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.

Training begins: personal digital archiving

Outreach & Training Fellow, Sarah, has officially begun training and capacity building with session on personal digital archiving at the Bodleian Libraries. Below Sarah shares how the first session went and shares some personal digital archiving tips.


Early Tuesday morning and the Weston Library had just opened to readers. I got to town earlier than usual, stopping to get a Melbourne-style flat white at one of my favourite local cafes – to get in me in the mood for public speaking. By 9am I was in the empty lecture theatre, fussing over cords, adjusting lighting and panicking of the fact I struggled to log in to the laptop.

At 10am, twenty-one interested faces were seated with pens at the ready; there was nothing else to do but take a deep breath and begin.

In the 1.5 hour session, I covered the DPOC project, digital preservation and personal digital archiving. The main section of the training was learning about personal digital archiving, preservation lifecycle and the best practice steps to follow to save your digital stuff!

The steps of the Personal Digital Archiving & Preservation Lifecycle are intended to help with keeping your digital files organised, findable and accessible over time. It’s not prescriptive advice, but it is a good starting point for better habits in your personal and work lives. Below are tips for every stage of the lifecycle that will help build better habits and preserve your valuable digital files.

Keep Track and Manage:

  • Know where your digital files are and what digital files you have: make a list of all of the places you keep your digital files
  • find out what is on your storage media – check the label, read the file and folder names, open the file to see the content
  • Most importantly: delete or dispose of things you no longer need.
    • This includes: things with no value, duplicates, blurry images, previous document versions (if not important) and so on.

Organise:

  • Use best practice for file naming:
    • No spaces, use underscores _ and hyphens – instead
    • Put ‘Created Date’ in the file name using yyyymmdd format
    • Don’t use special characters <>,./:;'”\|[]()!@£$%^&*€#`~
    • Keep the name concise and descriptive
    • Use a version control system for drafts (e.g. yyyymmdd_documentname_v1.txt)
  • Use best practice for folder naming;
    • Concise and descriptive names
    • Use dates where possible (yyyy or yyyymmdd)
    • keep file paths short and avoid a deep hierarchy
    • Choose structures that are logical to you and to others
  • To rename large groups of image files, consider using batch rename software

Describe:

  • Add important metadata directly into the body of a text document
    • creation date & version dates
    • author(s)
    • title
    • access rights & version
    • a description about the purpose or context of the document
  • Create a README.txt file of metadata for document collections
    • Be sure to list the folder names and file names to preserve the link between the metadata and the text file
    • include information about the context of the collection, dates, subjects and relevant information
    • this is a quick method for creating metadata around digital image collections
  • Embed the metadata directly in the file
  • for image and video: be sure to add subjects, location and a description of the trip or event
  • Add tags to documents and images to aid discoverability
  • Consider saving the ‘Creation Date’ in the file name, a free text field in the metadata, in the document header or in a README text file if it is important to you. In some cases transferring the file (copying to new media, uploading to cloud storage) will change the creation date and the original date will be lost. The same goes for saving as a different file type. Always test before transfer or ‘Save As’ actions or record the ‘Creation Date’ elsewhere.

Store:

  • Keep two extra backups in two geographically different locations
  • Diversify your backup storage media to protect against potential hardware faults
  • Try to save files in formats better suited to long-term access (for advice on how to choose file formats, visit Stanford University Libraries)
  • refresh your storage media every three to five years to protect against loss of hardware failure
  • do annual spot checks, including checking all backups. This will help check for any loss, corruption or damaged backups. Also consider checking all of the different file types in your collection, to ensure they are still accessible, especially if not saved in a recommended long-term file format.

Even I can admit I need better personal archiving habits. How many photographs are still on my SD cards, waiting for transfer, selection/deletion and renaming before saving in a few choice safe backup locations? The answer is: too many. 

Perhaps now that my first training session is over, I should start planning my personal side projects. I suspect clearing my backlog of SD cards is one of them.

Useful resources on personal digital archiving:

DPC Technology Watch Report, “Personal digital archiving” by Gabriela Redwine

DPC Case Note, “Personal digital preservation: Photographs and video“, by Richard Wright

Library of Congress “Personal Archiving” website, which includes guidance on preserving specific digital formats, videos and more

 

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.

