Towards a common understanding?

Cambridge Outreach and Training Fellow, Lee, describes the rationale behind trialling a recent workshop on archival science for developers, as well as reflecting on the workshop itself. Its aim was to get those all those working in digital preservation within the organisation to have a better understanding of each other’s work to improve co-operation for a sustainable digital preservation effort.


Quite often, there is a perceived language barrier due to the wide range of practitioners that work in digital preservation. We may be using the same words, but there’s not always a shared common understanding of what they mean. This became clear when I was sitting next to my colleague, a systems integration manager, at an Archivematica workshop in September. Whilst not a member of the core Cambridge DPOC team, our colleague is a key member of our extended digital preservation network at Cambridge University Library a is a key member for development for understanding and retaining digital preservation knowledge in the institution.

For those from a recordkeeping background, the design principles behind the front end of Archivematica should be obvious, as it incorporates both traditional principles of archival practice and features of the OAIS model. However, coming from a systems integration point of view, there was a need to have to translate for my colleague words such as ‘accession’, ‘appraisal’ and ‘arrangement’, which many of us with archival education take their meanings for granted.

I asked my colleague if an introductory workshop on archival science would be useful, and she said, “yes, please!” Thus, the workshop was born. Last week, a two and a half hour workshop was trialled for members of our developer and systems integration colleagues. The aim of the workshop was to enable them to understand what archivists are taught on postgraduate courses and how this teaching informs their practice. After understanding the attendees’ impressions of an archivist and the things that they do (see image) the workshop then practically explored how an archivist would acquire and describe a collection. The workshop was based on an imaginary company, complete with a history and description of the business units and examples of potential records they would deposit. There were practical exercises on making an accession record, appraising a collection, artificial arrangement and subsequent description through ISAD(G).

Sticky notes about archivists

Sticky notes about archivists from a developer point of view.

Having then seen how an archivist would approach a collection, the workshop moved into explaining physical storage and preservation before moving onto digital preservation, specifically looking at OAIS and then examples of digital preservation software systems. One exercise was to get the attendees to use what they had learned in the workshop to see where archival ideas mapped onto the systems.

The workshop tried to demonstrate how archivists have approached digital preservation armed with the professional skills and knowledge that they have. The idea was to inform to teams working with archivists and the digital preservation of how archivists think and how and why some of the tools and products are design in the way that they are. My hope was for ‘IT’ to understand the depth of knowledge that archivists have in order to help everyone work together on a collaborative digital preservation solution.

Feedback was positive and it will be run again in the New Year. Similarly, I’m hoping to devise a course from a developer perspective that will help archivists communicate more effectively with developers. Ultimately, both will be working from a better level of understanding each other’s professional skill sets. Co-operation and collaboration on digital preservation projects will become much easier across disciplines and we’ll have a better informed (and relaxed) environment to share practices and thoughts.

A portable digital preservation roadshow kit

As a part of the lead up to Digital Preservation Day, the Cambridge team held a series of roadshows with a pop-up exhibition to raise awareness of digital preservation within the wider University. They wanted to let people know that there was a team that was concentrating in this area. They also wanted to find out people’s concerns regarding the long term continuity of the digital content that they create and digital content they use. Outreach and Training Fellow, Lee, writes about what is in the pop-up kit and how it can be used at your institution to generate awareness of digital preservation.


The exhibition kit

In the lead up to the exhibition we created a portable carry kit that so that we could repeat the exhibition in various locations day after day.

To stimulate discussion as well as having an interactive experience, the first portable exhibition consisted of:

  • An A1 poster, printed on cloth for ease of carrying and to reduce wear and tear. Images attributed as correctly as possible and in line with open and creative commons requirements.
Exhibition poster

Prototype exhibition poster.

