Fáilte go Sráid na Banrighinn

The whole purpose of education is to turn mirrors into windows.  ~Sydney J. Harris

Football and digital preservation seem an unlikely combination but on May 15th Ed and I arrived to a slightly damp Glasgow celebrating en masse the end of the football season, to deliver our DPTP north of the border.  There, I am afraid the comparison between football and digital curation ends but it is worth noting that on Monday our students did not consist, in the main of bleary eyed Scots.  As I am myself half Scottish I was looking forward to hearing about the digital state of play in my mother’s country but curiously we had a very international group, many had travelled far from places such as the European Central Bank,  European Commission, PRONI,  and near  such as from the National Records Scotland (who clearly cannot get enough of a good thing as we were with them 4 weeks previous).  The group was very creative who seemed to work well together. I know  I know, we say this a lot but this group seemed to shine for many reasons.  They were keen to work together and shout out about their ideas right from the start. And though being a disparate international group they managed to work together very neatly and develop some great case studies for us.

Internationally (and sometimes nationally!) language has always been a barrier  for communication, but  it is also an enabler  and this is again where we see something such as the OAIS being a useful way of empowering people to be able to communicate with each other, and other professionals.  The DPTP rarely (and rightly so) has students just from the traditional information management world (libraries/archives/etc).  Many people now being redeployed from different parts of their organisation and as such are often unfamilair with the idea/concept of an archive or indeed of the traditional notion of the lifecycle of a document/record. This is where OAIS is very valuable due to the way it which it expresses the way a digital object should be ideally kept and uses a language describe this.

In many of our case studies with OAIS, we often find that many organisations are actually mapping very well to the OAIS which indicates that it reflects  good and real practise when it comes to managing our digital repository. Our job in the DPTP is to take someone who has never heard of the OAIS (suprisingly more often than not) and by the end of the three days have them fluent in the OAIS concepts both through listening and through application to their own environments.  Our feedback from the course has proven that this is a job well done….DPTP abú!

Our brief was to introduce digital preservation topics to traditional archivists. Among other things I was asked to deliver a module on BIP0008 and the legal admissibility of electronic records. In preparing this I discovered that the standard is very comprehensive, requiring written policies for classes of records that are in scope, a stated “duty of care” and written procedures for what staff should be doing, an extremely meticulous and well-documented methodology for the production of scanned versions of records, plus a reliable IT framework in which this can work. And of course, an audit trail marked with date and timestamps generated at every possible link in the chain of custody. That’s a lot of boxes to tick, but the payoff is a scanned document (or born-digital record) which is regarded in the eyes of the law as an authentic unaltered copy, hence legally admissible.

My personal take on the standard it goes a long way to satisfying the requirements of auditors who seem to take legal admissibility to rather extreme lengths; to my mind, any good EDRMS or records management system ought to be providing enough audit trails to keep them happy. Nonetheless the archivists at Scotland seem to have a requirement not only to observe this standard, but also to ensure they continue the chain of custody from current records management into archival storage. In other words, legally admissible records must also be legally admissible archives; and any preservation actions performed on these objects while in digital custody must not compromise that authenticity.

This may also have been reflected in their IT manager’s interest in use of the checksum and file format validation tools which can be used in the repository; he seemed to be wondering if such tools could verify authenticity, perhaps by indicating whether a file had been tampered with at any stage between leaving the EDRM system and entering the archival repository. It’s an interesting line of thought, and an approach that would probably involve a heightened degree of audit trailing for any organisation that wanted to work this way. My off-the-cuff contribution to this discussion on the day involved something about providing evidence that “best effort” had been made, but I suppose the real proof would be in a court of law and a legal precedent.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/projects-and-work/digital-preservation-faqs.htm

‘It’s designed to demystify issues and give a lead in to more detailed information provided by us or others in the DP community. So ….. please take a look and let us know what you think.’

The DPTP gets a nice recommendation here under ‘Where can I learn more?’. Many thanks!

