Hi! Today we would like to explain and exemplify the rhyming patterns used in early modern English texts, especially in texts written by William Shakespeare. We need to understand these in order to analyse the segmental phonological structures of the words within these texts. To explain these rhythmical principles, I'm supported by my colleague, Martin Küster, who can do this much better than me. Hello Martin! Hello Jürgen! Let's start with the Iambic pentameter. This meter is often presented in Shakespearean plays. It is a meter where an unstressed syllable is followed by a stressed one. Each line contains five of these diselabic units, also called feet, hence the term pentameter. Here's an example from Romeo and Juliet. It wears the nating gale and not the lark. Another very common meter used in Shakespeare is the trochaic tetrameter. It is a series of four feet that contain a stressed syllable before an unstressed one. So a line should ideally be eight syllables in total and end in an unstressed syllable. Listen to this example from a mid-summer night's dream where Puck says, Fairy king, attendant Merrick, aid you here, the mourning lark. In the middle of the lines, regardless of the meter, we usually have a pause. The technical term for this effect is cesura, which comes from Latin and means cut. This inner break occurs in almost every verse that is preceded by an enjambment. When a semantically coherent unit, for example a sentence or a clause, exceeds one verse and thus takes up part of the next, the cesura often marks the transition from one unit to the next. Here is an example from Shakespeare's Richard II. Me thinks I am a prophet new inspired, and thus expiring, do foretell of him. Although Shakespeare is likely to have known about and mostly adhered to the classic literary standards, there are many deviations. Very often Shakespeare extends the meter by one or two syllables, either before or after a cesura. Some verses have additional syllables or lack some. The heavens themselves, the planets and the center. Some others are divided among two or more characters. If that her breath will mist or stand the stone, way then she lives. Is this the promised end? This means that in a conversation of two or more characters, each of them speaks only a part of the line. As for the rhyming patterns, Shakespeare commonly wrote his plays in blank verse. Blank verse is an unrhymed iambic pentameter. Here are two examples. We few, we happy few, we band of brothers. This royal throne of kings deceptored ale. Interestingly, Shakespeare often signaled a change of scenes or the entering of new characters by means of a so-called couplet, that is, two lines whose final words rhyme. Here is an example from Romeo and Juliet. But no more deep will they ender it may nay, than your consent gives strength to make it flay. So, thanks for joining us. We hope that this short video lecture helps to understand the metrical patterns in texts written by William Shakespeare and enable you to work out the segmental phonological properties more accurately.


Okay, good morning and welcome to this first panel. You see, Tiara is very careful to say first panel rather than opening panel. This panel is called Geoeconomics and Development in a Fragmented World. And in light of the comments you were just making to start us off, it's a very good topic with which to get started. We have a great panel. Now let me just say a couple of things to get us started, if I may. International development and politics, international politics, geopolitics have always been connected. So it's not as if this is something new. The question I think we will explore in this panel is how the relationship is changing and what that means for the way in which we think about development, we think about development cooperation. And I'd like to propose that there are at least three ways in which that relationship is changing. First, we used to think about international development mainly as how to improve living standards, how to deal with poverty within individual countries. It was a country-based approach to thinking about issues. Today we think about international development much more as a set of global challenges which include climate change, pandemics, biodiversity. And while these overlay with countries, the way we think about them has become broader and different. Secondly, because we are thinking about these broader challenges, we can no longer, when we think about development cooperation, simply have the development agency or the development ministry in a rich country deal with their share of how to support development. Now every ministry, every agency, whether it's the financial sector and the role that it plays, whether it's the health ministries around the world, everybody needs to cooperate to be able to deal with global challenges much more so than was the case before. And finally third, even though the need for cooperation is broader to solve these shared challenges, the possibilities of cooperation, the scope for cooperation is becoming more constrained because of the fragmentation in the way in which global politics is organized now and the rivalry amongst great powers. And so we will explore, I hope, all of those issues during this panel.


I know many of you are working from home and some of you are back on campus. I hope you're all doing well during this difficult time of the pandemic. I'm Joan Lippincott, Associate Executive Director Emerita of CNI, and I'm moderating the nine sessions of this series. Each of you is registered for all sessions. And if you need to miss some, we'll have recordings available for all sessions, as well as a set of questions to guide planning discussions on your own campus. Both the videos and discussion questions for sessions one through three are now on the website. We have two speakers for this session and will be taking questions after each. And for our first speaker, if you have any clarifying questions, we'll stop and take them during the presentation. So please type your questions in the chat box at any time. In addition, after the formal one hour session is over, we'll open the mics in case some of you wish to verbally ask questions of the speakers. The chat box is also available to communicate with each other or with me or our technical lead, Beth Seacrest. During the presentations, all participants will be muted. For this fifth session, we'll learn about supporting research, a central topic in most digital scholarship programs. In this webinar series, we're using the term digital scholarship to apply to all disciplines. I'm pleased to welcome our presenters today. Liz Mellowitz, head of the digital scholarship and publishing services department and co-editor of Scholar Works, a center for scholarly publishing at Duke University Libraries and Amy Koshofer, assistant director for research and data services and co-lead of the research and data services team at the University of Cincinnati Libraries. Their bios are on the webinar site and I won't take any more time with introductions in order to give our speakers more time. So over to you, Liz. Thank you so much, Joan. I really appreciate the opportunity to talk with everyone today. I want to thank my co-presenter Amy. I really appreciated the time we had to talk about this presentation beforehand. And I'm hoping you also see a lot of complementarity between our different perspectives. And I want to thank you all for coming today. I really appreciate your interest in this topic. And I hope that this session will be as useful to you as all the other ones have been for me so far. It's been great. I'll give you a quick overview of what I'm going to cover. First, I'm going to really make sure you understand some of the context of how digital scholarship looks at Duke, as others have already noted throughout this webinar series. And I know we'll note in future presentations, context really matters. It's important to recognize what your environment looks like and what partnerships are possible given that environment, what resources are available, et cetera. Then I'll spend a little bit more time delving to what digital research needs look like in the humanities and social sciences, again, looking at our context and the kinds of support they often require so that it's a better way in case this is also newer to you of understanding how that might look like at your institution. And then I'll talk at the end about support and adaptations. Spoiler alert. I'm going to be talking about support all the way through this presentation. So you don't actually have to wait until the end to hear about that. You're going to hear about it all the way through. But in that last part of the presentation, I'll talk about this support in some general terms. So just to kind of remind, here's how this looks at our institution and then talk about some of