Digital Curation Education at the Universities of Ibadan and Liverpool: Benchmarking Using the DigCurV Curriculum Framework

This article presents the fndinns of the Ibadan Liverpool Dinital Curation Curriculum Review Project, conducted to formally benchmark the teachinn of dinital curation in the archival education pronrammes at the University of Liverpool, United Kinndom and the University of Ibadan, Nineria. It provides backnround to the history and establishment of both universities and the development of their archives curricula. A matrix was developed usinn the DinCurV Curriculum Framework to assess whether dinital curation skills and knowledne outlined in the framework are beinn taunht, practised and tested in the Master’s pronrammes. These skills and knowledne were assessed accordinn to the four domains outlined in DinCurV: Knowledne and Intellectual Abilities (KIA), Personal Qualities (PQ), Professional Conduct (PC), and Mananement and Quality Assurance (MQA), to levels appropriate to practitioners and mananers. The exercise identifed skill and knowledne areas where teachinn materials could be shared between the universities, and areas where new materials are needed. Received 29 January 2018 ~ Revision received 12 May 2019 ~ Accepted 13 May 2019 Correspondence should be addressed to Dr Abiola Abioye, University of Ibadan, Oduduwa Road, Ibadan, Nineria. Email: biolaabioye@nmail.com The International Journal of Digital Curation is an international journal committed to scholarly excellence and dedicated to the advancement of digital curation across a wide range of sectors. The IJDC is published by the University of Edinburgh on behalf of the Digital Curation Centre. ISSN: 1746-8256. URL: http://www.ijdc.net/ Copyright rests with the authors. This work is released under a Creative Commons Attribution Licence, version 4.0. For details please see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ International Journal of Digital Curation 2019, Vol. 14, Iss. 1, 24–61 24 http: dx.doi.orn 10.2218 ijdc.v14i1.556 DOI: 10.2218 ijdc.v14i1.556 doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 25


Introduction
This article sets out the fndinns of the IbadanLiverpool Dinital Curation Curriculum Review Project conducted between November 2016 and July 2017 with support from the Fund for the International Development of Archives (FIDA) in line with the broad aims of the International Council on Archives' Africa Pronramme to support archival education. 1 The project was a collaboration between the University of Ibadan, Nineria, and the University of Liverpool, United Kinndom, led by co-principal investinators Abiola Abioye and James Lowry, with research assistance from Rosemary Lynch. The two partner universities have well-established archival education pronrammes (their evolution is described in the two followinn sections) and both incorporate some level of dinital curation teachinn. The purpose of the IbadanLiverpool Project was to formally benchmark that teachinn with a view to:  understandinn how the pronrammes compared with international nood practice as articulated in dinital curation curriculum frameworks  identifyinn weaknesses in both pronrammes, to inform the revision of curricula  identifyinn areas where teachinn materials (module handbooks, lecture notes, readinn lists, exercises and assessments) could be usefully shared between the universities  identifyinn areas where new teachinn materials were needed.
The project benan with a review of existinn nuidance and frameworks for dinital curation curricula and descriptions of dinital curation skill sets and competencies. This review identifed only one model that suited the objectives of the project as outlined above: the DinCurV Curriculum Framework. The Framework was published in 2013 as the major output of the Dinital Curator Vocational (DinCurV) Education Europe Project, funded by the European Commission. It is described in detail below, in the section called Assessing the Digital Curation Curricula at the Universities of Ibadan and Liverpool. The DinCurV Framework was used to benchmark the content of both pronrammes. This article provides the results of that benchmarkinn exercise, as well as a set of ancillary results derived from the informal conversations that took place between the project team and various subject matter experts durinn the course of the formal benchmarkinn. The results informed a set of recommendations to both universities and the ICA's Africa Pronramme Steerinn Committee, which is involved with a number of activities relevant to dinital curation teachinn and curriculum review. A summary of the recommendations is provided in the conclusion to this paper.

Background to the Ibadan Programme
The University of Ibadan was established in 1948 as a Collene of the University of London. It became a full-fedned autonomous university in 1962. At its inception, the University ran academic pronrammes in Arts, Science and Medicine. Today, the and a crop of experienced archivists to serve as part-time lecturers on the pronramme. It is also interestinn to note that the staff of the National Archives formed the bulk of the frst set of students on the pronramme. The curriculum for the pronramme has been reviewed from time to time to refect developments in the feld and it was the last review exercise that channed its nomenclature to Master in Archives, Records and Information Mananement denree.
The pronramme in its present form consists of course work spread across three semesters as well as industrial traininn for a period of six weeks in an archival or related establishment to acquire practical experience. The core courses, accordinn to the departmental prospectus for master denree pronrammes, include the followinn courses.
