Featured post

NDSR-NY Selects 2015/16 Residency Host Institutions

Posted on by

The National Digital Stewardship Residency in New York (NDSR-NY) program, an initiative to develop new professionals in digital stewardship through funded, post-graduate residencies, has selected the five host institutions for the 2015-2016 set of residency projects. The NDSR-NY host institutions will be the Brooklyn Academy of Music, CUNY Television, New York Public Radio, Rhizome, and the Wildlife Conservation Society.

  • The Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) project focuses on creating an inventory of born-digital materials created at BAM. The resident will develop workflows and best practices for the long-term accessibility and preservation of born-digital objects.
  • The resident at CUNY Television will improve micro-services used for digital asset management tasks, including transcoding, assessment, delivery, storage, metadata harvesting, logging, and digitization.
  • The resident at New York Public Radio will aid in the creation of a robust digital preservation roadmap. The resident will help create recommendations for long-term, institution-wide digital curation policies.
  • Rhizome’s project will enable the functional preservation of up to 50 born-digital, performative artworks from the ArtBase collection. The resident will help develop standardized criteria and metadata to aid in the preservation of these artworks.
  • The resident at the Wildlife Conservation Society will pilot workflows and help develop systems for long-term preservation of born-digital content from the Education, Exhibit, and Geospatial Analysis Departments.

The NDSR-NY program is administered by Metropolitan New York Library Council (METRO), with assistance from partner Brooklyn Historical Society. The project is supported by generous funding from the Laura Bush 21st Century Library Program of the Institute of Museum and Library Services.

Concurrent NDSR initiatives are underway in Boston (administered by Harvard Library and MIT Libraries) and in Washington D.C. (administered by the Library of Congress).

Resident applications to NDSR-NY are still being accepted through May 22, 2015.

Seeking Our Next Cohort Of NDSR Residents

Posted on by

We’re pleased to have announced the five host institutions that will take part in the 2015/16 cycle of the National Digital Stewardship Residency (NDSR) in New York program. The Brooklyn Academy of Music, CUNY Television, New York Public Radio, Rhizome, and the Wildlife Conservation Society are all prepared to onboard and mentor an NDSR resident. (Read more about these projects here.)

Now that these worthy projects have been identified, we would like to remind recent graduates that applications for the nine-month paid residency positions are due May 22, 2015. Applicants are asked to rank their top three preferred hosts.

Selected residents will first complete an intensive digital stewardship immersion workshop. Over the course of the program, the cohort will attend a series of lectures, workshops, and special events. Residents will also present their projects at national and regional professional conferences.

Applications are comprised of an application form, your c.v., two letters of reference, and a short video answering the question “why are you interested in digital stewardship?”

It may help to know that digital stewardship is broadly defined as the practice of acquiring, selecting, managing, preserving, and providing access to digital information. The goal of this program is to develop a bridge between coursework and hands-on experience.

Want to learn more about the program? Our current cohort has answered frequently asked questions on their blog, and Vicky Steeves has recorded a screencast about her experience as a resident at the American Museum of Natural History.

If you have any questions about this program, please review the NDSR-NY websiteor contact Margo Padilla, Program Director.

So you’ve decided to apply to NDSR…

Posted on by

Applications to the 2015-16 National Digital Stewardship Residencies in New York are open! The deadline to apply has been extended by two weeks, to Friday, May 22! Woo! As if you needed more good news than that, METRO also recently announced the host institutions for this round of residencies, and they’re very exciting (like we’d probably compete with you for them if we could!). You can learn all about them and their projects here.

As the the current cohort round the corner and bring their 2014-15 residencies into the home stretch, we’re frequently asked for our advice to prospective Residents, those of you considering applying to the program (most important advice: do it!). We touched on some of these themes in our most recent interview with METRO. Here, in the meantime, are our summary responses to those questions most frequently asked of us live and online:

How did you approach the video portion of the NDSR application?

Julia: I took together multiple AV recordings of presentations, presentation files, moving  images I had worked on, etc., and overlaid/combined them to make a case for my expertise to work on my top choices.