  • A roll-up display banner with an image sourced from the Cambridge Digital Library (appropriately from the Book of Apocalypse), plus a bit of their Photoshop skills to make a corrupted version. I like to describe the image as the digital equivalent of mould affecting a precious manuscript. You can still see the image but it’s not quite right and so work needs to be done to put to ‘right’.
  • A laptop with the URLs to various playable games on the Internet Archive, to make the point about emulation and how digital is different from traditional media. The games we used were:
  • A small collection of tangible technology from the past to the present. This was sourced from the Fellows’ collections of materials and included:
    • 8” floppy disk
    • 25” floppy disk
    • 5.25” floppy disk
    • 5.25” floppy disk drive
    • Compact Disc Recordable (CD-R)
    • Commercial double sided film on Digital Versatile Disk (DVD)
    • Digital Versatile Disk ReWritable (DVD-RW)
    • A Hard Disk Drive 250GB from a laptop
    • 2GB and 1GB Randow Access Memory (RAM) chips
    • USB stick with the hard cases removed to show the small PCB and memory chip
    • An SD card enclosure
    • A 2GB micro SD card
    • A micro SD card USB enclosure
    • An iPod c. 2012
    • An acetate, c. 1990, with degradation (courtesy of JISC’s Dom Fripp) to make a visual point through an analogue item about the degradation and the fragile nature of materials we are working with.

A close up of the tech on display.

As a part of future work we’d like to develop this into a more generic display kit for those who do not have the time to create such materials, but have an opportunity to run displays. When it’s up and running, this is how the display looked in the University Library’s Entrance Hall.

Roadshow display at set up in the Entrance Hall of the Cambridge University Library.

We also relied on the generous acceptance and space from the hosting venues so that we could come and visit. It was important that we toured around the site to widen the message amongst the Cambridge University community, so we visited to following venues:

  • Alison Richard Building – 16th November
  • Gordon and Betty Moore Library – 17th November
  • Department of Engineering Library – 20th November
  • University Library Entrance Hall – 21st November
  • Churchill College – 22nd November
  • Faculty of English Social Space – 23rd November

The following is a summary of some of the views captured from the Post-It notes. As it’s not part of a proper study, we removed the views that repeated each other. The most popular answer for the “what digital materials should be saved” question was ‘all’ or ‘everything’. Most thought that the Library should be responsible for the preservation of all materials and the most common challenges were money, time, and reacting to change.

Summary of Post-It note capture.

There was a lot of work put into the creation of the pop-up exhibition and it was developed carefully so that it could be used beyond the life of the DPOC project. We have created a resource that can be used a moments notice to begin the digital preservation conversation to a wider audience. We’d like to develop this kit a bit further so it can be personalised for your own outreach efforts.


Please get in touch if you would like to collaborate on this kit in the comments below or via the ‘contact us’ page.

Transcribing interviews

The second instalment of Lee’s experience running a skills audit at Cambridge University Library. He explains what is needed to be able to transcribe the lengthy and informative interviews with staff.


There’s no ground-breaking digital preservation goodness contained within this post so you have permission to leave this page now. However, this groundwork is crucial to gaining an understanding of how institutions can prepare for digital preservation skills and knowledge development. It may also be useful to anyone who is preparing to transcribe recorded interviews.

Post-interview: transcribing the recording

Once you have interviewed your candidates and made sure that you have all the recordings (suitably backed up three times into private, network free storage like an encrypted USB stick so as to respect privacy wishes), it is time to transcribe.

So, what do you need?

  • A very quiet room. Preferably silence, where there are no distractions and where you can’t distract people. You may wish to choose the dictation path and if you do that in an open plan office, you may attract attention. You will also be reciting information that you have assured will remain confidential.
  • Audio equipment. You will need a device that can play your audio files and has an audio control player built into it. You can use your device’s speakers, headphones, preferably with a control device built into the wire, or foot pedal.
  • Time. Bucket loads of it. If you are doing other work, this needs to become the big rock in your time planning, everything else should be mere pebbles and sand. This is where manager support is really helpful, as is…
  • Understanding. The understanding that this will rule your working life for the next month or two and the understanding of those around the size of the task of what you are doing. To have an advocate who has experience of this type of work before is invaluable.
  • Patience. Of a saint.
  • Simple transcription rules. Given the timeframes of the project, complex transcription would have been too time consuming. Please see the following work below, as used by the University of California, San Diego, it’s really useful with nice big text.
    Dresing, Thorsten/Pehl, Thorsten/Schmieder, Christian (2015): Manual (on) Transcription. Transcription Conventions, Software Guides and Practical Hints for Qualitative Researchers. 3rd English Edition. Marburg Available Online: http://www.audiotranskription.de/english/transcription-practicalguide.htm
    (Last accessed: 27.06.2017). ISBN: 978-3-8185-0497-7.