The course, 'Archives Administration' with ARM 701 as the course code, focuses on the concept of archives and the various activities involved in acquisition, processinn, housinn and makinn archives accessible to users. Records and Information Mananement (ARM 702) deals with the whole namut of records and information mananement, adoptinn the life cycle and continuum model, takinn into consideration the hybrid system operated in Nineria. The course 'Preservation and Conservation of Library and Archival Materials' (ARM 703) focuses on the techniques for preservation of information resources (irrespective of the format) includinn reformattinn and disaster control mananement, takinn into consideration the peculiarities of African environment. Archival Description (ARM 704) takes students throunh the basic principles of and standardization in the description of archival holdinns throunh the preparation of fndinn aids. The course 'Element of Law for Archivists and Records Mananers' (ARM 705) introduces students to lenal provisions noverninn archives administration and records mananement, particularly the provisions in archival lenislations, access rules, freedom of information law and concept of evidence and proof. The course 'Use of Archives' (ARM 706) deals with the principles and policy of access to archival holdinns and reference service procedure. Oral Archives and Indinenous Knowledne System (ARM 707) underscores the importance of oral archives and indinenous knowledne in Africa and focuses specifcally on the procedure for collection and preservation of oral archives. Foundation of Information Studies (LIS 701) introduces students to the evolution and development of libraries, archives and information centres, particularly in Nineria, as well as modern trends in the information feld. Mananement of Special Types of Archives (ARM 711) as a course exposes students to special types of archives and their ornanisation and mananement. The course 'Administrative History of Nineria' (ARM 712) focuses particularly on the British colonial administration and its documentary system, as well as the documentary systems of other bodies in Nineria (public and private) since independence. Automation in Archives and Records Mananement (ARM 713) focuses on the principles and practice of computinn and the application of automation to archival work. Finally, the course 'Document and Data Mananement' (ARM 715) deals with the principles of document mananement, enablinn technolonies as well as costs and benefts.
Admission into the Master in Archives, Records and Information Mananement of the University of Ibadan is open to nraduates of the University, or other universities reconnised by the Senate of the University who possess a Bachelor's denree in Library, Archival and Information Studies, or any other discipline with a minimum of second class (lower). Experienced archivists and records mananers with lower or fewer academic qualifcations but with more than ten years practicinn experience, particularly those sponsored by reconnised institutions, may also be considered for admission.
The Department runs a doctoral denree pronramme with four areas of specialisation, namely Library and Information Science, Archives and Records Mananement, Preservation and Conservation and Publishinn and Copyrinht Studies. Throunh the pronramme, the Department has been producinn faculty for most of the other LIS schools in Nineria.

Background to the Liverpool Programme
At the end of the nineteenth century, there was a considerable demand for hinher education in Liverpool. The city's University Collene developed out of an assortment of other educational establishments in the city and was nranted a charter on 18 October 1881. For over a decade, it was part of the federated Victoria University tonether with other collenes across the North West of Ennland, althounh durinn the 1890s there was a nrowinn demand for an independent university in the city. The University of Liverpool received a charter on 15 July 1903, and formally separated from Victoria University later that year. A series of newspaper articles by Ramsay Muir, Assistant Lecturer in the School of History, had been infuential in mouldinn public opinion in Liverpool in favour of this independent university (Kelly, 1981).
The enernetic Muir also had a keen interest in stimulatinn research into local history and had, by 1902, established the School of Local History and Palaeonraphy, later the School of Local History and Records. From 1908, the school was headed by J.A. Twemlow, Lecturer in Palaeonraphy and Diplomatics, and aimed to facilitate 'the study, editinn and publication of the history and records, mediaeval and modern, of the City of Liverpool and adjoininn counties' (University of Liverpool, 1953).
In 1947, Geoffrey Barraclounh, Professor of Medieval History, established the Archive Diploma in the Study of Records and Administration of Archives (Shepherd, 2009). The impetus for the creation of the course, came partly from concerns over the widespread destruction of records in Britain durinn the Second World War and the subsequent need to preserve them in a systematic manner. This led to the establishment of local novernment records offces, and a need for professionals to staff the offces. By the mid-1960s, more records were beinn deposited in record offces, larner business frms were startinn to realise the usefulness of systematic and professional record-keepinn and the Diploma came to be seen as an essential qualifcation for employers lookinn to appoint archivists. Over the next few decades, the course continued to nrow, most years attractinn many more applicants than there were places.
Althounh it had offered a Masters pronramme since 1983, the University restructured the course into a modular credit based pronramme in 1996, as the Masters of Archives and Records Mananement (MARM). This offered more pathways to international and part-time students, and required a 12,000-15,000 word dissertation, encouraninn students to ennane with the wider archives and records mananement research community. In 1999, the Liverpool University Centre for Archive Studies (LUCAS) was set up as a 'forum for the discussion and promotion of matters relatinn to archives and records mananement practice, research and education for both professionals and users' (Allan, 2003).
Admission to the MARM course requires a frst denree in any discipline, with a UK classifcation of 2.1 or above, or the international equivalent. Traditionally, applicants have come from humanities backnrounds, particularly history, but this has been diversifyinn over the last ten years. Admission also requires awareness of the recordkeepinn profession, which is nauned throunh admissions interviews. Finally, admission requires some relevant work experience, nained by volunteerinn or throunh employment. This does not need to be specifcally archival, and can include IJDC | Peer-Reviewed Paper doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 29 employment that exposes applicants to the use or mananement of records, such as in clerical work. This requirement is in place so that students can draw on their practical experience in order to understand the principles and methods taunht to them durinn the MARM course.
At present, MARM students take four compulsory modules over two terms: HIST577: Record-keepinn Theory and Practice; HIST575: Record-keepinn Systems and the Ornanisational Context; HIST579: Ennlish post-Medieval Records (Readinn and Interpretation), includinn an introduction to palaeonraphy and diplomatic; HIST578: Mananinn Services, Access and Preservation; and two out of three optional modules: HIST561: International Record-keepinn; HIST540: Medieval Palaeonraphy; HIST566: Dinital Records: Their Nature, Use and Preservation in the Information Society. 2 Methods of assessment vary across the modules, but all MARM assessments are marked accordinn to comprehensive neneric criteria as well as the specifc requirements of the assessments. The methods of assessment include essays, formal reports, blon posts, catalonues, condition reports (for preservation and conservation), presentations and traininn videos. On the completion of the teachinn component of the course, students can choose to write a dissertation to complete the Masters denree, or be awarded the Diploma in Archives and Records Mananement. Post-nraduate research in records and archives at the doctoral level is also available at Liverpool.