Peggy: I used it as a sort of audiovisual cover letter. I explained what I had to offer my top choice and why I was enthusiastic and excited about the project. I used specific examples to back up my points. I did not use a script, but I practiced my answer beforehand and reshot it a few times.

Shira: Ah yes, the video. I used it as an opportunity to demonstrate my understanding of some of the key concepts that I would be required to engage with throughout my residency. Given how I work I knew that it would be easiest if I wrote a script beforehand. Although this might not be necessary for some people, it turned out to be a huge help for me since it forced me to pay careful attention to the video’s structure, which ultimately made for a tighter, more cogent piece.

Karl: I followed Julia’s and Shira’s general approaches to creating the video, but in terms of what I wanted it to actually achieve for me, I focused on making it the best possible representation of who I am and how I like to communicate–especially when challenged to speak on such a complicated topic in a short timeframe. I can’t stress heavily enough just how many directions you could take that in your own case, and therefore how beneficial it is to be yourself and make it your own.

Vicky: To be honest, I totally winged it. My boyfriend’s twin sister has a degree in photography with a concentration in film (big thank you to Zoë Catalano!), so after a double shift at the restaurant I was working at, I went to their house to film. It was nice that she had an HD camera and editing abilities, so the actual quality of the video was very good. As for the content, I didn’t practice or write a script, I just got in front of the camera and tried to focus on the reasons why I am interested in digital preservation, and then focused it onto the project at the AMNH–because I really, really, wanted that one. That being said, tailoring it so specifically probably isn’t a good idea…but for me in this one instance, it really worked. I agree with Peggy–think of it as a video cover letter.

What does good preparation for the residency look like? How did you do it?

Peggy: It’s really, really helpful to have worked in a cultural heritage institution while you’re in school, to show that you have at least a basic understanding of how these types of institutions work and that you’ve demonstrated your skills outside the classroom. Even if you’re volunteering or working one day a week – any hands-on experience you can get, take it.

Vicky: Keep up with the profession–librarians and archivists of all types are super active on Twitter, listservs, LinkedIn–you name it, we’re on it. Read the blogs, read the articles, and stay up to date with the latest developments in the field. This will put you ahead.

Shira: What Vicky said. Read widely, read closely, and in particular read the standards. During your residency it will be crucial to be able to explain the high-level digital preservation concepts within OAIS, TDR, etc., in layman’s terms, and so making sure you’re familiar with these documents is essential.

Julia: While I agree with what everyone else has said, I also want to stress that it depends. Each fellowship is different. I don’t think the fellows would be interchangeable on each other’s projects. For example, my thesis work in digital forensics applications to archives and my weeklong “Born-Digital Forensics” course at the Maryland Institute of Technology Humanities in Learning and Teaching all helped prepare me specifically for some of the challenges at NYU and made it much easier to hit the ground running with my project to start my acquisition workflows and documentation.

How do you balance your obligations to your residency’s host institution with all of the other NDSR cohort/workshop/conference activities?

Vicky: Well in the beginning of the Residency, it wasn’t too bad trying to balance the NDSR requirements/meetings and the work at the AMNH. That being said, as we are into the final stretch of the Residency, it’s become increasingly difficult. The final deliverable still needs to be written, some intermittent deliverables need to be cleaned up, and we are in the push. While workshops and professional development opportunities are critical to information professionals, there are times I just want to hunker down at the AMNH and not come out until I am finished. But otherwise, the AMNH has been very understanding and supportive of my PD/NDSR requirements and my mentors have been a huge help for me finding balance.

Karl: This is not always a binary choice; outreach and advocacy are part and parcel of our residencies, both within and on behalf of our host institutions. I try to keep in mind at all times how my work at NYARC advances the field outside of our walls (it helps when you’re already working for a consortium) and how my participation in outside events/efforts can advance NYARC’s specific goals. Still, as Vicky implies, these strategies do compete for your time and your presence, so you kind of have to love to do both in order to keep the fuel burning for either!

