Presentation to international specialists Information infrastructure in 2025.

Presentation to international specialists

Information infrastructure in 2025

Presentation of the project

AimHow could a general strategy concerning scientific information

supply in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) 2025 look like?

At the same time it must be ensured that on the one hand all kinds of eLearning and eTeaching are supported as good as possible. On the other hand it must be assured to make the most of Open Access possibilities.

Preliminary assumptionsAssumption 1:Strategies can only be defined, if the target to be achieved by the

strategy is clearly described.Assumption 2:The efficiency of eLearning and eTeaching as well as Open Access can

only be optimized, if all aspects are integrated in a collectively optimized information infrastructure .

Roadmap1. Taken the general discussions and developments in literature as a

basis, our theses concerning the scientific information supply in 2025 were generated.

2. At the same time we interviewed „interested groups“.3. Our theses from the interviews and literature were placed at our

dialog partners at the beginning of this year (2010).4. In spring 2010 we submitted a report about our view on the results

of the interviews to the dialog partners.

Roadmap5. Beginning of April 2010 we organized a workshop inviting all dialog

partners to discuss (3) and (4).6. In summer 2010 [right now] we generate a clearly expanded version

of the theses. This will include conclusions resulting in requirements for activities.

7. In autumn 2010 [resp. now] this will be discussed within a small group of experts of significant international organizations …

8. … thereupon improved and delivered by the end of 2010 as a strategy study to the government department

‚in-depth‘ interviews with 170 people in 80 talks

1. Libraries of universities and universities of applied science (= UAS)2. Computer centres of universities and UAS3. Media and eLearning centres of universities and UAS (if available)4. University / UAS management (vice-chancellor / executive board)

(CIO’s in particular)5. „Advisory boards “6. Selected public libraries7. Selected CIO’s beyond NRW8. „Big players“ e.g. DFG (German Research Foundation) or MPDL

(Max Planck Digital Library)

Short overview of the German library system

Short overview of the German Librarianship

• (strictly) separated into research and public libraries->almost no cooperation

• differ in terms of funding and target audience– local authority ministry for innovation NRW (MIWFT)

– differ in terms of library IT system (in NRW) within the academic libraries: OCLC Pica / SISIS, Ex Libris Group, …. within the public libraries: Bond, BibDia, Libero, …

Institutional Library Networks• offer services primarily to research libraries (in NRW)• coordinate cooperative cataloging and interlending in their area• administer quite often tasks concerning data processing, further education, …

Library Network Areas in Germany

• University Library Center (HBZ)

• Library Network Bavaria (BVB)

• Combined Library Network (GBV)

• Hessian Library Information System (HeBIS)

• Cooperative Library Network Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV)

• Southwest-German Library Network (SWB)

• [Network of the Public Libraries of Berlin (VÖBB)]

Special situation in

NRW

University Library Network (HBZ)• responsible for: NRW and some parts of Rhineland-Palatinate, located in Cologne• maintains the „DigiBib“ (digital library)

– = public internet library catalog– in use by 200 institutions from 10 federal states• offers moreover: Digital Peer Publishing (DiPP) -> Open Access ‚consortial‘ acquisition of digital content catalogue enrichment digital long-term preservation network data base (‚Verbunddatenbank‘), journal data base, etc.

Special situation in NRW

• the densest university landscape in Europe.• Altogether 68 top locations of universities and UAS with

several branches.• Almost all universities in NRW are state universities, decide

more or less on their own how to spend their funds, however (academic freedom law from 2007). in contrast to the other federal states of Germany

Our theses

In a nutshell 1(1) Functionalities, provided within universities by libraries, computing

centers, media centers and others need to be merged into a holistic information service of the university.

(2) For the re-division of tasks for a better information service, one should look for synergies between different institutions.

(3) Cooperation is needed beyond traditionally divided levels.(4) Public and research libraries need to be integrated much more closely.(5) The publicly funded “information space” of NRW should be seen as

one, though it is implemented by many players.

In a nutshell 2(6) Local advice to users and provision of social library space does not

need to be organized by the same administrative structure as library IT.

