HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...
Erasmus man gaelic & innovative an overview
1. GAELIC and Innovative –
overview 1996-2010 and
thereafter …
GAELIC Summer Training Camp, National Library of
South Africa, 17 November 2010
Di Man –Univ. of the Witwatersrand
Lettie Erasmus – Unisa Library
2. Outline of presentation
Di – historical aspect of setting up the
common library system, because
there are important lessons
Lettie – interaction between
institutions and with Innovative
Interfaces
Looking ahead to the future
3. Background to GAELIC
• Formed in April 1996 after changeover of
government and end of sanctions
• Offered a common library system by Mellon to
leapfrog technology changes
• 10 universities and 6 technikons
• HAIs and HDIs (Apartheid created)
• Opportunity to smooth out disparities
• Resource sharing and shared cataloguing– ILLs,
buying material collectively
• System architecture was important (number,
autonomy, network stability, high cost of
Internet bandwidth)
5. Proposal writing process
GAELIC Proposal Writing process facilitated
by Rob McGee
System functionality
System configuration
Connectivity issues
ICT infrastructure
6. Rob McGee with the GAELIC Proposal
Writing Team -1996
Lettie
Erasmus, Noel
Shillinglaw,
Hannie
Sander, Judy
Henning, Rob
McGee,
Heather
Edwards,
Magdaleen
Arlow, Pierre
Malan and Di
Man
12. GAELIC’s Needs vs National Needs
GAELIC’s Vision: a virtual library with local service
interfaces
Link 16 separate INNOPAC systems to facilitate
resource sharing and shared cataloguing
Early decision to provide free interlibrary loans to
assist smaller members
Reverse practice of original cataloguing (approx.
80% among Phases 1 and 2)
GAELIC’s strength in ILL and shared cataloguing
GAELIC dropped its regional database option for a
national strategy through SABINET Online (SACat
and OCLC)
17 Oct 2002
Mellon Foundation Conference
on Union Catalogs 12
13. Crossroads in 2004/2005
Government merged HE institutions
34 institutions to be reduced to 21
In GAELIC, 16 insts reduced to 8
Distributed system model - assisted in
merging library systems
High initial merging costs, but long term
savings in maintenance costs
Lots of holdings to be changed (SACat)
17 Oct 2002
Mellon Foundation Conference
on Union Catalogs 13
14. GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 1
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 2
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 3
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 4
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 5
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 6
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 7
GAELIC
LOCAL SYSTEM
# 8
SABINET
SA CAT
LIB 1
TENET
LIB 2
LIB 1 LIB 2
LIB 1 LIB 2 LIB 3
LIB 1 LIB 2 LIB 3
LIB 1 LIB 2 LIB 3
GAELIC
Current GAELIC System Model
15. New Crossroad
There are interesting times and
another new set of challenges ahead
for GAELIC.
Over to Lettie.
17 Oct 2002
Mellon Foundation Conference
on Union Catalogs 15
16. Library system demonstrations held at
Unisa Library 1996 –
Steve
Silberstein
(Innovative)
with Prof. June
Sinclair, Prof.
Egbert Gerryts,
Noel
Shillinglaw,
Heather
Edwards and
Lettie Erasmus
17. Evaluation of library systems process
Work Groups for each system module
Request for Information send to potential system
vendors
Short listing of preferred system vendors
Compile checklists of questions
Demonstrations by Innovative Interfaces Inc. and
ExLibris
Assessment of systems and recommendation
Negotiation with Innovative Interfaces Inc.
18. GAELIC System implementation 1997-
2003
GAELIC Implementation Team and local
library team
Phase 1, 2, 3 libraries –
Profiling and worksheets
Authority cleanup by LTI
Data conversion SAMARC to MARC21 by Sabinet
Data migration
TestPac
Training for each module
19. Mellon Foundation Conference on Union
Catalogs, Tallinn, Estonia, Oct.2002
Presentation on GAELIC system implementation
at a conference organized by the Andrew W.
Mellon Foundation and the National Library of
Estonia and held in Tallinn, Estonia, 17-19 Oct.
2002. :
Regional vs National Union Database Development:
the GAELIC Experience
Paper published in Proceedings of the Conference:
Union catalogs at the crossroad / edited by Andrew Lass and
Richard E. Quandt. Hamburg : Hamburg University Press, c2004.
