next section in this report >> | previous section >> | report contents >>
(See appendix B for Informed Consent Form.)
1. How many institutional repositories (IRs)—general IRs, special-purpose IRs, and IRs in the pilot-testing phase—are available or will be available to members of your institution's learning community in the near future?
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
5 or more |
Please answer the remaining 39 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.
2. How long has your institution been involved with IR planning and pilot testing? Please enter the number of months.
3. How much longer is your institution likely to continue IR planning and pilot testing before making the decision whether or not to implement an IR? Please enter the number of months.
4a. 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 4b 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 |
|||||||
4b. If
you rated "Other" for the question above, please specify in the box below.
5. 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 |
6. Has
your institution conducted a needs assessment for an IR?
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
Don't know |
7a. How
important are the results of the following investigative activities in terms of
influencing your institution to initiate planning and pilot testing 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. |
|
|
|