see email thread below. However, need to decide on a procedure if the thesis can't be scanned.
12/10/10 - Media notification
We are about to start the scanning and I was thinking about the disclaimers that we plan on including if the thesis also included additional media like CD, DVD, Video. I would like to standardize the text we use so it is consistent. I also thought about how we should say "where the item is". The disclaimer will be in the PDF copy of the thesis forever so if there is even the slightest chance that the additional items will not be permanently held by the divisional library in the future, I think we should at the very least say something like this: The accompanying media to this thesis is available at the Rotch Library or the Institute Archives.
Ann Marie suggests: The accompanying media item for this thesis is available in the MIT Libraries or Institute Archives.
12/1/10 - Packing & labeling info from Jenn
The way they are in the box doesn't really matter. Having a label on the outside of the box is important as we will use that information internally. You can include the range of names but we would also like to have each box assigned a consecutive number
669 theses in Barton, 431 in DSpace
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7614
12/3/10 - 5 boxes to Doc Svcs
12/2/10 - Info from Nick: I think it will be 18-20 boxes. There are 592 items on the pick list from before 2008, and we are fitting 30-35 items in a box.
12/1/10 - Andrew began disbinding theses
11/30/10 - Joaquin and Nick began pulling theses
2,682 theses in Barton, 972 in DSpace
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7610
Notes from meeting with Jenn Morris and Ann Marie Willer on 10/27/10:
see email thread below. However, need to decide on a procedure if the thesis can't be scanned.Steps that need staff assignment:
Will have Beth and others do this Beverly will work with Beth on thisPick list info from Nina:
As I expected, Ben assured me that catalogers do not need to see the actual print volumes in order to remove the holdings from Barton. Further, he assured me that if the pick list can include a system number, there will probably be a way to do this whole thing as a batch process.
So then I asked Beth. She said she would talk to Christine about the best way to implement this. But I am confident that this can happen.
I think the next step, then, is for you to work with Beth to figure out what additional information to include in the pick list, where to get it from the Data Warehouse, and set up an appropriate workflow. As always, let me know if any further interference on my part would be useful.
Email thread regarding post-scan procedure for theses:
----Original Message----
From: Millicent R Gaskell
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:30 AM
To: Christine Quirion; Jennifer S Banks
Cc: Marilyn G McSweeney; Nina Davis-Millis; irl-lib@mit.edu
Subject: RE: Operational decisions
Hi,
I confirmed with Jennifer that the expectation is that the divisional library copy would be recycled after scanning. If the title can't be scanned, however, we need to discuss what to do.
Millicent
________________________________________
From: Christine Quirion
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 9:45 AM
To: Jennifer S Banks
Cc: Millicent R Gaskell; Marilyn G McSweeney; Nina Davis-Millis; irl-lib@mit.edu
Subject: Re: Operational decisions
hi,
I don't see a problem with retaining some of the Rotch theses either on site or elsewhere when a scan cannot truly represent the content or for media preservation purposes, but we will need to have a clear process to identify these situations and an efficient way to differentiate them from those theses where this kind of retention is not required. I don't think we need to retain all the Rotch theses for this reason, so a work flow where we have 2 streams makes sense, but we should not design the process solely around the extreme cases. We have experience as a system with working on 2 tracks, and did so for the EAPS scanning for similar reasons.
I think we'd be missing out on part of our investment in the processing and scanning of these items if we did not see some gains on the space side. Would the theses we are retaining for preservation purposes and those that cannot be represented accurately by a single PDF file be stored at HD?
-Christine
On Nov 1, 2010, at 6:46 PM, Jennifer S Banks wrote:
Ann Whiteside and I had discussed a concern that Rotch theses often/sometimes have accompanying non-print formats (video, etc.). The non-print content isn’t going into DSpace (yet), so there isn’t a repository copy. We thought it would be a mistake to discard the divisional library copy because there’s no other back-up for the Archives copy. Non-print media are usually less durable, and the 2nd copy provides the only safety net we have.
