Output – KULTUR – Institutional Profile: University College for the Creative Arts

Title: Institutional Profile: University College for the Creative Arts
Number of pages or page numbers: pp 6-7
Section: Summation

Date Released: 27th March 2008

URI for Output: http://kultur.eprints.org/docs/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20UCCA%20profile%208%20April%20online%20version.pdf

Summary of contents:

A few observations of interest w.r.t. repositories for the arts in the ‘summation’ section of the report:

“The project will need to engage, advocate and secure ‘buy-in’ from the academic community. It will be important to establish an understanding of the culture of each college so that local differences or requirements can be taken into account. We will need to create a network of contact with key individuals and interest groups across the institution with which to communicate and gain direction on the project. Following on from this it will be imperative to be able to understand, interpret and communicate the range of differing concerns with the project team so that development is accurately representative.”

Additional information:

Comments:

Advertisements

Output – KULTUR – Environmental Assessment of the University of the Arts, London

Title: Environmental Assessment of the University of the Arts, London
Number of pages or page numbers: pp 6-7
Section: Summary

Date Released: 8th April 2008

URI for Output: http://kultur.eprints.org/docs/UUAL%20profile%208%20april%20online%20version.pdf

Summary of contents:

The summary section has a few useful observations w.r.t. repositories in the Arts sector:

“The opportunities for a repository at UAL are great since there is a wealth of research
being produced at all levels within the University. At the same time the sheer amount of
research and research active staff can present its own problems. The targeting of key
research staff, the enlisting of research centres/units and the research offices are
essential for the success of the project. Advocacy from the top and from the bottom is
needed but this can only really be effective by establishing good relationships and links
with relevant University bodies and staff. We need to identify just what a repository can
do for each group and advocate along those lines … Populating the demonstrator with a good number of pieces of research will help the project become more attractive and viable to research staff. The interface and the software itself will also play a large part in any success.”

Additional information:

Comments:

Output – KULTUR – Environmental Assessment Report

Title: Environmental Assessment Project and Literature Review
Pages 11-21
Section: 3

Date Released: 13th Feb 2008

URI for Output: http://kultur.eprints.org/docs/Environmental%20assessment%20VS%20Feb%2008.pdf

Summary of contents:

Section 3 “Issues Identified” has some useful insights. These are summarised in the report’s conclusion:

“…  Accounts of these projects give an indication of likely obstacles. In particular, they draw attention to the fact that metadata standards and copyright are made much more complicated when applied to visual, audio and moving image data. Complications arise, for example, in obtaining permission to broadcast a performance involving numerous groups and individuals, or in establishing how many and what kind of metadata records are required to usefully describe a single work.”

“In order to respond to the conceptual and practical challenges of representing
art practice in a repository, it is necessary for the project to know more about the working
habits and motivations of arts researchers. The project’s user profiles will play an
important role here. This knowledge will help us to pinpoint where a repository could fit
within the research process, knowledge which will be valuable in advocating the project.”

These points are filled out in section 3 of the report.

Additional information:

Comments:

Project – KULTUR

Short Project Name: KULTUR

Programme Name: Repositories and Preservation

Strand: Information Envirnoment, e-Resources

JISC Project URI: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/reppres/sue/kultur

Project URI: http://kultur.eprints.org/

Start Date: 1st May 2007

End Date: 31st March 2009

Governance: RPAG?

Contact Name and Role: Victoria Sheppard, Project Manager

Brief project description:

The aim of the Kultur Consortium is to create a transferable and sustainable institutional repository model for research output in the creative and applied arts, a discipline area where repository development is so far underdeveloped. The project will investigate a policy and technical framework for creating a multimedia, multifunctional repository, applicable both to specialist institutions and departments across the sector, and by extension to potential cross-domain users, museums, galleries and performing arts with whom there are strong links within these disciplines. The project is focused both at the technical level, primarily through the software configuration and deployment of EPrints.org, and at the institutional level by developing effective practice for managing multimedia deposit, population and advocacy, dissemination and preservation. An important output is the transfer of experience and expertise across the sector to support those working in the field to translate their mode of scholarly communication into digital form.

Outputs:

  • A working model of a sustainable institutional repository for research output in the visual and applied arts providing a framework for effective practice in managing and promoting non-text based research outputs.
  • A transferable model of an uber repository based on providing flexibility in matching metadata and indexing to discipline needs.
  • An application of a model of shared practice across the sector between a mature repository in the research sector and other HE institutions.
  • A metadata, preservation and access framework as an exemplar for managing material in the visual and creative arts compatible with evolving international standards and the work of a national datacentre (Visual Arts Data Service).
  • A framework for cross-sectoral, cross-domain partnership in the visual and creative arts.

Comments:

As at 27th January 2009:- Most current outputs are dissemination  and advocacy documents. I can’t find any link to the pilot repository mentioned in the project progress reports. Maybe it was never meant to be made public? Main ouputs of note are from the ‘environment assessment’ work package. There is little or no evidence of the outputs for work packages 3 to 9 on the KULTUR project website.