Shira: Google calendar is pretty much my bible these days.

Julia: This can be tricky. There’s definitely some push and pull between wanting to advocate both within my own institution and to the general community. More prosaically, just fitting in all the meetings into my schedule is difficult. There are standing meetings that are both NDSR- and NYU-specific, and it can be impossible to make them all. Factor in the travel and there’s really no time to waste. Fortunately, everyone I report to understands that I have multiple obligations that sometimes compete with one another.

Is there any one thing that’s been especially important to the success of your project?

Julia: My relationship with my mentor. While I don’t necessarily see or work with him on a daily or even every-other-day basis, if we didn’t agree on how to prioritize and focus my energies this project might not have worked out. Luckily, he’s given me a lot of flexibility to explore the issues that I think are interesting, like emulated access to complex media, while also giving me support when I get stuck, run out of ideas, and just need some help. I’ve also been super lucky in that we’ve been able to collaborate on talks and papers together.

Karl: I’ll agree with Julia and say that it’s all about relationships. To the success of my project, it was definitely more important that I could work and communicate effectively among geographically (and hierarchically) dispersed teammates than that I had any particular experience with software, metadata schemas, or scripting languages. Those are useful only insofar as you can gain and sustain buy-in for your work, and yes, having an engaged and engaging mentor in your corner can make all the difference there.

Peggy: I will also add that taking advantage of the cohort model of NDSR is incredibly important. By that I mean utilizing this built in support network of residents going through a very similar experience to you. I’ve found it so helpful to discuss problems and questions with the other residents, especially at the beginning of the program when you may be more hesitant to ask a lot of questions at your institution (even though, of course, you totally should! But I understand the hesitancy when you’re just starting somewhere). The other residents will probably be going through a lot of the same stuff you’re going through and be very grateful for someone to talk about it with.

Shira: I think Peggy hit the nail on the head as far as the advantages of the cohort model go, because having everyone’s input and support has been invaluable. I also want to mention how important it is to have your elevator pitch down pat. If I had a nickel for every time someone asked me what my project was about over the past year, I’d be an extremely rich lady by now. (Alas…) But in all seriousness, I’ve found that being able to concisely explain what the NDSR program is, what your project will accomplish, etc., was key to gaining buy-in from my colleagues at Carnegie Hall.

Born-Digital Workflows CURATEcamp

Posted on by

Last week, a group of digital preservation minded people got together for an all day born-digital workflows CURATEcamp (#curatecamp). We started the morning off with talks from practitioners approaching specific aspects of the workflow, from acquisition to access. The afternoon was organized into small discussion sections and demonstrations. In the coming days, the CURATEcamp wiki will be updated with links to presentation slides and notes from the presentations, breakout sessions, and demonstrations – stay tuned! Thanks to everyone who came out and supported the event!

This event was supported by the National Digital Stewardship Residency in New York program, funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services, and implemented by the Metropolitan New York Library Council in partnership with Brooklyn Historical Society. CURATEcamp was also affiliated with this year’s Personal Digital Archiving conference.

On Buy-In, Communication, and Sustainability

Posted on by

Shira here. Last week officially marked the final six weeks of the residency, which means that the bulk of my time these days is dedicated to drafting my final project deliverable: a Digital Preservation and Sustainability document that will serve as the foundation for Carnegie Hall’s digital preservation policy. I’m proud of the document that I’m creating, but as I head into the home stretch a big concern of mine has become what will happen with this document after my work here wraps up.

What can I do to ensure that these policies take root? How can I make sure that they’ll become woven into my colleagues’ routines at Carnegie Hall? The underlying answer to all of these questions is simple: buy-in. In the context of digital preservation, buy-in means the acceptance of and willingness to actively support and participate in digital preservation initiatives. This term can be applied to entire organizations, departments, or even to an individual.

clipart

For those of you thinking that “buy-in” is an artificial-sounding buzzword that sounds like it would be more appropriately slung around a Wall Street Board Room than an archive, hear me out. For proof of the extent to which buy-in matters, I would point to Christy Allen’s 2006 study called “Foundations for a Successful Digital Preservation Program: Discussions from Digital Preservation in State Government: Best Practices Exchange”.