Cropped view of person hands typing on laptop computer. Image credit: Designed by Freepik

What did you do?

Using a Mac environment, I imported the audio files for transcription into a desktop folder and created a play list in iTunes. I reduced the iTunes application to the mini player view and opened up Word to type into. I plugged in my headphones and pressed play and typed as I was listening.

If you get tired typing, the Word application on my Mac has a nifty voice recognition package. It’s uncannily good now. Whilst I tried to route the output sound into the mic by using Soundflower (I wasted time doing this as when the transcription did yield readable text, it used words worthy of inciting a Mary Whitehouse campaign) I did find that dictation provided a rest for weary fingers. After a while, you will probably need to rest a weary voice, so you can switch back to typing.

When subjects starting talking quickly, I needed a way to slow them down as constantly pressing pause and rewind got onerous. A quick fix for this was to download Audacity. This has the function to slow down your sound files. Once the comedic effect of voice alteration has worn off, it becomes easier to transcribe as you don’t have to pause and rewind as much.

Process wise, it doesn’t sound much and it isn’t. It’s just the sheer hours of audio that needs to be made legible through listening, rewinding an typing.

How can the process be made (slightly) easier?

  • Investigate transcription technology and processes. Investigate technologies available beforehand that you can access. I wish I had done this rather than rely on the expectation that I would be just listening and typing. I didn’t find a website with the answer but a thoughtful web search can help you with certain parts of the transcription method.
  • Talk slowly. This one doesn’t apply to the transcription process but the interview process. Try and ask the questions a little bit slower than you usually would as the respondent will subconsciously mimic your speed of delivery and slow themselves down

Hang on in there, it’s worth it

Even if you choose to incorporate the suggestions above, be under absolutely no illusions: transcription is a gruelling task. That’s not a slight against the participants’ responses for they will be genuinely interesting and insightful. No, it’s a comment on the frustration of the process and sheer mental grind of getting through it. I must admit I had only come to a reasonably happy transcription method by the time I had reached number fourteen (of fifteen). However, the effort is completely worth it. In the end, I now have around 65,000 quality words (research data) to analyse to understand what existing digital skills, knowledge, ways of learning and managing change exist within my institution that can be fed into the development of digital preservation skills and knowledge.

Skills interviewing using the DPOC skills interview toolkit

Cambridge Outreach & Training Fellow, Lee, shares his experiences in skills auditing.


As I am nearing the end of my fourteenth transcription and am three months into skills interview process, now is a good time to pause and reflect. This post will look at the experience of the interview process using the DPOC digital preservation skills toolkit. this toolkit is currently under development; we are learning and improving it as we trial it at Cambridge and Oxford.

Step 1: Identify your potential participants

To understand colleagues’ use of technology and training needs, a series of interviews were arranged. We agreed that a maximum sample of 25 participants would give us plenty (perhaps too much?) of material to work with. Before invitations were sent out, a list was made up of potential participants. In building the list, a set of criteria ensured that a broad range of colleagues were captured. This criteria consisted of:

  • in what department or library do they work?
  • is there a particular bias of colleagues from a certain department or library and can this be redressed?
  • what do they do?
  • is there a suitable practitioner to manager ratio?

The criteria relies on you having a good grasp of your institution, its organisation and the people within it. If you are unsure, start asking managers and colleagues who do know your institution very well—you will learn a lot! It is also worth having a longer list than your intended maximum in case you do not get responses, or people are not available or do not wish to participate.

Step 2: Inviting your potential participants

Prior to sending out invitations, the intended participant’s managers were consulted to see if they would agree to their staff time being used in this way. This was also a good opportunity to continue awareness raising of the project as well as getting buy-in to the the interview process.

