 Thank you very much. So I'm Christina Camposchori and I'm the program officer at RLUK. So today I would like to tell you a little bit about a recent project we did on research libraries and digital humanities tools and more specifically look at how collections were used as tools for collaboration between libraries and digital humanities scholars. So first I would like to tell you a little bit to give you some contextual information and I'll let you know the reasons why we decided to do this project. So one of the reasons was that there has been a lot of discussion around the challenges posed to research libraries by digital humanities scholars, especially when it comes to building and maintaining digital projects. Also while doing some of the research for this project we realized that there has been very little published research on the role of libraries in digital humanities as scholarship and little documentation on the collaborations that are being formed at the moment. Also finally this was very much within our strategic goals and more specifically we are interested in further defining the role of research libraries in digital scholarship and facilitate the sharing of best practices through these types of projects. Okay, so a little bit more about our methodological approach and how we conducted this project. So this was the definition we decided to employ as the general framework for designing our research and is the research and teaching made possible by digital technologies or that takes advantage of them to ask and answer questions in new ways. And this is the digital humanities definition that we employed and of course there has been a lot of discussion and debates around what digital humanities is but we found that this definition was broad enough to be able to refer and include and relate to the different practices that are conducted within the library and of course it has been used by other studies looking at the role of libraries and digital humanities scholarship in the US. So we decided to do first of all a survey and just before talking about the survey I'd like to say a little bit about our objectives through this project and some of our objectives were to explore the types of digital humanities initiatives that RLUK members supported or participated or participated in at the point of these research to identify current support and all collaboration models employed by member institutions. Investigate the role of libraries and the creation, archiving, curation and preservation of digital humanities tools as well as understand related challenges and requirements for developing this role. And finally to start building a community around digital humanities issues that concern member institutions raise awareness about related practices in the library sector and make suggestions that will eventually lead to further discussion and debate. So for the purposes of the survey we developed a questionnaire that aimed to explore what it meant for the libraries to engage in such a role in supporting and collaborating with digital humanities scholars in terms for example in terms of the activities. They were involved in the skills required, the knowledge base and the infrastructure. Also we're interested in learning at the types of tools that digital humanities scholars in their communities employed. In the context of the collaborations that were formed like the type and the purpose of the projects and the terms of these collaborations. And finally we wanted to find out about existing cases of such collaborations and use them as case studies to understand further their role of the libraries in digital humanities scholars. So regarding this case studies we we, the participants that were, that took part in this case studies, they were chosen based on their activity in the areas of the production and preservation of digital humanities tools. The ways they engaged with the digital humanities community. Like whether they were supporting researchers at different states of their projects or being more active collaborators. In them and we decided to look in more detail at three institutions the Sussex University Library, the St Andrews Library and the Seffield University Library. So going now to the results just to mention that we had as all of 27 responses to the survey and for those that are not familiar with RLUK we have 37 members and usually it was just one person from its institution taking part to the survey and it was left to the institutions to decide who was the most suitable person to answer the survey and we also had one response from a non-RLUK member as well. So one of the first things that we asked through the survey was about the definitions they employed if they employed a definition of digital humanities within the every institution. So we found that most of the times they didn't have, participants didn't have a formal definition for work and usually they didn't work in the context of a specific framework around digital humanities but they had working definitions and these were often saved by the types of initiatives their scholarly communities led at the time the types and level of participation in these initiatives as well as the expertise of the staff members that were involved in these activities. So next this graph gives you an idea of the different activities that were undertaken by the D8s communities in the institutions that took part in our survey. So you can see that most of the activity was conducted around museums and cultural heritage related research, digitization, text and data mining and then digital editions and digital publishing and as you can imagine many of these activities involved the use of library collections. So looking more detail about the services provided by the library, the digital human and the scholars, so the two main areas where the ad hoc support and the D8s materials and collections and we through analyzing the data we saw an emphasis on promoting the use of library collections in the project. So and this chart gives you an idea of how many people responded positively in the question around the different collaborative activities between the library and the digital humanities community in their institution. So you can see that 63% responded said yes that they do participate actively participate in collaborative work with scholars and at this point I should mention that even some of the people actually most of them that replied other they referred to initiatives like organizing collaborative seminars and so on that they can also be considered as a collaborative work in this context. So some further evidence around the around this collaborative culture that exists at the moment in the institutions was the participants response on the question around the role of library in the creation, archiving, curation and preservation of tools for digital humanities research and as you can see 51.9% of the participants said that the creation of digital tools would be a collaborative activity between librarians and the responsible digital humanities units or teams and the 63% replied the same when it comes to archiving and curating tools for digital humanities and finally the 55.6% agreed that libraries have a role in the preservation of tools for digital humanities research again in collaboration with any responsible units and teams. Going now to to look at the collections in more detail as tools for collaboration. Actually it was no surprise that very often the collections were at the core of these collaborations as many of the participants reported that collection professionals were often the first point of contact for researchers when looking for material to use in their projects and so there was a lot of co-building activity of collections between librarians and scholars and this was of