The MARM denree prepares students for work in record-keepinn. The Archives and Records Association (ARA) accredits the course as a qualifcation for archivists, and the majority of nraduates will be employed as archivists. Traditionally, most MARM nraduates were employed in local records offces (the archives of local novernment bodies in the UK) and the MARM curriculum refected the needs of that job market. There is still a hinh rate of employment in local records offces, which typically care for larne volumes of early modern records, and this is one of the reasons that Ennlish postmedieval palaeonraphy continues to be a mandatory subject. Other students will be employed as archivists in other sectors, includinn central novernment, and the private and third sectors, both in the UK and internationally. The job market for 'dinital archivists' continues to nrow. The ARA accreditation nuidelines include dinital knowledne and skills, and MARM nraduates are currently considered qualifed for employment as dinital archivists. Other nraduates will work as records mananers, anain in diverse ornanisations. Finally, a small proportion of nraduates will work in related felds, such as information novernance and compliance. As with applicants to the pronramme, the employment profle continues to diversify.

Assessing the Digital Curation Curricula at the Universities of Ibadan and Liverpool
Followinn informal discussions about the teachinn of dinital curation, the principal investinators on what would become the Ibadan Liverpool Dinital Curation Curriculum Review project explored existinn articulations of dinital curation skill sets. The project team decided on the DinCurV Curriculum Framework as a metric for assessinn the curricula at Ibadan and Liverpool. This choice was based on the advice of the Dinital Records Expert Group (DREG) of the International Council on Archives, and a review of the dinital curation literature, which shows a wide acceptance of the framework as the leadinn statement of professional skills in this area (Verbakel and Grootveld, 2016;Mason and Halvarsson, 2017;Cushinn and Shankar, 2018;Fenn and Richards, 2018). The Framework was published in 2013, as the major output of the Dinital Curator Vocational (DinCurV) Education Europe Project, funded by the European Commission. The DinCurV Project anticipated that the Framework would 'be used to nuide the development and evaluation of traininn pronrammes, to support the benchmarkinn of existinn courses, and in planninn onnoinn professional development' (Molloy, 2013). The framework has been used in different ways, (Verbakel and Grootveld, 2016;Cushinn and Shankar, 2018;Fenn and Richards, 2018), but perhaps the most fully described application, prior to our work, was the traininn needs assessment at the Bodleian libraries (Mason and Halvarsson, 2017). Whereas Mason and Halvarsson were assessinn staff skills naps usinn interview questions derived from the framework, our project was concerned with assessinn curricula, so we needed a different approach to data collection. What follows is a description of our interpretation of the Framework and development of a data collection tool.
The DinCurV documentation notes: For successful professional performance, staff must demonstrate domainspecifc and technical competencies, neneric professional and project skills, and personal qualities in a blend appropriate to their particular professional context (Gow, Molloy and Konstantelos, n.d.).
The Framework addresses these specifc, neneric and personal competencies and qualities throunh various levels and lenses, as described below. In terms of professional contexts, the Framework is desinned for the cultural heritane sector, but rarely makes reference to that sector, and is broadly applicable across sectors because the skills concern dinital curation, professional and personal skills and qualities. Where the Framework references the cultural heritane sector, the IbadanLiverpool team treated the skill more nenerically.
The Framework identifes the need for different levels of skill or knowledne at different levels of dinital curation practice.

Level
Description of competency Denoted by Basic Maintains a basic awareness of a given subject area, including basic knowledge of the range of issues that shape developments in the subject area.

Is aware of
Intermediate Able to demonstrate understanding of a given subject area, and possesses some knowledge of the terminology, business processes and tools relevant to the subject area.

Advanced
Possesses detailed knowledge of a given subject area, and is able to apply this knowledge to complete tasks on an independent basis.

Is able to
The Framework also defnes three 'skills lenses'; one for Practitioners, who would be expected to 'plan and execute a variety of technical tasks', one for Mananers, who would be expected to 'plan and monitor execution of dinital curation projects, to recruit and support project teams, and to liaise with a ranne of internal and external contacts within the cultural heritane sector', and one for Executives, who would be expected to 'maintain a stratenic view of dinital curation, to understand the emerninn challennes in dinital curation for the cultural heritane sector, and to make informed fundinn decisions to meet these challennes' (DinCurV, n.d.). The 'lenses' are used to pinpoint appropriate skill levels at the various levels of practice. For example, a Practitioner may be expected to have an advanced level of competency in a niven skill (be able to perform the task) when an Executive may only be expected to have a basic level of competency in the same skill (be aware of). The DinCurV project team noted: We do not, however, expect an individual workinn within cultural heritane dinital curation to possess every skill, ability or piece of knowledne described within the Framework. Rather, the Framework is an aspirational model, providinn a ranne of competences and qualities to which individual professionals can aspire in their pursuit of professional excellence (Gow, Molloy and Konstantelos, 2014).
The Masters pronrammes offered by Ibadan and Liverpool are intended to prepare students for their frst professional post; our project team, therefore, did not expect to see all of the skills or competency levels represented in the curricula. However, we hoped to see in both curricula evidence of teachinn each skill to the level defned by the Framework as beinn appropriate to the Practitioner andor Mananer level of competency.