1. Consider your organisational requirements, drivers and level at which you want to do it, and create a selection policy that matches this. Consider legal framework.
2. Understand the technology that copies websites (harvesters) and how websites themselves behave. I talked about aspects of the dynamic web that sometimes trip up a harvester – CMS, wiki, databases.
3. Consider how (and indeed whether) you want to offer access to the collection, and whether metadata is needed.
4. Build a programme for web archiving, adapting existing methodologies as needed – e.g. Institutional vs Individual. What other services exist, and can they do it for you?

In the middle, we had an excellent case study from Dave Thompson at the Wellcome Trust, and his experiences strongly reflected many of the themes of the course. Like many organisations, they don’t have one single reason for collecting web archives, and the future value of these collections is something we can’t yet see (due to its closeness with the live web).

We were all impressed by the people attending the course, all from a variety of backgrounds and projects, coming with widely different expectations of how they would be managing their web content. National libraries and business archives were represented, but also the arts; the Tate Gallery are doing interesting work in time-based media and specialist works of art that manifest themselves over the web. How to capture that content, and make it perform in the future?

The DPTP recognises the value of participation and sharing experiences, which we can all learn from. When I was holding forth on the concept of three possible points of capture for web content, I was very pleased to hear a proposal for a fourth possible method from our Swiss delegate Daniel Spichty. There were also numerous questions about exactly what it is that Content Management Systems do, which suggested to me I need to learn more about the inner workings and preservation implications of such systems.

I’m also pleased we were able to offer a printed copy of the PoWR Handbook to all those attending – in advance of the official launch of the book, which will take place at IWMW 2010 on 12 July.

Safely home in Firdos Square, Baghdad.

Our last Digital Preservation Training Programme (DPTP) was attended by many people from the UK and abroad.  Thanks to the British Institute for the Study of Iraq and the British Council in Iraq among the attendees were two colleagues from the Iraq National Library and Archives in Baghdad (INLA).  The INLA was destroyed during and post the 2003 invasion and conflict in Iraq.

In April of 2003, the National Library and Archives (Dar al-Kutub wa al-Watha’Iq) of Iraq, which was located directly across from the Ministry of Defense, was burned and looted. The burning and looting appeared to have taken place on two occasions: April 10 and April 12-13. These fires were set professionally with accelerants. A report was later given by Saad Eskander, the director–general of the National Library and Archive, regarding the destruction. He noted that three days before the invasion, library staff were told to destroy all archival material related to the Ba’athist rule. Eskander also reported that the destruction was performed by “a mix of poor people looking for a quick profit, along with regime loyalists intent on destroying evidence of atrocities”.

In total, an estimated 60 percent of its total archival materials, 25 percent of its books, newspapers, rare books, and most of its historical photographs and maps were destroyed.

Before the destruction, the library and archives were reported to have held 417,000 books, 2,618 periodicals dating from the late Ottoman era to modern times, and a collection of 4,412 rare books and manuscripts. According to Eskander, Saddam loyalists burned the entirety of the Republican Archive, which contained the records of the Ba’athist regime between the years 1958 and 1979. Also completely destroyed were the Ba’athist court proceedings detailing the charges against and trials of party opponents. Records of Iraq’s relations with its neighbors, including Iran, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, are missing. Iraq has accused neighbouring countries of stealing sections of its national archives. In addition to these documents, which would have been of great interest to Iraqi citizens as well as to historians, the INLA lost records and documents from the Ottoman reign, the British occupation, the monarchical era, and much more. The destruction or loss of these materials, according to Eskander, did not occur only during the April 2003 attacks.

Saad Eskander, director of the library and archives since 2003, kept a diary through the British Library’s website, with entries starting in November 2006. His entries document the events covering the library and archive’s restoration. By 2007, the center “had already become a safe haven for intellectual activity, fully accessible to the public, with a state-of-the-art computer center”. In addition, there is also a facility for transferring documents to microfilm, a cataloging operation, and a department that locates documents from Iraqi government ministries. Having been a major player in the history of Iraq, the British Library was able to help the reconstruction, by providing microfilm copies of rare books and microfiche copies of documents relating to the administration of Iraq from 1914 to 1921 that were held by the British in India. Despite the fact that five staff members have been killed, along with the library closing for days at a time due to heavy fighting, Eskander says he sees the institution as “an important source of uniting and unifying the country.”

