Transcript Engaging Faculty with New Models: Openness in Practice Location: James Madison University Date: June 2012 ACRL Workshop: Scholarly Communication 101

Engaging Faculty with New Models:
Openness in Practice
Location: James Madison University
Date: June 2012
ACRL Workshop: Scholarly Communication 101
In this section we will…
•
Identify and examine current models and
programming that support “openness”
•
Explore models that you might consider piloting
or experimenting with
•
Consider what next steps you might take
Why engage with faculty?
• They are key stakeholders (and therefore partners)
• They are producers and consumers of the products of
scholarly communication
• They edit journals, sit on editorial boards, provide peer
review, and are officers of scholarly societies
• They are the movers behind many new models of
scholarship (often because of their own frustrations
with the traditional model)
• They can make change in ways that libraries struggle to
do on their own
What’s the faculty point of view?
• What are the practices in a
particular discipline?
• How does the scholarly
society(s) approach
scholarly publishing and
communication?
• What’s the culture in the
department and college?
• What are promotion and
tenure requirements?
Why do faculty engage with new models of
scholarship?
• A reaction to the restricted flow of
information
• A reaction to traditional models of
control
• New technologies enables new modes
of research
• Research doesn’t fit into traditional
models
Pilots and Projects and New Programs,
oh my.
• Education/outreach via seminars, brown bags, talks to faculty and graduate students
on publication agreements, open access policies, content recruitment for IR, etc.
• Support open access to backfiles of publications put out by departments and research
centers
• Open educational resources have significant appeal
• Faculty (and graduate student) resolutions and OA policies
• Facilitate publication projects with faculty
• Foster digital humanities projects
Tool: Environmental Scan
Purpose: Understand the scholarly communication environments for
particular disciplines and help to identify advocates and allies within
the faculty.
Collect Information Like:
• Are there faculty who have signed Elsevier Boycott, or who sent in
comments to White House RFI, or PLoS petition (long ago)?
• Who among the faculty are editors?
• What are the major scholarly societies? What are their policies on author
rights? Open access?
• How many faculty share their work in SSRN or ArXiv, or other disciplinary
databases?
• Is there a disciplinary repository? Is it well used?
• Are there faculty already providing open access to their work?
• What are the skills and strengths needed in potential collaborators and
colleagues for the right “team” on any given project/pilot?
Drivers for
change?
Drivers for
status quo?
Case studies
• Case I [Examples from Duke]
• Case II [Examples from UBC]
• Case III [Examples from Illinois Wesleyan
University
• Case from group?
Implementing an open access
policy
• Adopted in March 2010
Case studies
• Case I [Examples from Duke]
• Case II [Examples from UBC]
• Case III [Examples from Illinois Wesleyan
University
• Case from group?
Implementing an OA policy
• Adopted March 2010
– Clear message was “make it easy”
– Opt out was included
• Automated harvest of citations
• About 12% uploaded directly from publisher
sites
• Faculty response overwhelmingly positive
Awards that promote student work
Innovative Dissemination
of Research Award
Transcription Factor
Encyclopedia (TFe)
Dimas Yusuf, 2nd Year
UBC Medical Student
photo by Jill Pittendrigh
Giving students publishing experience
• Assignment based publishing
– OJS
– Wikipedia
• Institutional repositories
– Theses
– Exemplar student projects
– GSS award
Illinois Wesleyan
Think through an experience
• Who (had the idea, was involved, ran with it)?
• What was the plan?
• When did it start? (what situation sparked it?)
• How did it play out (brief timeline and ending – if
there was an ending)
How about you?
• Who (had the idea, was involved, ran with it)?
• What was/is the plan?
• When did/will it start? (what situation sparked it?)
• How did it play out (or start)?
• What kind of “magic team” might be best suited?
A few other strategies…
Discuss scholarly
communication issues
(especially author
rights) with graduate
students and work
with your Graduate
College.
Engage with the
research offices on
campus about funder
open access policies.
Give faculty examples of
changes and new models
from other similar disciplines.
Bring faculty
advocates from
other
campuses to
speak.
Share knowledge of
copyright, legislative
issues, and other current
events that may have
direct impact.
And what about within the library?
Include scholarly
communication in
subject librarians jobs
& service models
Negotiate for
Green OA with
publishers in
license agreements
Have an institutional
repository? Get more
people involved –
catalogers, subject
librarians, etc.
Provide technical
and organizational
infrastructure for
publishing
journals and other
content
Set an
internal
OA
policy
Education
around
copyright and
author rights
internally
Conversational Openers
How might you start a
conversation?
(TIP: Start from a place of curiosity.)
Conversational Openers
• What journals do you publish in? Who is your publisher?
• What are the scholarly societies you belong to?
• What grants support your research?
• How do you keep up with new developments in your field?
• Do you sign publication agreements?
• What rights were you able to retain?
• Does this publisher allow you to post on a website, share with a colleague at another
institution, use graphs/pictures/sections of that work in future publications?
• How are you complying with the NIH open access mandate?
• How is your publisher complying with the NIH open access mandate?
• How are you archiving your work? How are you storing your research data?
• What mechanisms to you use to communicate your research to others besides formal
publication?
Summary
• New models are often collaborations between faculty (groups)
and libraries
• Create “work-arounds” for current and broken system of
publication (at any point in the system- or between points in the
system)
• Size doesn’t matter– innovation, bold collaborations, tentative
yet strong.
• Purpose is to test new ways and strengthen innovative solutions.
• Start small, find a collaborative team, experiment. Don’t “just”
adapt.
Resources
ARL Environmental Scan Outline and Tools
• http://www.arl.org/sc/institute/fair/scprog/scprogc.shtml
Univ. of Minnesota Environmental Scan Example
• https://wiki.lib.umn.edu/ScholarlyCommunication/SurveyPartOne
• https://wiki.lib.umn.edu/ScholarlyCommunication/ScanPartTwo
ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit
• http://www.acrl.ala.org/scholcomm/
Create Change – ARL, SPARC, and ACRL
• http://www.createchange.org/
Attribution
• Slide 4: Faculty Member - http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeeperez/
• Slide 5: Curiosity - http://www.flickr.com/photos/emiliodelprado/
• Slide 7: Flowing Data http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicmcphee/2217375343/
• Slide 20: Slow - http://www.flickr.com/photos/fatboyke/
All photos used under a Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
license
This work was created by Sarah L. Shreeves, Joy Kirchner, and Ada
Emmett. Most recent modification by Kevin Smith, June 2012. It is
licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Share
Alike 3.0 Unported License.