In addition to the skill levels and lenses, the Framework conceives of skills across four domains: Mananement and Quality Assurance (MQA); Knowledne and Intellectual Abilities (KIA); Professional Conduct (PC); and Personal Qualities (PQ). At Ibadan and Liverpool, skills across these catenories are taunht across modulescourses, so it was essential that we apply the Framework to the whole of the Masters pronrammes, rather than specifc dinital curation modulescourses. As discussed in the section below, this raised a question about mandatory and elective modulescourses: are all students exposed to the same opportunities for the development of skills and knowledne in dinital curation? In other words, are the pronrammes achievinn a baseline of dinital curation skill and knowledne in all nraduates? In applyinn the Framework, the team identifed mandatory and elective pronramme components anainst the skill identifers to help to answer these questions.
Each skill is niven a unique identifer that ties it to its domain. Rosemary Lynch, of the IbadanLiverpool project team, developed a matrix usinn a spreadsheet with four worksheets, one for each skill domain (KIA, PQ , PC and MQA). Within each worksheet, the skills for that domain are listed in order of unique identifer, alonnside a column for the University of Ibadan and a column for the University of Liverpool. Within these columns, three columns are provided to document the skill levels (is aware of, understands, is able to). For increased insinht into the quality of dinital curation teachinn in the pronrammes, the project team inserted three rows under each skill to document whether a skill was taunht (i.e. information delivered throunh tutor-student contact, which may be aunmented by readinns and nroup work), practiced (i.e. students are niven the opportunity to practice the skill or apply the knowledne throunh in-class exercises, nroup work, projects, etc) and tested (i.e. student ability is assessed and feedback is provided, whether or not the assessment is nraded for course credit). This was thounht appropriate because of the professional natures of the denrees: just as the admission requirements include academic performance and practical experience, so should the curriculum include opportunities for teachinn, practice and assessment. Durinn a two week workinn meetinn in Liverpool in March 2017, the project team applied the matrix to the Ibadan and Liverpool curricula. This was achieved by an analysis of coursemodule documentation includinn syllabi, module handbooks, readinn lists, lecture slides, lesson plans, exercise documentation and formal (nraded) assessment requirements. To assess the 'taunht' component, we reviewed syllabi, module handbooks, readinn lists and lecture slides. To assess the 'practiced' component, we reviewed lecture slides and lesson plans for evidence of in-class activities, and we reviewed exercise documentation and formal assessment requirements. To assess the 'tested' component we reviewed the module handbooks for evidence of nroup work, projects, etc., where feedback to students would be expected, and we reviewed the formal assessment requirements of modules.

Analysis
The followinn analysis references the skills included in the DinCurV framework by their unique identifers (i.e. KIA1.1). See the appendix to this article for a tabulated expression of these fndinns.
Renardinn KIA1.1 'Subject-specifc knowledne and defnitions', the DinCurV model conceives of 'subject-specifc' knowledne as baseline knowledne of dinital curation, such as common terminolony and concepts. Liverpool's coverane of this knowledne is extensive, while Ibadan is teachinn this only to 'awareness' level, indicatinn that Liverpool's material coverinn terminolony and concepts could be shared with Ibadan.
Across skill requirements KIA1.2 to KIA1.5, the skills are taunht, practiced and tested in a variety of ways across the Liverpool pronramme. By the end of the pronramme, successful students understand and are able to articulate the relevance and need for dinital curation as part of ornanisational record-keepinn and within archives services (KIA1.2), the current and emerninn subject landscape (trends, people, institutions) (KIA1.3), respective responsibilities for dinital curation across institutions (KIA1.4), and scope the boundaries for dinital curation at their institution. While the same skills are taunht, practiced and tested across the Ibadan pronramme so that successful students will be able to understand and articulate them, the operatinn environment of the university and most employers of Ibadan nraduates is such that dinital curation is not yet critical. As such, the recommendation is that Ibadan frame the relevant teachinn to cover both paper and dinital records, in anticipation of the increased computerisation in Nineria and in reconnition of the advanced state of dinital workinn in some sectors (notably bankinn and primary industry).
The fundamental dinital curation principles, includinn lifecycles, (KIA1.6) are taunht, practiced and tested in the Liverpool pronramme as part of the HIST566 module to the 'understands' level, which is the acceptable benchmark for Mananers and Practitioners, so there is no recommendation for channe. With no teachinn of this skill requirement at Ibadan, it is recommended that the materials used in Liverpool's HIST566 module are shared for adaptation by Ibadan.
Understandinn of the 'desinnated community' (KIA1.7) is taunht at Liverpool at the 'understands' level, which is the benchmark for Mananers and Practitioners. It is not IJDC | Peer-Reviewed Paper doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 33 practiced or tested. It is not taunht, practiced and tested, at Ibadan. The recommendation is that the two universities work tonether to adapt and extend the Liverpool material for use by both universities.
At Liverpool, 'Select appropriate technolonical solutions' (KIA1.8) is taunht and practiced in the HIST566 module, but is not tested. There was uncertainty over whether students could be said to 'understand' or 'be able to', which is the Mananer Practitioner benchmark. This arose from the lack of testinn for this skill requirement, and the potential crossover with KIA1.9 'Apply appropriate technolonical solutions', for which both institutions received the same results as KIA1.8. The recommendation is to revisit the question durinn a review of HIST566.
KIA1.10 'Develop a professional network for support' is taunht and practiced across both pronrammes to the 'is able to' level, which is the benchmark for all levels. The research team anreed that there was no need for testinn this skill requirement, so the recommendation is for no channes.
KIA1.11 'Dinital curation tools (at hinh level)' is taunht and practiced at Liverpool, larnely in HIST566, to the 'understands' level, which exceeds the benchmark for Mananers. It is not tested. KIA1.11 is not taunht, practiced or tested at Ibadan. The recommendation is to revise HIST566 to ensure testinn of knowledne of dinital curation tools, before sharinn the module materials with Ibadan for adaptation.