Having been a major player in the history of Iraq, the British Library was able to help the reconstruction, by providing microfilm copies of rare books and microfiche copies of documents relating to the administration of Iraq from 1914 to 1921 that were held by the British in India. Despite the fact that five staff members have been killed, along with the library closing for days at a time due to heavy fighting, Eskander says he sees the institution as “an important source of uniting and unifying the country.”  The British Library is also digitizing important collections for the INLA. As a result, at  CILIP’s award ceremony in his honour, Dr Eskander articulated the need for training in relation to digital preservation and to ensure good management of these and other digital resources. The Digital Preservation Training Programme offered to find funding to enable some colleagues from the INLA to attend.

Waleed Al-Naqshabandi and Zahraa Al Lami both work in the INLA. Waleed’s father is a government scultor who made the iconic sculpture which was pulled down on the 9th of April 2003. His father still works as sculptor for the present government. waleed is a senior IT specialists at the INLA and came to the DPTP to learn more about the preservation of the many digital copies of documents which the INLA is gathering from aroudn the world to replenish its holdings. Both spent time at the British Library being shown various projects relating to digital preservation.  Waleed and Zahraa were very keen to emphasise their Iraq identity regardless of religion. Both have suffered during the post invasion aftermath. Waleed carried his old era Iraqi passport everywhere with him as a reminder of how bad things were under Sadaam Hussein’s regime.

I felt very humbled hearing about Waleed and Zahraa’s life in Baghdad. While we all hear about how dangerous life can be in Baghdad, it was plain to see how much they both love their city and their country.  I learned a lot, not just about life in Baghdad but how to get visas fastracked from Jordan to Baghdad, the kindness of the British Council’s Iraq based team but also where to get some fine Iraqi food in London and of course I learnt some Arabic!

Both have been letting me know how they are proceeding at the INLA since their return and I hope to maintain my connection with the INLA and continue this programme.

Zahraa, a very good student!

Waleed hard at work at the DPTP

Sunny SOAS and Senate House

Hard to believe that yet another DPTP has come and gone.  We had a full house again for this course and had to close bookings due to demand.  We had a very international attendance once again with people from the Netherlands, Iraq and Venezuela (via Essex) attending.  Our UK represenatation was very impressive with large and small organisations being represented.  We were also very chuffed that the DPC once again awarded the DPTP  with five scholarships.  Thank you! It enables many who could not attend take part in the DPTP.

In terms of feedback our score cards shows that we our ratings are constantly improving for all our modules which sees the standard of content and presentation improving course by course, as it should be doing.  We aim for excellence in each of our modules.  Again and again we see that the more we work with the students the richer the course becomes.  Each person and their experience which they bring adds significantly to the course. You can take a look at some outputs here. I think the presenters will all agree that working with the students makes what could be a quite a long three day event very enjoyable and rewarding.  Here are some photos of the course.

So good stuff.  But what did our students really think of the course? here are some of the comments we got:

‘I really enjoyed the interactivity of the course; it broke up the day & helped put learning into context.’

‘Very encouraging – gave me lots of practical ideas as to how to move forward and not to “byte” off more than I can chew.’

‘Excellent exposition of model and practical application – will make a great difference to how I engage with projects and discussions in the profession.’

And one which speaks for itself: ‘Ace!’

Enough for now.  A big thanks to everyone for their hard work and participation.

Patricia

We are pleased to announce a series of of one-day workshops to be delivered as a follow-up to the established Digital Preservation Training Programme (DPTP).

A one-day workshop on web archiving will be held at SOAS on 28th June 2010. The workshop will look at the selection, capture and management of websites and web resources, introducing and assessing various organizational approaches and technological tools which exist. The training will look at website archiving within the framework of the OAIS model which is currently taught on the DPTP, and illustrate the concepts with practical examples and exercises. Attendees should leave the course with the ability to understand the why, what and how of web archiving and be in a position to apply the learning to their own institutional context and requirements.
The course costs £100.00 exclusive of VAT. Refreshments are included in the price.