Post-holiday project update

You may be forgiven for thinking that the DPOC project has gone a little quiet since the festive period. In this post, Sarah summarises the work that continues at a pace.


The Christmas trees have been recycled, the decorations returned to attics or closets, and the last of the mince pies have been eaten. It is time to return to project work and face the reality that we are six months into the DPOC project. That leaves us one and a half years to achieve our aims and bring useful tools and recommendations to Cambridge, Oxford, and the wider digital preservation community. This of course means we’re neck-deep in reporting at the moment, so things have seemed a bit quiet.

So what does that mean for the project at the moment?

Myscreen

A view of my second screen at the moment. The real challenge is remembering which file I am editing. (Image credit: Sarah Mason)

At both Cambridge and Oxford, all Fellows are working on drafting collection audit reports and reviewing various policies. The Outreach & Training Fellows are disseminating their all staff awareness survey and will be compiling the results from it in February. At Oxford, semi-structured interviews with managers and practitioners working with digital collections is in full swing. At Cambridge, the interviews will start after the awareness survey results have been analysed. This is expected to last through until March – holidays and illnesses willing! The Oxford team is getting their new Technical Fellow, James, up to speed with the project. Cambridge’s Technical Fellow is speaking with many vendors and doing plenty of analysis on the institutional repository.

For those of you attending IDCC in Edinburgh in February, look for our poster on our TRAC and skills audits on our institutional repositories. Make sure to stop by to chat to us about our methodology and early results!

We’re also going to visit colleagues at a number of institutions around the UK over the next few months, seeing some technical systems in action and learning about their staff skills and policies. This knowledge sharing is crucial to the DPOC project, but also the growth of the digital preservation community.

And it’s been six months since the start of the project, so we’re all in reporting mode, writing up and looking over our achievements for the past 6 months. After the reports have been drafted, redrafted, and finalised, expect a full update and some reflections on how this collaborative project is going.

The digital preservation gap(s)

Somaya’s engaging, reflective piece identifies gaps in the wider digital preservation field and provides insightful thoughts as to how the gaps can be narrowed or indeed closed.


I initially commenced this post as a response to the iPres 2016 conference and an undercurrent that caught my attention there – however, really it is a broader comment on field of digital preservation itself. This post ties into some of my thoughts that have been brewing for several years about various gaps I’ve discovered in the digital preservation field. As part of the Polonsky Digital Preservation Project, I hope we will be able to do some of the groundwork to begin to address a number of these gaps.

So what are these gaps?

To me, there are many. And that’s not to say that there aren’t good people working very hard to address them – there are. (I should note that these people often do this work as part of their day jobs as well as evenings and weekends.)

Specifically, the gaps (at least the important ones I see) are:

  • Silo-ing of different areas of practice and knowledge (developers, archivists etc.)
  • Lack of understanding of working with born-digital materials at the coalface (including managing donor relationships)
  • Traditionally-trained archivists, curators and librarians wanting a ‘magic wand’ to deal with ‘all things digital’
  • Tools to undertake certain processes that do not currently exist (or do not exist for the technological platform or limitation archivists, curators, and librarians are having to work with)
  • Lack of existing knowledge of command line and/or coding skills in order to run the few available tools (skills that often traditionally-trained archivists, curators, and librarians don’t have under their belt)
  • Lack of knowledge of how to approach problem-solving

I’ve sat at the nexus between culture and technology for over two decades and these issues don’t just exist in the field of digital preservation. I’ve worked in festival and event production, radio broadcast and as an audiovisual tech assistant. I find similar issues in these fields too. (For example, the sound tech doesn’t understand the type of music the musician is creating and doesn’t mix it the right way, or the artist requesting the technician to do something not technically possible.) In the digital curation and digital preservation contexts, effectively I’ve been a translator between creators (academics, artists, authors, producers etc.), those working at the coalface of collecting institutions (archivists, curators and librarians) and technologists.

To me, one of the gaps was brought to the fore and exacerbated during the workshop: OSS4Pres 2.0: Building Bridges and Filling Gaps which built on the iPres 2015 workshop “Using Open-Source Tools to Fulfill Digital Preservation Requirements”. Last year I’d contributed my ideas prior to the workshop, however I couldn’t be there in person. This year I very much wanted to be part of the conversation.

