What volunteers and community groups said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings #5

Here’s the next in the series of HERALD survey findings: 67 of the total 516 respondents classed themselves as volunteers or community archaeologists including local societies and independent archaeologists or researchers.

The responses sample size was quite small in comparison with other groups (12% of total respondents). However, the results did provide some insight into the nature of community groups and how they were using existing digital resources and some of the reasons for not using the current OASIS system. Continue reading What volunteers and community groups said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings #5

What historic building specialists said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings #4

This is the fourth post in the series of HERALD survey findings for the redevelopment of the OASIS form. 79 of the total 516 respondents defined themselves local government conservation officers and 20 of the total 516 were historic building specialists.

  1. Most buildings specialists (BS) responded as individuals whereas conservation officers (CO) were much more likely to respond on behalf of their organisation. The majority of respondents for both groups work in England with a few BS working in Wales. There were no CO responses from Scotland because the survey was sent out on an English Heritage Conservation Officer list but not an equivalent list for Scotland.

Continue reading What historic building specialists said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings #4

What specialists said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings #3

This is the third instalment in the findings from the HERALD survey on the redevelopment of the OASIS form. Only 17 respondents from of the total of 516 respondents defined themselves Specialist (post excavation analyses). And although the results set was small these were the conclusions drawn from it:

  1. Three quarters of the 17 respondents who defined themselves as post-excavation specialists responded as individuals and all work in England with about a quarter also working in Scotland and Wales. The organisations represented were of all sizes from one person to over 250 employees.

Continue reading What specialists said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings #3

What contractors thought of OASIS: HERALD Survey findings #2

Here’s the second instalment of the seven posts on the HERALD survey findings. This covers 155 of the total 516 responses from contractors otherwise known as the FAME survey and it includes contracting archaeologists and archaeological consultants.

  1. Respondents were almost evenly split between responding as individuals and on behalf of their organisations this probably reflects the high proportion of small businesses in commercial archaeology – over half of respondents have less than 10 staff in their organisation. Just over two thirds of respondents were contracting archaeologists, the rest were archaeological consultants. The majority of respondents work in England with almost 30% working in Scotland and/or Wales and almost 10% working in Northern Ireland.

Continue reading What contractors thought of OASIS: HERALD Survey findings #2

What local government archaeologists said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings # 1

I’m pleased to be able to tell you about the findings of the HERALD: OASIS redevelopment survey that happened last year. Although there was one survey the results have been analysed in seven separate groups according to the way that people defined themselves:

How respondents were grouped in the survey results
How respondents were grouped in the survey results

Here are the findings of the survey of local government archaeologists including – multi-role archaeologists, HER Officers, planning archaeologists, county/city archaeologists. This includes 104 of the total 516 respondents.

  1. Who is including OASIS in briefs: There is a surprising level of inconsistency in who sets brief and indeed if briefs are set at all .

“We do not use briefs – it [OASIS] is expected to be included in Written Schemes of Investigation” Continue reading What local government archaeologists said about OASIS: HERALD survey findings # 1

OASIS redesign mock up: available until Sunday 8th February

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8r1ght/4029257315/Thank you if you already commented on the OASIS redesign mock-up. If you have not yet had the chance to, there are a few days left.


We would really appreciate all historic environment professionals and volunteers commenting on the mock-up of how the new system might look, even if you don’t currently use the OASIS system, as this will give us the best guidance on how to redevelop it for the future.

The mock up is available on the OASIS website.

Commenting on the mock-up will give you a real opportunity to influence the redevelopment of OASIS.

The Archaeology Data Service, as part of the HERALD project, has been commissioned by English Heritage to undertake this user needs consultation to help define and shape the future of the OASIS system (http://oasis.ac.uk).

If you have any questions about this, or the project in general, please contact the ADS via Jo Gilham on  jo.gilham@york.ac.uk or 01904
323937.

OASIS Mock up for comment

OASIS mock up front page
OASIS mock up front page

Thank you if you responded to the OASIS redevelopment survey over the summer, we have now produced a selection of scenarios which reflect the survey responses. We will be making the survey responses available in due course

http://oasis.ac.uk/form/redev_demo/

The mock up is divided into different scenarios for different types of user: Contractor, HER, Museum etc and each page has a comment area at the bottom. Please use the comments area to leave any feedback you have, positive or negative, as if we don’t know your thoughts now we cannot accommodate them in the final design. We would appreciate your comments even if you are not a user of the current system.

The mock up will be open for comments until Sunday 8th February.

