Search

Slides from “Making the business case for investing in metadata" Description: Metadata provides context and provenance to raw data and methods and is essential to both discovery and validation of scientific research. Metadata is also necessary for finding, using, and properly managing scientific data while playing a crucial role in increasing the data quality of information systems. Join us as we discuss the relevance of metadata within the research lifecycle - from research organisations to funders to publishers and researchers and why it is important to research. Josh Brown from MoreBrains Cooperative will provide insights and examples into how business cases for investment into research infrastructure can be built using metadata. Heather Kotula from Access Innovations, Inc will provide her take on how metadata contributes to knowledge management and how to measure its value. Michelle Urberg brings her expertise on metadata and its impact on research output. Julia McDonnell will round it out with her take on metadata and how publishers can influence and benefit the uptake and implementation of metadata within publishing systems. Speakers: Josh Brown Heather Kotula Michelle Urberg Julia McDonell

The Metadata 2020 initiative is an ongoing effort to bring various scholarly communications stakeholder groups together to promote principles and standards of practice to improve the quality of metadata. To understand the perspectives and practices regarding metadata of the main stakeholder groups (librarians, publishers, researchers, and repository managers), we conducted a survey during summer 2019. The survey content was generated by representatives from the stakeholder groups. A link to an online survey (17 or 18 questions depending on the group) was distributed through multiple social media, listserv, and blog outlets. Responses were anonymous, with an optional entry for names and email addresses for those who were willing to be contacted later. Complete responses (N = 211; 87 librarians, 27 publishers, 48 repository managers, and 49 researchers) representing 23 countries on four continents were analyzed and summarized for thematic content and ranking of awareness and practices. Across the stakeholder groups, the level of awareness and usage of metadata methods and practices was highly variable. Clear gaps across the groups point to the need for consolidation of schema and practices, as well as broad educational efforts to increase knowledge and implementation of metadata in scholarly communications.

The Metadata 2020 initiative is an ongoing effort to bring various scholarly communications stakeholder groups together to promote principles and standards of practice to improve the quality of metadata. To understand the perspectives and practices of the main stakeholder groups (librarians, publishers, researchers and repository managers) regarding metadata, the Metadata 2020 Researcher Communications Project Group conducted a survey in the summer of 2019. The survey content was generated by representatives from the stakeholder groups who are active in this Metadata 2020 project. This document provides a summary of the survey responses in both written and graphical form, and serves as a companion to the following resources: ANALYSIS PAPER: Kaiser,K, Urberg, M, Johnsson, M, Kemp, J, Meadows, A, Paglione, L, An International, Multi-Stakeholder Survey about Metadata Awareness, knowledge, and Use in Scholarly Communications. (202X) Location: To be provided once published SURVEY QUESTIONS: Metadata 2020. (2019). Metadata 2020: Survey Questions [PDF]. Location: Ihttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4666193 SURVEY RAW DATA: Paglione, L, Kaiser,K, Urberg, M, Johnsson, M, Kemp, J, Meadows, A, . (2021). Raw Data: An International, Multi-Stakeholder Survey about Metadata Awareness, Knowledge, and Use in Scholarly Communications [Excel spreadsheet]. Location: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4f4qrfj8s, Please see later versions of this paper for included cross-referenced materials.

The Metadata 2020 initiative is an ongoing effort to bring various scholarly communications stakeholder groups together to promote principles and standards of practice to improve the quality of metadata. To understand the perspectives and practices of the main stakeholder groups (librarians, publishers, researchers and repository managers) regarding metadata, the Metadata 2020 Researcher Communications Project Group conducted a survey in the summer of 2019. The survey content was generated by representatives from the stakeholder groups who are active in this Metadata 2020 project. The survey was reviewed by the UAB Office of the IRB. This document contains the questions that were asked and serves as a companion to the following resources: ANALYSIS PAPER: Kaiser,K, Urberg, M, Johnsson, M, Kemp, J, Meadows, A, Paglione, L, An International, Multi-Stakeholder Survey about Metadata Awareness, knowledge, and Use in Scholarly Communications. (202X) Location: To be provided once published METHODS AND RESULTS SUMMARY: Metadata 2020. (2020). Metadata 2020 Survey Methods and Results Summary [PDF]. Location: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4666087 SURVEY RAW DATA: Paglione, L, Kaiser,K, Urberg, M, Johnsson, M, Kemp, J, Meadows, A, . (2021). Raw Data: An International, Multi-Stakeholder Survey about Metadata Awareness, Knowledge, and Use in Scholarly Communications [Excel spreadsheet]. Location: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4f4qrfj8s, Please see later versions of this paper for included cross-referenced materials.

Slides from “AI, metadata creation, and historical bias"Description: Much has been written about the dangers of bias — conscious and unconscious — in the creation of artificial intelligence. Our speakers will share their thoughts on the challenges of metadata creation for and by AI, and how standards and best practices can help address them.

This dissertation examines the unique musical culture of Vadstena Abbey, the Swedish double monastic house (both brothers and sisters) of the Birgittine Order, and uses traditions associated with this culture to begin filling several holes in medieval musicology, medieval studies, and studies of gender in the Middle Ages. I present new details about the chant traditions of a late-medieval, double monastic order, discussing the relationships among music, saints, symbolism, and gender identities. I answer questions about how the Birgittines took symbolic identities for saints and constructed liturgies to elaborate on this symbolism, and how gender identities were created and sustained by women and men in a cloister. Careful detective work with processionals and choir directories has revealed a rich and vibrant world of Birgittine liturgical practice that resounded in the spaces of Vadstena Abbey church throughout the late fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries. This dissertation is divided into three parts: Chapter 1 presents an overview of the central foci for this dissertation: gendered organization of Vadstena Abbey as a double monastery, the different texts that explain Birgittine liturgical practices (not only Birgitta’s revelations, but also the customaries, ordinals, and a devotional treatise), and the four women central to Birgittine devotional practice (the Virgin Mary, St. Anne (mother of Mary), St. Birgitta, and Katarina (Birgitta’s daughter, venerated locally in Sweden but not officially canonized, also first abbess of Vadstena Abbey). Part 2 comprises Chapters 2 and 3, which deal with specific parts of devotional life, namely the architecture of the abbey church and liturgical manuscript production (studied with paleographic and codicological lenses), and their relationship to the liturgy and social organization at Vadstena. Part 3 comprises Chapters 4 and 5, which feature examinations of specific Birgittine feast day liturgies. Chapter 4 is a case study about the multisensory devotional landscape of Stabat Virgo dolorosa, the Swedish office for the Compassion of Mary. Chapter 5 is a survey of processions; processional chants for the Virgin Mary, St. Anne, St. Birgitta, and Katarina serve as the musical objects of study. Together, Chapters 4 and 5 examine devotional networks created by the Birgittine brothers and sisters at Vadstena Abbey.