How Librarians Use Digital Humanities @ Survey

How Librarians and Faculty Use Digital Humanities

A summary of the 2015 Gale–American Libraries survey 

Librarian responses

The majority of librarians prefer a collaborative relationship with faculty. Seven out of 10 librarians indicated that the acquisition, transcription, and coding of digital source materials should be shared by librarians and humanities faculty. Only 20% felt that this should be the sole province of the library, and 11% thought that humanities faculty should be doing it. Some 63% of librarians see themselves as full-fledged project collaborators and participants in providing DH services.

The role that the library plays in DH research is still evolving. Four out of 10 librarians said that their DH services are “ad hoc.” Another 17% said they provided no services to users engaged in DH projects, although an equal number wrote that their library has a digital scholarship center that assists multiple disciplines. The most common methods of support were:

• institutional repositories (54%)
• digital preservation (50%)
• improving access to metadata (46%)
• campus-wide DH coordination (43%)
• consulting with faculty on digitization projects (37%)
• project sustainability planning (33%)

In most cases, a subject librarian or digital scholarship librarian provides support for DH projects (45%).

Funding for DH is spread across institutional departments. Although 58% reported that the library operating budget was the source of funding for DH projects, other revenue sources included:

• grants (47%)
• academic departments (35%)
• one-time funds (27%)
• the library IT budget (17%)

A majority (88%) of librarians indicated their libraries do not have a written statement describing DH support, nor is there a formal process for reviewing DH project proposals (81%).

Librarians rate institutional support for DH projects as generally low. Only 23% rated their library’s effectiveness at seven points or higher on a 10-point scale. The most common challenges to effectiveness were:

• difficulty connecting with faculty (26%)
• lack of institutional commitment (24%)
• lack of authority to marshal resources (13%)
• inflexible IT structure (9%)

Staffing is a serious hindrance to effective DH services, with 41% indicating that additional hires with special technical skills and knowledge were needed. Open-ended responses included:

• “A digital resource center would [ideally] have a professional director, one instructional designer, a part-time support staff person for logistics, and a team of student workers. Also some dedicated space, equipment, and a recurring budget.”
• “A digital humanities librarian would need technology expertise, an understanding of the changing role of the humanities in our 21st-century culture, the ability to pool resources and create collaborations to avoid duplication of effort, and the ability to communicate the significance of the humanities and their role in libraries of the future.”
• “Computers, software, network infrastructure are all important, but there needs to be a willingness to engage students and faculty in digital scholarship, even when there are knowledge gaps.”

Survey Result Link | http://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/digital-humanities-librarian2.pdf

Regards

Pralhad Jadhav

Senior Librarian

Khaitan & Co

Upcoming Event | National Conference on Future Librarianship: Innovation for Excellence (NCFL 2016) during April 22-23, 2016.

Note | If anybody use these post for forwarding in any social media coverage or covering in the Newsletter please give due credit to those who are taking efforts for the same.