Creating metadata practices for MIT’s OpenCourseWare Project
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830410524567 |
| Date | 01 June 2004 |
| Published date | 01 June 2004 |
| Pages | 138-143 |
| Author | Rebecca L. Lubas,Robert H.W. Wolfe,Maximilian Fleischman |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
Creating metadata
practices for MIT's
OpenCourseWare Project
Rebecca L. Lubas
Robert H.W. Wolfe and
Maximilian Fleischman
Until 2002, MIT Libraries' Bibliographic Access
Services only dabbled in non-MARC metadata.
The reliable MARC format met most cataloging
needs for decades. In the last few years,
encounters with other metadata schemes began to
occur with increasing regularity. Frequently,
digital objects carried metadata that could be used
in the online catalog if harvested and converted to
MARC. The libraries converted a sampling of
Dublin Core (DC) and Federal Geographic Data
Committee (FGDC) metadata records into
MARC to make them compatible with MIT's
local integrated library system. The focus of these
experiments was to make the data as MARC-like
as possible rather than to exploit the features of the
alternative standards.
With the advent of DSpace, MIT's digital
repository, the libraries' staff gradually realized
that not all metadata would ultimately be
converted to MARC and that in some cases
MARC would not be the most desirable standard.
DSpace contains items in a variety of formats.
Some of the items are born digital and others are
converted from print resources. Dublin Core was
chosen as the DSpace metadata standard because
it is well-developed and flexible enough to address
the needs of a wide array of formats.
DC's similarity to MARC also made it a logical
choice for MIT's first major venture into
non-MARC metadata. Its advantage over MARC
is in being tailored specifically for describing and
providing access to electronic resources. The DC
records in DSpace function in the same way that
the MARC records do in an ILS. They are
primarily surrogates to aid discovery. The
libraries' approach to creating metadata practices
for DSpace was heavily influenced by MARC
traditions.
These early metadata experiences demonstrated
that much needed to be learned to appreciate and
utilize the capabilities of other metadata
standards. The libraries formed a Metadata
Advisory Group in 2001 for the express purpose of
creating inhouse expertise about metadata beyond
MARC.
In the spring of 2002, representatives from
MIT's OpenCourseWare Project (OCW)[1]
approached the libraries. OCW plans to make
much of the course materials from 2,000 of MIT's
course offerings available on the Web, free of
charge, to any user anywhere in the world. They
plan to do this by 2007, with 25 per cent off the
courses available in Fall 2003. OCW's planners
recognized the need for metadata to make the
courses with their associated learning objects
The authors
Rebecca L. Lubas is the Special Formats Cataloging Librarian,
Robert H.W. Wolfe is Metadata Specialist and Head, Metadata
Unit and Maximilian Fleischman is Metadata Production
Assistant, all at Massachusetts Institute of Technology Libraries,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Keywords
Online cataloguing, Libraries, USA
Abstract
The MIT libraries were called upon to recommend a metadata
scheme for the resources contained in MIT's OpenCourseWare
(OCW) project. The resources in OCW needed descriptive,
structural, and technical metadata. The SCORM standard, which
uses IEEE Learning Object Metadata for its descriptive standard,
was selected for its focus on educational objects. However, it
was clear that the Libraries would need to recommend how the
standard would be applied and adapted to accommodate needs
that were not addressed in the standard's specifications. The
newly formed MIT Libraries Metadata Unit adapted established
practices from AACR2 and MARC traditions when facing
situations in which there were no precedents to follow.
Electronic access
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available
at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0737-8831.htm
Received August 2003
Revised September 2003
Accepted November 2003
138
Library Hi Tech
Volume 22 .Number 2 .2004 .pp. 138-143
#Emerald Group Publishing Limited .ISSN 0737-8831
DOI 10.1108/07378830410524567
To continue reading
Request your trial