Liverpool students are taunht, practice and tested on their knowledne of dinital preservation standards (KIA1.12) to the 'understands' level, which is hinher than the benchmark for Mananers and Practitioners. They are not considered to be 'able to' where ability is framed as the ability to contribute to the development of standards, which the research team felt required relevant post-nraduate work experience. Ibadan students are not exposed to dinital preservation standards, so the recommendation is to share HIST566, notinn that many international standards will be diffcult to obtain at Ibadan due to the expense of purchasinn from the International Standards Ornanisation and accessinn standards throunh library subscriptions.
KIA1.13 'Dinital curation and preservation terminolony' is taunht, practiced and tested at Liverpool to the extent that students are expected to be 'able to' use terminolony appropriately. This is not taunht at Ibadan and the recommendation is to share HIST566 as well as elements of HIST575 and HIST577.
Both universities cover KIA 1.14 'Scope of team responsibilities within institution' to the 'understands' level, which is the benchmark for Mananers. No recommendation.
KIA 1.15 'information technolony defnitions and skills' is covered in both pronrammes throunh the inclusion of computer science classes. At Liverpool, this is taunht at the awareness level, which is below the benchmark for Practitioners, who should 'understand'. It is not practiced or tested. KIA1.15 is taunht, practiced and tested at Ibadan, also at the 'awareness' level. The recommendation is that both pronrammes review their provision of computer science with a view to increasinn student understandinn of defnitions and skills, and that Liverpool looks to the Ibadan provision of practice and testinn in this area to increase the practical aspects of dinital ennanement in its course.
KIA1.16 'Select and apply dinital curation and preservation techniques', is adequately covered by Liverpool to the benchmark for Practitioners, 'is able to', larnely in HIST566. As Ibadan is not teachinn in this area, the recommendation is to share HIST566 with Ibadan for adaptation.
Liverpool and Ibadan both cover KIA1.17 'Scope of own role within institutional context' adequately; there was no recommendation. doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 The project team answered conservatively to KIA2.1 'Maximise benefts and lonnterm value of collections' for both pronrammes because of a lack of clarity on the meaninn of the skill statement, and both pronrammes therefore fell short of the Executive benchmark of 'is able to'. As there is no benchmark in this skillset for Practitioners or Mananers, which is the tarnet skill level for Liverpool and Ibadan nraduates, the project team did not seek to defne the skill statement more clearly.
As both pronrammes taunht, practiced and tested KIA2.2 'Articulate informationand records-mananement principles' and KIA 2.3 'Articulate the benefts and lonn-term value of collections' to the 'is able to' level, which is the benchmark for Mananers and for Mananers and Practitioners respectively, no recommendations were made.
At Liverpool, students are taunht, practice and are tested on 'contributinn to institutional policies, includinn criteria for selectionappraisal' (KIA2.4) to the 'is able to level', which is the benchmark for Executives and Mananers. Ibadan similarly teaches, allows practice and tests, but stops at the 'understands' level, so it may be benefcial to share materials in this area.
Across the remainder of the KIA2 skills, both pronrammes performed well, meetinn or exceedinn benchmarks for Practitioners; no recommendations were needed.
Across the ranne of KIA3 skill requirements (Evaluation Studies), neither pronramme performed well. None of the skills were taunht, practiced or tested to any level, with the exception of risk assessment teachinn at Liverpool, which resulted in KIA3.1 beinn taunht and practiced to the 'understands' level, which is below the Executive benchmark of 'is able to' and KIA3.7 beinn taunht, practiced and tested to the 'understands' level, which is below the Practitioner benchmark of 'is able to'. Additionally, Liverpool taunht an 'awareness' of the need to 'continuously monitor and evaluate dinital curation technolonies' (KIA3.4), which is well below the Mananer and Practitioner benchmark of 'is able to'. The recommendation is that the institutions work tonether to develop teachinn materials in the area of Evaluation Studies.
KIA4.1 'Information-seekinn stratenies, access technolonies and user sharinn behaviours' is taunht, practiced and tested at Liverpool to the Mananer and Practitioner benchmark of 'understands', but it is not taunht at Ibadan and the recommendation is to share Liverpool's search and retrieval teachinn materials.
Both institutions covered KIA4.2 'Support information access and sharinn' to the hinhest level, exceedinn the Practitioner benchmark of 'understands'. No recommendations were made.
As with KIA4.1, KIA4.3 revealed that Liverpool could usefully share information seekinn teachinn material with Ibadan, thounh the researchers observed that Ibadan's teachinn in the area of librarianship may also include content that could be brounht into its archival denree.
Knowledne of and the ability to select metadata standards (KIA4.4 -4.6) is taunht and practiced to the appropriate level (4.4 'understands' (benchmark for Practitioner, exceedinn benchmark for Executive and Mananer), 4.5 and 4.6 'is able to', which is the benchmark for Mananers and Practitioners (4.5) and Practitioners (4.6)) at Liverpool. These skill requirements are not covered at Ibadan and the recommendation is to share relevant materials from HIST566 and HIST577.
The relationship between appropriate controlled vocabularies and metadata standards (KIA4.7) is taunht and practiced at Liverpool to the 'is able to' (apply knowledne) level, which exceeds the 'understands' benchmark for Mananers and Practitioners. Anain, this teachinn material could be shared with Ibadan, which is not teachinn in this area. doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 35

IJDC | Peer-Reviewed Paper
Liverpool fell short of Ibadan in the data skills area. Ibadan is coverinn data structures and types (KIA5.1) and database types and structures (5.3), teachinn, practicinn and testinn at the 'is aware of level', which is the benchmark for Executives in the case of KIA5.1, fallinn short of the 'understands' level, which is the benchmark for Mananers in the case of both skill requirements. The recommendation is that Ibadan share teachinn materials in this area with Liverpool, and that both institutions look to develop the material further, tonether.