The interviews were arranged in blocks of five to make planning around other work easier.

Step 3: Interviewing

The DPOC semi-structured skills interview questions were put to the test at this step. Having developed the questions beforehand ensured I covered the necessary digital preservation skills during the interview.

Here are some tips I gained from the interview process which helped to get some great responses.

  • Offer refreshments before the interview. Advise beforehand that a generous box of chocolate biscuits will be available throughout proceeding. This also gives you an excellent chance to talk informally to your subject and put them at ease, especially if they appear nervous.
  • If using, make sure your recording equipment is working. There’s nothing worse than thinking you have fifty minutes of interview gold only to find that you’ve not pressed play or the device has run out of power. Take a second device, or if you don’t want the technological hassle, use pen(cil) and paper.
  • Start with colleagues that you know quite well. This will help you understand the flow of the questions better and they will not shy away from honest feedback.
  • Always have printed copies of interview questions. Technology almost always fails you.

My next post will be about transcribing and analysing interviews.

Outreach and Training Fellows visit CoSector, University of London

Outreach & Training Fellow, Lee, chronicles his visit with Sarah to meet CoSector’s Steph Taylor and Ed Pinsent.


On Wednesday 29 March, a date forever to be associated with the UK triggering of Article 50, Sarah and Lee met with CoSector’s Stephanie Taylor and Ed Pinsent in the spirit of co-operation. For those that don’t know, Steph and Ed are behind the award-winning Digital Preservation Training  Programme.

Russell Square was overcast but it was great to see that London was still business as usual with its hallmark traffic congestion and bus loads of sightseers lapping up the cultural hotspots. Revisiting the University of London’s Senate House is always a visual pleasure and it’s easy to see why it was home to the Ministry of Information: the building screams order and neat filing.

Senate House, University of London

Senate House, University of London. Image credit: By stevecadman – http://www.flickr.com/photos/stevecadman/56350347/, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6400009

We were keen to speak to Steph and Ed to tell them more about the DPOC Project to date and where we were at with training developments. Similarly, we were also keen to learn about the latest developments from CoSector’s training plans and we were interested to hear that CoSector will be developing their courses into more specialist areas of digital preservation, so watch this space… (well at least, the CoSector space).

It was a useful meeting because it gave us the opportunity to get instant feedback on the way the project is working and where we could help to feed into current training and development needs. In particular, they were really interested to learn about the relationship between the project team and IT. Sarah and I feel that because we have access to two technical IT experts who are on board and happy to answer our questions—however simple they may be from an IT point of view—we feel that it is easier to understand IT issues. Similarly, we find that we have better conversations with our colleagues who are Developers and Operations IT specialists because we have a linguistic IT bridge with our technical colleagues.

It was a good learning opportunity and we hope to build upon this first meeting in the future as a part of sustainable training solution.

A view from the basement – a visit the DPC Glasgow

Last Monday, Sarah, Edith and Lee visited the Digital Preservation Coalition (DPC) at their DPC Glasgow Office on University Gardens. The aim of the visit was to understand how the DPC has and will lend support to the DPOC project. The DPOC team is very fortunate in having the DPC’s expertise, resources and services at their disposal as a supporting partner in the project and we were keen to find out more.

Plied with tea, coffee and Sharon McMeekin’s awesome lemon cake, William Kilbride gave us an overview of the DPC, explaining that that they are not-for-profit membership based organisation who used to mainly cater for the UK and Ireland. However, international agencies are now welcome (UN, NATO, ICC to name a few) and this has changed the nature of their program and the features that they offer (website, streaming, event recording). They are vendor neutral but do have a ‘Commercial Supporter’ community to help support events and raise funds for digital preservation work. They have six members of staff working from the DPC Glasgow and DPC York offices. They focus upon four main areas of:

  • Workforce Development, Training and Skills
  • Communication and Advocacy
  • Research and Practice
  • Partnerships and Sustainability

William explained the last three areas and Sharon gave us an overview of the work that she does for developing workforce skills and offering training events, especially the ‘Getting Started in Digital Preservation’ and ‘Making Progress’ workshops. The DPC also provide Leadership Scholarships to help develop knowledge and CPD in digital preservation, so please do apply for those if you are working somewhere that can spare your time out of the office but can’t fund you.