To register your interest and book on the course please look here: http://www.dptp.org/events/web-archiving-day/

The Digital Preservation Coalition are also generously giving three, yes THREE scholarships to attend the DPTP. Once again open to DPC members. Remember folks, this can include your institution or your professional association.

Hope to see some of you there!

Following up his excellent interview with William Kilbride at DPTP in May, this time Frank Steiner conducted video interviews with some of the DPC students and scholarship winners – hopefully you can see them below:

But I digress. I’m here to write about some outcomes from Friday’s DPC board meeting. Encouragingly, it looks likely that the digital preservation award will return in November 2010, although some hurdles remain to be overcome. It’s quite possible that some aspects (such as eligibility or marking criteria) may change. Watch out for news late this year or early next. In the meantime, if you have views on what would make the awards more interesting or relevant to you, and particularly on what might encourage you to enter, do let me or the DPC know.

The joint Society of Archivists’s digital preservation roadshows (supported by DPC, TNA, Planets and Cymal) have been extremely popular, with some events over-subscribed. They are proving a great way to get basic, practical information about digital preservation tools and methods into the hands of working archivists and records managers. The problems, and the reception, sound reminiscent of similar work I did for the SoA about 10 years ago, as part of their occasional training days for newly-qualified archivists.

I’m also pleased to say that the Board approved a proposal to allocate more money to training scholarships in 2009/10, which can be used to support attendance at DPTP or other member-provided courses such as DC 101 (which is currently free.) We’re also looking forward to a joint training showcase in Belfast with the DCC’s DC 101, facilitated by JISC and PRONI, in September. More details will appear here and elsewhere when we have them.

We’re expecting an increased number of DPC techwatch reports in the coming year. The latest, released on preview to DPC members yesterday (2009-07-10), covers geospatial data, and there’s a long list of candidate topics for the next couple of years.

Finally, the board said thanks and farewell to its current chair, Ronald Milne, who is taking up a new post at the National Library of New Zealand next month. The Vice Chair, Bruno Longmore, will act as DPC chair until elections are organised for the AGM in November.

Frank Steiner: I understand you’ve just recently taken on the post at DPC. What is your background in the field of digital preservation and how did you end up at the DPC?
William Kilbride: After my archaeology studies at Glasgow University and an MSc in computer applications I worked for the Archaeology Data Service at University of York. I started there in 1999 – which were early days in digital preservation – at least within archaeology. Part of our work involved raising awareness as well as ensuring long-term provision and access to archaeological research data. Because fieldwork can be very destructive, archaeologists have always had a close relationship with and respect for archives. The DPC came into existence at that time – also based in York. We had a lot of shared interests and quickly developed a close working relationship.

FS: So you basically switched camps and went to the other part of town to get into work in the mornings. (N.B.: DPC is based in York)
WK: No, I actually took a slight detour. For family reasons and because of some interesting work they were doing I moved to Glasgow in 2006 to work in Glasgow Museums as Research Manager.

FS: This sounds like there is more than one?
WK: Indeed, most people don’t know it, but the city of Glasgow owns one of the largest and most impressive civic collections in Europe, displayed in 13 museums across the Glasgow. Glasgow has a real love affair with its museums and although only about 2 percent of the collection is on display, a new research centre will soon provide access to the whole lot – like a massive reference library or public archive.It’s really innovative and shows a real commitment to access.

FS: So you went back to your archaeological roots, so to speak?
WK: Yes – but computing projects and the issue of digital preservation caught up with me once more. We developed online access to collections as well as trying to ‘make sense’ of the ever growing pool of native digital items which the collection contained. But the Executive job at the DPC became available and considering the history I had with DPC it was very attractive. I decided to apply, and now have an office in Glasgow University where I was already an honorary lecturer. So although DPC is based in York, my office is in ‘HATII’ – the Humanities Advanced Technology and Information Institute in Glasgow – which has an impressive track record in research and development with digital preservation. It’s a good place to work.