What struck me was the discussion still began with the notion that digital preservation commences at the point where files are in a stable state, such as in a digital preservation system (or digital asset management system). Appraisal and undertaking data transfers wasn’t considered at all, yet it is essential to capture metadata (including technical metadata) at this very early point. (Metadata captured at this early point may turn into preservation metadata in the long run.)

I presented a common real-world use case/user story in acquiring born-digital collections: A donor has more than one Mac computer, each running different operating systems. The archivist needs to acquire a small selection of the donor’s files. The archivist cannot install any software onto the donor’s computers, ask them to install any software and only selected the files must be collected – hence, none of the computers can be disk imaged.

The Mac-based tools that exist to do this type of acquisition rely on Java software. Contemporary Mac operating systems don’t come with Java installed by default. Many donors are not competent computer users. They haven’t installed this software as they have no knowledge of it, need for it, or literally wouldn’t know how to. I put this call out to the Digital Curation Google Groups list several months ago, before I joined the Polonsky Digital Preservation Project. (It followed on from work that myself and my former colleagues at the National Library of Australia had undertaken to collect born-digital manuscript archives, having first run into this issue in 2012.) The response to my real-world use case at iPres was:

This final option is definitely not possible in many circumstances, including when collecting political archives from networked environments inside government buildings (another real-world use case I’ve had first-hand experience of). The view was that anything else isn’t possible or is much harder (yes, I’m aware). Nevertheless, this is the reality of acquiring born-digital content, particularly unpublished materials. It demands both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ skills in equal parts.

The discussion at iPres 2016 brought me back to the times I’ve previously thought about how I could facilitate a way for former colleagues to spend “a day in someone else’s shoes”. It’s something I posed several times when working as a Producer at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Archivists have an incredible sense of how to manage the relationship with a donor who is handing over their life’s work, ensuring the donor entrusts the organisation with the ongoing care of their materials. However traditionally trained archivists, curators and librarians typically don’t have in-depth technical skillsets. Technologists often haven’t witnessed the process of liaising with donors first-hand. Perhaps those working in developer and technical roles, which is typically further down the workflow for processing born-digital materials need opportunities to observe the process of acquiring born-digital collections from donors. Might this give them an increased appreciation for the scenarios that archivists find themselves in (and must problem-solve their way out of)? Conversely, perhaps archivists, curators and librarians need to witness the process of developers creating software (especially the effort needed to create a small GUI-based tool for collecting born-digital materials from various Mac operating systems) or debug code. Is this just a case of swapping seats for a day or a week? Definitely sharing approaches to problem-solving seems key.

Part of what we’re doing as part of the Polonsky Digital Preservation Project is to start to talk more holistically, rather than the term ‘digital preservation’ we’re talking about ‘digital stewardship’. Therefore, early steps of acquiring born-digital materials aren’t overlooked. As the Policy and Planning Fellow at Cambridge University Library, I’m aware I can affect change in a different way. Developing policy –  including technical policies (for example, the National Library of New Zealand’s Preconditioning Policy, referenced here) – means I can draw on my first-hand experience of acquiring born-digital collections with a greater understanding of what it takes to do this type of work. For now, this is the approach I need to take and I’m looking forward to the changes I’ll be able to influence.


Comments on Somaya’s piece would be most welcome. There’s plenty of grounds for discussion and constructive feedback will only enhance the wider, collaborative approach to addressing the issue of preserving digital content.

How do we solve the developer gap? The ever-present question for libraries and archives.

PASIG 2016 was held at MoMA in NYC on 26-28 October 2016. And like many digital preservation conferences, Twitter was ablaze with ideas and discussions—both those in attendance and those watching from twitter feeds at their desks.

During Karen Cariani’s (Director WGBH Media Library and Archives) presentation, ‘The Complexity of Preserving Digital Media Files,’ there was a tweet highlighting a point from Cariani regarding the lack of developers in the library and archives sector:

This was something I have been pondering on for some time; it led me to retweet with this question:

And then I went back to the conference only to realise I had unleashed quite a strong debate among developers, IT staff, librarians and archivists working in a diverse range of institutions. Turns out, this is a question many people are asking as well. And the answer is probably not straightforward, or at least not answerable in 140 characters.