In terms of helping DPOC, the DPC can help with hosting events (such as PASIG 2017) and provide supporting training resources for our organisations. They can also help with procurement processes, auditing as well as calling on the wealth of advice gained from their six members of staff.

We left feeling that, despite working as a collaborative team with colleagues we can already bounce ideas off, we had a wider support network that we could call on, guide us and help us share our work more widely. From a skills and training perspective, the idea that they are happy to review, comment and suggest further avenues for the skills needs analysis toolkit to ensure it will benefit of the wider community is of tremendous use. Yet this is one such example, and help with procurement, policy development and auditing is also something they are willing to help the project with.

It is reassuring that the DPC are there and have plenty of experience to share in the digital preservation sphere. Tapping into networks, sharing knowledge and collaborating really is the best way to help achieve a coherent, sustainable approach to digital preservation and helps those working in it to focus on specific tasks rather than try and ‘reinvent the wheel’ when somebody else has already spent time on it.

DPC Student Conference – What I Wish I Knew Before I Started

At the end of January, I went to the Chancellor’s Hall at the University of London’s Art Deco style Senate House. Near to the entrance of the Chancellor’s Hall was Room 101. Rumours circulated amongst the delegates keenly awaiting the start of the conference that the building and the room were the inspiration for George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Instead of facing my deepest and darkest digital preservation fears in Senate House, I was keen to see and hear what the leading digital preservation trainers and invited speakers at different stages of their careers had to say. For the DPOC project, I wanted to see what types of information were included in introductory digital preservation training talks, to witness the styles of delivery and what types of questions the floor would raise to see if there were any obvious gaps in the delivery. For the day’s programme, presenters’ slides and Twitter Storify, may I recommend that you visit the DPC webpage for this event:

http://www.dpconline.org/events/past-events/wiwik-2017

The take away lesson from the day, is just do something, don’t be afraid to start. Sharon McMeekin showed us how much the DPC can help (see their new website, it’s chock full of digital preservation goodness) and Steph Taylor from CoSense showed us that you can achieve a lot in digital preservation just through keeping an eye on emerging technologies and that you spend most of your time advocating that digital preservation is not just backing up. Steph also reinforced to the student delegation that you can approach members of the digital preservation community, they are all very friendly!

From the afternoon session, Dave Thompson reminded those assembled that we also need to think about the information age that we live in, how people use information, how they are their own gatekeepers to their digital records and how recordkeepers need to react to these changes, which will require a change in thinking from traditional recordkeeping theory and practice. As Adrian Brown put it for digital archivists, “digital archivists are archivists with superpowers”. One of those superpowers is the ability to adapt to your working context and the technological environment. Digital preservation is a constantly changing field and the practitioner needs to be able to adapt and change to the environment around them in a chameleon like manner to get their institution’s work preserved. Jennifer Febles reminded us that is also OK to say that “you don’t know” when training people, you can go away and learn or even learn from other colleagues. As for the content of the day, there were no real gaps, the day programme was spot on as far as I could tell from the delegates.

Whilst reflecting on the event on the journey back on the train (and whilst simultaneously being packed into the stifling hot carriage like a sweaty sardine), the one thing that I really wanted to find out was what the backgrounds of the delegates were. More specifically, what ‘information schools’ they were attending, what courses they were undertaking, how much their modules concerned digital recordkeeping and their preservation, and, most importantly, what they are being taught in those modules.

My thoughts then drifted towards thinking of those who have been given the label of ‘digital preservation experts’. They have cut their digital preservation teeth after their formal qualifications and training in an ostensibly different subject. Through a judicious application and blending of discipline-specific learning, learning about related fields they then apply this learning to their specific working context. Increasingly, in the digital world, those from a recordkeeping background need to embrace computer science skills and applications, especially for those where coding and command line operation is not a skill they have been brought up with. We seem to be at a point where the leading digital preservation practitioners are plying their trade (as they should) and not teaching their trade in a formal education setup. A very select few are doing both but if we pulled practitioners into formal digital preservation education programmes, would we then drain the discipline of innovative practice? Should digital preservation skills (which DigCurV has done well to define) be better suited to one big ‘on the job’ learning programme rather than more formal programmes. A mix of both would be my suggestion but this discussion will never close.

