We have recently revamped the focus for our Digital Services, to deepen our ability to manage the highly automated infrastructure we're
developing, and to shift some of our energy to assessing and improving the usability of the content we're putting online.
After all, we now have online representations
for 1120 collections. This includes 991 EAD
finding aids (296 of those have digitized content, and 234 of those have the digital content
linked into the finding aid!) and 422 digital collections
(comprised of 74,228 intellectual items, or well over 282,500 captures). Most of this has been digitized since I arrived in mid-2008,
which gives you some idea of how much we've automated our workflow.
(You can find all this content online in Acumen!)
The ability to automate our work is heavily dependent upon our
file-naming scheme.
Each file name reflects the
storage location of the file and its relation to the collection, type of material, and the other files around it.
We also restrict the directory structure
within our shared digitization area. This allows our scripts to know where to look for things (and what the collection number should be),
when performing quality control checks
or picking up content to move it to another server, or to generate derivatives. For example, scans are always in folders that begin with the
word "Scans" beneath the collection directory. Metadata is always in the "Metadata" folder there, transcripts in the "Transcripts" folder,
and so forth.
But back to the second part of our newly shifted focus: how do we determine what users need?
In January of this year, our Outreach Coordinator
(Amanda Presnell),
with the help of our Digitization Manager
(Jeremiah Colonna-Romano)
performed a usability study on our Acumen interface. We were surprised at
what this qualitative study unveiled: some people didn't know how to use the interface, and some didn't have a clue what was in there!
I don't know why we were surprised; but that's why usability studies are so helpful. Without feedback, we have no clue if we're
headed in the right direction, meeting users needs, or off on the wrong track. To address these two issues, we are currently
developing short (3-minute) videos which will soon be linked on the left navigation bar of
Acumen. One will show how to use the interface; and the other will
highlight the types of content to be found here.
So stay tuned! We hope to have these linked in by the end of June at latest.
For more info about what we're up to over in Digital Services at the University of Alabama, please check out our
blog and our
wiki!
Publications
DeRidder, Jody L.; Presnell, Amanda Axley; and Walker, Kevin W."Leveraging Encoded Archival Descriptions for Access to Digital Content: A Cost and Usability Analysis," in American Archivist(Spring/Summer 2012), Vol. 75, Iss. 1.
Zeng, Marcia Lei; Oh, Sam; Phipps, John; Summers, Ed; Hodge, Gail; Needleman, Mark; and DeRidder, Jody L. Linked Data -- Enabling Standards and Other Approaches, ASIS&T '10 : Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual meeting on Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem, Vol. 47 (Silver Springs, MD: American Society for Information Science, 2010).
DeRidder, Jody L. "From Confusion and Chaos to Clarity and Hope" a chapter in Digitization in the Real World: Lessons Learned from Small to Medium-Sized Digitization Projects, Kwong Bor Ng and Jason Kucsma, ed., (Metropolitan New York Library Council, 2010).
DeRidder, Jody L. "Googlizing a Digital Library" An exploration of effectively and efficiently providing full-text web search capabilities to a dynamically-generated set of digitized materials, in order to leverage the power of web search to enhance access. Code4Lib Journal Issue 2, 2008-03-24. Available from http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/43
DeRidder, Jody L. "Choosing Software for a Digital Library" [Powerpoint] with exercises for students comparing Fedora and DSpace. Presented to University of Tennessee School of Information Sciences Digital Libraries classes in 2007 & 2008. Revised for presentation to another UT Digital Libraries class and a University of Alabama School of Information Sciences Digital Libraries class in 2011.
DeRidder, Jody L. Dublin Core Metadata Terms and Uses [Powerpoint] presented to a University of Tennessee School of Information Sciences class in 2007.
Digital preservation, or enabling long-term access for electronic documents
Grant application development and writing
Analysis of infrastructure or workflow problems and recommendations
Assistance in setting up the lowest-cost, most scalable methods of implementing a local
digital library
Digital library or electronic document management cost analysis
Assessment of digital library and electronic document management and delivery software
Metadata mapping
Transformation of structured information or data
Contact me for more information on consultation services.
Background
Current Position:
Head, Digital Services University of Alabama Libraries
Research Interests:
Currently researching and developing pragmatic solutions for capture, management, delivery, access, usability, and long-term support for digital content.
Fascinated by the potential applications of linked data, semantic web technology, the power of "pull," and ontological applications.
Education:
MS in Information Science, 2008, University of Tennessee.
MS in Computer Science, 2002, University of Tennessee.
Graduate work in Community Agency Counseling, 1981-2, University of Tennessee.
BA in Human Services, 1980, University of Tennessee.
An invited interview for Kent State University School of Library and Information Science, fall 2010:
5 years of development work on DLXS software, including modifications for
cross-type searching and linking, and support for streaming media and embedded audio and video
3 years of modifications and support for CONTENTdm, including analysis
for extraction of content and metadata to provide additional search/browse and storage capabilities
1 year of beta-testing for Ex Libris Digitool, testing multiple scenarios and issues, providing feedback and recommendations for improvements, and analysis of software support.
8 years of developing solutions for support of long-term access for digital content.
9 years of developing infrastructure, policies and proceedures, work flows, and information architecture.