the ways that that might adapt or change for reasons that have to do with partnerships, changes in the institution, maybe pandemic, those sorts of things. So in terms of context, really thinking about this, what are those factors influencing digital research support at your institution? I wear a few hats in my role. I'll talk for this presentation very specifically about the work of the digital scale, digital scholarship and publishing services department. I am one of two full time staff. So there's myself and then there is my colleague, well, who serves as a DH consultant between us. We also do supervision for various students. So we may have one student working with us at a time. We may have three, but in terms of the funding and support just for that unit, that's usually the max, although we can also supervise many more students. Once we throw in those other, those other hats into the ring. I also want to note here that again, this is a very small department. And so part of what I'll be looking at is, and talking about is what support looks like. When your resources are very limited, but also what that support looks like when you are surrounded by a lot of other units that provide compliments to what you're offering. In terms of the digital scholarship and publishing services department, we're very project based and we have an emphasis on digital humanities. As I mentioned before, we're also very small scale. And that also is a result of, but also translates into a very high touch approach to the ways we work on projects, as well as low direct funding for our department. That does not mean there isn't funding in other ways that affects our department, but in terms of actual staff, that's what impacts some of our work. We also divide our work into three main areas, our work on projects, our consultations, which are these one-on-one small scale advisement and assist, and then programs, which include things like workshops. I would love to talk with the people who talked about assessment again from last week, but I think how you assess that work is a fantastic topic, which we'll not get into, but I'm happy to talk about in Q&A. So where do we fit in the libraries? Within the libraries, we are one group. Our primary focus is humanities and interpretive social sciences. We do get different sorts of social science questions. For instance, text mining that an economist wants to do, but we don't get the kinds of questions that are more data driven. Our focus is more qualitative research. That said, we have in the libraries an adjoining department, the center for data visualization science that addresses a lot of social sciences questions, as well as data sources and data visualization. They are really key partners for us. There are lots of consultations we might do together. They're instructions that we do together. So I will not discuss their work much beyond this, but I want to flag that really high that in our case, this support can be divided. If we were doing this all ourselves, I can absolutely understand that our department would take on a greater focus on data, but because of the way that we're situated, we're able to focus much more squarely on qualitative research and project development. We also, and I include them just to kind of reference that in our context, things like learning innovation, that's just another group within the libraries that focus on instructional design and course building, even though that's technically not research narrowly defined. Within our institution, there's so much overlap between a pedagogical need, a research need and a publishing need that for many groups who are extensively focused just in this one area, we focus on learning and innovation and teaching in the classroom. We will often get referrals from them about projects that don't quite fit in or maybe have more of a research focus. We're currently working with students who are fellows in their program who are working on projects. So in many ways, there are places where we absolutely overlap. And also in terms of subject liaisons, I really enjoyed Zoe's presentation earlier this week, where she was talking about some of those interactions with liaisons. They are tremendous in terms of helping us connect. They have been many of them just fearless in their approach to learning new skills. So while we also talk about this a little bit later, and I can talk more in Q&A, we have worked to do more workshops with them to build up kind of what it is that we can each do together. And we have different programs, but they're also part of what we see as kind of our immediate sphere. I totally left people out. I feel like I'm doing an Oscar speech. So there's much more complicated than what I'm going to show you here today. But there's a lot going on in the libraries in that context. And then digital research support at Duke. This is also, I feel like the through Billy Coast Graph, there's going to be a fantastic presentation and Amy slides of the ways that this kind of support can be visualized across the entire campus. I'm giving you just a very focused and PowerPoint, limited view of it. But in terms of like how we work across campus, we do rely a great deal on the fact that we have a centralized IT that provides things like enterprise-wide access to WordPress. We rely a great deal on the kinds of technology support that's provided through the College of Arts and Sciences Technology support. There are many groups in those respects who can also provide some of that additional infrastructure. And then within the Franklin Humanities Institute, I just want to call them out as well because they have been such long-term partners with us in terms of funding, in terms of bringing groups together. So there are lots of different ways that we see them as helping to provide the support beyond just I'm helping you find a tool and learn how to use it. And I really want to emphasize this in some ways to get away from a way of perceiving our work that is perhaps too limited where we're only focused on the unit, but we're not really looking at the larger ecosystem. And I think the more that we recognize how we interrelate and interact with each other, the stronger our own ability to engage with that system will be. Finally, the requisite side about Duke. We're mid-sized research one institution, private. We have a number of institutes and centers. And those institutes and centers are also particularly strong influencers of the work that we do because they're interdisciplinary in nature. And they pull together different parts of the research community. So even though a project may be very humanistic in nature, it can actually arise from a sciences or a professor working out of, for instance, an environmental institute. So we can vary widely. And so some of the things that come to us are not things that necessarily we think, oh, that's a humanities project because that professor brought it. But it turns out it has a lot of the kinds of challenges as we'll see in the next section, the digital research needs of humanities. So thinking again about your institution, what are those specific digital scholarship needs for researchers at your institution? And how do those manifest? Coming back again to the idea of kind of what's the context, but also to give you a little sense of how this has developed over time and why the digital research needs I'm about to discuss came into being. I won't completely unpack this timeline. I did share my slides if you want to look at that more closely. But there are a few things I want to point out that helped to kind of highlight key factors. The digital research needs at our institution were aided significantly in their development as well as their support by funding programs. So as funding and incentives came into being, certain types of digital research needs were likely to emerge or at least became able to be supported. And because of those funding programs, there was other support that could be available to enable those projects to go forward. The digital scholarship of publishing services departments work has been generated and supported by these initiatives that provided initial funding for the DH consultant position in our department. It also has funded over time those one to three graduate assistants who would work with us on digital projects. And also has provided a wealth of projects for them to work with. So it's, it has been a virtuous, I don't know if it's a circle necessarily, but it's a virtuous swarm of activities and opportunities. And the projects have arisen from these initiatives and I think critically the services and spaces that we've developed in response have also been mutually supportive. So it's not really, it's not a judgment. It's an observation that those kinds of initiatives can push certain types of digital research forward and make it, it leads