EDUCAUSE | Contributed by Organizations or Campuses; Articles, Papers, and Reports; and Scholarly Communication

2 New Digital Models Promise Academic Publishing for Profit

ckeller — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:04:09 -0500

"Scholarly publishers are well aware that more and more readers and libraries want to get hold of monographs in electronic form. The trick has been how to deliver content digitally without going out of business. Two new models—one with an open-access component, one without—should help publishers test out ways to adapt and, maybe, thrive."

No Brief Candle: Reconceiving Research Libraries for the 21st Century

ckeller — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:34:41 -0500

In February 2008, CLIR convened 25 leading librarians, publishers, faculty members, and information technology specialists to consider this question. Participants discussed the challenges and opportunities that libraries are likely to face in the next five to ten years, and how changes in scholarly communication will affect the future library. Essays by eight of the participants—Paul Courant, Andrew Dillon, Rick Luce, Stephen Nichols, Daphnée Rentfrow, Abby Smith, Kate Wittenberg, and Lee Zia—were circulated to participants in advance and provided background for the conversation. This report contains these background essays as well as a summary of the meeting.

Ithaka’s 2006 Studies of Key Stakeholders in the Digital Transformation in Higher Education

ckeller — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:51:48 -0500

Ithaka's 2006 survey of faculty members sought to determine their attitudes related to online resources, electronic archiving, teaching and learning and related subjects. This study affords the opportunity to develop trend analysis of many measurements collected in the 2003 and 2000 faculty surveys. As in the past, Ithaka developed a robust set of disciplinary and other demographic analyses that have allowed them to learn more about how best to serve the needs of different types of faculty members. Findings include;

Attitudes towards the possibility of a transition away from print format, both for scholarly journals and monographs
Perceptions of libraries and their value, including specific library functions, and how these perceptions are changing
Preferences in research practices, including disciplinary differences and changes over time
Attitudes towards archiving of both print and electronic resources
Preferences that lead authors to choose among scholarly journals in which to publish their articles, as well as attitudes towards digital repositories

Scholarly Publishing Initiatives

ckeller — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:22:08 -0500

This is an essay that was part of the 2007 The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation annual report. This piece focuses on scholarly publishing initiatives that the Foundation funded: "one aimed at increasing the capacity of university presses to publish first books by junior scholars in fields where publication opportunities have become constrained, the other at strengthening the substantive relationship between university presses and their home institutions."

Research Library Publishing Services: New Options for University Publishing

ckeller — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:14:53 -0500

A study of publishing services offered by ARL member libraries that provides valuable context for librarians and campus leaders considering the opportunities offered by this rapidly emerging research library role.

Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An In-depth Study of Faculty Needs and Ways of Meeting Them

elilly — Fri, 16 May 2008 12:50:23 -0500

The Center for Studies in Higher Education, with generous funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, is conducting research to understand the needs and desires of faculty for in-progress scholarly communication (i.e., forms of communication employed as research is being executed) as well as archival publication. In the interest of developing a deeper understanding of how and why scholars do what they do to advance their fields, as well as their careers, our approach focuses on fine-grained analyses of faculty values and behaviors throughout the scholarly communication lifecycle, including sharing, collaborating, publishing, and engaging with the public. Well into our second year, we have posted a draft interim report describing some of our early results and impressions based on the responses of more than 150 interviewees in the fields of astrophysics, archaeology, biology, economics, history, music, and political science.

Our work to date has confirmed the important impact of disciplinary culture and tradition on many scholarly communication habits. These traditions may override the perceived “opportunities” afforded by new technologies, including those falling into the Web 2.0 category. As we have listened to our diverse informants, as well as followed closely the prognostications about the likely future of scholarly communication, we note that it is absolutely imperative to be precise about terms. That includes being clear about what is meant by “open access” publishing (i.e., using preprint or postprint servers for work published in prestigious outlets, versus publishing in new, untested open access journals, or the more casual individual posting of working papers, blogs, and other non-peer-reviewed work). Our work suggests that enthusiasm for technology development and adoption should not be conflated with the hard reality of tenure and promotion requirements (including the needs and goals of final archival publication) in highly competitive professional environments.

The University as Publisher: Summary of a Meeting Held at UC Berkeley on November 1, 2007

ckeller — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:05:24 -0600

With the advent of electronic publishing, the scholarly communication landscape at universities has become increasingly diverse. Multiple stakeholders including university presses, libraries, and central IT departments are challenged by the increasing volume and the rapidity of production of these new forms of publication in an environment of economic uncertainties.

As a response to these increasing pressures, as well as the recent publication of important reports and papers on the topic, the Center for Studies in Higher Education (CSHE) convened a meeting of experts titled,The University as Publisher. The event was sponsored as part of the A.W. Mellon Foundation-funded Future of Scholarly Communication project at CSHE. http://cshe.berkeley.edu/research/scholarlycommunication/

Our goal was to explore among stakeholders --faculty, publishers, CIOs, librarians, and researchers-- the implications of the academic community, in some structure, taking over many, if not all, aspects of scholarly publishing. Two themes were the focus of the public panels: Institutional Roles in Evaluation, Quality Assessment, and Selection andStructuring and Budgeting Models for Publishing within the University Community.

Our discussions included the importance of distinguishing between informal dissemination and formal publishing and the challenges that each presents to the university community. The harsh economic realities of high-quality formal scholarly publication, not least of which are managing peer review and editorial processes, were emphasized. Understanding disciplinary needs was cited as paramount throughout the discussions; the needs and traditions of scholars in the sciences and humanities, as well as among myriad disciplines, will likely demand different dissemination and publishing models and solutions.

An additional theme that emerged was acknowledging the diverse forms electronic dissemination takes in the academy and the need to foster a spectrum of alternatives in publication forms, business models, and the peer review process. Budgetary and academic freedom concerns were explored as well. Regarding the expensive infrastructure required for electronic dissemination and publishing, it was agreed that there is enormous duplication among the university press, IT, and the library.

Participants included Laura Brown, Diane Harley, James L. Hilton, Donald Kennedy, C. Judson King, Mark J. McCabe, Mark Rose, Ellen Wartella, Kate Wittenberg, Catherine Candee, Raym Crow, Nicholas P. Jewell, Tom Leonard, Sheila Levine, Clifford Lynch, James Neal, Sarah Earl-Novell, Abby Smith, Shel Waggener, Keith Yamamoto

Can Universities Dream of Electric Sheepskin?: Systemic Transformations in Higher Education Organizational Models

elilly — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:29:29 -0600

Charles Henry raises fundamental questions about the nature of the university now that
communication and scholarship are so ingrained in academe.

On the Threshold of Cyberscholarship

elilly — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:45:55 -0600

The widespread availability of digital content creates opportunities for new forms of research and scholarship that are qualitatively different from those represented in traditional scholarly literature. To capitalize on these opportunities, digital content must routinely be collected, managed, and preserved in ways that are significantly more rigorous than conventional methods. A new form of infrastructure is required to ensure that digital content, including research products and primary sources, is readily available, accessible, and usable.

Open Access in 2007

elilly — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:50:38 -0600

Peter Suber shares his annual review of the open access movement. The article highlights 15 categories of open access activity in 2007.