21. GAELIC Library System Focus Group
Focus Group (later called a Team) focused on:
Training – on-site, workshops, individual members arrange
visits and training
Special training interventions – UniVen, UNIN and NWU-
Mmabato and others
Innovative training: Advanced System Acces and Administration
Sharing of information and expertise: “Show-and-Tell”
Workshops
Support and advice: List of advisors and experts
Coordinate communication with Innovative
Facilitate implementation of Millennium at all sites
22. GAELIC and IUG-SA
GAELIC provided support to the IUG-SA by:
Sponsoring the first IUG-SA Annual Conference
Sponsoring the visits of 2 overseas experts –
Linda Bills (Tri-College Library Consortium, USA)
And, Carolyn Jones (Queensland Univ., Australia)
Donating a trophy to encourage the libraries to do
presentations at the annual IUG-SA Conferences
23. GAELIC and IUG
Initially GAELIC sponsored representatives from
most of the GAELIC libraries to attend the Annual
Conference of the IUG in the USA
IUG in
Nashville,
1998 –
Ellen, Lettie,
Pierre and
Elna
24. GAELIC and IUG
IUG 2009,
Anaheim, USA –
Lettie, Hilary
Newman,
Estonian friends
and Graham
25. Relationship with Innovative
First contact made with Innovative in 1994
Initial training visits and support during system
implementation and the integration of systems as a
result of the mergers
Site visits by Innovative representatives
Innovative supports the annual IUG-SA conferences
Negotiate discounts on new purchases
Communication and advice
GAELIC Millennium (INNOPAC) Focus Group Leader and
GAELIC Libraries’ Site Coordinators are responsible for
relationship with Innovative
28. GAELIC and Innovative staff in
Madrid
Maryvonne with
Carina and Maria
Maryvonne and Charo
with the GAELIC Team
29. GAELIC and other Innovative sites
Regular contact with other Southern
African Innovative sites:
SEALS
Free State sites
NLSA
HSRC
Univ. of Namibia (was GAELIC member)
Univ. of Botswana (became GAELIC
member)
30. GAELIC membership survey 2005,
another crossroad
Survey highlighted considerable differences
in the use of the Millennium system, as well
as:
Age of the servers supporting the Innovative
library systems
Versions of the software, the modules and
functionality being utilised
Campus ICT support
Skills level of library staff
31. GAELIC System Investigation 2006-2008 –
sponsored by the Mellon Foundation
Problem areas were investigated by:
Conducting a GAELIC System Survey
Conducting a benchmarking exercise by visiting all
GAELIC libraries and SEALS libraries, library
consortia in Spain and Estonia as well as a
discussion with CALICO
Comparison of the shared and decentralised server
models
Recommendations resulted in 2 Frameworks:
Library System Support Structure
Millennium System and Library Processes
32. GAELIC Team in Spain
GAELIC Team with Carmen in
Maria Luisa Gardens, Seville
GAELIC Team at entrance of
Univ. of Seville
33. GAELIC Team in Tallinn, Estonia
GAELIC Team with members
of the ELNET Consortium
GAELIC Team with
Management Team
of National Library of
Estonia
34. GAELIC Team in Tallinn, Estonia …
cont.
GAELIC Team with members
from the Academy of Music and
Theatre
GAELIC Team –
Maria, Soekie,
Carina & Lettie
35. Two GAELIC Frameworks
GAELIC Millennium System Team developed 2
frameworks based on the recommendations of the
GAELIC System Investigation:
Library System Support Structure
Describe the main elements of a Library System Support
Structure
Define the roles and responsibilities of a Site Coordinator and
a Library System Administrator
Millennium System and Library Processes
Define the roles and responsibilities of a process owner and
library system champion
Two frameworks were adopted by all GAELIC
members in 2010
36. And now the thereafter, another
crossroad?
FOTIM closes in 2011
GAELIC needs to reappraise its future
Proposal on future to be submitted in Dec. 2010
Issues and options:
Contract with Innovative Interfaces Inc.
Importance of a legal entity for fundraising, funding from
institutions, etc.
Management support
Need for champions to carry the new structure forward
Ongoing training initiatives
Relationship with Innovative regarding support and new
system developments
Evaluate GAELIC’s vision vs actual achievement
What has changed since 1998: network infrastructure, III’s
ability to partition a large server, mergers, regional
consortia disbanding, etc.
37. And now the thereafter, another
crossroad … cont.
GAELIC Group to consider a future
structure
IUG-SA Group to consider a formal
structure for IUG-SA
38. And now the thereafter, another
crossroad … cont.
National scene
Future of regional structures
FOTIM level will no longer exists, only library level
IUG-SA to become formal national structure?
Permanent structure and support
Include all Innovative sites across regions
Represents Innovative users on other national committees e.g.
Implementation of RDA
Coordinate Innovative training and communication
Benefits of membership
Benefits of continued co-operation
Consider new costing models for annual maintenance fees and
new products
Discounts for joint purchases, co-ordering, etc.
Networking among peers and learning from each other –
Training and sharing of information is very important
Inter-institutional support
39. Thank you!
Di Man – Univ. of the Witwatersrand
e-mail address: Dianne.Man@wits.ac.za
Lettie Erasmus – Unisa Library
e-mail address: erasmaj@unisa.ac.za
Notes de l'éditeur
GAELIC is one five academic library consortia. It consists of ten universities and six technikons and is the largest consortium. There are great differences between the institutions in terms of size, resources and expertise, leading to the terms Historical Advantaged Institutions (HAIs) and Historical Disadvantaged Institutions (HDIs). The HDIs were Black institutions set up by the Apartheid regime and were mostly situated in outlying regions. A consortium provided the opportunity to lessen these disparities. The system architecture for GAELIC was an important consideration as this could influence the choice of library system. Factors to be taken into account included: the number of institutions, their autonomy, the lack of network stability and the high cost of Internet connectivity on and between campuses.