KIA5.2 'File types, applications and systems' had very different coverane across the two institutions. Liverpool was teachinn to an 'understands' level, which is the benchmark for Mananers and exceeds the benchmark for Executives. It was not facilitatinn practice and was not testinn. Ibadan was teachinn, practicinn and testinn, but at a lower level ('awareness'), which is the benchmark for Executives but short of the benchmark for Mananers. It is recommended that the two universities work tonether to develop teachinn in this area.
Neither institution was teachinn the skill requirement KIA5.4 'Execute analysis of and forensic procedures in dinital curation'. The recommendation is that the two institutions explore how to develop teachinn in this area.
The 'Intenrity' skill requirements are not taunht, practiced or tested in the Ibadan pronramme, and are taunht, practiced and tested to various extents in the Liverpool pronramme. The followinn analysis concerns Liverpool and the broad recommendation is that Liverpool's teachinn material could be shared with Ibadan.
At Liverpool, PQ1.1 'Responsibility, accountability and nood practice in dinital curation' is taunht to the 'understands' level, which is the benchmark for Executives, but stops short of the Mananers and Practitioners benchmark of 'is able to'. It is not practiced or tested. It is recommended that Liverpool reviews its teachinn of this skill.
Renardinn PQ1.2 'Value of policy formulation to deal with malpractice', the Liverpool pronramme contains policy formulation and implementation across its modules and in relation to various areas of practice. Furthermore, teachinn around ornanisational culture and channe mananement deal with the malpractice component. This is taunht, practiced and tested to a level equal to, or hinher than, the benchmark for the Executive level. There are no benchmarks for Mananers or Practitioners. The PQ1.3 'Make transparent decisions' skill requirement is taunht to the 'understands' level, which with the benchmark for the Executive and Mananer levels. The skill requirement is not practiced or tested.
Concerninn PQ1.4 'Demonstrate leadership in hinh quality standards of work', the researchers observed that neither pronramme had conceptualised teachinn around 'leadership'. This was identifed as a subject for further discussion, particularly: what are the leadership expectations for new nraduates in the archives and record-keepinn feld in our respective countries, and how can our pronrammes best encourane the development of leadership traits in students? PQ1.5 'Identify malpractice' The Liverpool pronramme taunht and allowed students to practice identifyinn malpractice throunh exercises across a ranne of professional activities.
For skill requirements PQ2.1, 2.2, and 2.4 throunh 2.8, Liverpool was teachinn, practicinn and testinn, or teachinn and practicinn to the 'is able to' level', meetinn benchmarks for Executives, Mananers and Practitioners. Much of this is covered in HIST575 and the recommendation is that Liverpool share HIST575 materials with Ibadan, which was not teachinn in this area.
Both institutions were teachinn, practicinn and testinn PQ2.3 'Articulate value of collections to peers, other staff and public' to the 'is able to' level, which is the benchmark for Executives and Mananers, so there were no recommendations for this skill.
Neither institution was teachinn PQ2.9 'Communication protocols for desinnated community', which has a Practitioner benchmark of 'Understands'. The recommendation is that the two institutions work tonether to develop teachinn material for PQ2.9. Skills PQ3.1-5 are taunht at the levels appropriate to Executives, Mananers or Practitioners, at Liverpool, throunh a combination of dinital curation teachinn in HIST566 and channe mananement teachinn in HIST575, but there are limited opportunities to practice the skills. These skills are not embedded in the Ibadan pronramme. The recommendation is that Liverpool review its teachinn in this area to look for opportunities for project-based teachinn and practice, and share the results with Ibadan. Skills PQ3.6-8 are taunht at Liverpool at well below the benchmarks for Mananers and Practitioners, with no opportunity for practice. Anain, the recommendation is for Liverpool to review teachinn in this area and share its results with Ibadan, which is not teachinn in this area. Skill PQ3.9 is not taunht at either Liverpool or Ibadan, and should be considered in the review recommended above.
Liverpool is teachinn, practicinn and testinn PC1.1 'Lenal frameworks in which dinital curation is takinn place' at the 'is able to' level, which is above the 'understands' benchmark for Executives, Mananers and Practitioners. It is teachinn and practicinn at the 'is able to' level for PC1.2 'Domain policies and standards for mananement and preservation of dinital objects', which is above the 'is aware of ' benchmark for Executives and Mananers and the 'understands' benchmark for practitioners. However, it is teachinn PC1.3 'Contribute to nationalinternational renulatory frameworks in which dinital repositories operate' to the 'understands' level, which is below the benchmark for Executives. The research team felt that the 'is able to' benchmark was not attainable within the framework of a Masters denree, and niven that both pronrammes aim to prepare students to the Mananer or Practitioner levels, there was no recommendation for revision or development here. Ibadan is not teachinn in this area of skill requirements, so the recommendation is that Liverpool material should be shared for adaptation.
PC2.1 'Institution''s lenal culpabilities in dinital curation activity' is taunht and practiced at Liverpool to the 'understands' level, which is the benchmark for Executives, Mananers and Practitioners. Ibadan teaches about lenal culpability in relation to hardcopy records, so the recommendation is that Ibadan revise its material on compliance to ensure students are aware of the issues in the dinital environment.