Allen’s paper reports the findings of a 2006 summit at the State Library of North Carolina that was intended to facilitate communication between librarians, archivists, and other information professionals, including over one hundred participants from thirty states, federal agencies, and private industries. In spite of their diversity, Allen reported that, “Participants stressed again and again that a successful digital preservation program requires a strong foundation,” and that “nearly all attendees agreed that the first step in establishing a successful digital preservation program is gaining support and buy‐in from stakeholders.” This sentiment is echoed again and again throughout other digital preservation reports, policies, and standards.

“But what does this mean in practical terms?” you might ask. That’s a good question and fair one, because while there seems to be broad consensus that buy-in is crucial to the success of any digital preservation program, there is comparatively very little writing about how one actually creates buy-in. While I can’t speak for the profession at large, I thought that I would give some thoughts on this based on what my own experience here at Carnegie Hall has been. So without further ado, some of the ways I’ve tried to foster buy-in for digital preservation at both micro- and a macro-level throughout the course of my residency:

  1. Communicate. For me, one of the most important and basic facets of this is communication. I have long been a believer in the idea that part of doing one’s job well in this field is the ability to make digital preservation understandable to those outside it. When I say this, I don’t mean to imply that in order for a digital preservation program to be effective everyone in your organization must understand the differences between a SIP, DIP, and AIP, be able to define the designated community that your repository serves, or distinguish between a Content Data Object and Content Information. However I do believe that fostering buy-in for digital preservation throughout an organization will be impossible if you’re unable to effectively translate high-level digital preservation concepts to layman’s terms. Let me explain: in my experience people don’t particularly appreciate being told what to do when the instructions arrive without an explanation. I’ve tried to keep this in mind as I flesh out the set of digital preservation policies that I’ve been tasked with writing. These policies will require some of my colleagues to fundamentally alter some aspects of their daily routines. If I am able to make a succinct and compelling case as to why these changes are necessary my colleagues will be more likely to follow my guidelines; if I fail to do so there is a higher risk that they will be ignored. As a result, I’ve tried to consistently communicate the reason behind the changes I’ll be asking my colleagues here to make. For example, when discussing best practices for file naming conventions I could simply state, “file names should contain no spaces.” My guidelines do say this, but I also offer the following explanation: “Some programming languages use spaces to signify the end of a character string, and many software applications don’t recognize file names containing spaces. On the web, spaces are typically replaced with “%20” in URLs, and some browsers will ‘throw away’ anything after a space. Use the underscore symbol (_) or dash (-) in between words to represent a space, or use CamelCase and omit spaces from your file names altogether.”
  2. Avoid jargon where possible. Sometimes using jargon is unavoidable, and I would never recommend trying to do away with jargon entirely since that is neither practical nor realistic. However, as I prepare to head into the final month of my residency, I am making a concerted effort to comb through my deliverables for unnecessary jargon so that I can present my recommendations in plain English to the greatest possible extent. My logic for this is twofold. First of all, in spite of the fact that my deliverables are principally intended for individuals for whom the jargon doesn’t pose such an obstacle, I want anyone at Carnegie Hall who is interested in these recommendations to have a chance at understanding them. Secondly, the reality is that these digital preservation policies will touch every department within Carnegie Hall, and at some point the Archives team will need to train our staff about these new policies. Translating these policies into language that is comprehensible to those outside our field now will save Archives staff time in the future.
  3. Manage expectations. As I have mentioned previously, the root issue my NDSR project was designed to address is that up to now there hasn’t been a streamlined process at Carnegie Hall for staff to push digital assets and their associated metadata upstream. For my colleagues, this has resulted in a series of workarounds that are both inefficient and unsustainable. The extended conversations that I had with creators and users of media here early on in my residency put me in a unique position to understand how each department will benefit from the digital preservation policies that I’m introducing. But I don’t want to leave anyone with the mistaken belief that these policies represent a magic bullet that will solve all their problems with no additional work on their sides. Quite the opposite: in every meeting that I have here I make it a point to explain what I will need from my colleagues’ in order for our digital preservation program to be effective. For example, rights is a key concern that affects nearly every single department within Carnegie Hall. Although staff have an extremely high level of awareness about rights issues, currently there is no unified system for recording and tracking rights-related information pertaining to born-digital assets, which means that this information is researched on an as-needed basis. It’s easy to describe to my colleagues how much easier their lives will be once rights information is captured and embedded within an asset at the point of its creation. But once I’ve explained what they stand to gain from these policies, I try my hardest to make it clear to them that this will require work on their part, and that without their help these policies won’t be effective.

