A multilingual discussion forum and resource-sharing platform for people interested in a global outlook on scholarly communication.
Open access has great potential to transform the future of scholarly communication, but its success will require a focus on values — and particularly generosity — rather than on costs.
A group editorial from the Editorial Board of the Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication.
Scholarly communications often values free access above all else, but what happens when that drive for openness conflicts with ethical issues of consent and ownership? In this CARL IG Showcase panel, members of SCORE (Scholarly Communication and Open Resources for Education) will discuss some of the thorny issues of ethics and scholarly communication, including: consent (particularly among diverse communities outside of the institution) and digital collections, students as information creators / library as publisher, and decolonizing who we consider scholars and what we consider scholarship. This panel will feature speakers who will share current discussions and personal stories on issues pertinent to scholarly communication and ethics. This file in particular represents the second portion of the presentation, focused on balances of power between intellectual property creators in faculty-student collaborations as well as collaborations between university students and underage scholars.
Currently, there is a strong push to address the apparent deficits of the scholarly communication system. Open Science has the potential to change the production and dissemination of scholarly knowledge for the better, but there is no commonly shared vision that describes the system that we want to create. Between April 2015 and June 2016, members of the Open Access Network Austria (OANA) working group “Open Access and Scholarly Communication” met in Vienna to discuss this matter. The main outcome of our considerations is a set of twelve principles that represent the cornerstones of the future scholarly communication system. They are designed to provide a coherent frame of reference for the debate on how to improve the current system. With this document, we are hoping to inspire a widespread discussion towards a shared vision for scholarly communication in the 21st century.
INTRODUCTION This paper reports on a survey administered to faculty at Chapman University to assess their knowledge, attitudes, and practices with regard to scholarly communications, in order to help the new scholarly communications librarian plan appropriate library programs and services to meet faculty needs. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM The survey was adapted from the Institute on Scholarly Communications’ “Faculty Involvement in Scholarly Communications Opportunity Assessment Instrument” for a faculty audience in early fall 2013. It “failed” in that it faced long administrative delays and was met with a low response rate when finally published in December 2013. However, the responses received were enough to deduce general trends and gaps in faculty knowledge about scholarly communications, including a misunderstanding of the meaning of open access, misconceptions about its quality, concern with how publicly accessible research and data could be used by others, and a desire for information on how to manage, preserve, and share data. NEXT STEPS Both the survey results and the obstacles encountered in the survey’s administration provided important lessons in how to structure, market, and assess the impact of future scholarly communications discussions, such as those surrounding the university’s upcoming institutional repository. While the survey itself might have “failed,” these lessons can be applied to future endeavors in order to contribute to the long-term success of the faculty and the university as a whole.
Harvesting Scholarly Communication Padi Seeds via Mendeley Institutional Edition for Your Academic Libraries
Much of the rhetoric around the future of scholarly communication hinges on the “open” label. In light of Elsevier’s recent acquisition of bepress and the announcement that, owing to high fees, an established mathematics journal’s editorial team will split from its publisher to start an open access alternative, Jefferson Pooley argues that the scholarly communication ecosystem should aim not only to be open but non-profit too. The profit motive is fundamentally misaligned with core values of academic life, potentially corroding ideals like unfettered inquiry, knowledge-sharing, and cooperative progress. There are obstacles to forging a non-profit alternative, from sustainable funding to entrenched cynicism, but such a goal is worthy and within reach.
Textbook affordability is a critical issue in higher education. Academic librarians have responded by creating programs to encourage faculty to become aware of the cost of textbooks and using open educational resources as an alternative. Another, less obvious reason to start a campus textbook affordability initiative is to establish a culture of openness for all types of open material. Faculty are often much more willing to confront textbook costs than they are costly, pay-walled journals. The author describes how he instituted a project to create more awareness of open content on his campus.