Pengembangan Repositori Institusi Sebagai Sarana Komunikasi Ilmiah di Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Imam Bonjol Padang
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengeksplorasi dan mendeskripsikan persepsi pustakawan dan dosen, serta tantangan dan kesulitan secara teknis dalam mengelola dan mengembangkan repositori institusi untuk mendukung komunikasi ilmiah. Kajian berfokus di Perpustakaan UIN Imam Bonjol Padang. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah campuran (mixed-methods) yang memadukan pendekatan kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa pustakawan belum sepenuhnya memahami tentang konsep komunikasi ilmiah. Di sisi lain, dosen belum yakin dengan kompetensi pustakawan dalam mengelola repositori institusi. Masalah teknis juga menjadi tantangan dalam pengembangan repositori insitusi sebagai sarana komunikasi ilmiah. Dibutuhkan kerja sama antara dosen dan pustakawan dalam mengembangkan komunikasi ilmiah. Kerja sama tersebut melalui kebijakan tertulis dalam bentuk peraturan rektor. Selain itu, UPT Perpustakaan UIN Imam Bonjol Padang harus mengembangkan pola komunikasi yang lebih baik dengan UPT TIPD.
ABSTRACT:
The purpose of this study was to explore and describe the perceptions of librarians and lecturers, as well as the challenges and technical difficulties in managing and in developing institutional repositories to support scientific communication. The study was focused on the Imam Bonjol UIN Padang Library. The research methods were used are mixed (mixed-methods) which combine qualitative and quantitative approaches. The results showed that librarians do not fully understand the concept of scientific communication. On the other hand, lecturers are not yet convinced of the librarian's competence in managing institutional repositories. Technical problems were also a challenge in the development of institutional repositories as a means of scientific communication. Cooperation between lecturers and librarians was needed in developing scientific communication. The cooperation was through written policies in the form of rector regulations. Besides that, UPT Library UPT Imam Bonjol Padang must develop a better communication pattern with UPT TIPD.Downloads
References
Adewumi, A., & Omoregbe, N. (2011). Institutional repositories: features, architecture, design and implementation technologies. Journal of Computing , 2 (8).
Association of Research Libraries. (2010). Envisioning research library futures: A scenario thinking project. Retrieved January 30, 2019, from Association of Research Libraries: http://www.arl.org/rtl/plan/scenarios/index.shtml
Berg, B. L. (2009). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. .
Bjork, B. C. (2005). A lifecycle model of the scientific communication process. Learned Publishing , 18 (3), 165-76.
Bjork, B., Laakso, M., Welling, P., & Paetau, P. (2014). Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology , 65 (2), 237-250.
Bonn, M. (2014). Tooling up scholarly communication education and training. College & Research Libraries News , 75 (3), 132-135.
Budapest Open Access Initiative. (2002). Read the Initiative. Retrieved January 28, 2019, from Budapest Open Access Initiative: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml
Carroll, M. W. (2011). Why Full Open Access Matters. PLoS Biology , 9 (11).
Dewatripoint, M., Ginsburgh, V., Legros, P., Walckiers, A., Devroey, J. P., Dujardin, M., et al. (2006). Study on the Economic and Technical Evolution of the Scientific Publication Markets in Europe. Final Report, European Commission, Directorate-General for Research, Brussels.
Drott, M. C. (2006). Open Access. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology , 40, 79-109.
Epp, R. H., & Segal, J. S. (1987). The ACLS Survey and Academic Library Service. College and Research Libraries News , 48, 67-68.
Griffin, S. (2013). New roles for libraries in supporting data-intensive research and advancing scholarly communication. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing , 7 (Supplement), 57-91.
Hahn, S. E., & Wyatt, A. (2014). Business faculty’s attitudes: open access, disciplinary repositories, and institutional repositories. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship , 19 (2), 93-113.
Hixson, C. (2006). If we build it, will they come (eventually)?: Scholarly communication and institutional repositories. The Serials Librarian , 50 (1-2), 197-209.
Johnson, P. (2014). Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. Chicago: Americal Library Association.
Karla, L. H. (2008). Talk about talking about new models of scholarly communication. Journal of Electronic Publishing , 11 (1).
Kling, R., & Callahan, E. (2003). Electronic journals, the Internet and scholarly communication. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology , 37, 127-178.
Kling, R., & McKim, G. (1999). Scholarly communication and the continuum of electronic publishing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science , 50 (10), 890-907.
Lynch, C. H. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. Portal: Libraries and the Academy , 3 (2), 327-336.
Mulligan, R. (2015). The Transformation of Scholarly Communications. Washington, D.C.: Association Research Libraries.
Prosser, D. C. (2005). Fulfilling the promise of scholarly communication – a comparison between old and new access models. In E. K. Nielsen, K. G. Saur, & K. Ceynowa, Die innovative Bibliothek : ElmarMittlerzum 65 (pp. 96-106). Geburtstag: K.G. Saur.
Sauer, A. (2009). Why archivists should be leaders in scholarly communication. Journal of Archival Organization, , 7 (1-2), 51-57.
Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (2000). Towards electronic journals: realities for scientists, librarians, publishers. Washington D.C.: Special Libraries Association.
Yeates, R. Institutional repositories. Vine , 33 (2), 96-101.
By submitting your manuscript to our journal, you are following Copyright and License