to some interesting trends in the humanities at Duke. In this case, we see that a lot of the digital research that we work with are tend to be collaborative or team based. They tend to be experimental. So they're really trying something new, not so much. I heard so and so has done this, how do I do this? But I'm going to try this thing and I'm not sure if it'll work or not, but let's, let's test it out. And critically that they are often, as I mentioned earlier, research teaching and publishing often all kind of fall together within the same experimental project. And third that they're grant funded. So by highlighting that, it means it's time limited. It has very specific outcomes it needs to meet. So collaborative experimental grant funded or some of those research trends that we're seeing and that I'll talk about. Project teams are one of those key elements. So things like best connections, which was mentioned in that timeline and it's been off projects. Sorry, plus, which is predominantly humanities research and data plus for quantitative research have been major catalysts and accelerants for team based research at Duke. One of the initial challenges that very first year when it came out was finding space for these teams to meet a space that wasn't limited in terms of access to the space during all hours of the day, the fact that it could be reservable for a group and not dedicated exclusively to particular group that it could be convenient to everyone who needed to meet that it could be flexible in terms of how many people could be in the space at one time. And that neutrality as well. The fact that it wasn't one institute that was kind of managing the space. So that was a place where the library certainly stepped in and that was dry. It drove a lot of thinking around the development of the edge. In fact, this picture here on the slide of students working together is in one of those reserved, reservable project rooms in the edge. So here's an example of a project team. A science professor of working with documentary film footage from a nonprofit environmental organization forms a team of graduate and undergraduate students to catalog footage. So needs here, digitization of that footage, service space for storing the footage, workflows for describing the footage, video editing software, guidance on copyright and permission, a range of things, not to mention project planning. All of those things together amounted to more of a workflow challenge. It's also not things that immediately suggested other places to go. This was more of a project area and digitization was one in particular. That took a lot of work to negotiate. So, I mean, I'll pose these questions rhetorically and then I'll move along. Questions about, well, why is this a humanities project? What makes it one well suited to work in the libraries is one I would ask. And what services does it suggest to you that would be needed to support this kind of project? So those are some of the things that I hope will, we can discuss more in the Q&A, but that's the kind of example that I'm talking about and the kinds of needs that potentially emerge from these projects and the support needed. I told you I talked about support. Okay. So the other third area is, sorry, second area was humanities labs and DH pedagogy. So this is the experimental aspect of these, these different research needs. So, the collaborations might result in here, we have example of a emerging infectious diseases article in which the team of students who worked on that project are actually cited in the article. In fact, some of the work that they did is also linked in the article that this timeline here showing a number of those humanities labs affected that they were very specifically oriented. They had a period of development after which they might continue their work. And much of that work would also involve experimenting with different sorts of tools. Scale on a Mecca were both some of those. They're web based. We didn't need to host them, but it's a different kind of support that was needed, which might be helping people understand the best way to use it, understanding how it could be both a research tool and a pedagogical tool at the same time, other ways that they might host it. If they wanted this tool to keep going with them after they graduated. So case in point sonic dictionary. This emerged from one of those labs. It was an experiment and pedagogy in this case. Like so as it was developed, it was a pilot a prototype to see how this would work. Some of the things that were needed were really developing guidelines for description and helping students understand metadata, which led to fascinating conversations in the classroom. Planning for sustainability. That started at the very beginning where we're asking questions about how are you going to demonstrate its value? How are you going to build in new contributors? Who might those contributors be? Would you have predicted that it might be someone who does cochlear implants and wants to help someone train and learn how to actually understand what a sound sounds like as they're training to understand sound as this coming through their brain. There are so many different ways that this could have been used that we couldn't predict, but part of that sustainability planning is something that was possible for us to do as part of the support early on. Finally, that grant funded element. So we had projects and fellows who worked with us, whose time was very limited. And so they had very specific things they need to be able to get done and then move on. I want to, I know I'm going to keep going quickly, but the example I want to really highlight here in this case was a visiting faculty fellow, Meredith Goldsmith, who was on the previous page, came to develop these scalable research projects for undergraduate humanities students. So really what she was there, she was learning how to learn, how to tell people, others, people, instructors, as well as students, how to do this work. So it wasn't merely help me set up this GIS instance, but it was really asking the question of how do I actually pinpoint and map movements of characters and an historically realistic novel like Edith Wharton's Age of Innocence. So it's intellectually challenging as well as raised questions, technical challenges about how to map. And then how to document this type of work, which I don't know that we do or raise high enough in our discussions of how we support digital scholarship. If it's not documented, how does it get repeated? And we say that in terms of sustainability, but even just sustaining it from the individual doing the project to the next person who's going to work on it, maybe the next class. So those are some elements of this that were particularly interesting for us in how we support digital scholarship. One other element I want to highlight in terms of digital research needs. So all of these things work together. You have the particular content. It's qualitative. It could be maps, images, text, audio. You have the ways that people want to work with it. Maybe they're doing close analysis. Maybe they're doing distant analysis. Maybe they're categorizing. There are different ways that they want to work with that content. And then there are things they actually have to do to actually get that content in shape or make sure that they understand how to apply the method or even just to get the project moving. So there are all of these moving parts that are part of just that project that we're helping people to think through. Then there are these other layers that those other digital research needs pointed to, which are that a lot of these were collaborative. How do we figure out the project in a way that more than one person can do it? How do we figure out the project in a way that it meets those grant needs in the timeframe that the grant has with the resources the grant provides? And how do we think about sustainability of that project beyond the experimental phase? Not everybody's interested in that. And that's always a good question to ask, but sometimes that may be something that occurs later. So we think about high touch. What we're often thinking about is, do we have opportunities to ask those questions and help those projects keep moving forward? So final point, forms of support and adaptation. So how do we support it? But also how do we adapt that support over time? Forms of support. I talked to earlier on about programs, projects and consultations. All the pictures you see here are in a past life, past place. This is pre-pandemic, mostly in a Marthe digital studio, but also in a project room in the edge. Much of what we did and what we continue to do is really centered in the staff. It's what the staff knows, and it's the staff finding ways to engage with those individuals in different ways to help assist. Whether