Research Article

ETD Management & Publishing in the ProQuest System and the University Repository: A Comparative Analysis

  • Gail P Clement (Texas A&M University Libraries Annex 501G College Station, Texas 77843)
  • Fred Rascoe (Scholarly Communications Librarian, Georgia Institute of Technology)


INTRODUCTION This study compares the two most popular electronic theses and dissertation (ETD) management systems used in the American higher education community today: the commercial ProQuest dissertation publishing system and the university repository. METHODS Characteristics of these systems are identified and categorized to determine the features, functions, and policies common to both, and those that uniquely characterize one or the other system. Performing such a head-to-head comparison provides valuable information and insights to decision makers responsible for managing or overhauling their university’s ETD program. RESULTS Comparison of characteristics shows the ProQuest system and the University Repository both provide functional solutions for submitting, storing, disseminating, and archiving ETD’s using digital technology. Yet each system also has unique characteristics that distinguish it from the other. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION The authors conclude that there is no single ‘best’ system for ETD management overall. Rather, it is up to decision makers at each institution to choose an approach that best fits their university’s values, goals, and needs. Additionally, the authors point out the need for a single portal for ETDs that allows for search and discovery of these unique works of scholarship wherever the full text resides. Future investigation into possible solutions for such an ETD portal would be a boon not only to universities and ETD authors, but to the diverse researchers, students, professionals, and interested citizenry who could benefit from easier access to this growing corpus of knowledge.

How to Cite:

Clement, G. P. & Rascoe, F., (2013) “ETD Management & Publishing in the ProQuest System and the University Repository: A Comparative Analysis”, Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 1(4), eP1074. doi:

Download PDF
View PDF



Published on
15 Aug 2013
Peer Reviewed