Starting out in digital preservation may seem terribly daunting, with so much to learn as there is so much going on. I think that the ‘information schools’ can equip students with the early skills and knowledge but from then on, the experience and skills is learned on the job. The thing that makes the digital preservation community standout is that people are not afraid to share their knowledge and skills for the benefit of preserving cultural heritage for the future.

Data reproducibility, provenance capture and preservation

An update from the Cambridge Fellows about their visit to the Cambridge Computer Laboratory to learn about the team’s research on provenance metadata.


In amongst preparing reports for the powers that be and arranging vendor meetings, Dave and Lee took a trip over to the William Gates Building which houses the University of Cambridge’s Computer Laboratory. The purpose of the visit was to find out about the Digital Technology Group’s  projects from one of their Senior Research Associates, Dr. Ripduman Sohan. 

The particular project was the FRESCO project which stands for Fabric For Reproducible Computing. You can find out more about the strands of this project here: https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/dtg/fresco. The link to the poster is especially useful and clearly and succintly captures the key points of the meeting far better than my meeting notes.

Cambridge Computer Laboratory - FRESCO Poster

FRESCO Poster. Image credit: Cambridge Computer Laboratory.

The discussion on provenance was of interest to me coming from an recordkeeping background and hearing it discussed in computer science terms. What he was talking about and what archivists do really wasn’t a million miles apart – just that the provenance capture on the data happens in nanoseconds on mind blowing amounts of data.

Rip’s approach, to my ears at least, was refreshing. He believes that computer scientists should start to listen to, move across into and understand ‘other’ domains like the humanities. Computer science should be ‘computing for the future of the planet’ and not a subject that should impose itself on other disciplines which creates a binary choice of the CompSci way or the highway. This is so they can use their computer science skills to help both future research and the practitioners working with humanities information and data.

The other place

Image

The Cambridge team visited Oxford last week. Whilst there won’t be anything of a technical nature in this post, it is worth acknowledging that building and developing a core team for sustainable digital preservation is just as important a function as tools and technical infrastructure.


One of the first reactions we get when we talk about DPOC and its collaborative nature between Oxford and Cambridge is “how on earth do you get anything done?” given the perceived rivalry between the two institutions. “Surprisingly well, thank you” tends to be our answer. Sure, due to the collaborative (and human) nature of any project, there will be times when work doesn’t run parallel and we don’t immediately agree on an approach, but we’ve not let historical rivalry get in the way of working together.

To keep collaboration going, we usually meet on a Wednesday huddled around our respective laptops to participate in a ‘Team Skype’. As a change from this, the Cambridge people (Dave, Lee, Somaya, Suzanne, and Tuan) travelled over to see the Oxford people (Edith, Michael, and Sarah) for two days of valuable face to face meetings and informative talks. The Fellows travelled together; knowing we’d be driving through the rush hour on an east to west traverse, we left a bit earlier. What we hadn’t accounted for was a misbehaving satnav (see below), but it’s the little things like this that make teams bond too. We arrived half an hour before the start for an informal catch-up with Sarah, Edith, and Michael. Such time and interaction is very important to keep the team gelled together.

Satnav misbehaving complicating what is usually a simple left turn at a roundabout. Image credit: Somaya Langley.

Satnav misbehaving, complicating what is usually a simple left turn at a roundabout. Image credit: Somaya Langley.

A team meeting in the Osney One Boardroom formally started the day at 11am. It continued as a working lunch as we had plenty to discuss! We then had a fascinating insight into the developers’ aspects of how materials are ingested into the ORA repository from Michael Davis, followed by an overview from Sarah Barkla on how theses are deposited and their surrounding rights issues. Breaking for a cup of tea and team photo, the team then had split sessions; Sarah and Lee reviewed skills survey work whilst Dave, Edith, and Somaya discussed rationale and approaches to collections auditing.

