Developing a Metadata Best Practices Model: The Experience of the Colorado State University Libraries

Abstract

Abstract:The Metadata Best Practices Task Force at the Colorado State University (CSU) Libraries developed a core set of metadata elements and an accompanying data dictionary to facilitate a coordinated metadata management approach for a central digital repository of diverse digital objects. This article describes the rationale for the Task Force and the process used for its work following a look at the background of digitization and past metadata practices at CSU. The article includes a literature review on institutional metadata projects and examples, and it ends with a description of the Task Force's ongoing work and plans for future assessment.

Metadata Dictionary Database: A Proposed Tool for Academic Library Metadata Management

“…In addition to matching user expectations, there is also an implicit recognition derived from the literature (e.g., Agnew, 2003;Kurth et al, 2004;Ma, 2006;Rettig, Liu, Hunter, & Level, 2008) that indicates that good metadata management will be necessary for digital collections to be of high quality within organizations. Equally important is the ability of metadata to be integrated with external collections, the latter being the strategic objective of contemporary libraries.…”

“…Compiling the primary tasks from the experience at Colorado State (Rettig et al, 2008) and from Pennsylvania State (Ma, 2006) reveals certain patterns in the metadata management definitions. In both these cases, metadata management in practice often includes specific approaches to metadata and implementation and activities focused on assessment, maintenance, and preservation.…”

“…This has led some institutions to seek a way to manage the knowledge gained through each project. For instance, at Colorado State, a metadata task force was created to investigate metadata practices and was charged to improve the metadata development process by establishing a base metadata workflow that could be adapted to fit each new project (Rettig et al, 2008). The committee was charged (among other tasks) to "research and identify a set of core metadata elements for local use.…”

“…Rettig et al (2008) describe how digital collection-management software influenced the initial metadata design and implementations for their early collections, noting that system design does influence how information is stored. Often systems contain implied workflows that can result in a "siloed approach" where data are created either without any system-provided controls or to conform to a particular system workflow, with the resulting data lacking in uniformity across collections.…”

UALC Best Practices Metadata Guidelines: A Consortial Approach

“…Ma (2006) looked at metadata implementation for digital projects at the Pennsylvania State University Libraries. Rettig, Liu, Hunter, and Level (2008) discussed the development of a metadata best practices model (along with their data dictionary) at the Colorado State University (CSU) Libraries. CSU's migration from CONTENTdm to DigiTool impacted their "locally customized fields" (p. 322).…”