FS: I have spoken to both of your scholarship winners, who seemed very pleased to be given the opportunity to be funded to attend the most recent DPTP course. What other activities is DPC involved in to raise awareness of the importance of the preservation of digital material?
WK: You already mentioned part of our mission statement there. We are an agenda setting and enabling body with the ultimate goal to make our digital memory accessible in the future.

FS: I gathered from the competition, which you ran for the scholarships, that you are member’s only club. Is that right?
WK: Not really, we are a not-for-profit membership organisation, but by no means exclusive. Our members benefit through early bird rates at events, special discounts and preferred access to reports and such. Ultimately we share our reports and training with anyone who needs it. Members are able to share their work through the DPC and also able to set the agenda – to point us at issues they need resolved. Digital preservation is a topic for everyone from large commercial organisations, small charities down to each and every one of us. So it makes sense economically and intellectually if we work together.

FS: Interesting you should mention that. I realised there were a wide spread of backgrounds at the last DPTP.
WK: And I think that is one of the many benefits for people attending the course. Every time I present there is this sense of mutual problem solving, regardless which organisation the participants are from or what their background is. The chance for DPTP students to establish peer contacts and network with people trying to solve similar problems is something I like to see happening and it is also something we at DPC try to achieve.

FS: Can you shed some more light on the DPC’s involvement with the DPTP course?
WK: We helped ULCC develop the course with Cornell University, ADS, JISC and others, based on the general need within the community for training in digital preservation. I find it very satisfying to see some of the first students (in 2005) who went from looking for solutions to resolving their digital preservation issues to becoming significant leaders in the field – developing and applying solutions and sharing their experience with the community.

FS:Looking into the future, do you think there will be further scholarships by DPC?
WK: There’s no question about it, yes. There is a persistent need for digital preservation training and there are also growing expectations of what digital assets can do for organisations and individuals.

FS: Do you think the course itself has to change to stay relevant?
WK: Of course it does and it certainly has over the past 3 years. The field has developed quickly and I’m confident Patricia and the guys from ULCC will ensure the latest changes are reflected in the course syllabus. I think maybe there will be or could be a variation or targeting of DPTP, like ‘DPTP for Museums’, ‘DPTP for Publishers’ and so on. Although basic concepts and principles of digital preservation remain the same there is a trend of more specialised requirements which could be addressed by a more customised DPTP offering.

FS: William, thank you for your time and I hope to see you at the next DPTP course.
WK: Thanks for having me.

Japanese Zen garden at Brunei gallery, School of Oriental and African Studies.

So another DPTP over! As presenters we felt it went really well. We again had a great group of people. The level of knowledge was very high and even so it seems the course really does help consolidate many levels of knowledge about digital preservation. For many it was OAIS and the class project seems to have helped put the theory into practice. One quote from the feedback:

‘Things really fell into place for me during this exercise and models started to make proper sense. Moved things from theory to practice.’

Overall the level of satisfaction with what we are providing is high.

‘Overall an excellent course. Bringing together so many disparate ideas and concepts and making sense of the muddle! Just hope we can move forward using the models. Excellent group too, good interaction and discussion – I got as much out of this element as from the taught content. Thank you so much all!’

We are now looking to developing links with the DCC as well as moving on to another stage of the DPTP. We will keep providing these 3 day courses with readjustments and updates but we are also looking at developing the modules into e-learning objects. Now all we need is funding!

Iraq National Library and Archives, Baghdad, Iraq.

So we are on tenterhooks awaiting the visa applications of Rawaa and Waleed from the Iraq National Library and Archives (INLA). The visas are now being processed in Baghdad and should be ready any day. Thanks to the British Council and the British Institute for the study of Iraq, Rawaa and Waleed are (hopefully) coming to attend the next DPTP which takes place in SOAS on the 18th-20th of May. The programme is really shaping up, we have added a few things and altered the schedule somewhat in light of feedback from the last course. So exciting stuff.