course because library professionals would have the best working knowledge of the collections. These activities were seen very positively by information professionals and library professionals as well and these are some of the things that came up, some of the statements that came up from the survey and many of them said that collections need to be translatable in digital humanities tools like for text and data mining reasons in order to achieve greater impact and then that also collaborative work between librarians and scholars can help solve issues around digital collections such as digital born data and their long-term accessibility and of course collections we have found not only were valuable not only for research purposes but for teaching and teaching collaborations as well. So now I would like to go a little bit more about to talk a little bit more about the case studies and talk about how these institutions were forming these collaborations about the circumstances of these collaborations and how collections were used in the context of these of the different activities. So the first one was the Sussex University library who participates in the Sussex Humanities Lab and as our participants or first participant told us the aim was to embed the work of the library and special collections in the research and teaching activity of the lab through providing relevant services. Also the library was found to lead at the time of these research to lead and contribute to digital projects often through providing archives related expertise advice on digital preservation or the technical infrastructure as well as participating in funding bids led by the lab. And finally apart from participating in this type of activities the library was actively involved in the organization of events that focused on showcasing innovative research that falls within the scope of the lab's interests such as the recent digital preservation for social sciences and humanities conference that took place during the summer as well as participating in different seminars and networking activities. And as you can see from participant A's quote here taking part in these types of activities and contributing to the lab was really a very positive experience for everyone. So now moving on to the second case study. So in this case the Digital Humanities and Research Computing team was usually approached by researchers mainly academic staff and postgraduate students from different subject areas who lacked the technical skills required to conduct specific tasks in the context of a digital project such as and this type of projects usually involved the building of a database or an archive or maybe the creation of a digital edition and used part of these collections. They also provided a helper with funding applications for these projects but also the team apart from from helping researchers build their projects was responsible for producing and maintaining St Andrews digital collections as well as archiving curating and preserving digital projects in collaboration with the relevant departments and schools. And yet apart from this apart from this work they were also responsible for initiating and leading Digital Humanities projects related to the library's digital collections or other projects and digitization activities with the aim of increasing the library's visibility in the area and working together with staff and students for the purposes of seminar teaching and the delivery of specialist digital humanities training. So finally they were responsible as in the previous case they were responsible for building digital humanities communities interested in exploring issues such as software development and other digital humanities related topics. So and again this it was reported that this was very much a new experience and but helped librarians contribute new ways and do some innovative work that could contribute to research and teaching. Okay so the final the final case study was the several university library and in this case their library worked and were found to work in partnership with the Digital Humanities Institute at Seville University and had often been involved in projects especially with a focus on each collections which could be characterized as digital humanities projects for example library staff had worked with linguists on the use of Gaels 19th century collections online with Schetzenzin and in our report of the project we have included a full list of all the projects and activities that were that were reported through the survey in the case studies so you can have a look at different activities if you want. And also the services were built around collections were built many times around collections and that was a very important part of the work of the library for supporting academics including digital humanities researchers and the library professionals enabled access to and the use of the collections with the aim of facilitating the research process from data collection to publishing and digitized and born digital collections were also available for from the library for academic use. Moreover the library was found to provide the range of workshops and lectures of interest to the scholars on topics related to open research and the evolving nature of scholarly communication as well as tailored support on issues such as data management planning. And it is worth mentioning that at the point of these research they were scoping out it's a support service offer around the data and text mining which of course is a topic of considered interest to digital humanities scholars as the first graph also also showed. And finally the library had invested in the digital preservation system which will be used to archive and preserve all research outputs and digital humanities projects included and digital collections for the long-term in collaboration with the relevant schools and departments. So just coming to the conclusion. So generally speaking all this activity and the collaborative work were seen very positively from most of the library professionals and it was a great it was it was mentioned as a great opportunity to increase the impact of collections to lead further funding and raise the status of the library and this stuff of course there were some challenges reported that should always be taken into account like the diverse types of projects and the variety of digital humanities output formats were often considered was considered a challenge the lack of common language between library professionals and digital humanities scholars as well as common language around what digital humanities is and what types of support services we need. And finally limited resource and lack of infrastructure could sometimes be a problem as well. So coming back to the beginning this was a very this was a project that was really related to our to our interest and the strategic goals and we aim to further explore some of the issues that came up through this report and look at the state of digital scholarship in the UK libraries and beyond. Also we through that work we aim to create different different materials like briefing papers and reports and to provide for our members to use. And finally some other examples of our participation in the general discussion around digital humanities are our involvement in our local digital humanities work at Senate House, the Liberal Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage Group as well as through our special collections program activities where many times the discussion evolves around digital humanities issues especially when it comes to opening up the collections through digital projects. So thank you very much. These are my contact details and that's the link to the report if you would like to have a look. So thank you very much.