alternatives models to off-the-peg CRIS systems running alongside a supplier exhibition. The last similar RSP event at Leeds Met had around 100–150 attendees.

ACTION: RP to circulate draft timetable

ACTION: RP to find out more about possible numbers, the venue and the timetable of deadlines for what we need to sort out when.

4. Google group discussions/blog posts

LD reminded everyone that we need to keep up with the outstanding list of blog posts and Google group discussion topics. JD said she could do a post in mid May. IT will post an update on the Exeter situation later once there is more clarity there.

ACTION: All to catch up on blog posts and start their designated Google group discussions.

5. How is the advocacy/training actually going so far?

Given that neither Exeter nor Plymouth are live with Repository Tools, and without SM and EJ in this call, the only update came from Leeds. RP said that the demos had gone down very well at a recent Strategy/Advisory Group meeting. They’ve secured support there and are actively working on that. In the two faculties spearheading the advocacy, they’ve got meetings for History coming up in early May and an email campaign for Engineering. LD reminded everyone that there’s nothing in the spreadsheet logging events yet.

ACTION: All to put details of training/advocacy events in the log.

6. Task list review

7. AOB

• Request for an extension to project report-writing

LD has asked JISC for a three-month extension to the deadline for handing in the end-of-project report but hasn’t had an answer yet. The extension is to allow Exeter and Plymouth time to run their advocacy plans after Repository Tools has gone live. The general consensus was that if possible, this is a really good idea, and writing up the repost later wouldn’t be a problem for anyone.

• Team meeting in May

One suggestion from LD was to split the final project team meeting in half – one half the afternoon before the Symplectic User Conference in London on 24th May, and the second half the afternoon before the RSP event in Nottingham on 19th July. However, there was some discussion from IT around the fact that staying overnight to meet up the day before an event makes it harder to get away at all (taking two days out of the office at once). Also will there be enough to discuss by May? The other option is to have a completely separate day in June for the final project team meeting.

ACTION: LD to consider options and speak to BM about funding for travel/overnight stays.

• Dig-Lib piece

JD is writing a piece about RePosit for Dig-Lib – do we want anything in it about the RSP dissemination event? Only the date and venue.

SUMMARY OF NEW ACTIONS

3