It sounds like Millicent is raising similar issues in the last sentence of her comment about the Rotch theses.
Jennifer
From: Christine Quirion [mailto:cquirion@MIT.EDU]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:06 PM
To: Millicent R Gaskell
Cc: Marilyn G McSweeney; Nina Davis-Millis; irl-lib@mit.edu<irl-lib@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Operational decisions
so was the COP decision that the copies could be discarded as the norm except for cases where there is value to the item as 'artifact' or there were there is content that can't be represented with a scan?
who will determine exception vs. norm?
-Christine
On Oct 29, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Millicent R Gaskell wrote:
Hi,
The A&H CoP did discuss what to do with the divisional library copy of the historic theses to be scanned and I believe (but I’ll follow-up to confirm) that they agreed to discard the copy after scanning. We’re only doing a subset of the Rotch theses collection at this time (only specific degrees and a specific date range). Of that subset, there will likely be some (large foldouts, accompanying images, media) that can’t be done easily and that we may need to retain the divisional library print copy.
Millicent
From: Christine Quirion [mailto:cquirion@MIT.EDU]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 10:53 AM
To: Marilyn G McSweeney
Cc: Nina Davis-Millis; irl-lib@mit.edu<irl-lib@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Operational decisions
hi,
a few more thoughts....
In other cases where this has come up, the retention strategy of the local unit was what drove the scanning of the items. For the ESL, for example, thesis items were weeded based on the ESL retention policy of the most recent ten years only in the library, and then they were candidates for scanning via the cheaper process of disbinding and scanning via document feeder. Rotch's thesis retention policy has been to not weed, so their collection is complete. I believe Hum has a similar policy, but a smaller number of degrees are awarded so it hasn't come up yet as a space issue.
The second loose paper copy that was kept in shrink wrap as a result of the Lindgren closure was at the request of the EAPS department, and those copies are held at EAPS.
I agree with Marilyn that we should not take on the expense of keeping the second copies of earlier years once in DSpace, especially given the new model of not binding the second copy, but I suspect the staff affiliated with these collections in Rotch and the Arts/Hum COP may have different feelings about this and may want to be part of the conversation. They have seen a value in retaining a complete collection up to this point and not retaining this second paper copy will be a new mode of operating.
-Christine
On Oct 28, 2010, at 6:02 PM, Marilyn G McSweeney wrote:
Somehow, I was thinking we had already discussed and decided that the second print copies of theses used for scanning would be “discarded”… but of course, I’m not finding anything that confirms that.
We do have a recent example that may speak to this -- the EAPS thesis scanning project. This was all negotiated and decided before I was involved, but I was told that the Lindgren print copies (used for scanning) were shrink wrapped and deposited with the EAPS department, since otherwise they would be discarded. I assume that Archives had right of first refusal in the unlikely case that they needed to replace anything. My understanding was that the theses were never destined to stay within the Libraries once they were scanned, and that it was a request of the EAPS department that they get to keep the chopped copies.
I must have nodded off at LC because I’ve forgotten whatever discussion there was about keeping a chopped up second paper copy of theses once they were in DSpace. If we are willing to live with one paper copy and one electronic copy in DSpace beginning in July 2010 on, why would we want to keep the back second copies of earlier years once they are also in DSpace??
MGM
From: Nina Davis-Millis [mailto:ninadm@MIT.EDU]
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 2:55 PM
To: irl-lib@mit.edu<irl-lib@mit.edu>
Subject: Operational decisions
Importance: High
Greetings. As discussed at our last meeting, plans are underway for the Rotch thesis scanning project. Beverly needs a policy decision, not immediately but soon:
Are we prepared to implement a policy that local copies of theses will not be kept once the items are scanned and put into DSpace? (Remember the Archives already has one paper copy; the DSpace copy would constitute the second copy.)
At a recent Lib. Council meeting there was discussion about retaining the physical copies, even if we’re withdrawing them from the local unit. Do we still need to do this? If so, where should they be kept?
Again, we really need some answers to these probably by early December.
Nina