While I knew going into this residency that creating buy-in would be crucial, I underestimated just how central to my project it would be to the long-term sustainability of this project. Fortunately, I have found that this task is something I really enjoy, and these past eight months have provided me with immeasurable experience in this vein that I will bring with me to every project I work on in the future.

 

Deep in the Art of Texas

Posted on by

arlis-2015

About a month ago–has it really been that long already?–I made the trek down to Fort Worth, TX, with about 500 colleagues to attend the annual conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America (ARLIS/NA). As the conference title, “New Frontiers on the Old Frontier,” suggests, these historic and often quaint environs played host to some very future-focused people and projects. Digital humanities, linked open data,  and user-responsive systems design topics, as seen specifically through the art librarian’s eyes, permeated sessions, discussions, and spontaneous meetings throughout the program. At the same time, there was a strong current of big, multi-institutional projects that benefit from this rare opportunity for digitally networked partners and stakeholders to come together and plan their communal next moves as only face-to-face meetings can enable.

The Tex-Mex chapter’s Joel Pelanne and Sarah Long pose proudly with our hotel’s impressive(?) collection of bullwhips. Photo by Allana Mayer.

The Tex-Mex chapter’s Joel Pelanne and Sarah Long pose proudly with our hotel’s impressive(?) collection of bullwhips. Photo by Allana Mayer.

I was in Fort Worth specifically to share updates on my NDSR work at a web archiving collaborations panel organized by my mentor and NYARC’s program coordinator, Sumitra Duncan. Judging from the attendance to this session–about 50–and the tendency of web archiving to pop up as an issue at other meetings throughout the program, the topic really has gone mainstream and touched the imaginations of librarians throughout the community. Still, National Gallery of Art Reference Librarian Anne Simmons kicked off our panel with a useful intro to web archiving for the uninitiated by way of an update on the ARLIS/NA Artists Files Special Interest Group’s own experiment to collect the websites of art galleries all around the country. Web Archiving Project Librarian Anna Perricci next introduced the communal collection development in areas like architecture, environmental design, and music, that she coordinates among Ivy league research libraries from their collecting hub at Columbia University. I made the case for NYARC’s model of shared responsibilities and burdens in tackling some of the most persistent/laborious problems of web archive quality assurance and preservation services. Jefferson Bailey, Partner Specialist and Program Manager at Internet Archive, rounded out the panel by privileging us with a quick glimpse through his crystal ball into the future of access and researcher services for this one very peculiar archival medium. Among the most salient points that the panelists raised to my interests were Anna’s experience that shared responsibilities do not necessarily make these types of projects any faster or cheaper (rather quite often the opposite can happen) and Jefferson’s observation that sharing accessions and even description tasks among institutions has not yet led us to a truly shared information infrastructure at the back end.

A/V archivist Kristin MacDonough provides a pretty effective illustration of the need for quality control tools in video transfer. Photo by Dan Lipcan.

A/V archivist Kristin MacDonough provides a pretty effective illustration of the need for quality control tools in video transfer. Photo by Dan Lipcan.

