Digital scholarship as a learning center in the library: Building relationships and educational initiatives

Authors: Merinda Kaye Hensley, Steven J. Bell

Abstract:  While librarians may have loads of ideas for how to design digital scholarship support and services, if those ideas clash with a scholars’ workflow or goals for tenure and promotion, we failed. The question remains: How do we align our ideas and expertise to the digital scholarship needs of students and faculty? We argue the answer is centered on two alternative needs assessment approaches: relationship building and educational initiatives.

Citation: Hensley, M., & Bell, S. (2017). Digital scholarship as a learning center in the library: Building relationships and educational initiatives. College & Research Libraries News, 78(3), 155-158. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crln.78.3.9638

View

Research data management and services: Resources for novice data librarians

Authors: Sarah Barbrow, Denise Brush, and Julie Goldman

Abstract:  Research in many academic fields today generates large amounts of data. These data not only must be processed and analyzed by the researchers, but also managed throughout the data life cycle. Recently, some academic libraries have begun to offer research data management (RDM) services to their communities. Often, this service starts with helping faculty write data management plans, now required by many federal granting agencies. Libraries with more developed services may work with researchers as they decide how to archive and share data once the grant work is complete.

Citation: Barbrow, S., Brush, D., & Goldman, J. (2017). Research data management and services: Resources for novice data librarians. College & Research Libraries News, 78(5), 274.

View

Collaborating and communicating: Humanities scholars working and talking together

Author: Maria Bonn

Abstract:  Among the academic truths that we generally hold to be self evident, are 1) the inherent value of collaboration and 2) humanists tend to be lone scholars, tucked away at their desks or in their carrels, surrounded by their books and papers, jealously guarding their intellectual expression until such a time as it can spring from their heads, fully formed, into the world. Like all truisms, these are open to dispute. Anyone who has tried managing projects undertaken by those with a diversity of personalities and perspectives, intellectual and otherwise, can quickly summon examples of the sometimes chaotic inefficiency of collaboration undermining the benefits afforded by that diversity. More positively, one can assert that those lone scholars in their studies are always working in collaboration, often across time and space, through the mediation of texts, rather than in team meetings and group conversations.

Citation: Bonn, M. (2017). Collaborating and communicating: Humanities scholars working and talking together. College & Research Libraries News, 78(4), 206-209. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crln.78.4.9650

View

Libraries as Content Producers: How Library Publishing Services Address the Reading Experience

Author: Daniel G. Tracy

Abstract: This study establishes baseline information about the ways library publishing services integrate user studies of their readers, as well as common barriers to doing so. The Library Publishing Coalition defines library publishing as “the set of activities led by college and university libraries to support the creation, dissemination, and curation of scholarly, creative, and/or educational works.” This area includes traditional as well as novel publication types. Results suggest that discussions of library publishing underrepresent engagement with readers but that ample room for increased attention remains. Existing reader-related efforts vary widely and may in some cases be happenstance. These efforts also face key barriers in lack of prioritization, lack of expertise, and lack of control of out-of-the-box platforms.

Tracy DG. (2017). Libraries as Content Producers: How Library Publishing Services Address the Reading Experience. College & Research Libraries, vol. 78 no. 2 pp 219-240 doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.219

 

View

Scholarly Metrics Baseline: A Survey of Faculty Knowledge, Use, and Opinion about Scholarly Metrics

Authors: Dan DeSanto and Aaron Nichols

Abstract: This article presents the results of a faculty survey conducted at the University of Vermont during academic year 2014–2015. The survey asked faculty about: familiarity with scholarly metrics, metric-seeking habits, help-seeking habits, and the role of metrics in their department’s tenure and promotion process. The survey also gathered faculty opinions on how well scholarly metrics reflect the importance of scholarly work and how faculty feel about administrators gathering institutional scholarly metric information. Results point to the necessity of understanding the campus landscape of faculty knowledge, opinion, importance, and use of scholarly metrics before engaging faculty in further discussions about quantifying the impact of their scholarly work.

DeSanto D & Nichols A. (2017). Scholarly Metrics Baseline: A Survey of Faculty Knowledge, Use, and Opinion about Scholarly Metrics College & Research Libraries vol. 78 no. 2, pp 150-170 doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.150

View

 

Scholarly Communication and the Dilemma of Collective Action: Why Academic Journals Cost Too Much

Author: John Wenzler

Abstract: Why has the rise of the Internet—which drastically reduces the cost of distributing information—coincided with drastic increases in the prices that academic libraries pay for access to scholarly journals? This study argues that libraries are trapped in a collective action dilemma as defined by economist Mancur Olson in The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. To truly reduce their costs, librarians would have to build a shared online collection of scholarly resources jointly managed by the academic community as a whole, but individual academic institutions lack the private incentives necessary to invest in a shared collection. Thus, the management of online scholarly journals has been largely outsourced to publishers who have developed monopoly powers that allow them to increase subscription prices faster than the rate of inflation. Many librarians consider the open access movement the best response to increased subscription costs, but the current strategies employed to achieve open access also are undermined by collective action dilemmas. In conclusion, some alternative strategies are proposed.

Wenzler J. (2016). Scholarly Communication and the Dilemma of Collective Action: Why Academic Journals Cost Too Much. College & Research Libraries, 78(2), pp 183-200, doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.183

View

Faculty Use of Author Identifiers and Researcher Networking Tools

Authors: Clara Y. Tran and Jennifer A. Lyon

Abstract: This cross-sectional survey focused on faculty use and knowledge of author identifiers and researcher networking systems, and professional use of social media, at a large state university. Results from 296 completed faculty surveys representing all disciplines (9.3% response rate) show low levels of awareness and variable resource preferences. The most utilized author identifier was ORCID while ResearchGate, LinkedIn, and Google Scholar were the top profiling systems. Faculty also reported some professional use of social media platforms. The survey data will be utilized to improve library services and develop intra-institutional collaborations in scholarly communication, research networking, and research impact.

Tran CY & Lyon JA. (2017). Faculty Use of Author Identifiers and Researcher Networking Tools College & Research Libraries vol. 78 no. 2 pp 171-182 doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.171

 

View

Fast and Furious (at Publishers): The Motivations behind Crowdsourced Research Sharing

Authors: Carolyn Caffrey Gardner and Gabriel J. Gardner

Abstract: Crowdsourced research sharing takes place across social media platforms including Twitter hashtags such as #icanhazpdf, Reddit Scholar, and Facebook. This study surveys users of these peer-to-peer exchanges on demographic information, frequency of use, and their motivations in both providing and obtaining scholarly information on these platforms. Respondents also provided their perspectives on the database terms of service and/or copyright violations in these exchanges. Findings indicate that the motivations of this community are utilitarian or ideological in nature, similar to other peer-to-peer file sharing online. Implications for library services including instruction, outreach, and interlibrary loan are discussed.

Caffrey Gardner C & Gardner G. (2017). Fast and Furious (at Publishers): The Motivations behind Crowdsourced Research Sharing. College & Research Libraries vol. 78 no. 2 131-149 doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.131

View