it's doing that consultation, whether it's teaching a course, whether it's leading a project. I would say a secondary investment in terms of thinking about the support you're offering is the space and the equipment. And I put them there because I don't think we should ever forget the fact that the people are really critical in helping to make sure that those services connect and that we can think through some of what is needed and help build those programs out and recognize those other partnerships that are available. Space and equipment are also important in our case. They didn't need to happen quite so much as those people, but they also are really essential in terms of making sure that you have room for people to work for those meetings to happen. And then of course, pandemic. So space means something completely different now. We do continue to provide the support that we did. We still advise. We still equip and train and partner. It just happens in slightly different ways. Some of these are things that are available. Really only one of these I'll point to is where you claim hosting is a tool that we have pointed people to that's not supported through our institution. Every one of the others is. And so that's a point where it really, you kind of fall back again on what your. Individual support network looks like at your institution. So having the office of information technology was incredibly important for us. It continues to be. It's a support that we don't always have to think about, but it's incredibly important in terms of being able to do the things that we need to do, which is connect. We'll also say that over time, whether or not you're in a pandemic, people move on. The organization may shift focus. The organization may shift focus. The organization may shift focus. But the organization may shift focus in different ways in what they think they need to. Put higher value on. So for us, we did have an individual who was working with the college of tech of arts and sciences technology services who moved on. We don't have that connection. So that connection to that group is not as strong as it was. However, we do. Do still continue to meet. Regularly. The individuals and CDVS. Right now, we have a really strong partnership. We're working with the Humanities Institute individuals in the wired lab, which is a really strong partner in working through and thinking about these issues. As well as staff in learning innovation. Regularly meet and talk through what are our collective needs. What are ways we can advocate for that? The last point I want to raise is really a series of questions. And it's, it's really asking about that small scale. I always want to say how can we continue to do this for more people? And there's great, great value in that. I also really ask, coming back to the slide about assessment, what are we scaling to? And really, I think we have to really interrogate what that looks like in our institution and where that really is a benefit and to what purpose. Because we are working with a lot of different partners, it's really asking a question, where are we moving into? What is the growth needed? What's not being met? So I think it does point to having these conversations. And it's also asking, does this make sense for your institution? So asking not just can I do this at this particular moment, but can I do this over time? How will I sustain the broader scale? And if I can't do that, who do I need to work with to make that support possible? And not simply in the mentality, if my department can't do all of it, I don't know that we should even try. I think really it's thinking about what that partnership could look like. And I welcome your questions. And I also welcome hearing from Amy when she talks about this more in her presentation. So thank you. Thank you so much, Liz. That was so comprehensive and I was especially interested in so many links between research, teaching and learning. And would love to talk to you more about that. I'm going to start with one question. We'll have a little bit of time for Q&A right now and more at the very end of the whole session. It really speaks somewhat to your last point. And I'd like to know whether you have any formal guidelines for negotiating projects. You've listed so many types of support for various projects that you gave as examples. How do you decide at the outset or along the way what you can and can't do? So we have, and I thank you for bringing up this question because I was on my list of, don't forget to mention this and I didn't mention this, but when we began our department and also as we have grown over the years, it's, there has been pretty consistently a major grant initiative with pre-approved projects to which we are committed to providing support. To that extent, that part of it has been removed. We know that we will work with this project or at least we will consult with them and if we can't partner on it, we'll figure out who else they might be able to work with. One of the tools that we have used in those projects specifically, even though they're pre-approved has been a basic project plan. When it's not filled in, it's one page. We try to really keep it very, very brief, but it's intended to clearly articulate, this is why we're doing this. And it's also a way that we can sit down and talk with the people that we're working with to articulate, if we're gonna devote this time, I wanna make sure that we're both invested and then we both see this as a partnership and we have shared that risk. And so where we've pushed ourselves to really continually fill that out and revisit it. So it's not just like, here's what we said, but that we come back and look at that plan again, mostly to reaffirm what it is that we're all invested in to achieving, not in a contract sense. And I could absolutely hear some people who might be saying like, but what if this? And I totally hear you on that. But we really have pushed it in terms of a commitment around a shared interest because we wanted to establish this as a partnership, not as a transaction. So for us, it's really important to establish a front. So I do have that tool, which I'd be happy to also share if others want to see. The other thing I'll say is, especially this summer, we have done a lot of thinking about the way that we've managed the projects that we take on and the degree to which we've been explicit about, these are our skill sets and these are not. It's been easy for us up to this point because we have a broad network to talk among each other and say, could you do this project? Okay, this is probably, you should go talk to them. But I don't think we've made it explicit what we're taking on. And I especially in thinking about decolonization and anti-racism, one of the things that our department will be working on is looking to actually make those criteria more explicit and then to really push ourselves to be, to accept and work with projects very explicitly and overtly that we believe will help act towards a different type of environment around digital scholarship. We are still developing that, but I flag that because I think it's been something that has not been in our radar as fully, even though we have been thinking about it and it's important to me that we push that forward as part of our selection. I'm seeing some questions. I'm also looking. Liz, we'll take one more question, but we need a quick answer from you, please. Can you describe how decisions are made administratively about which service areas you invest in and how you grow new service areas? And I see, Micah, thank you, Micah. That's a good question. Administratively, I will say within, if you're saying within our department, we have a lot of leeway to simply make that it's two people and I just say, can we do this here and we go. Now, in terms of investing in new services, let me take as an example, almost five years ago, we set for our department a five-year plan to put ourself on a more curricular footing and to say we want digital scholarship to be part of the curriculum. So there's so much leeway at our institution to kind of set our goals and move forward. Where would we have to get more buy-in if we were saying we need more resources? And I think it's a really, I think that's the question we should all be asking ourselves is what are we doing without resources and to what extent do we have to flag that and say this is not actually sustainable? So we have a lot of room to experiment, not necessarily a lot of room to grow something that is at an institutional level is sustained, but there's a lot of room to build a proof of concept. I don't know if that answers your question, Micah, but I'll stick around after the talk today if you have time. Thank you very much, Liz, and I appreciate your really excellent answers. If you would, yes, stop your share screen. And