However, I was inundated with plenty of good ideas. Here are a few of the highlights:

And this only a selection of the conversations from the Twitterverse. It shows that there are many ideas for potential solutions to the ‘developer gap’ in libraries and archives. However, there’s no one-size-fits all solution for every institution. These ideas sound great, but do they work in practice?

Pay developers market rates. Or at least on par with IT staff.
This would ideally make our developer roles competitive, but as budgets continue shrink in our sector this proposal can be hard for some institutions to get the support from senior management to pay market rates. Paying on par with other IT staff seems a given and I would be interested to see where this is not put into practice and why not.

Find burnt out IT staff and lure them over.
If we can sell a work-life balance and other benefits in our organisations, perhaps that would make up for different rates. Remuneration is not all about the salary, but about the overall benefits. And if your institution can offer them, should this be highlighted in job advertisements up front better? After all, it’s not always all about the money…we also have interesting puzzles to solve!

Improving higher education curriculums for library and archives programmes.
Should understanding the digital environment (such as Web 2.0 and the Internet) still be taught in 2016 or can we all agree that students should have these prerequisite skills? Can we include basic computing science and basic programming skills? These skills are reaching into broader fields than just computer science, so why have library and archives courses not bothered to catch up? Even if it doesn’t give a librarian/archivist all the skills to be a developer, it will help to bridge the communication gap between IT and librarians/archivists.

Preserve less?
Likely a very contentious solution, for a number of reasons. Having strong and clear collections development policies will outline the scope of collection, but sometimes institutions cannot simply say ‘no’. However, whenever we acquire a collection, considerations must be made. It’s not just about the cost of storage that matters in digital preservation, but the cost of care and management over time.

There is likely no one easy solution. It is likely a combination of many things and shifts that will take place over years—probably at a glacial pace. These questions and potential solutions should be considered, because our development needs aren’t going anywhere. I think it’s safe to say that digital is here to stay…


Have an idea how to fill the developer gap? Share below:

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.

The Fellows’ routes into digital preservation

One of the important thoughts that we took away from iPres2016 is that we are not alone in trying to implement a digital preservation programme at Oxford and Cambridge: we are part of a helpful, collaborative digital preservation community. We were also struck by the variety of backgrounds conference attendees had that brought them to the digital preservation field.

Leaving a debate on the definition of digital preservation aside (we will be blogging on this in the future!), the variety of backgrounds got us thinking firstly about the skills, knowledge and competency survey that we have been tasked with. Secondly – and more importantly for this blog – about the backgrounds and experiences of the Polonsky team and what attributes each one brings to the project team. We put the following two questions to the Fellows:

  1. What background and experience do you bring to the project?
  2. What particular skills, knowledge and attributes do you bring project?

These are their thoughts:

Dave

I have worked in IT systems design and development for 20 years, recently graduating with a PhD in Information Science. I have worked with museums and archives on digitisation projects. I have knowledge of Information Retrieval that is applicable to the discovery aspects of digital preservation, but I have plenty of expertise of working with data more generally, too.

Edith

I come from a background in the Social Sciences and Archives, which has given me experience in collecting and interpreting evidence. This was the path which brought me into Digital Preservation, as I enjoy constantly learning, problem-solving and of course lovely big chunks of data.

Lee

I have a professional background in records management, archives and UK information compliance with over a decade of experience. I enjoy explaining ideas and systems to people, demystifying seemingly abstract concepts to help people develop their own skills and interests.

Sarah

I bring to the field a strong background in photography, alternative processes and the management of photographic collections, physical and digital. Being in that field drew me to digital preservation; the question of “now what?” came up regularly when looking at managing born-digital and digitised photographs over time. I believe important attributes that I to bring to the field are an eagerness for life-long learning and a tenacity towards problem-solving. I’ve found that being willing to learn something new and tackle a problem logically (and with the help of Google or by asking people). Also, just “giving it a go” can go a long way when working in digital preservation.

