The enemy of the good: How specifics in publisher’s green OA policies are bogging down IR deposits of scholarly literature

Abstract: In the evolving landscape of scholarly communication, librarians not only spend countless hours educating researchers about copyright, subscription licensing, classroom use, author’s agreements, and open access, but they also pay enormous subscription fees to publishers. This is potentially the reality of a system in flux, the fact of being in the middle of a change: we work for reform and enforce the current system in the same breath. Librarians tend to be risk averse, and rightly so, but this caution should not mean that librarians are pacifiers instead of change agents, that we educate while accepting publisher’s models without question or action.

Citation: Sterman, L. (2017). The enemy of the good: How specifics in publisher’s green OA policies are bogging down IR deposits of scholarly literature. College & Research Libraries News, 78(7). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.78.7.372

View

Open access outreach: SMASH vs. Suasion

Author: Jill Cirasella

Abstract: Some librarians became open access (OA) supporters because they were outraged—and budgetarily hamstrung—by certain commercial publishers’ artificially inflated prices. (We know they are artificially inflated, unjustified production costs because these publishers have jaw-dropping profit margins, higher than those of Disney, Starbucks, Google, and even Apple.1) Other librarians were won over to OA by its more altruistic aspects, by the promise of a world rich in knowledge. However, in their outreach to patrons, librarians cannot rely on the arguments that swayed them. What convinced a librarian to embrace OA may not convert a student, a faculty member, or an administrator. Therefore, librarians must consider what rhetoric works on whom and craft different arguments for different audiences.

Citation:Cirasella, J. (2017). Open access outreach: SMASH vs. Suasion,  College & Research Libraries News 78(6). https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.78.6.323

View

Source: Open access outreach: SMASH vs. Suasion

It’s all the same to me!: Copyright, contracts, and publisher self-archiving policies

Author: Nancy Sims

Abstract: “Green” open access—sharing copies of published scholarship online via repositories, rather than in the place of original publication—can be an appealing option for scholarly authors. It’s largely within their own control, and also often the option with least personal financial cost. Many publishers have standing policies enabling green open access of some kind, but the specifics of these policies vary widely and can be quite confusing for authors and others trying to understand and comply.

Citation: Sims, N. (2015). It’s all the same to me!: Copyright, contracts, and publisher self-archiving policies. College & Research Libraries News, 76(11), 578-581. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.76.11.9411

View

Rights, ethics, accuracy, and open licenses in online collections: What’s “ours” isn’t really ours

Authors: Nancy Sims

Abstract:  Digitizing existing collections and making them available online facilitates public and scholarly access to the niftiness we have squirreled away in our archives and special collections. But providing only online access to collections is of limited value when visitors don’t know how they can make use of these materials. That is why there are many efforts underway in libraries and related cultural institutions to become more active in establishing and communicating this information to our visitors.

Citation: Sims, N. (2017). Rights, ethics, accuracy, and open licenses in online collections: What’s “ours” isn’t really ours. College & Research Libraries News, 78(2), 79-82.

View

Collaboration in scholarly communication: Opportunities to normalize open access

Author: Allyson Rodriguez

Abstract:  As most librarians are well aware, open access and scholarly communication have been and will continue to be hot button issues. But what is a librarian’s role within the library? What about out in the greater world of scholarly communication? How do we ensure the changes we wish to see? To answer these, we must look at scholarly communication from a more holistic approach. It cannot simply be the job or responsibility of one group, or, even worse, one person on a campus. Scholarly communication is a multifaceted issue that should be addressed through education, outreach, recognition, and fiscal support. With so many lingering questions and doubts from faculty and students, librarians must continue to educate, collaborate, and highlight in ways we have not tried before. At the University of North Texas (UNT) Libraries, through collaboration and communication, we have made great progress toward reaching these goals.

Citation: Rodriguez, A. (2017). Collaboration in scholarly communication: Opportunities to normalize open access. College & Research Libraries News, 78(5), 270.

View

Library publishing and diversity values: Changing scholarly publishing through policy and scholarly communication education

Author: Charlotte Roh

Abstract: In 2014, students at over 75 higher education institutions demanded “an end to systemic and structural racism on campus.” The most common demand among student protesters was an increase in faculty diversity; faculty of color, according to a U.S. Department of Education 2015 report, make up only 16% of full professors.

This lack of diversity persists in librarianship and publishing, as well. ALA’s 2014 demographics update reports the association’s membership is 87.1% white, and the annual 2015 Publishers Weekly survey reports that publishers are 89% white/Caucasian.

Citation: Roh, Charlotte. “Library publishing and diversity values: Changing scholarly publishing through policy and scholarly communication education.” College & Research Libraries News [Online], 77.2 (2016): 82-85. Web. 2 May. 2017

View

 

Access to research and Sci-Hub: Creating opportunities for campus conversations on open access and ethics

Author: Sarah Crissinger

Abstract: Sci-Hub is a repository that makes illegal access to academic papers possible to anyone. It has generated a spectrum of responses from librarians, publishers, and open access advocates. Some have defended1 Sci-Hub and its creator, Alexandra Elbakyan, while others have denounced2 the repository. Coverage of Sci-Hub has been extensive. Science published an article3 in April 2016 that attempted to answer questions about who uses Sci-Hub, where those users are located, and what they are downloading. American Libraries followed with a primer4 on the issue. Perhaps the most useful analysis of Sci-Hub came from Ernesto Priego in his article in The Winnower entitled “Signal, Not Solution: Notes on Why Sci-Hub is Not Opening Access.” He holds that Sci-Hub might offer a technological solution to access, but it fails to address complex moral, social, and legal barriers in a sustainable way.

Crissinger S. (2017). Access to research and Sci-Hub. College & Research Libraries News vol. 78 no. 2 pp 86-95

View