Continue reading OASIS Mock up for comment

London HER officer, Stuart Cakebread, discusses his OASIS experience

I have to confess that the London HER has not really engaged that much with OASIS; there has always been something else to do rather than validate new records, and as a result we’ve left this in the capable hands of Mark Barrett (thanks to Mark for his hard work) and tried to get on with dealing with our report backlog, and the hundreds of data requests we get each year. A couple of things this year, however, have made me think that we should really take the time to properly record OASIS records in our HER database (by this I mean the OASIS references). As I said, we get an awful lot of data requests each year, and we’ve been looking at how we can improve our service to our customers. One idea we had would be to supply pdf reports along with our standard database, and GIS data, as we had our entire report library scanned a couple of years ago. One obvious problem with this is copyright, and so we have been working with our legal team to draw up a copyright agreement we can send out to organisations who have deposited reports with us over the years. Now given the number of reports we hold, just over 12,000, this is going to take a long time, so is unlikely to happen very soon. At this point I can imagine someone, Jo, or some people, Jo and Catherine, shouting, ‘What about the ADS grey literature library? You could link to that!’ Well we had thought about it, and linking to units who have their reports online, but we’d have to do this individually, and we don’t have the resources to do that. Then, back in June, Catherine gave a talk to the ALGAO-HER Steering Committee during which she mentioned DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers). These are a rather neat way of referencing information such as reports on the ADS website (for more about DOIs have a look at their website www.doi.org, or have a word with Jo and Catherine). After a quick chat with Jo, she was able to send me a spreadsheet (thanks to Jo for getting me the data) of all the reports the ADS holds for London, giving the title, unit, NGR, project code, OASIS reference, the DOI, and importantly for us, the site code (this is the code for the project given, in our case, by the London Archaeological Archive Resource Centre). As we record the site code in our HER database, we use HBSMR, it meant that I could then link the ADS records to our ‘Source’ and ‘Event’ Records. Now our Source records have the ADS DOI link, our Event Records have OASIS reference numbers, and project codes, and both are linked from the database to the ADS grey literature library.

I should at this point confess that I still had to do some manual checking; not all of the ADS records had site codes, and some had duplicate site codes so I did have to check back through the HER. Also I’m trying to figure out how to get the DOI to show up in our data search html reports so that users can click and view reports, so this has all taken a bit longer than I had initially thought, but it has been worth doing. We are now nearly up to date with linking to our OASIS records, and so shortly will able to provide a better customer service. Also, the ADS spreadsheet threw up a number of reports that, for some reason, we never received, so improving our data, and the list of reports that we’ll still need to get copyright permission, as they are not on the ADS website, is much smaller. So, would I recommend others doing this? Well yes. If you do record the OASIS references in your HER, or you assign site code numbers, then it would be a fairly straight forward thing to do, but even if you don’t, then it would be worthwhile, as you could compare ADS reports, by running a spatial GIS query. So why not contact Jo, and giving it a go!

So, what’s the difference between OASIS and ADS easy????

As the popularity of depositing small archives via our new online deposition system ADS-easy has risen, we have come across a couple of examples where depositors have eschewed OASIS in favour of uploading a report to the ADS archive via ADS-easy.
In terms of just depositing data with the ADS that is fine but not really the best practice, and more costly for depositors too!

So how should it work?

If you just have a ‘grey literature’ report for fieldwork undertaken in England or Scotland we would recommend that you use OASIS for three really good reasons:

  1.  By using OASIS you also connect with the local HER and the NMR who are made aware of your work. In contrast to this the primary relationship with ADS-easy is between you, the depositor, and us the ADS.
  2. By using OASIS to upload the report it is subject to the same archiving procedure as depositing the report by and other means and still ends up in the Grey Literature Library
  3. Using OASIS is free to upload a single report, ADS-easy is not!

So the message is, always use OASIS; this helps get your fieldwork recorded by the right people in the right places and allows for the free upload of a single grey literature report.
Even if you have additional archive (images, CAD files, spreadsheets etc) and are required or want to deposit it with the ADS via the ADS-easy system, then you should still use OASIS for recording the event. Once you start to use ADS-easy you can insert the OASIS id for the project’s field work record and it will help populate ADS-easy so you work is not wasted or duplicated .

Put simply:

  • OASIS lets people know about your fieldwork and you can upload one report for free.
  • ADS-easy is for the rest of the digital archive and is a paid-for service.

Results of the OASIS redevelopment surveys start to become available

Over the summer holiday period we’ve continued to work away at trying to make sense of the results of the range of surveys we undertook earlier in the year. While completion of the reports is still a work in progress we wanted to give you a sneak preview into the results and the way in which it was forming out ideas about a new model for OASIS. The survey results have reinforced a few things that we already suspected.

We definitely:

  • need to maintain a consistent and continuing level of communication, engagement and training surrounding the system.
  • need a range of work-flows to suit different people.
  • need to provide for different levels of interaction with the system, from a light touch to a comprehensive reporting system.
  • need to encourage the archiving and dissemination of grey literature.
  • need to include the museum curators in the process.
  • need to include the ability to record specialist data when and where appropriate.
  • need to work with data consumers to make import and export systems that are simple to use.

So our initial thinking, as yet not set in stone by any means, was to have a fairly open system, so you will still need to register and login to a system which is not ‘public’, but the process of creating records will be a lot less rigid. It might be something like this…

HERALDstructureFor those HERs who primarily value the services provided by the ADS Grey Literature Library , we will have a limited number of fields and simple report upload facility that could be used by either the HER or the unit. A second option may better serve those who want to take data from OASIS to form a basic event record, much as it does now. And we could also look at a range of additional specialist modules to be used when appropriate.

We are still open to all good ideas; so let us know if you have a brainwave!