Thursday saw the continuation of working in smaller teams. Sarah, Lee, and Michael had meetings to discuss PASIG 2017 organisation details. Dave, Edith, and Somaya (later joined by Michael) discussed their joint work before having a talk from Amanda Flynn and David Tomkins on open access and research data management.

Lunchtime heralded the time to board Oxford University’s minibus service to the 14th century Vault Café, St Mary’s Church for a tasty lunch (communal eating and drinking is very important for team building). We then went to the Weston Library to discuss Dave’s digital preservation pattern language over cake in the Weston’s spectacular Blackwell Hall and then on up to the BEAM (Bodleian Electronic Archives and Manuscripts) Lab (a fantastically tidy room with a FRED and many computers) to see and hear Susan Thomas, Matthew Neely, and Rachel Gardner talk about, show, and discuss BEAM’s processes. From a recordkeeping point of view, it was both comforting and refreshing to see that despite working in the digital realm, the archival principles around selection, appraisal, and access rights issues remain constant.

View from the BEAM Lab

The end of the rainbow on the left as viewed from the BEAM lab in the Weston Library. Image credit: Somaya Langley.

The mix of full team sessions, breaking into specialisms, joining up again for talks, and informal talks over tea breaks and lunches was a successful blend of continually building team relationships and contributing to progress. Both teams came away from the two days with reinforced ideas, new ideas, and enhanced clarity of continuing work and aims to keep all aspects of the digital preservation programme on track.

We don’t (and can’t) work in a bubble when it comes to digital preservation and the more that we can share the various components that make up ‘digital preservation’ and collaborate, the better contribution the team can make towards interested communities.

img_2744

The DP0C team assembled together on day one in Oxford.

Reflecting on knowledge and skills

From the Outreach & Training perspective at iPres2016, the work of the NDSR competencies has given us much thought towards both the content and methodology of our skills and knowledge needs survey. Jaye Weatherburn’s award nominated iPres poster also reinforced our present thinking. In the poster it stated that

digital preservation is not just a system. It’s about the people, the culture, and the support networks that provide the expertise to build the robust infrastructure required to safeguard digital assets into the future to ensure reuse and reproducibility.

It was great to see that culture and organisation were included in their four distinct areas of focus for digital preservation alongside the perceived established areas of policy and infrastructure.

One of the draws of the Polonsky project was that there were three distinct roles, one of which focussed purely on engagement with its immediate designated communities and the the wider digital preservation world, which had a particular focus on people and organisational culture.

Sustainable digital preservation is not just about tools running from command lines, workflows and deep knowledge of file formats (although that is a massive component of it and are skills that can be learned!) it’s also about an awareness of the working environment and contexts in which the preservation of digital assets is needed. To make this happen, we need the people in our cultural institution to be aware of looking after these digital assets for the long term. Our particular task is to make it accessible and relatable to colleagues. Digital preservation is not something to be afraid of and we hope to strike a chord with them that perhaps this digital preservation thing isn’t as abstract as they might have first thought and is something that they already have the relevant transferable skills and attributes.

We’ll avoid the use of digital preservation buzzwords where possible but through constant review and in consultation with our institutional HR teams we’ll see what specific terms and requirements stand the test of time and what terms become a passing fad. However, until we find out what our colleagues do know and what they can do, can we then begin to give them training, support and confidence with their needs when they think about preserving cultural digital objects.

To do this, we’ve been working on a skills survey which has so far reviewed skills frameworks like DigCurV and DigCCurr, competency frameworks like CILIP and ARA as well as our own institutions and projects and papers such as PARADIGM and the follow up work done by The University of British Columbia.

When the survey template is complete, we will share with you here first on our Resource page which we’d love to get feedback on. We won’t be sharing the results of the survey until we get permission to publish an anonymised summary. If you feel moved to contribute to this discussion on what attributes, skills and competencies are needed to work in digital preservation, please get in touch or leave us a comment.