Institutional Repositories:
The Great Debate
THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 2008
What is an institutional repository? How do topics like scholarly communication, copyright, institutional memory, digital libraries, metadata, intellectual property, research impact, digital preservation, and Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) fit in the concept and implementation of an institutional repository?
In the spirit of classical oration and political debate Dr. Helen Tibbo and Kevin Smith, MLS, J.D. will square off on these topics with a duel of dialog.
Following the debate, Kristin Antelman, Associate Director for the Digital Library at NCSU, Nancy McGovern, Digital Preservation Officer at Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) at University of Michigan, and Carolyn Hank, SILS PhD student and project manager with the UNC Institutional Repository will join the panel discussion.
Featured Participants:
Dr. Helen Tibbo is professor in the School of Information & Library Science at the University of
North Carolina. Her current research is in digital curation, digital preservation and curriculum
development in this emerging field. She chairs the Digital Curation - Institutional Repository
Committee charged by the Chancellor with developing a plan and prototype for the Institutional Repository at UNC.
Kevin L. Smith is the Scholarly Communications Officer at Duke University providing consultation
on copyright, scholarly publishing and licensing issues. He serves on the faculty of ARL's Institute
on Scholarly Communications and ALA's Committee on Legislation Subcommittee on
Intellectual Property. He also has a highly-regarded blog on scholarly communications.
Event Details:
Carolina Digital Library & Archives (CDLA) Facilities
1st Floor of Wilson Library, UNC Chapel Hill
http://www.lib.unc.edu/wilson/directions.html
6:00 PM Dinner from Mediterranean Deli
6:30 PM Debate & Discussion
Summary:
The Great Debate was well attended with about 60 people present and multiple institutions represented. Discussion was lively with a significant amount of participation from audience members. In conclusion, the participants agreed that more conversation about the benefits and drawbacks of institutional repositories is required.