To that point, and as something of an archivist who frequently masquerades as a librarian, I was happy to represent and to see others promote the importance of long-term sustainability to the access-driven data linking projects that our institutions proliferate. Linked open data and web-based digital humanities projects are often very resource intensive to get off of the ground, so I don’t have to tell the people reading this blog that it’s never too early to think a little about the long-term in order to mitigate the risks that those costs are sunk. I couldn’t even shake this same feeling while enjoying our keynote convocation address by Mari Carmen Ramírez, the Curator of Latin American Art and Director of the International Center for the Arts of the Americas at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston. Her address and much of the curatorial work around which it revolved confronted both the changing representation of Latin America in art spheres as well as specifically in its documentation; a meandering and slowly evolving conversation that requires uninterrupted access to evermore artists files, art museum archives, and printed publications than we may have ever anticipated.

Fort Worth’s Philip Johnson-designed Water Gardens (left) and Tadao Ando-designed Modern Art Museum (right). Photos by Lynn Cunningham.

Fort Worth’s Philip Johnson-designed Water Gardens (left) and Tadao Ando-designed Modern Art Museum (right). Photos by Lynn Cunningham.

I’ll admit that I was pretty ignorant of Fort Worth’s own artistic landscape, outside of the world famous Kimbell Museum, before I got to town. When the few opportunities between session commitments arose, though, it really delivered! Both the nearby botanic and water gardens were open to attendee tours, and, in addition to the Kimbell, the arts district includes the fascinating Amon Carter Museum of American Art and the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth. Word to the wise, however, when in Fort Worth definitely make it your business to stop by the very fun and inspirational National Cowgirl Hall of Fame and Museum!

Convocation reception at the Kimbell Art Museum’s Renzo Piano Pavilion. Photo by Anna-Sophia Zingarelli-Sweet.

Convocation reception at the Kimbell Art Museum’s Renzo Piano Pavilion. Photo by Anna-Sophia Zingarelli-Sweet.

Fun as it was to turn a corner and be greeted by a Philip Johnson or Tadao Ando, I probably looked forward the most to closing out our conference with a party at Renzo Piano’s recent addition to the Kimbell. While the new pavilion bears the architect’s name–an unusual deference to designer over donor to see even at a museum–the whole space did in fact strike me as a tasteful modernist reflection of rather than competitor to Louis Kahn’s now iconic design for the original space.

The Hattie May Inn in Fort Worth. Photo © BedAndBreakfast.com.

The Hattie May Inn in Fort Worth. Photo © BedAndBreakfast.com.

Then, somewhere near the opposite end of the aesthetic spectrum, there is the Hattie May Inn. To avoid the claustrophobia-inducing corporate conference hotel (and to save a few bucks at the same time) I booked a stay at this Queen Anne era bed and breakfast and somewhat notorious piece of Fort Worth history–a 1917 armed robbery-turned-murder is said to the be the source of the Inn’s ghosts! Unfortunately, and eventhough I shared the building for one night with a team of actual ghost hunters, I can’t report any sightings. What I can say is that co-owner and New York transplant Laura’s complimentary and daily vegetarian/vegan breakfasts were the not-so-secret highlight of the entire trip.

Well, that and appearing on LibrarianWardrobe, at least…

All images CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 unless otherwise indicated.

Project Update: DONE WITH ANALYSIS

Posted on by

The month of April has been an absolute and complete blur at the American Museum of Natural History. It seems like it has been mere hours since March, and yet here we are halfway through April with only 45 days left in the Residency.

April for me has been filled with final analyses, presentations, interviews, and more presentations. In this post, I’m going to give a general project update, as well as some insights into the goings-on in this penultimate month to the Residency.

Though it’s not technically in April, March 30 was the kick off to all the April activities. The NDSR Residents did a panel for ARLIS/NY. I won’t go into too much detail since Shira did that for me in this post.

Everyone but me presenting at ARLIS/NY!

Everyone but me presenting at ARLIS/NY!

As of April 1st, I have officially interviewed every single curator and relevant curatorial staff member at the AMNH! This last curator was out on an injury and couldn’t come back to the Museum before the end of March. Since I was 99% done at the middle of February, finally interviewing this last curator felt like a huge triumph. I could now finish my analyses in time to spend the final two months of the Residency working on my last deliverable, which I will get to in a minute.