Amy, if you can put your slides up, I'll turn this over to you. And they look just fine. Thank you, you can go ahead. Okay, thank you very much. And it was an excellent and wonderful presentation by Liz and really appreciate all the information that you shared. And I'll come back to some of the questions as well that Liz has raised in my presentation. So I am, I'm gonna click on this. I am from the University of Cincinnati. The University of Cincinnati is a very urban university. We are located just north of the heart of Cincinnati. And one of the key components of education at the University of Cincinnati is experiential learning. We call it the co-op or cooperative education and started at the university in 1906. So it's been a long tradition of students having experiential learning as a part of their education process and research falls very firmly in that category of experiential learning. University library system, we are very geographically dispersed system with two regional campuses. We have a uptown campus, which is where I am based, which is split in between an east side and a west side. The east side is the medical campus and the west side is where I am based where much of the undergraduate learning happens. Because on our campus, the east and west side, our system, our research and data services team, we work with our medical colleagues. They are a part of our research and data services team. And that's something I think that's somewhat unique to our team. Just a little bit about me. I have a long career before coming to the library in doing research. I was an assistant research assistant in dermatology and cell biology. So I have that experience myself and I bring that to the work that I do and combine that with my information professional training. The areas that I focus on, I'm gonna talk very mostly from a STEM perspective in my talk today. And I have done, I do the support for data management. I oversee students who work in our data visualization and GIS and data lab. And I work on data literacy support as well. So about our team, our research and data services team, we are really interested in promoting research efficiencies and thinking about best practices. And so we teach on those best practices. We teach data literacy skills and we work to provide what I would call customized support. We are very interested in partnerships and that being the title in my talk. We are really interested in engaging with the researchers as a partnership and also reaching out to others who are working in this space on our campus. And then lastly, we raise awareness. The library has been the lead on research data management issues on our campus. And so we bring awareness about the policies and trends and practices that are impacting our research environment. As I mentioned, our team is very geographically dispersed between our East Campus and West Campus. Here are the members of the research and data services team and the affiliated faculty that we work very closely with. These are library faculty, I should say. I'm highlighting in red the leads on our research and data services team. I'm highlighting Ted Baldwin, who's the director of our science and engineering library. Our research and data services started as a strategic initiative and Ted was one of the key leads on that project and has brought the unit and has shaped what our philosophies are to this point. Currently, our team is led by Tiffany Grant, who is based on the medical campus, my counterpart on the medical campus and myself. This is a little information about how our services have evolved over time. Like I said, it started as a strategic initiative back in 2013 and in the seven years, we've increased our services, we've added staff. I'm highlighting in colors every time where we've invested resources into our team. So by hiring the three informationist, I was a part of that cohort that came in. At that time, we were focused mostly on research data management, but when we came in with my colleagues, we started to think about support for medical informatics. Over time, we developed GIS services, which is an area that I'm focused on. Then we hired a data visualization specialist and could start to provide data science support. And now we're moving into an area which we are calling digital integration. And we think of this as every student and every researcher needs to have very technical skills to survive in our current environment. And especially in that experiential learning and taking these technical skills into the workforce. So we are going to start to develop, thinking about much more support for upskilling the students and the researchers. We formed as an official unit in the library in 2019. So that meant we were given a guaranteed stable budget. Doesn't mean that the amount was guaranteed, but we at least had a budget and we had staffing and a reporting structure in 2019. And that's when I became one of the leads of it. So to think about developing relationships, I'm gonna also highlight the questions that Liz was asking about, thinking about the research needs of people coming to seek our services, what are those needs? What are the research and can we support them? For me, this process is very much about those personal relationships. I mean, my work, I can't do it without building personal relationships to people. That's the way I function and that's the way I've approached the development of the work that I do. But I also think a lot about what makes this library work? Given the nature of our team, we had two PhDs on the team for a while and they could think about setting up their own lab, establishing something external to the library. But for me, I'm thinking what makes this library work? And it really has to do for me about the way that I think about information, the way that I organize information and a guiding principle of libraries being about the access and preservation of information. And I translate that into the research support that I do to have people think about access and preservation of the information so that they can continue to reuse the data that they're developing. We really want to partner with units on our campus that are doing this work as well. So like our Office of Research, our central IT. And so we are looking for people to partner with who have synergy with us, thinking about grant support or infrastructure and how can we partner with them and build services from there. Okay, so we have a three tiered model to the engagement that we have with people coming to seek our services. This is triage, amplify and partnership. And these are very fluid classifications and something can go very quickly from being just a triage situation to being an amplify. Our gold standard would be to form as many partnerships as we can. We'd love to be PIs on grants. We'd love to have authorship on papers. If we can get to that point in a relationship, that's great, we're really happy. But I also know that a lot of things will be in between amplify and partnership. But like I said, it's a very fluid classification from pointing somebody to a lib guide versus helping them to select a particular software. I support, like I said, the STEM areas. I'm highlighting and read the bioinformatics because that's something that I actually don't do. That's more the class area that my colleague on the medical campus will do. But we look for partnerships in these various areas. Okay, so some of the partnerships that we've been able to form have been through instruction, research and innovation. So thinking about instruction and how we can form partnerships. The director of undergraduate research who is based in our college of experiential learning and career-based education. Again, thinking about the co-op experience came to the library and asked if we would partner with her and participate in a series of lectures that she was developing. They are very much based on helping undergraduate researchers develop self-advocacy skills to make sure that they can optimize their research experience. And we partnered in the beginning just by participating in one lecture. But after that series was over, I went to her and said, I'd really like to expand my role in this. What does that look like for you? And is that something that you're interested in? And finding somebody who has this vision and has the synergy to say, this is great, let's work on this together. She brought me in as a partner and she and I then sat down and developed the curriculum for the next year. That was a very successful year. We were able to really flesh out a series of 10 weeks what students could learn over the 10 weeks and really develop those self-advocacy skills that they would need to be successful in a research program. This past summer, we did a third iteration of it and she brought in one more partner and I brought another partner from