BDTD – Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ETD2012.

Apresentação em tema: "BDTD – Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ETD2012."— Transcrição da apresentação:

1 BDTD – Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ETD2012

2 Ana Pavani Member IEEE Laboratório de Automação de Museus, Bibliotecas Digitais e Arquivos Departamento de Engenharia Elétrica Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro apavani@lambda.ele.puc-rio.br http://www.maxwell.lambda.ele.puc-rio.br/ Lima, Peru – Sep 13, 2012

3 12 years of ETDs in Brasil 2001 - 2012 BDTD

4 BRAZIL

5

6 Population: 195.5 million (UNDP Report 2010) Language: Portuguese

7 North: 7.95% pop 45.25% area North East: 7.95% pop 45.25% area Center West: 5.85% pop 18.8% area South: 14.53% pop 6.77% area South East: 42.33% pop 10.86% area Fed Distric: 1.33% pop 0.07% area

8 LITERACY MAP IN 2000

9

10 Why 2000? Because the first meeting to establish BDTD, the Brazilian National ETD Consortium, was held in January 2001.

11 What can we see in the maps? (1) Brazil is very big. (2) Brazilian regions are very different in terms of areas and of populations; (3) They are also very different in terms of educational levels.

12 Why is this important? It helps understand the beginning of BDTD and it shows how BDTD was important in terms of disseminating ETDs, digital publishing, IPR issues, etc.

13 ETDs IN BRAZIL

14 Before 2001

15 UFSC – Univ Federal de Santa Catarina USP – Universidade de São Paulo PUC-Rio – Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro

16 2001 & 2002

17 Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ( Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações (http://bdtd.ibict.br/)http://bdtd.ibict.br/ Created and run by IBICT – Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia ( Created and run by IBICT – Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia (http://www.ibict.br/)http://www.ibict.br/

18 Main events:  Definition of a metadata set and a XML schema  First union catalog (Dec 2001)  Choice of the OAI-PMH – Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (http://www.openarchives.org/) to gather metadatahttp://www.openarchives.org/

19  Choice of the OAI-PMH – Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (http://www.openarchives.org/) to gather metadatahttp://www.openarchives.org/  First union catalog using OAI-PMH (Dec 2002) – there were two additional institutions and between 1,700 and 2,000 metadata records  Development of the TEDE system for free and open distribution  Implementation of a training program

20 December 2004

21 Number of ETD programs: 10 Number of ETDs: 5,394

22 Nordeste: 18.18% proj 0.463% ETDs Sul: 18.18% proj 35.206% ETDs Sudeste: 45.46% proj 63.144% ETDs Distrito Fed: 18.18% proj 1.187% ETDs

23 In two years: (1) Number of ETD programs: 3  10; (2) Number of ETDs:  2,000   5,500;  2,000   5,500; (3) Number of regions: 2  4. (3) Number of regions: 2  4.

24 September 2012

25 Number of ETD programs: 96 Number of ETDs: 200,216

26 North: 6.1% proj 0.6% ETDs North East: 19.4% proj 12.8% ETDs Center West: 5.1% proj 2.1% ETDs South: 21.4% proj 18.3% ETDs South East: 44.9% proj 62.6% ETDs Fed District: 3.1% proj 3.6% ETDs

27 Dec 2004Sep 2012% Growth Programs1096960.00 ETDs5,394200,2163,711.83 There are ETD programs in all regions!!

28 Some characteristics of BDTD:  10% of the members hold 66.95% of the collection  The top 3 institutions hold 44.71% of the collection  The top 2 institutions have more than 30K ETDs  18.75% of the institutions have less than 100 ETDs

29

30 Some benefits BDTD brought:  The culture of ‘digital libraries’ was spread all over the (huge) country  Topics in IPR, restrictions and Open Access were addressed  The offer of references to researchers and graduate students increased  Brazilian T&D became more visible

31  A metadata set for Brazilian ETDs was created  Brazilian institutions matured and became ready to introduce IR – Institutional Repositories and go beyond ETD (make available scholarly communications in general)

32 SOME ISSUES

33 Current

34  Poor quality of metadata  Institutions whose collections grow at a very slow pace  Digital preservation  Lack of a common set of statistic to allow comparisons among collections  Commitment from institutions to keep programs and services

35 Near future

36  Review of metadata model – is under discussion at the moment  Migration from TEDE to DSpace – some institutions  Repositories with multilingual interfaces

37 ETD CONSORTIA Pavani & Southwick (ETD2004)

38 Goal & Requirements

39 Goal:  To create a collaborative environment to promote interoperability and increase the availability of ETDs on networked digital libraries Requirements:  Partnership  Participation

40 Objectives

41  Help each other start and maintain ETD programs  Share experiences and SW solutions  Find new ways of enhancing programs and ETDs themselves  Discuss and create standards to allow interoperability  Create union catalogs of metadata records

42 Elements

43  ETDs!!!!  Coordination  Cooperation  Integration

44 Questions to Answer

45  Is it worthed to build a consortium?  What are the benefits you expect from a consortium?  Would you help build a consortium?  Would your institution join a consortium? Why? Why not?

46 THANK YOU! ¡MUCHAS GRACIAS! OBRIGADA!

47 Maps in slides 5 and 6 are colored versions of a mapa-mundi from IBGE – Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística http://www.ibge.gov.br/