(7) NRW should provide a publicly available information infrastructure providing basic services in IT in general and library infrastructure in particular.

(8) Base technologies for all branches of IT should be provided beyond the boundaries of individual institutions.

(9) Only services with frequent and intensive contact to end-users should remain at the level of individual institutions.

General assumptions I

• IT is a primary factor in the competition between national systems of higher education and research.

• The acquisition of digital and non-digital media should be closely connected.

General assumptions II

• Content from libraries should be integrated seamlessly into the overall infrastructure.

• "Information" is a crucial pre-condition for the functioning of society in the 21st century.

• All problems of IT should be resolved only once within a single institution.

General assumptions III

• Digital information is the backbone of all research and higher education in 2025.

• Many information technologies can be implemented better if institutions cooperate.

• In 2025 we need a unified interface for all library content that serves a person through throughout his/her (academic) life-cycle.

General assumptions IV

• Information infrastructures are as other infrastructures - road networks…: We differentiate between the provider of an infrastructure and the provision of services based upon it.

General assumptions V

• Competition between institutions on the base of a platform provided for them can either be realized by the offered content or the access tools / “catalogue” enrichment locally.

technical assumptions for 2025

• Convergence of digital media will grow.• Networked devices will be ubiquitous,

irrespective of a convergence to one multi-purpose tool or a separation into tools.

• Devices will be location-aware. Users will expect all services to be operating within the geographical context, therefore.

technical assumptions for 2025

• Fixed physical internet-connections (LANs) and WiFi (WLANs) will be extinct. Both will be displaced by mobile channels like UMTS.

• Ubiquitous information access will be as normal as driving cars today.

technical assumptions for 2025

• Usage and success of a digital resource will strongly depend on the popularity and accessibility of the platform on which it is offered (e.g. Amazon, Google, Wikipedia, Ebay).

• It will not depend on quality and precision of metadata but on popularity and usability.

technical assumptions for 2025

• Neither holographic projections nor direct mind-interfaces or real 3D-interfaces will become a mass-phenomenon in 2025.

• This is particularly true of the small cheap network devices which will be everywhere.

ID management in 2025

• Devices will be offered more and more with biometric identification technologies. Like identification through finger-prints.

• Expansion of retina-scan-devices is not completely unlikely during the next years.

• New ID-cards will create a de-facto standard for an identification signature.

ID management in 2025

• In 2025 every person will own one ore more unique electronic identity – but not 500.

• Protection of identities against external unauthorized access will be technical possible, e.g. strict security and privacy management.

print- vs. non-print content in 2025

• Kindle-like e-book readers will have a strong impact on the growth of digital content

• They also propagate new opportunities to collaboratively edit and annotate content.

• Boundaries between print- and non-print material are more and more blurred.

print- vs. non-print content in 2025

• Users can decide themselves if they prefer a print-out or a digital copy of a document.

• A supplier of information is responsible to take care that the content reaches the user; not how the user decides to render it.

Desired platform services in 2025

• Basic administrative services.• E-Learning materials and lesson content.• Library services (access to publications and

articles & open access publication opportunities / preprint server).

Desired platform services in 2025

• IT services.• Organisational services (scientific or

administrative panel materials).• Social platform functionality.• ubiquitous access to all functionalities

Library MediaIT

Departement

AdministrationeLearning

Library MediaIT

Departement

AdministrationeLearning

Library Media eLearning Administration

IT Departement

SocLib

Spec IT

Soc X

Spec IT Spec IT Spec IT Spec IT

Soc X Soc X Soc X

Basic IT:

Library Media eLearning Administration

IT Departement

SocLib

Spec IT

Soc X

Spec IT Spec IT Spec IT Spec IT

Soc X Soc X Soc X

University platform:

Library Media eLearning Administration

IT Departement

SocLib

Spec IT

Soc X

Spec IT Spec IT Spec IT Spec IT

Soc X Soc X Soc X

Basic IT:

Library/ Media

SocLib

Spec IT

Campus Management 2.0 IT Departement

Spec IT Spec IT

Soc X Soc X

University platform:

Basic IT:

