The Scholarly Communications Needs of Faculty: An Evidence-Based Foundation for the Development of Library Services

Statut

“Objectives – This exploratory research seeks to broadly understand the publishing behaviours and attitudes of faculty, across all disciplines, at the University of Saskatchewan in response to the growing significance of open access publishing and archiving. The objective for seeking this understanding is to discover the current and emerging needs of researchers in order to determine if scholarly communications services are in demand here and, if so, to provide an evidence-based foundation for the potential future development of such a program of services at the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

Methods – All faculty members at the University of Saskatchewan were sent personalized email invitations to participate in a short online survey during the month of November 2012. The survey was composed of four parts: Current Research and Publishing Activities/Behaviours; Open Access Behaviours, Awareness, and Attitudes; Needs Assessment; and Demographics. Descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated.

Results – The survey elicited 291 complete responses – a 21.9% response rate. Results suggest that faculty already have a high level of support for the open access movement, and considerable awareness of it. However, there remains a lack of knowledge regarding their rights as authors, a low familiarity with tools available to support them in their scholarly communications activities, and substantial resistance to paying the article processing charges of some open access journals. Survey respondents also provided a considerable number of comments – perhaps an indication of their engagement with these issues and desire for a forum in which to discuss them. It is reasonable to speculate that those who chose not to respond to this survey likely have less interest in, and support of, open access. Hence, the scholarly communications needs of this larger group of non-respondents are conceivably even greater.

Conclusion – Faculty at the University of Saskatchewan are in considerable need of scholarly communications services. Areas of most need include: advice and guidance on authors’ rights issues such as retention of copyright; more education and support with resources such as subject repositories; and additional assistance with article processing charges. The University Library could play a valuable role in increasing the research productivity and impact of faculty by aiding them in these areas.”

URL : The Scholarly Communications Needs of Faculty

Alternative URL : http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/21764

 

A Review of Public Library E-Lending Models

Statut

“The market for e-books and digital content is continually evolving and adapting, while simultaneously becoming increasingly global in terms of its interdependence and reach. Whilst many determinants of this evolving and decentralised information environment are beyond the control of any one actor, institution or organisation – there is significant scope for libraries to act as the architects of their own future by learning from the diverse spectrum of international e-lending experiences and practices to evaluate which models (and their components) deliver the best outcomes for library users. These e-lending business models include:

  • Library-managed platforms for hosting owned digital content
  • Library-managed platforms for aggregating multiple sources of licensed digital content
  • Third party platforms which offer either of the two services above
  • Library-led licensing arrangements with publishers, authors or aggregators (either through consortia or on an individual library system basis)

This research project will seek to produce a comparative analysis of different national/regional e-lending business models to identify key environmental, political, cultural, financial and logistical factors which are capable of fostering sustainable approaches to supporting e-lending and public access to digital content. It will endeavour to map a number of actors and initiatives across the international e-lending landscape as well as the common barriers which may restrict the future development of effective e-lending business models.

Whilst the resulting report will necessarily approach the e-lending landscape from a library standpoint, it will also attempt to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of each approach from the perspective of library users, publishers and authors – given that any viable long-term solutions in this space must effectively address the holistic concerns of all stakeholders.”

URL : A Review of Public Library E – Lending Models

Alternative URL : http://stichting.bibliotheek.nl/content/dam/landelijk/stichting/bestanden/Rapporten-Public-Library-e-Lending-Models.pdf

Research Data Management and Libraries: Relationships, Activities, Drivers and Influences