the library and we expanded again. And that's the curriculum that you're seeing on the slide there. So that was an example of a very personal relationship that I was able to expand on, develop, that then became a service that we are now offering every summer to partner with this team and provide this instruction for students. Another example of a really great partnership that has happened is one that Ted Baldwin and Rebecca Olson are involved in and that is our relationship with our Venture Lab. This is a program at the University of Cincinnati which helps researchers, community members and other say students who are interested in taking something from research into commercialization. And a role that the library can play there is to really help with the competitive intelligence research that happens. In the beginning, the very first cohort that they partnered with, the team did the research for them but then it was realized that it would be much more successful in teaching the participants in the cohort to do this research themselves. And now they have been through, I believe it's up to nine cohorts where they've been working with these partners and teaching them how to do these skills and it's a very successful collaboration to this point. A third way is actually to get in and to apply for grants with a researcher. So the last example on this slide is where we applied for an information supplement. So we got money from NIH, it's about $25,000 a year and we partnered with a researcher to bring librarians into that research group and to have goals that were very much focused that supported the research but also were very based in library work. So we developed information for the website and we worked with them to bring some data into our repository and this was an example of a partnership that we were able to take in the research environment. Sometimes we're able to develop relationships through challenges that we're facing. As I mentioned, it's the library that is the lead on data management issues on our campus. Data management is not always a sexy subject and a popular subject and researchers are more like, I want the grant and I want the paper. I don't think so much about what I'm gonna do with this data in five years but we were able to connect with people in the office of research and they developed a data management task force. Unfortunately, the task force only lasted for about a year and a half but we were able to put together a paper from that that highlighted the research needs in this case of social science researchers and that paper is still there. We are able to refer to it and say, this is common themes of these researchers and it would be something that we can take into a next relationship with the office of research to hopefully develop support for that. I serve now on the faculty research and scholarship committee and so this is another place where I can bring that kind of partnership to develop services and raise awareness at our office of research level. An example of another challenges that when we took on the GIS support, we found that not being the administrator of the access to the technology that there were times where we would maybe want to facilitate a workshop or something and we weren't able to get the licenses. So by being in an administrative role, having a partnership with the IT who was working in that role, we were able to then get access and now it's a much more seamless process. So these challenges give us a chance to develop relationships with other entities on the campus. I'm mentioning the office of research and our IT department at UC. To me, these are the very big key players that we need to build personal relationships with. With our office of research, it's taken a long time. It's been seven years and we've worked hard to communicate with them and to develop a relationship. Sometimes these are personality driven. As I mentioned with the task force, it was very one particular person who was interested in that. I think we need to try to work to get to a culture of a more interaction between us, but we are making headway. So right now we were just able to get a member of our team, Tiffany Grant, onto our research advisory council to the office of research. And we are also starting to participate in their training programs. So we get the branding under the office of research. Specifically, we are talking about training in infrastructure, data management plans and building an NIH bio sketch. Our partnership with our IT department has been much more, it's long lived from the very beginning of my time with the library. We just have found this energy and that's the place where we are really able to have constant conversations and build partnerships there. We serve on their IT governance and research and development committee and we have also put in for grants together. So we have created a series that's funded by our provost and that's been a really great partnership for us to build services from and training through this series. And we also partner on our annual day-to-day which we had to postpone due to the pandemic and we are going to be holding that at the end of October. Okay, so for our research and data services team, we are going through some organizational changes. We are going to be merging with our digital scholarship center. The scholarship center started also as a strategic initiative but it's become much more the research engine for our library unit. And so in merging with our digital scholarship center that will bring our team much more access and partnerships to research. The digital scholarship was very successful to get a Mellon grant. So they brought in million dollars to set up the scholarship center and they were just successful with the renewal. And so we'll be continuing that work and focusing on machine learning and transdisciplinary research that's been the focus of the digital scholarship center before but now with the merger with the research and data services team, this will also encompass their thinking about data management and research efficiencies and also open science and research reproducibility. When we merge together, we will be the digital integration unit. Not sure if they're gonna be a technical name change but it'll be the unit that's supporting this new process of digital integration and we will be forming an actual space that will be a digital core within our library. Some of the first steps of merger, it's been interesting to try to bring these two cultures together, our research and data services team has been very focused, I said on the services component of supporting research where the digital scholarship center has been very active in supporting research by partners and being the grants and partners in a grant. So we are starting to incorporate ourselves more into these different projects. There's a lot more projects going on but these are the four of the ones that I'm involved in at the moment. And interestingly enough, I'll highlight the first project with digitization of herbarium cards. This is a STEM researcher but it's also a humanities project because they're looking at text. And so this has been a very interesting partnership because I met this professor maybe secretly on the third day of my time in the library and we have been able to talk and build a very close relationship over time and by having that personal relationship with the researcher, I was able to make a connection for him through the digital scholarship center and now his work is being supported through the digital scholarship center. And so again, these personal relationships really translate well into services for us. Our next step is to really think about what does this digital core look like. Here you can see there's a lot of different partners. This is the slide that Liz alluded to earlier and you can see that it really is a scope that would span all these different partners and try to have them integrate together to form this digital core that would support students upskilling with these technical skills and to really integrate all the different partners that could participate. The libraries is there but we would be focusing on these three major structures of teaching, research and services which I think Liz also mentioned as kind of being the staples of her work. And I myself, I find myself more comfortable in the teaching component of this but any member of our research and data services team will be able to support any part of this triad of function, teaching, research or services. And then the future steps are after we are more of a structured unit we will be moving into membership in what is called our digital futures. This is an office of research initiative and our digital scholarship center will have a space in this building and will be an anchor team. And so we will be able to then bring research and