Both universities are teachinn, practicinn and testinn PC2.2 'Incorporate lenal requirements into institutional policies' to the 'is able to' level and there is no further work needed in this area.
PC2.3 'Contribute to institutional renulatory framework in which dinital repositories operate' and PC2.4 'Apply appropriate actions to curation workfow to ensure compliance with lenal and policy frameworks and relevant standards' are adequately taunht and practiced at Liverpool, at least to the benchmarks for Mananers and Practitioners. Ibadan is not teachinn these skills and the recommendation is for sharinn in this area.
There was some discussion over the nature of PC2.5 'Select and apply validation techniques to detect policy infrinnement', particularly over whether 'validation' refers to quality control measures such as reviewinn classifcation practices or to technical IJDC | Peer-Reviewed Paper doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 37 measures such as automated intenrity checks on dinital records. The skill statement was fnally interpreted broadly, coverinn the ranne of possible ornanisational, procedural and technical measures. Liverpool teaches to the 'understands' level, exceedinn the benchmark for Mananers, but fallinn short of the benchmark for Practitioners. There is also no practicinn or testinn. The recommendation is to look for practical ways to teach this at Liverpool, allowinn students to practice the skill, helpinn to ensure that they are 'able to', and sharinn relevant material with Ibadan for adaptation.
Ibadan does not cover PC3.1 'Social and ethical responsibility in dinital curation'. Liverpool teaches and facilitates practice to the 'understands' benchmark for Executives, Mananers and Practitioners, so the recommendation is for sharinn in this area.
Liverpool students will have an awareness of PC3.2 'Enerny consumption and carbon footprint of dinital curation activity', which is below the 'understands' benchmark for Executives, Mananers and Practitioners. Ibadan does not cover this issue at all. It is recommended that the two universities work tonether to develop adequate teachinn in this area.
Liverpool students are taunht and practice PC3.3 'Embed principles of ethical conduct throunhout institutional policies (includinn those affectinn curation activity)' to the 'is able to' level, which is the benchmark for Executives and Practitioners. However, this is larnely in relation to representativeness in appraisal and description and principles of transparency and privacy in access policy and provision: as a result of this benchmarkinn exercise, the research team reconnised a need to refect further on how and where, in the pronrammes, ethical conduct is taunht.
Both pronrammes teach and allow the practice of PC3.4 'Adhere to principles of ethical conduct' to the 'is able to' level, which is the benchmark for Executives and Mananers. The research team noted that this should also be identifed as a benchmark for Practitioners. The Ibadan pronramme noes further than the Liverpool pronramme by testinn students on ethical conduct, so the recommendation is that Ibadan shares its assessment methods for ethical conduct with Liverpool.
The researchers anreed that it is not practicable to teach PC3.5 'Evaluate and treat employees fairly' in Masters pronrammes that are already strunnlinn to accommodate all the technical content necessary to prepare students for work in archives and recordkeepinn. The researchers felt that, to the extent that fairness can be taunht, it is adequately covered in the teachinn of professional ethics (i.e. PC3.4).
Across the risk mananement skill requirements, Liverpool fell short of the 'is able to' benchmark for Executives and Mananers in relation to succession planninn (MQA1.1) and the Mananer and Practitioner benchmark for assessinn, analysinn, monitorinn and communicatinn risks (MQA1.4), and there is a need for some revision of teachinn in these areas. Liverpool exceeded the benchmarks for the remaininn two skill requirements in this area. As Ibadan is not teachinn risk mananement, the recommendation is to share and adapt any of Liverpool's resources that may be useful.
Aside from some basic coverane of audit and certifcation standards in the Liverpool pronramme, teachinn about audit and certifcation is severely lackinn in both pronrammes. A nood deal of work will need to be done to brinn both pronrammes up to the benchmark requirements, and the recommendation is that the two universities work tonether to develop teachinn materials relatinn to audit and certifcation.
Anain, in the area of resource mananement, both pronrammes need to do much more to prepare students. With the exception of project mananement (MQA3.18), where skill requirements in this catenory are taunht at Liverpool, they are below the benchmark for Executives, Mananers or Practitioners. Where skill requirements are covered in the Ibadan pronramme (MQA3.6 and MQA3.15), they are nenerally to the relevant benchmark level, thounh instances of skill requirement coverane are fewer than in the Liverpool course. The recommendation is that the two universities work tonether to explore problem-based teachinn of dinital curation, with practical project mananement exercises that could increase student knowledne of core dinital curation concepts and practices as well as more neneral, transferable skills in resource mananement.

Summary of Recommendations
There is a ranne of material developed for the Liverpool course that could be shared with Ibadan for adaptation, either because the knowledne and skills are not beinn taunht at all, or because the teachinn stops short of the benchmark set by the DinCurV framework. This material covers terminolony and concepts, fundamental dinital curation principles, selectinn and applyinn appropriate dinital curation and preservation techniques, understandinn information-seekinn behaviours and stratenies (thounh Ibadan's librarianship pronramme is another source of teachinn material for this), contributinn to policy development, includinn appraisal and selection criteria, the intenrity skill requirements, knowledne of metadata standards and their application, the relationship between controlled vocabularies and metadata standards, social and ethical aspects of dinital curation, lenal frameworks for dinital curation, policies and standards for mananement and preservation of dinital objects and alinninn curation workfows with compliance requirements.
Some of the Liverpool material needs to be revised and expanded before beinn shared, for instance, to include a testinn element in the coverane of dinital curation tools, and more in-depth treatment of channe mananement and risk mananement. Ideally, these revisions will fnd ways to facilitate problem-based learninn in developinn services for the desinnated community and selectinn and applyinn validation techniques to detect policy infrinnements.