Somaya

I have a background in the arts and music and have spent over 20 years working at the nexus between creativity and technology. I am a (somewhat lapsed) sound/media artist and have worked in a number of cultural institutions across the GLAM sector in Australia. I’ve worked in a production and tech capacity in Australia and Germany on festivals and events as well as live-to-air national radio broadcasts. This has given me considerable experience in problem-solving technical issues in short time-critical situations. Basically, I’m a jill-of-all trades, mistress of none and I learn something new every day.

To draw these together, we made a word cloud to see if there were any common attributes.

Word cloud from the Fellows' thoughts.

Word cloud from the Fellows’ thoughts. Courtesy of wordle.net.

Apart from ‘digital’ and ‘preservation’ (as we would expect) some of the largest words in the cloud are:

  • problem-solving
  • people
  • information
  • archives
  • years

To address digital preservation in a sustainable way within our respective institutions, it would seem that a team that has the collective ability to enjoy solving problems, interacting with people as well as having varying, yet complementary, professional backgrounds and experience is a great starting point. We realise that in many organisations, assembling a team may not be practical nor have the resources available and we know that this project is very lucky in this regard. However, if you can problem-solve, interact with people in your organisations and the wider digital preservation community (they are very helpful!) you are well equipped to at least begin tackling your digital preservation challenges.

iPres 2016: outreach, competencies and training

iPres 2016 in Bern, Switzerland was an excellent opportunity to talk to practitioners and managers in the digital preservation field and begin to talk about the DPOC project. Here is a round-up of useful ideas from the Outreach and Training Fellows, Lee (Cambridge) and Sarah (Oxford).


iPres was an excellent opportunity to share ideas and ask questions; we have made great contacts and returned to the UK full of new ideas to trial in the project. Here are some of the best outreach, training and skills-related learnings that we got out of iPres 2016:

  • In-house training: Keep it short and refresh it regularly. Before the conference even started, we sat down to dinner with some colleagues from the British Library and chatted about their in-house training programme. They were full of useful tips about the value of running shorter awareness training sessions. We’re hoping to have the opportunity to see some of their training in action someday.
  • Research data stewards: find the gaps and helping them understand the value of preserving unique research data. Jeremy York (University of Michigan) delivered a paper on measuring the stewardship gap in research data management. His research can be seen here. The most interesting result was the disparity between the importance of the research data and the intention to preserve it–research data was deemed of high value, but there were no plans to preserve the data beyond the project. The question we must ask ourselves is: what training and support can we offer to help researchers understand how (and why) to preserve valuable research data?
  • Technical skills in digital preservation: important or role specific? Previous NDSR residents undertook a project to establish core competencies for a digital steward. The core competencies outlined from the findings were: technical skills, professional output responsibilities communication skills, research responsibilities, project management responsibilities and knowledge of standards and best practices. The research concluded that while those were the core competencies, skills were niche and role-specific, especially technical skills. It was interesting that communication skill and knowledge of standards and best practices were two competencies often viewed as essential where technical skills were not–soft skills still matter in digital preservation. The research can be accessed here.
  • Outreach and training: changing office culture to promote digital preservation. Jaye Weatherburn’s (University of Melbourne) poster got Lee and I talking about the importance of creating the right office culture when starting a digital preservation programme. Getting the message out about the importance of safeguarding digital assets, translating current expertise into future roles and the importance of using different messages for faculty and students. Jaye said in her poster introduction that “it’s about migrating the attitude as well as the bits.”

weatherburn-poster

  • Outreach: it’s an ongoing task. Workshop 12 on writing a business case had interesting discussions on outreach during breakout groups. One comment was that outreach doesn’t happen once in an organisation, but it happens all the time, forever; it happens upwards, sideways and down. Another comment was about getting staff to commit to digital preservation through showing them the value of a hybrid (physical and digital) archive; many of the skills are the same. And rather than having them in opposition, they should work together to augment each other. Many people who work with physical material (such as Conservators) will still have an important role to play with digital objects.

We’re looking forward to taking some of these learnings and applying them to our training needs assessment over the next few months. We’ll also be continuing with our outreach efforts (after all, it is always an ongoing effort) using some of the ideas suggested.


Stay tuned for more conference discussions from the Policy & Planning Fellow, Edith.