Search results

The DAEDALUS project is funded under the Joint Information Systems Committee, Focus on Access to Institutional Resources Programme for three years until June 2005. The project is based at the University of Glasgow and is developing online institutional repositories for the university, while at the same time encouraging debate and discussion about scholarly communications issues and is made up of two complementary strands: advocacy and service development. This paper sets out the achievements of the project to date and details some of the advocacy strategies that have been used to engage academic staff and researchers with the aims and objectives of the project. Also discussed are some of the barriers which have been faced in obtaining content for the repositories.

The Instruction Commons information literacy initiative at Iowa State University provides users with both an information literacy program and a virtual space in which students, librarians, and members of the teaching faculty at Iowa State can explore new ways of integrating electronic resources and library research instruction into teaching and learning. Furthermore, the concept of a “commons” implies not just a collaborative information space for students, faculty and librarians, but also an area in which an information literacy program can subsist with learning materials which promote IT literacy. The following paper describes the institutional background of the Instruction Commons, its history, funding, and organization while also providing a description and tour of the Commons. Future directions are also anticipated, including the need for effective program assessment with a view to extracting useful planning and management information. With regard to functionality, we anticipate the integration of more interactive features, including increased use of learner‐controlled paths and quizzes to provide immediate feedback. Finally, the paper offers a useful summary of some other related projects in the USA.

The purpose of this paper is to chart the development and growth of open access and institutional repositories at the University of Glasgow, Scotland from initial work in 2001 to the University's recently launched service, Enlighten. The University of Glasgow is a signatory to the Scottish Open Access Declaration and recently released a statement on Open Access.

The study will focus on the key lessons learned through a twin track approach of advocacy and service development during the DAEDALUS Project (2002‐2005) and the transition of that work to a University service called Enlighten. This service includes a repository for published and peer‐reviewed papers which has now had over 2 million hits and over 270,000 PDF downloads since it was established in February 2004.

The paper reveals the lessons learned by the Library and the project team. It also identifies the range of issues which must be addressed in the successful implementation of a repository and its transition to a production service. These include the development of content policies, copyright clearance and the cultural change necessary to populate a repository service. These challenges have and continue to be addressed by the repository team at the University of Glasgow.

This paper provides details of the lessons learned in the practical experience of setting up an institutional repository and ensuring its transition to a full and supported University service. It will be of particular interest to institutions implementing a repository or running a pilot service.

President Bill Clinton has had many opponents and enemies, most of whom come from the political right wing. Clinton supporters contend that these opponents, throughout the Clinton presidency, systematically have sought to undermine this president with the goal of bringing down his presidency and running him out of office; and that they have sought non‐electoral means to remove him from office, including Travelgate, the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster, the Filegate controversy, and the Monica Lewinsky matter. This bibliography identifies these and other means by presenting citations about these individuals and organizations that have opposed Clinton. The bibliography is divided into five sections: General; “The conspiracy stream of conspiracy commerce”, a White House‐produced “report” presenting its view of a right‐wing conspiracy against the Clinton presidency; Funding; Conservative organizations; and Publishing/media. Many of the annotations note the links among these key players.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Term. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Tenn. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.

The purpose of this paper is to summarize and provide excerpts from a two‐day roundtable on securities lending and short selling hosted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on September 29‐30, 2009.

The paper provides summaries and participants' comments from two days of SEC commissioner's questions and panel discussions. Day one – securities lending: Panel 1 – overview of securities lending; Panel 2 – securities lending and investor protection concerns; Panel 3 – improving securities lending for the benefit of investors; Panel 4: the future of securities lending and potential regulatory solutions. Day two – short selling: Panel 1 – controls on “naked” short selling; Panel 2: making short sale disclosure more meaningful.

Many pension and mutual funds view securities lending as an investment activity. Securities lenders see cash collateral as an important risk. FINRA and the SEC have considered the need for increased transparency and the possible benefits of a central counterparty for securities lending. The securities lending market is highly regulated, including through requirements imposed by Regulation T, 15c3‐3, 15c3‐1, Regulation SHO, and ERISA guidelines. The SEC has considered “hard locate” and “pre‐borrow” requirements for short sales, which some market participants believe would be uneconomical. An estimated 50 percent of fails are from ETFs. The SEC has considered enhanced disclosure requirements for short sales, both anonymous and public, their possible effects on fraud prevention and market efficiency, and any harm they could do to market makers.

The paper provides a discussion by regulators and industry experts on the most important current regulatory issues related to securities lending and short selling.

At a meeting of the Council of the Royal Borough of Kensington on February 12th, 1918, Councillor Dr. A. J. Rice‐Oxley, Chairman of the Public Health Committee, brought up a Report as follows :—

The following definitions and standards for food products have been adopted as a guide for the officials of this Department in enforcing the Food and Drugs Act. These are standards of identity and are not to be confused with standards of quality or grade; they are so framed as to exclude substances not mentioned in the definition and in each instance imply that the product is clean and sound. These definitions and standards include those published in S. R. A., F. D. 2, revision 4, and those adopted October 28, 1936.