packaging University museum collections information as part of open metadata provision
Aims, Objectives and final outputs of the project
The overall aim of the project is to improve resource discovery of aggregated collections information from UK University Museums, through the use of collection level records within the Culture Grid. (www.culturegrid.org.uk)
The objectives that support this aim are:
- To better understand the scope, use and value of collection records for resource discovery
- To develop enhanced ways for the Culture Grid to aggregate and open up collections information from University Museums for improved resource discovery by higher education and other audiences
- To demonstrate new ways to access and engage with this significant body of resources for research, learning, teaching and wider engagement.
The outputs of the project are:
- A consultation report (following an online survey and stakeholder focus groups)
- Enhancements to the Culture Grid to improve how collections are described and aggregated
- Enhanced collection records (for Culture Grid and from University Museums and Subject Specialist Networks)
- Prototype user interfaces:
- A UK University Museums access point, (based on the UMiS ‘Revealing Collections’ service http://www.umissearch.org.uk/ ) and to include mobile / location based access for HE users to find nearby and course-relevant collections
- An improved UK Collections (Culture Grid) search interface, including collections navigation.
- An improved collections browse interface for the Fitzwilliam
- Formative evaluation report (from online consultation and user evaluation focus groups at 5 University Museums)
- Project reports (Quarterly)
Wider benefits to sector and achievements for Host Institution
University museums and galleries play a key role in the nation’s educational system and as part of the national heritage, serving audiences both within and outside Higher Education (http://www.umg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Briefing-on-University-Museums-and-Galleries-May-2011.pdf). In England, Wales & Northern Ireland University Museums are custodians of 30% of all the collections ‘Designated’ by DCMS as being of national or international importance and 55% of University Museums in Scotland are Recognised Collections of National Significance (http://www.umis.ac.uk ).
The project’s development of enhanced and sustainable ways to aggregate and open up this wealth of resources for improved resource discovery by higher education and other audiences should stimulate new ways to engage with this significant body of resources.
The project also gives added value by building upon the investments of JISC and other funders in the original Wrappers project (www.context.collectionstrustblogs.org.uk ) , the UMiS ‘Hidden Collections’ project (www.umis.ac.uk) and Collections Trust’s Culture Grid service; and offers potential for join-up and knowledge sharing with other JISC funded projects involving University Museums.
As an individual institution and a member of the University Museums Group, the host institution will achieve new insight into the broader use of collection records and the applicability of the ‘wrappers’ approach, plus enhancement of and improved integration and dissemination of its collections information through the Culture Grid and other interfaces.
Risk analysis and success plan
The following risks have been identified at the outset of the project
|unable to recruit RA in time||H||L||Recruitment period built into schedule and temporary agency / freelance options available|
|difficulty engaging stakeholders||H||L||Support of UMG, UMIS and SSNs secured to ensure stakeholder involvement from an early stage.|
|difficulty engaging end users||H||L/M||Researcher will provide extra capacity to establish user engagement across a selection of institutions, supported by UMG, UMIS and SSNs|
|unable to secure open licensing agreement from contributors||M||M||Engage contributors at early stage of project in licensing discussions. Draw on experience from previous Contextual Wrappers project, Culture Grid, and RDTF programme.|
|insufficient collection descriptions to adequately test enhanced service||M||L||mitigated by involving University Museum Group and SSNs|
|failure to sustain enhancements to aggregation service||H||L||schedule technical delivery to ensure that enhancements can be rolled out into live service at the end of the project|
The IPR ownership of collection records will be that of the source organisation. As part of stakeholder consultation, the project will advocate through UMG and UMiS for further adoption of the RDTF Open Metadata Principles (http://discovery.ac.uk/businesscase/principles/) by UK University Museums and thus for the most open licensing possible for all aggregated resource discovery metadata, (equivalent to ODC-PDDL http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1-0/). Other licence options will also be made available to meet any specific needs of contributing organisations, (as per http://discovery.ac.uk/files/pdf/Licensing_Open_Data_A_Practical_Guide.pdf)
Project Team Relationships and End User Engagement
The core project team is:
- Collections Management and technical staff at The Fitzwilliam – David Scruton & Shaun Osborne
- Management and research staff at Collections Trust – Phill Purdy & Katie Smith
- Technical development expertise from Knowledge Integration – Neil Smith & Rich Bruin
- Design and technical expertise Gooii Ltd – Taras Johnson & Franz Evert
The team will meet at least three times during the course of the project as well as in sub-groups as required and communicate through the project blog and the basecamp project collaboration tool. The team has a solid and productive working relationship borne from involvement in the Culture Grid and other open metadata and aggregation projects, such as Wrappers1, (www.context.collectionstrustblogs.org.uk ) UMiS ‘Hidden Collections’ (www.umis.ac.uk ); SCA BBC CenturyShare (www.culturegrid.org.uk/timeline) and Peoples Network Discover (www.peoplesnetwork.gov.uk/discover )
Decisions impacting on the project as a whole will be made through agreement between the partners and steered by stakeholder consultation and engagement, with the Fitzwilliam having final sign off. The lead areas of responsibility will be:
- Fitzwilliam Museum – project management, stakeholder consultation and evaluation (WP1, 2, 5)
- Collections Trust – project management, data enhancement and dissemination (WP1,3,6)
- Knowledge integration & Gooii Ltd – Technical development (WP4)
End User Engagement
Engagement of key stakeholders, including collections management practitioners, is core to the project to assure outcomes meet stakeholder needs. This will be achieved with the support of UMG, UMiS and Subject Specialist Networks active in collections metadata activities. Stakeholder groups will be established early in the project (as part of WP 5) & consulted in depth (WP2) including an online survey and focus groups.