IT infrastructure

Unique information access

Information provision

Media production

Administration

Scientific computing

University perspective

Regional IT:

L / M

S

University platform A:

T

CM

S

T

IT

S

Basic IT

T

L / M

S

University platform A:

T

CM

S

T

IT

S

Basic IT

T

L / M

S

University platform A:

T

CM

S

T

IT

S

Basic IT

T

NRW Uni IT:

Regional IT:

L / M

S

University platform A:

T

CM

S

T

IT

S

Basic IT

T

L / M

S

University platform A:

T

CM

S

T

IT

S

Basic IT

T

L / M

S

University platform A:

T

CM

S

T

IT

S

Basic IT

T

Library/ Media

Social Library

University platform A:

Ca

University platform B: University platform C:

Basis IT Basis IT Basis IT

Co Add

Library/ Media Library/ Media

Social Library Social Library

CaCa Co CoAdd Add

Regional IT:

NRW Uni IT:

Public Lib:

NRW Uni Lib:

Co

Ca

Knowledge platform NRW:

Library/ Media

Social Library

University platform A: University platform B: University platform C:

Basis IT Basis IT Basis IT

Add

Library/ Media Library/ Media

Social Library Social Library

Add Add

Regional IT: Public Lib:

NRW Uni Lib:NRW Uni IT:

Co

Statewide information infrastructure

Statewide unique information access

Universitysupply I

State perspective

Universitysupply II

Universitysupply III

Infrastructurenetwork A

InfrastructureNetwork B

InfrastructurenetworkB

Possible realisation:

• All services, which involve frequent direct contact between users and “advisors”, shall be implemented at individual institutions.

• Basic services handled only once in each institution.

• It will be more economical to provide them by service units supporting a “region” or city.

Countrywide:

• Allocation and administration of one ID account per citizen.

• Supervision of the overall platform. • Central purchase of hard- and software.• Central purchase of e-publications.

University relevant functionalities

• A course / seminar is an interactive group with material you have to register for in the start of a semester.

• Communication with the lecturer is operated via the platform, content of that communication is only made available for other course-participants.

University relevant functionalities

• Through the unifying process of Bologna online-courses are modularized and therefore exchangeable between universities.

• Despite the online-opportunities of collaborative teaching and learning, most courses will still have regular periods of lectures taught in direct contact with teachers

IT relevant functionalities

• Long term access to and - if required - migration of digital research data.

• Infrastructure-provision • One account per citizen, which grants access to

copyright-free content inside "ePlattform“.• provision of analyzing-machines for research data.

Library relevant functionalities

• Open Access -> a state/region-wide publication platform with prepress- and discussion functionality.

• Material funded from specific accounts can only be accessed by members of specific organizations (libraries, universities).

• Material acquisition.

Library relevant functionalities

• Local library premises are used for student group-work and access to older not-yet-digitized publications

• Librarians are advertising university programs and teaching information literacy

• Physical information resources in libraries can be easily detected for any user by using gps;

pre-conditions for libraries

• Standardized library software systems.• Consistent usage of only a few relevant

metadata-fields.• Stop complaining about Google; learn from it:

New search optimizations only rely on better algorithms not on extensive human indexing

Google and Search in Libraries

• Although we absolutely welcome Google’s robust approach to the implementation of decisions once made, and at the same time strongly doubt that public institutions will ever be able to act accordingly, we still find Google’s privacy and copyright policy questionable.

contradictory trends in libraries

• Social library trend vs. strong increase of digital content usage (not bound to any premises)

• Should be understand as encouragement to fulfill both expectations.

• But not necessarily within one house.

Desired changes in institutions in general

• Assignment from institution-based tasks to location/region-based tasks.

• “Content-agnostic" IT-Infrastructure.• Cloud-computing as paradigm?

Discussion about our theses• Where do you think we may have been wrong in

general?• Where may the need to think in terms of a specific

library system have blinded our eyes?• And finally: How do you think institutional changes will

be feasible regarding the merging of academic and public librarianship in NRW resp. Germany in 2025?(e.g. Scandinavian or Netherlands library systems)

Thank you very much for your attention!