Abstract
Mandating contribution of theses and dissertations (TDs) to university archives and their electronic equivalents (ETDs) to an institutional repository (IR) is common practice. Optimizing workflows for archival print copies while managing electronic copies in an IR can be challenging given such factors as embargoes and the skill sets required to ensure theses and dissertations are accessible, discoverable, and ultimately safely stashed where they belong. As rational processes were gradually developed at the University of Vermont, pitfalls and breakthroughs presented themselves. This article relates our experience launching an ETD mandate, including campus outreach initiatives and improvements to the various related processes (document submission, harvesting, embargo removal). Our journey encompassed a range of experiences that we designated good, bad, or ugly, depending on workflow impact. We realize these are mere labels and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, especially regarding embargoes.
Included in
Cataloging and Metadata Commons, Collection Development and Management Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons, Scholarly Publishing Commons
Managing ETDs: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Mandating contribution of theses and dissertations (TDs) to university archives and their electronic equivalents (ETDs) to an institutional repository (IR) is common practice. Optimizing workflows for archival print copies while managing electronic copies in an IR can be challenging given such factors as embargoes and the skill sets required to ensure theses and dissertations are accessible, discoverable, and ultimately safely stashed where they belong. As rational processes were gradually developed at the University of Vermont, pitfalls and breakthroughs presented themselves. This article relates our experience launching an ETD mandate, including campus outreach initiatives and improvements to the various related processes (document submission, harvesting, embargo removal). Our journey encompassed a range of experiences that we designated good, bad, or ugly, depending on workflow impact. We realize these are mere labels and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, especially regarding embargoes.