One of the most nerve-wracking experiences of my life happened on the first Monday of April, the 6th. I was to give a presentation to an assembly of the Museum’s curators and administration, called the Science Senate. There are two parts to the Senate meetings: an Open Session, in which general news and updates are given along with a scientific presentation, and the Closed Session, though I do not know what goes on then because it is for curators only. My presentation happened at the very end of the Open Session.

I was channeling my inner Amidala the whole time…

I was channeling my inner Amidala the whole time…

Originally, I had my presentation scheduled for about 10 minutes but due to time constraints on the agenda, it was shortened to five. This meant I speed-talked my way through all the analyses I had finished the Friday before (April 3) while hoping to impress on everyone there that the risk of data loss is not only imminent, but inevitable. Given the questions and comments I received directly after my presentation and in the week to come, I can say this presentation was a definite success.

For the Residency itself, all I have left to do is my final report–this is a compilation of my previous reports and analyses with recommendations for storage, management, and preservation of the Museum’s vast scientific collections and research data. These previous reports include: a plan for the length of retention for digital assets, an environmental scan to see what other similar institutions are doing for their data, and an overview of what federal agencies fund AMNH research, and whether those agencies require data management plans or not. All these previous reports will come together to form my recommendations as well as provide the Museum with the information it needs to understand and interpret my recommendations.

DigiMan knows what's up

DigiMan knows what’s up

From there, I will take the results of my survey and translate them into functional requirements I believe should be met by the Museum.  This will be the final half of the report. What I anticipate taking up the bulk of the report are my findings and analytical work. This is the evidence for my recommendations and must be given the majority of emphasis. Translating my enormous excel sheet of results into nicely graphic’d and verbal will be a task worthy of its two month timeline for sure.

This Friday, I will fulfill my last requirement for NDSR. This is my enrichment session–basically a way for the Residents to get experience planning events. I will take the other Residents up to the AMNH Research Library for a presentation on the types of data at risk at the Museum, and current strategies for preservation of such data.

CT Machine at the MIF @ the AMNH!

CT Machine at the MIF @ the AMNH!

After this, I will give them a snapshot into the research process by taking them down to the Microscopy and Imaging Facility for an in-depth look at how research using the CT Scanner works. Think of a “cooking show” type of presentation that shows each data at each step of the process, with an eye toward management of that data. This could have only been achieved with the collaboration of the exceptional MIF staff, whom I will now publically thank: Morgan, and Henry–thank you!

So as you can see–the life of a Resident is busy and the work is always flowing never ending. However, with two months left at the AMNH, I can only hope that time starts to slow down and I can have a small infinity within the remaining months.

 

NDSR in the News

Posted on by

Residents selected for 2015 cohort in Washington D.C.

NDSR-New York extends our congratulations to the 2015 class of National Digital Stewardship Residents selected for the Washington D.C. area program. The residents listed were selected by a committee of experts from the Library of Congress, the Institute of Museum and Library Services and other organizations, including the host institutions:

  • John Caldwell will be resident in the U.S. Senate Historical Office.
  • Valerie Collins will be resident at the American Institute of Architects
  • Nicole Contaxis will be resident at the National Library of Medicine
  • Jaime Mears will be resident at the D.C. Public Library
  • Jessica Tieman will be resident in the Government Publishing Office

You can read their full bios and more about the NDSR projects in the press release from the Library of Congress.

WGBH Receives IMLS “Librarians for the 21st Century” Grant to develop NDSR Program

WGBH, with the American Archive of Public Broadcasting (AAPB), a collaboration between the WGBH Education Foundation and the Library of Congress, will develop a National Digital Stewardship Residency (NDSR) project to train residents and develop curriculum for an increasingly critical area of digital preservation, the preservation of audiovisual materials. More in the announcement.

Congratulations to WGBH! We look forward to sharing resources and seeing the NDSR model grow!