data services into this space and support researchers in this new facility. And then also as the provost is supporting our digital core this helps us to think about fulfillment of what is known as our Bearcat Promise that we will be bringing students much more into these skills and thinking about these skills through teaching a semester long course. So this is what the next steps in our digital integration will look like. And I think that's the end of my presentation so I appreciate the attention and if you wanted to talk to me you can email me at askdata at uc.edu. Amy, thanks so much for that excellent presentation. What you're building there is so comprehensive and so clearly tied to the institutional priorities. Really interesting. I'm going to ask each of you a question that came up at the end of Liz's presentation. Liz, I'm gonna ask you the question first and Amy while Liz is answering if you could share the citation of the article you mentioned about the social science researchers. I don't know if it was a paper or a published article that you mentioned is still being used. One of our participants asked for that. You could type it in the chat if you can provide a link. And after Liz answers, this question will ask you the same. Is that okay, Amy? Do you know what we're referring to? It'll take me a moment so let me try to look forward. So Liz, was there a discussion at the beginning of your presentation or just in general in terms of your work about ethical considerations such as labor issues, diversity, giving credit to graduate students and post-docs, et cetera. And the person comments, universities and libraries can be very hierarchical. I really appreciate this question. I did not discuss that. I don't think at all in this presentation, but it's something, and it surprises me now that you're asking this. We, so let me just say a couple of things. We used to have practicum students who worked with digital scholarship because we have a number of library science programs around us. We stopped doing that because we couldn't pay them because I had looked into this and read and it was like wages for unpaid work and it felt like that that was not appropriate. That was a hard decision to make but that was certainly an ethical choice that we made. I've still debate that because I think that there are individuals who have benefited, but that was a concern. We do have students who are paid and then the question for us was, is it enough that they're getting paid or should we be considering other aspects of their professional development? And years and years ago, we did talk about this. In fact, there was a, on the wall of the glass wall in my office, there was this grid, these axes where we talked about like, what are the motivations? Why would people do it? Why would they do this work? And for us, they might be motivated by money but for us that wasn't really a consideration for why we wanted people to work with us. We really wanted this to be an educational experience. So I will say one, you didn't ask about this but let me pull this in because one of the ethical considerations for us was always that when we start that semester with the student, we have a conversation about what they want to get out of this. What's their professional goal and what's intrinsically motivating them and what do they hope to learn so that that could always guide us in questions about what's the work you're doing if there's a choice? Is there something else you could be doing that actually puts you on a path to developing the skills you want? So there's both a decision, can we pay them? And that's a consideration. There's a question about what do you want to do when you're doing this work? And that's a consideration. And then the question about getting credit. To the extent that there's room to give credit, we do give credit. There isn't always room to publicly do that and that is a dilemma and I would be interested in how others do this. What we do is we list every individual who's worked with us, the projects they work on and the work that they did on our webpage. I can provide you a link to that. If you want to see how we've done that because we wanted to provide a place where that could be at least visible. I think there are plenty of other places I've done a better job of designing that than we have. We just got it up. But we did want to be able to credit them in that way. And I'll say one other thing. I did talk about the project plan. I said it was really important. Another really important aspect of that project plan was clearly defining the role of the student. Because if we were working with a student, we wanted to make it clear. This is what the student is actually being asked to do and this is what's reasonable. And this is not, this is not what the student is being asked to do. And so it was for us also a way to manage the student from simply bearing the work of the project and not carrying what was an appropriate load given and that everyone else was carrying their load. So those are those different elements of asking, are they getting paid? What's their motivation? Are we acknowledging what they did and is their work equitable in relationship to the rest of the individuals? And in terms of diversity, we do our best. I think there's still a pipeline question. But I also think there's some questions about how are we supporting students who want to come and work with us who are bringing different perspectives than we have. And I think that's some work we still need to do to figure that part out. I hope I answered your question. But if you didn't, please let me know in chat. Thank you. Thank you so much, Liz. Amy, I'm gonna repeat the question for you. Can you talk about how you view, not you personally, but all the units that are involved in digital scholarship, data management, et cetera, about ethical considerations, such as labor issues, diversity, giving credit to graduate students and postdocs, et cetera. And then she comments, universities and libraries can be very hierarchical. Yeah, so I would say graduate students have been critical to the work that we've been doing and also undergraduates, especially in our GIS. So I refer to on the picture or the slide where you saw our team members, there was a graduate student there as part of our team. She's very critical to our team. And we have hired them as student workers for our unit. So they are paid a salary and they are given a salary for the time that they work. We have been discussing, particularly in research and data services, developing an author policy. And we have that worked out, but we've not implemented it. But I think that for me, it's really important to acknowledge that when a student has been critical to a work being done, I asked myself, if the student wasn't there, would this work get done? And if the answer to that question is that they needed the student to do the work, then the student deserves credit. But I think that we need to put it out as a policy. And so that's why we developed the author policy. And that's something that we would talk more after the merger with our digital scholarship center. The digital scholarship center has taken a different approach because they are grant-based, like the projects are grant-based, they do lay out the work and they guarantee any student that is a part of a project will be an author on the paper. Doesn't mean they'll be first author, but they will be an author on the paper. Those students are also receiving funding. So it's a lot more clear in that grant or that project-based environment than it is in our research and data services team. But I think that one thing that our students are getting from us is professional development. And I try to stress for my students that work for me, that they go to library offered events. So like if we're doing an accessibility training, then I'm going to send my student to that training because they are a part of our team and they deserve that professional development. And I think that that has been really helpful for a lot of students to be able to put those kinds of things on their resume to get credit for it. Again, I really appreciate the work students do and I want to be a part of their professional development and tying back to the self-advocacy and research, I also want to help them learn to advocate for themselves as well. So by empowering them through these different training opportunities that we do. Thank you so much Amy and Liz for your excellent presentations and for your really clear answers to the questions. We will continue some informal discussion in just a minute, but right now we're at the end of our hour. So I want to formally thank our speakers and I also thank all the participants. Our next webinar is on Tuesday, September 29th and our speakers will discuss initiatives and teaching and learning. Thank you.


