The document discusses different approaches to repository policies at Worcester University for their research repository (WRaP) and content repository for learning materials (CoRE). Initially WRaP had no mandate but emphasized showcasing research outputs, while CoRE faced poor uptake and abandoned metadata reviews. Recommendations include allowing different material types and access restrictions, embracing open resources, and linking repositories to learning management systems.

1. Supporting Repository Development with Policies : Considering different approaches for a range of purposes Sarah Hayes, Aston University [email_address]

2. http://www.worc.ac.uk/drawproject Worcester Research and Publications (Eprints) CoRE (Software from City College, Coventry) The Developing Repositories at Worcester Project (DRaW) planned to embed repository use and provide an integrated repository service for staff

7. Changing our repository functionality Staff can now choose the individuals they wish to allow access to their resources

8. “ Using Repositories for Learning and Teaching: Can we find a recipe for success?” Diglis Hotel, May 2008 http://eprints.worc.ac.uk/451/

9. Success of online repositories for research publications Universities use similar systems to store and access teaching materials Tutors reluctant to use such systems How might policies need to change? Difference between material created by lecturers and ‘collections’ of materials Collections stored separately – using a traditional repositories approach? Easy transfer or link between material in the VLE and repository Minimal metadata for lecturer's own material and adopt a Web 2.0 style? A published paper Work in progress?

10. Learning Box, developed by Faroes Project http://languagebox.eprints.org/

12. “ Repository Embedding Day” (RED) Our policy event to embed support Diglis Hotel, October 2008 Whoduzit? Repository roles and tasks Tutor support Metadata Advocacy System updates Repositories Web page