More about the INLA: The Iraq National Library and Archives had 95% of its holdings destroyed mostly during and post conflict. This was an institution which held 417,000 books, 2,618 periodicals dating from the late Ottoman era to modern times, and a collection of 4,412 rare books and manuscripts.  Now with the energy and dedication of its director, Dr Saad Eskander and his staff the library is being rebuilt with donations and a lot of digital surrogates. Rawaa and Waleed are coming here to learn more about how to manage these digital assets which are vital to the reconstitution of Iraqi culture and history.

The alert among you will remember me talking about Dr Eskander before.

Here’s looking forward to meeting our Iraqi colleagues as well as everyone booked on the next DPTP.

DPTP is of value to anyone with responsibility for digital preservation in an institutional context – its aim is to equip you with the knowledge to effect change in the organisation to allow the right things to happen. (If your primary responsibility is scientific data curation, you may find the DCC’s DC 101 course more applicable.)

Applications need to be in by May 5th – it’s not an onerous process, so don’t delay.

Without going into too much detail and re-living every single presentation, there clearly is a lot more to digital archiving than meets the eye. Five stages, three legs, “the two documents”, OAIS were the main methods and models discussed, all during the first day of the three day programme. Even though my head was spinning and I had trouble remembering my own name, thanks to the information overload, my interest was sparked.

The methods and models mentioned above can be used by any organisation to find out where they are in the greater scheme of things, so to speak. Cornell’s five stages help determine at which ‘knowledge’ stage of digital preservation an organisation is; the OAIS reference model and TDR (Trusted Digital Repositories) help analyse technological and organisational infrastructure respectively. Once these methods and approaches have been used to decide on the “right” approach to digital preservation we looked at the next step: preservation approaches and legal issues. Not surprisingly the latter could have been extended to a week-long workshop itself.Day 2 was filled with a good mix of case studies, presentations and workshops, which focused on the use and necessity of metadata in preservation, and a big group exercise putting the recently acquired knowledge to the test.

Despite the fact that I missed the last day, I personally found it a more than worthwhile and helpful workshop to attend. Patricia, Ed, Rory and Kevin did a great job “on stage”; as I’m sure did all the unnamed heroes in the background, organising and supporting this fantastic event.

• ‘It was all good. Thank you for the extra bits of reading in the pack too.’
• ‘This course came highly recommended and didn’t disappoint!’
• ‘Even the things that don’t directly apply to me now were useful to know for the future, and to understand the needs of our collaborators.’

We are now studying the feedback with a view to further improving the course and looking at developing some social networking opportunities as well as looking at e-learning. The next DPTP will be in February 2009. Once dates are confirmed we will post them here.

I’m here because I was invited to speak this morning about Ingest, the previous stage in the lifecycle. That was followed by a stimulating set of exercises developed and led by Suzanne Embury which got attendees to think about data quality and the varied measures we might use for it. Suzanne’s exercise was based on work by Wang and Strong (“Beyond accuracy: what data quality means for data consumers”) which starts from the premise that we can never directly measure data quality – rather, we must construct measures which are proxies for quality, or measure only one facet of it. This was new work to me, but it was reassuring to see that it fitted very well with my own experience and with what I know of the ways in which others have approached quality in data. Their original paper took 176 measures of data quality and condensed them into 15 generic aspects of quality. Not all are applicable to all settings, and part of the exercise today got our students considering which were appropriate to them and how they might measure them. This struck me as being particularly useful, as it provides a formal means for deciding which aspects of quality are important to your consumers. Effort can then be focussed on dealing with those aspects well, and not wasting effort on areas that are of lesser relevance, or for which measures are difficult to establish.

The DCC 101 looks to be a promising addition to the canon of training and education in digital curation. We’re looking forward to working with Joy Davidson and her colleagues at the DCC to explore how our training provision and theirs can complement, rather than compete with, each other. There are plans to discuss these issues at a workshop following the IDCC this year, and I’m interested in opinions from a wider audience that would help inform our discussions. If you are a potential attendee at one or more of these training courses, would it help you to see them more integrated ? Do you find it easy to identify the training and education that best suits you at present, and what could improve that situation ? If you are responsible for staff that may need training now and in the future, what type of training provision best suits you and your organisation and what constraints – budgets, time, place – should we all be aware of ? Responses as comments to this post, or by email, would help us all greatly to plan future training that will meet the community’s needs.