Projected Timeline, Workplan & Overall Project Mthodology
The project is being run over 9 months from 1st November 2011 to 31st July 2011.
The Workplan includes 6 work packages:
Two of these work packages ‘Project Management’ and ‘Engagement and Dissemination’ are continuous through the project to ensure project delivery and appropriate consultation and awareness of the project amongst key stakeholder groups, specifically University Museums and their users and Subject Specialist Networks actively engaged with collection records.
The early part of the project includes a dedicated element of stakeholder consultation (WP2 Nov-Feb) to better understand the current needs of University Museums and other stakeholders for aggregated resource discovery and to assure fit for purpose service enhancements within and beyond the project. This will include online surveys and a workshop.
Data enhancement (WP3 Dec-Jun) will provide a baseline of enhanced collections metadata to support technical developments.
Technical developments (WP4 Nov-Jul) will be managed through an agile approach with system enhancements and user interface developments growing through iteratively through 3 phases. Technical developments will include changes to the Culture Grid internal data model to facilitate improved resource discovery as per the Wrappers approach. These changes will underpin the production of a range of prototype end-user interfaces, which will demonstrate multiple use-cases achievable through the RDTF approach.
Formative evaluation (WP5 Jan-Jul) will review developments and indicate the value of project outcomes by further engaging with stakeholders online and in focus groups at five University Museum sites across the UK.
The project will be managed in accordance with JISC Project Management Guidelines using P2 based methodologies and an Agile approach will be used for technical development.
Gantt Chart and detailed deliverable list:
|1||Project plan||Nov 11||1. Project initiation|
|2||Project meetings x 4||Set up Nov 11||2. Iteration 1 & Consultation Report complete|
|3||Project reports x 3||Jan, Apr, Jul 12||3. Iteration 2 &|
|4||1 day Workshop||Feb 12||4.Project ends – system enhancements and prototype UIs complete, evaluation & final reports delivered|
|5||Online survey/consultation mat’ls||Dec 11|
|6||Consultation Report||Feb 12|
|7||Sufficient new Grid Collection records to support development||Jan 12|
|8||Enhanced collection records produced by UMs & SSNs||Jun 12|
|9.1||Enhanced system developments – i1||Jan 12|
|9.2||Enhanced system developments – i2||Apr 12|
|9.3||Enhanced system developments – i3||Jun/Jul 12|
|10.1||User Interface prototypes – i1||Jan 12|
|10.2||User Interface prototypes – i2||Apr 12|
|10.3||User Interface prototypes – i3||Jul 12|
|11||Evaluation materials for online survey & evaluation / user testing sessions||Feb 12|
|12||Contributor & end user evaluation sessions at 5 UM sites||From March to July 12|
|13||Evaluation Report||July 12|
|14||Project communication channels inc website/blog||Nov 12|
|15||Project Updates x 3||Jan, Apr, Jul 12|
|16||Stakeholder Groups||Dec 12|
|Directly IncurredStaff||April 11– March 12||April 12-March 13||TOTAL £|
|Total Directly Incurred Staff (A)||£7,840||£7,927||£15,767|
|Non-Staff||April 11– March 12||April 12–March 13||TOTAL £|
|Total Directly Incurred Non-Staff (B)||£7,162||£5,388||£12,550|
|Directly Incurred Total (C)(A+B=C)||£15,002||£13,315||£28,317|
|Directly Allocated||April 11-March 12||April 12-March 13||TOTAL £|
|Directly Allocated Total (D)||£41,930||£33,866||£75,796|
|Indirect Costs (E)||£12,032||£11,877||£23,909|
|Total Project Cost (C+D+E)||£128,022|
|Amount Requested from JISC||£101,000|