Statut

“The management of research data is now a major challenge for research organisations. Vast quantities of born-digital data are being produced in a wide variety of forms at a rapid rate in universities. This paper analyses the contribution of academic libraries to research data management (RDM) in the wider institutional context. In particular it: examines the roles and relationships involved in RDM, identifies the main components of an RDM programme, evaluates the major drivers for RDM activities, and analyses the key factors influencing the shape of RDM developments. The study is written from the perspective of library professionals, analysing data from 26 semi-structured interviews of library staff from different UK institutions. This is an early qualitative contribution to the topic complementing existing quantitative and case study approaches. Results show that although libraries are playing a significant role in RDM, there is uncertainty and variation in the relationship with other stakeholders such as IT services and research support offices. Current emphases in RDM programmes are on developments of policies and guidelines, with some early work on technology infrastructures and support services. Drivers for developments include storage, security, quality, compliance, preservation, and sharing with libraries associated most closely with the last three. The paper also highlights a ‘jurisdictional’ driver in which libraries are claiming a role in this space. A wide range of factors, including governance, resourcing and skills, are identified as influencing ongoing developments. From the analysis, a model is constructed designed to capture the main aspects of an institutional RDM programme. This model helps to clarify the different issues involved in RDM, identifying layers of activity, multiple stakeholders and drivers, and a large number of factors influencing the implementation of any initiative. Institutions may usefully benchmark their activities against the data and model in order to inform ongoing RDM activity.”

URL : Research Data Management and Libraries: Relationships, Activities, Drivers and Influences

DOI : 10.1371/journal.pone.0114734

A Platform for Closing the Open Data Feedback Loop Based on Web2.0 Functionality

Statut

“One essential characteristic of open data ecosystems is their development through feedback loops, discussions and dynamic data suppliers – user interactions. These user-centric features communicate the users’ needs to the open data community, as well to the public sector organizations responsible for data publication. Addressing these needs by the corresponding public sector organizations, or even by utilising the power of the community as ENGAGE supports, can significantly promote and accelerate innovation. However, such elements appear barely to be part of existing open data practices in the public sector. A survey we conducted has shown that professional open data users find the feedback and discussion on open data infrastructures from their users to their providers as highly useful and important, but they state that they do not know at least one open data infrastructure that provides various types of discussion, and feedback mechanisms.

In this paper we describe and discuss an open data platform, which contributes to filling this gap and also present a usage scenario of it, explaining the sequence of using its functionality. The discussed open data infrastructure combines functionalities that aim to close the feedback loop and to return information to public authorities that can be useful for better government data opening and publication, as well as establishing communication channels between all stakeholders. This may effectively lead to the stimulation and facilitation of value generation from open data, as such functionality positions the user at the centre of the open data publication process.”

URL : A Platform for Closing the Open Data Feedback Loop Based on Web2.0 Functionality

Alternative URL : http://www.jedem.org/article/view/327/270

“Free to All”: Library Publishing and the Challenge of Open Access

Statut

“There is a significant and important responsibility as libraries move into the role of publishing to retain our heritage of “access for all.” Connecting and collaborating with colleagues in the publishing industry is essential, but should come with the understanding that the library as an organization is access-prone. This article discusses the complexities of navigating that relationship, and calls for libraries and publishers to embrace and respect the position from which we begin. Finally, the article forecasts several possible characteristics of what “publishing” might look like if libraries press the principle of access in this growing area.”

URL : “Free to All”: Library Publishing and the Challenge of Open Access

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1181

Library Publishing is Special: Selection and Eligibility in Library Publishing

Statut

“Traditional publishing is based on ownership, commerce, paid exchanges, and scholarship as a commodity, while library activities are based on a service model of sharing resources and free exchange. I believe library publishing should be based on those values and should not duplicate or emulate traditional publishing. University presses have mixed views of library publishing, and libraries should not adopt those attitudes. Library publishers are not gatekeepers; their mission is dissemination. Libraries need to publish because traditional publishing suffers from high rejection rates, required surrender of intellectual property, long production schedules, high cost of products, and limited dissemination. Nebraska’s Zea Books is a response to these needs. Miscellaneous advice for library publishers is offered and selection and eligibility criteria are outlined. A suggestion is made for a cooperative ebook distribution network.”

URL : https://microblogging.infodocs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/royster2014.pdf

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1183

 

The Evolution of Publishing Agreements at the University of Michigan Library

Statut

“Taking as an example an open-access journal with a single editor, this article discusses the various configurations of rights agreements used by the University of Michigan Library throughout the evolution of its publishing operation, the advantages of the various models, and the reasons for moving from one to another.”

URL : The Evolution of Publishing Agreements at the University of Michigan Library

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1175