Chris Rusbridge has already done an excellent job of some near-real-time reporting on the sessions, and I’m not going to try to replicate that level of detail in this post. As a first-time attendee at iPres, I was impressed by the professional mix attending, which took in hard-core computer science, digital preservation and curation folk, repository managers and those from the traditional custodial professions. In that respect it was very reminiscent of the early DLM-Forums, which were eye-opening for me when I attended the first one in 1996. But it was also interesting to observe that, just as DLM was dominated by archivists and records managers, iPres is a very library-oriented event. For example, those who expressed a desire for a Europe-wide event bringing together all those with an interest in digital preservation didn’t seem to be aware that the DLM-Forums existed.

One positive observation (of many) is that there is more reassuring news on the oft-vexed issue of IPR barriers to digital preservation. At the close of day 1, we heard a summary of the findings of the international survey on the impact of copyright law on digital preservation. That indicated that the UK had one of the strictest set of constraints of all the countries looked at – in terms of who is permitted to carry out certain acts in the name of preservation and what those acts are. Other countries have more relaxed exemptions and that doesn’t appear to be causing the major rightsholdfers any significant financial loss. That should give us hope for some change in the law in the UK at least. And Horst Foster, making the keynote speech opening day 2, appeared to echo this at the European level, implying that the case for change had been made and accepted, although he was notably cautious about making any promises as to when this change might come about.

That’s an improvement on the situation in Europe a few years ago, though, when I was at one of a number of expert panels helping the European Commission to frame the forthcoming research questions and challenges in the digital preservation arena. At that time we were all warned off mentioning the (C) word at all – it seemed to have a somewhat toxic flavour. It’s really heartening to see that things have changed.

One should add a note of caution, however. After Adrienne Muir had commented favourably on how Australian law allows institutions such as the national library and archives to bypass DRM systems in order to preserve material, Colin Webb injected a note of caution. It is apparently still illegal to manufacture or to import a device to Australia which allows a DRM system to be bypassed. But if the national library happens to find such a device on its premises, it can use it without fear of breaking the law. Still some way to go, then, before the law is ‘joined up and working’ – the strapline of iPres2008.

The Programme is predicated on the need for institutions to combine organisational and technological perspectives to devise an appropriate response to the challenges that digital preservation requirements present. The course uses a pedagogical approach to training, and involves group work and plenty of interaction.

For more details about this event please see http://www.ulcc.ac.uk/dptp/. The booking form can be found at http://www.ulcc.ac.uk/dptp/future-courses/booking-form.html.
If you have any questions regarding this, please contact us at dptp-admin@ulcc.ac.uk. Please book early to avoid disappointment as we have limited spaces.

The course is particularly beneficial to those working in the world of information management such as librarians, records managers, archivists and IT specialists working within a library or archives. The new interactive element of the course has seemed to pay off as attendees mostly responded positively to this approach. Feedback includes:

• ‘Excellent. Was able to feed off other people’s ideas and views.’
• ‘Fun and VERY helpful.’
• ‘Very good presentations! Very professional.’
• ‘Very well organised and presented. Good to have additional reading material.’

So we are pretty happy and are planning our next event very soon in June and in London. So keep your eye on the blog, and the DPTP website.

We have also been strengthening our skills as pedagogical teachers, so that the course becomes much more interactive and participatory for those attending, and gives them something to engage with instead of listening passively to a series of hour-long PowerPoint lectures. We think this new approach, inspired by the principled teaching model of Graciano Soares at the JISC RSC for London, is paying off; we heard much from the experiences and expertise of archivists, librarians, curators, museum staff, and IT specialists, all placed at varying levels of seniority and responsibility in their parent organisations. Their input in fact generated a significant part of the actual course content. We shall soon be providing photographs of many a flipchart page, and hosting them on flickr or the DPTP website, in order to share the many group-work and pair-work exercise results. The course can only improve as a result of this approach, giving us new ideas and further material to enrich the modules.