Scholarly communication, scholarly publishing and university libraries. Plus ca change ?

Statut

“The scholarly communication and research evaluation landscape is locked into historical paradigms which inadequately reflect the opportunities of the digital era. Why hasn’t the Internet disrupted the practices and the economics of scholarly publishing? The article traces how university library budgets have become dominated by a small number of multinational publishers and attempts at scholarly communication change have only had limited impact, despite the opportunities for increased global distribution of research scholarship. Open access initiatives are assessed in relation to future scholarly communication change in which university libraries play an increasing role in campus scholarly ecosystems.”

URL : http://hdl.handle.net/1885/11944

Analysis of Open Access Scholarly Journals in Chemistry

The present study has investigated the trends of open access journals appeared in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). It provides an insight to the open access publishing in the field of chemistry based on the data collected from DOAJ. The DOAJ available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Website lists Open Access Journals and is maintained by Infrastructure Services for Open Access (IS4OA). Notably, it has listed about 9804 journals across 124 countries till 8th January 2014. Out of 9804 journals, 164 (1.67%) journals are listed under Chemistry.

The data was extracted in excel format and analysis was carried out on the basis of subject coverage, decade and year, country of origin, publisher, language, format and Indian contribution to OA journals. The select subject i.e. Chemistry is being categorised into Chemistry General, Chemical Engineering, Analytical Chemistry, Organic Chemistry and Inorganic Chemistry. It was found that out of 164 journals from chemistry, majority of the open access journals belong to the category chemistry general and contribute some about 68.9% of the total chemistry journals in DOAJ. Though the maximum growth of these journals has been recorded in the decade 2000s, however in 2011, a record number of 30 journals of Chemistry appeared in DOAJ.

Interestingly, India contributed 24 OA journals and is placed second after Egypt in publishing OA journals in chemistry. Further, it has been found that commercial publishers with 29 journals are the major contributors to OA in DOAJ with Hindawi Publishing Corporation as the leading contributor. Moreover, English has been found as the most popular language of OA journals. While as Indian Academy of Sciences: Chemical Sciences is reported to be the oldest journal publishing since 2005.

URL : http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1100/

The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations

Statut

“This study explored national differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication in retracted biomedical literature. The national affiliations of authors and reasons for retraction of papers accessible through PubMed that were published from 2008 to 2012 and subsequently retracted were determined in order to identify countries with the largest numbers and highest rates of retraction due to plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors from more than fifty countries retracted papers. While the United States retracted the most papers, China retracted the most papers for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Rates of plagiarism and duplicate publication were highest in Italy and Finland, respectively. Unethical publishing practices cut across nations.”

URL : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3988779/

Library-as-Publisher: Capacity Building for the Library Publishing Subfield

Statut

“The role of publisher is increasingly assumed by academic and research libraries, usually inspired by campus-based demands for digital publishing platforms to support e-journals, conference proceedings, technical reports, and database-driven websites. Although publishing is compatible with librarians’ traditional strengths, there are additional skill sets that library publishers must master in order to provide robust publishing services to their academic communities.

To help library publishing services mature into a consistent field of practice, practitioners in this growing publishing subfield increasingly cite their need for specialized training and professional development opportunities. For example, the authors’ conversations with participants in the Library Publishing Coalition (LPC), a collaborative network of 60 North American academic libraries involved in publishing, have revealed that no existing graduate-level training program adequately prepares practitioners for the full range of theoretical, practical, and organizational issues involved in publishing. LPC participants have also noted the relative lack of continuing education opportunities targeted toward those who are engaging in publishing—whether in a library, university press, or commercial publishing environment.

This essay provides a brief history of publisher training and uses this context to think about how and where library publishers may engage in capacity building to inform and train this growing publishing subfield. Throughout the essay, we integrate findings from a series of interviews conducted by the authors with 11 industry leaders from several publishing sectors, including university presses, library publishers, and commercial publishers (see Appendix A). We conclude with recommendations for pathways forward, focusing on seven key areas in which library publishers need additional training opportunities. This essay focuses primarily on North American activities.”

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0017.207

Publishing Education in the 21st Century and the Role of the University

Statut

“Publishing education arose in the 20th century in response to a need for trained employees in a stable industry with a well understood set of competencies and skills. Today, the publishing landscape is disrupted, and that stability is seriously threatened. Given these circumstances, what is the role for university-level publishing education? This article argues for a model of university-level (graduate and undergraduate) publishing education that builds upon a vocational self-identification of incoming students, nurtures a community of practice and professional discourse, and in doing so generates and renews the very culture of publishing. In times of transition and disruption, this is a role uniquely suited to the university, where an environment of collaborative research, development, and innovation can be cultivated.”

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0017.205

Teaching an Old University Press Publisher New Tricks: Living in the Present and Preparing for the Future of Scholarly Communications

Statut

“University presses currently exist in the dual worlds of print and digital publishing. Current staffing needs require that they hire personnel with skills and experience that mirror that present duality. Training and maintaining a skilled workforce requires a commitment to flexibility and an openness to the ever-changing nature of scholarly communication. As the scholarly publishing ecosystem continues to evolve, university presses will need to look to a future workforce that has additional training, knowledge, and experience beyond the traditional skills associated with academic publishing, one that fully embraces the realities of a digital world, the habits of new generations of researchers, and the increasing role of technology in scholarly communication. This article looks at what the future might look like, what skills might be required, and how one might prepare for that future.”

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0017.202

Why Do We Still Have Journals?

Statut

“The Web has greatly reduced the barriers to entry for new journals and other platforms for communicating scientific output, and the number of journals continues to multiply. This leaves readers and authors with the daunting cognitive challenge of navigating the literature and discerning contributions that are both relevant and significant. Meanwhile, measures of journal impact that might guide the use of the literature have become more visible and consequential, leading to “impact gamesmanship” that renders the measures increasingly suspect. The incentive system created by our journals is broken. In this essay, I argue that the core technology of journals is not their distribution but their review process. The organization of the review process reflects assumptions about what a contribution is and how it should be evaluated. Through their review processes, journals can certify contributions, convene scholarly communities, and curate works that are worth reading. Different review processes thereby create incentives for different kinds of work. It’s time for a broader dialogue about how we connect the aims of the social science enterprise to our system of journals.”

URL : http://asq.sagepub.com/content/59/2/193.full