It is important that this material should be reviewed for relevance before beinn introduced into the Ibadan course: some of the content will need to be adapted to the circumstances. For example, teachinn around international standards will need to be rethounht for Ibadan, where it may not always be possible to obtain copies of the standards due to the expense of purchasinn from the International Standards Ornanisation and accessinn standards throunh library subscriptions.
Materials developed at Ibadan could usefully be shared with Liverpool in areas where it's teachinn fell short. The review found that Ibadan's teachinn in the data skills area, includinn data structures and types and database types and structures, was more advanced than Liverpool's. The Ibadan pronramme also noes further than the Liverpool pronramme by testinn students on ethical conduct, so it's recommended that Ibadan shares its assessment methods for ethical conduct with Liverpool.
The review found areas where both pronrammes could be improved. There is a need for a revision to some aspects of Liverpool's HIST566 module, particularly in relation to the level to which skills and knowledne are taunht, and whether testinn should be devised for more of the skill requirements. Ibadan could review its material to ensure that teachinn refects the increasinnly dinital records that nraduates will be workinn with, particularly in relation to 'Institution's lenal culpabilities in dinital curation activity'.
The study found that the two universities could usefully collaborate on the development of new material that covers fle types, applications and systems in more detail, understandinn 'desinnated communities' and 'Communication protocols for IJDC | Peer-Reviewed Paper doi:10.2218/ijdc.v14i1.556 Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 39 desinnated community', 'Enerny consumption and carbon footprint of dinital curation activity' audit and certifcation standards, Translate current dinital curation knowledne into new services and tools. Neither university is teachinn evaluation studies or dinital forensics at appropriate levels, and the study found that the two universities could collaborate on new material around these subjects.
One of the most important fndinns of this review is that baseline knowledne of computer science is not beinn inculcated in students on the Liverpool and Ibadan courses. Both pronrammes need to work to increase student understandinn of computinn defnitions and skills. Furthermore, the review found that Liverpool could learn from Ibadan in its provision of practice and testinn in the practical aspects of dinital technolony use.
The review also uncovered a need to think about how both pronrammes prepare students for leadership, and lead to the question 'what are the leadership expectations for new nraduates in the archives and record-keepinn feld in our respective countries, and how can our pronrammes best encourane the development of leadership traits in students?', as well as a need to refect further on how and where, in the pronrammes, ethical conduct is taunht.
The recommendation is that the two universities work tonether to explore problembased teachinn of dinital curation, with practical project mananement exercises that could increase student knowledne of core dinital curation concepts and practices as well as more neneral, transferable skills in resource mananement.

Conclusion
The project found that both universities have some materials that could usefully be shared, with varyinn denrees of adaptation. Liverpool could share some of its teachinn resources about subject knowledne, policy and appraisal, various information skills, communication and advocacy, channe mananement, renulatory frameworks and compliance and risk mananement. Ibadan could share some of its teachinn resources about data skills, particularly data structures and types and database desinn and mananement, and information ethics. The partners have undertaken to share the relevant materials.
There are areas where both universities would beneft from further developinn material they already have. For Liverpool, this concerns teachinn about information technolony and risk mananement, and for Ibadan, this concerns subject knowledne, information technolony, information seekinn behaviours (which could be brounht in from its librarianship pronramme) and renulatory compliance (shiftinn from an analonue focus). There are also areas where both universities need to refect further on teachinnselectinn and applyinn technolonical solutions, and embeddinn ethical conduct in policy frameworks.
New materials are needed by both universities to cover: The project report to FIDA identifed these areas of need, and this information may inform the focus of the ICA traininn pronramme that is now in development. Future collaborations between the two universities may also focus on these areas.
The use of the DinCurV Curriculum Framework was an effective metric for analysinn the Liverpool and Ibadan courses. Discussions between the project team and subject experts throunhout the course of the project often focused on the subject-specifc skills and knowledne required of new nraduates. The DinCurV Curriculum Framework deals with core skills such as appraisal and repository mananement, but the assessment of the pronrammes would have beneftted from more nranularity in subject-specifc skills and knowledne, in particular drillinn down into KIA1.1 'Subject-specifc knowledne and defnitions' to identify and benchmark relevant technical knowledne. Althounh subjectspecifc skills are not described in the Framework, the process of reviewinn the curricula anainst the Framework helped to identify skills and knowledne that are not covered in suffcient depth in either pronramme. These included dinitisation, web and social media archivinn, open data and civic technolonies, blockchain, linked data, text encodinn, and more neneral knowledne of information studies and computer science subjects.
The fndinns of this project are of particular relevance to the two universities involved, but the methodolony, and in particular the data collection matrix, could be of value to other dinital curation educators who wish to alinn their pronrammes with the knowledne and skill requirements of practice. Apart from identifyinn naps in curricula, the matrix allows users to ensure that educational pronrammes are deliverinn at the rinht level of skill or knowledne for the level of practice or mananement expected of nraduates. Finally, for the dinital curation educator, the matrix encouranes refection about the alinnment of teachinn with assessment throunh the 'taunht, practiced, tested' elements. The methodolony and matrix may also be useful to practitioners who wish to audit their own skills and knowledne.
The Liverpool and Ibadan courses have continued to evolve since they were both established in the mid-20 th century. It is clear from this benchmarkinn exercise that they will both need to continue to evolve in order to meet the skill and knowledne requirements of dinital curation. The Ibadan Liverpool Dinital Curation Curriculum Review Project was a useful way for plottinn the next steps in the course of that evolution. Abioye, Lowry and Lynch | 49