Hi, this is Jack Lipton speaking and today I'm very happy to be talking with Mark Chalmers, the CEO of America's Energy Fuels. And Mark, you have just come back from Brazil in extended stay and you've published some pretty important news. So would you tell us what's going on in Brazil that's important to Energy Fuels in Utah? Yeah, Jack. No, it's my pleasure to be on the show. Yeah, big news for us. We signed binding agreements to secure the Bahia project, which is in the Bahia region of Brazil, a few hundred miles north of Rio de Janeiro, a very large land position that we still have to do due diligence, but about 60 square miles of development. Well, it's been drilled and well known as a heavy mineral sand, a very quality heavy mineral sand deposit in Brazil, which also contains substantial quantities of monazite. And we're looking at this as finally Energy Fuels will have a deposit, I mean, subject to final successful completion of the due diligence. And we're in business. This is a big step for our company and we think that it could supply ultimately because of the size between 3000 to 10,000 tons a year of monazite sand, so between 1500 to 5000 tons of REO per year. And it's important as a base load for the white mason mill. So, you know, we're focused on full integration. We believe there's going to be more news flow, not just at Bahia, but with other companies that want to align with us to feed the mill at world scale and at world competitive, hopefully first quartile cost structures in rare earth without subsidies. It's my understanding that you have a total vertical integration plan for producing rare earth products and that up until now you haven't had a company owned domestic mine. So am I right in saying that this basically completes your vertical integration plan? It doesn't complete it, but it's an important step in that process. You know, we're looking at what we're basically looking at replicating the China plan when it comes to their focus on monazite. But now we've secured, you know, a heavy mineral sands deposit. As I said, you know, we think that'll be a big chunk of the feed in the next few years to white mason, but we're also looking at other sources of monazite. We're talking to at least a half a dozen different players that want to feed the white mason mill. And we're doing some creative things there where we believe we can do things that will make sure that that feed is exclusive to the mill. And then as you know, we're cracking and leaching as we speak. We're doing separations, at least the first separation of the lanthanum out. And look at this is interesting, Jack. Logan Shumway, our mill managers here, and you know, he at our AGM, he gave all the board members some 99.8% NDPR produced at the mill through our continuous pilot plant that's producing a kilogram per day of high purity NDPR right now as we speak. And after the oxides as we move forward with separations of the oxides, lights and heavies, we are looking towards metals. So yeah, it's all happening. It's happening lightning speed as compared to what most people move at in the rare earth business. And but we have many steps to the plan, but but having the integration is is absolutely critical as we know, because you don't want to have a hole in the middle of your integration plan. Oh, it's my understanding that energy fuels has been working with solvent extraction, the preferred legacy system for separating the rare earths for nearly 40 years in its uranium business. Is that correct? So you're quite now. Yeah, the White Mesa Mill, it was built as a solvent extraction facility focused on uranium and vanadium recovery. So now it's very large scale because it's a 2000 ton per day plant. So they're very large vessels. Now, you know, so we're very comfortable to solve an extraction, you know, even though with rare earths is much, much smaller cells. So yeah, the the the NDPR that I mentioned, and you know, this little vial would produce with with a number of mixture settlers in our lab. We've got some smaller vessels that we're using commercially in the current processing of the carbonate taken out of the lanthanum. And that provides this very high purity carbonate almost 35% NDPR. But then at the same time, you know, we're we're advancing our progress using solvent extraction to produce this 99.8% NDPR as we speak. I have to make just one comment on that. I've been following this technology and rare earths for about half a century.  And certainly no one in the United States prior to this has ever produced such a product. And the amazing thing is that you're flying solo under the radar. I'm worried that that your your wings are going to are going to touch down on the desert. People don't realize you're already in business. No, I you're not shipping NDPR to a commercial customer, but you're shipping mixed where earth carbonate to a customer. Are you not any commercial parties? Yeah, no, we're shipping it to to NEO's a cement plant in Estonia. And as we know, there's no commercial separation facility in the United States. And that's worked very well. We've got a great relationship with Constantine and the NEO team. It's a unique partnership, but it's been beneficial to both of us. For a lot of reasons. I mean, we are able to to make product and ship it to them. They check the quality and the specifications on the products that we make. But at the same time, you know, NEO's very interested in sources of of rare earth products, you know, you know, made in the United States. So, yeah, it's been very productive. And, you know, but we want to be US centric in time, but we see our relationship with NEO continuing for all the right reasons.  Okay. And, and, you know, we have a lot of beakers and we have a lot of bulky bags that that we have product in. And, you know, we're doing stuff small commercial right now. Our bottleneck right now is just more monosite. So, you know, we're actively, you know, working with with Kimors to to to get more monosite to the mill. You know, we've got this behia project now or subject to due diligence without a close and we believe in 90 days and our relationship with I period X with their project, the Titan project in Tennessee. And then there are another handful of people around the world that have projects in various jurisdictions that are looking to ship us feed for the white mason mill because they know how important it is to have a US centric rare earth processing capabilities to do this integration. But we plan to do it with feeds from multiple sources, you know, but he could be a third or fourth or 50% potentially, but we're going to need other feeds to get up to world scale. Mark, can you remind our listeners to exactly why? Why doesn't everybody do this? Why don't I open up a monosite processing plant in the Los Angeles area? For example. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's all about radionuclides. And we have the licenses. We have the facility in Utah and Salon County and our core businesses recovering uranium and we're able to monetize the uranium and we have the facilities to dispose of the tailings state of the art triple line rickra design cells for 1000 years. It is also a perpetual care facility that ultimately when the site is reclaimed will be under the stewardship of the Department of Energy. Not many people have that. Okay, we do. And the fact that we can monetize uranium, we believe ultimately we're going to monetize the thorium and we're going to provide, we believe, radionuclides for medical isotopes using these targeted off of therapy. So we're going to basically use the whole animal here where most people if they're looking at monosite sands are not they're focusing on just the rare earth. So so this is a story that you know actually it is the China story because they're used they're monetizing uranium and thorium. But we're doing it in the United States at world standards with world class regulations at a facility that is up and running and permitted and would be almost impossible to replicate pretty much anywhere in the world from scratch. It's not impossible, but it'd be very difficult to replicate. So let me get this straight. You're already processing monosite, removing removing the the radium as a payable storing the thorium legally. You're already pre separating the first four heavy first four light reverbs and you're producing a kilogram a day of NDPR in your 35 to 40 year old solvent extraction facility manned by people who've been running this for about 40 years. And in the meantime, you're also in the Iranian business. And did you did you have any news about sales of your right? I announced yesterday at the AGM that we have signed three contracts, three material contracts with two major US nuclear utilities. Okay. So yeah, it's all happening at energy fuels. Okay. And, you know, we're excited about that because we haven't signed long term contracts for 10 years, you know, the focus on nuclear power, base load, carbon free energy and reducing our dependence on Russia. Okay. For nuclear products. So yeah, we have a lot going on. And so, you know, in the last two weeks, you know, signing up the Bahia project, signing up three significant contracts that run between 2023 to 2030 for uranium products. You know, I don't know how to say that, you know, things are moving forward very quickly. I don't think the market fully appreciates we trade with our peers. None of our peers, none of them are doing what we're doing right now. But we trade with them. I think we go up 2%. Everybody else goes up 2%. We go down. Nobody's doing what we're doing. So when people figure that out, I believe we'll get a re-rate for all the right reasons because we become the critical mineral hub of the United States of America. You have certainly the most dynamic company in the rare space in North America at this time. I sincerely believe that. I want to thank you for this time and best of luck in fishing. And we'll be talking to you soon when you have your next series of earth shattering announcements. No kidding. Thanks, Mark. Thank you, Jack.