Publishing Original Content in an Institutional Repository

Institutional repositories (IRs) have been developed and promoted primarily as a means to re-publish scholarly content previously published elsewhere—usually in journals, festschriften, or collections of articles. This essay discusses the use of IRs as the originating publisher of materials not previously published elsewhere and assesses their potential use as a viable “first resort” for scholarly publication and an already existing alternative to traditional commercial or university presses.     

Electronic journals and the paradigm shift: 1995 Spring forum of the Canadian Serials Industry Systems Advisory Committee

Abstract

Since 2006, Research Online, the University of Wollongong's open access institutional repository has utilised Bepress' Digital Commons software to make available published research outputs and digital theses. This article discusses the outcomes of recent academic demand for its use as a publishing tool of university journals and conference proceedings. The Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice is provided as an example. Digital Commons includes the editorial management software, EdiKit, which assists in managing submissions, editorial functions, and peer review. Also considered are changes to scholarly communication patterns arising out of the new open access, electronic only, publication regimes.     

“United we save,divided we spend”: Current purchasing trends in serials acquisitions in the UK academic sector

Abstract

CrossRef is an independent membership association for building shared technologies. It has an unusual mission: to improve access to published scholarship through services that require collective agreement among competitors in scholarly and professional publishing. The CrossRef network today covers millions of articles and other content items from several hundred publishers. This article looks at how far CrossRef has come since it launched in 2000 and what has to happen going forward in order for the service to arrive at a truly comprehensive linking network for scholarly and professional content online. Serial Review 2004; XX: XXX-XXX.     

Open Access Mandates and Policies: The Basics

Abstract

Universities can afford to subscribe to only a small percentage of available scholarly journals. Consequently, researchers do not have access to all articles in journals pertinent to their fields of study. The Open Access (OA) movement began in response to wanting to find a solution to this “serials crisis” and the availability of the Internet to disseminate scholarly research in new and innovative ways to a larger, worldwide audience. OA mandates are policies adopted by research institutions, universities, or funders that require researchers to provide free, unrestricted access to their published research by publishing in OA journals, depositing their articles in an OA repository or both. This edition of “In Lay Terms” provides basic information about OA mandates and policies, gives an overview of university and funder OA mandates, discusses geographic differences in policies and compliance rates, and reviews United States federal funding agencies’ OA policies and Plan S.     

Managing Perpetual Access

ABSTRACT

Libraries are committed to long-term access to the scholarly record in published journals. The transition from print to online format has presented numerous challenges for libraries. While many publishers provide some form of post-cancellation or perpetual access to subscribed journals, libraries sometimes find it difficult to ensure that access is available to users. Language regarding perpetual access can be vague in the license agreements libraries sign with publishers. Even when perpetual access is available, libraries may lack the staff, tools, or workflows needed to review and confirm access. Examples of how libraries have addressed these challenges are provided.     

Toolkits for Equity: An Antiracist Framework for Scholarly Publishing

Abstract

Fueled by a recent groundswell of support, scholarly publishing organizations are formalizing their focus on equity and inclusion, yet there is still a lack of effective programs and solutions actually in place. A cross-organizational working group is developing antiracism toolkits (for organizations, for allies, and for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) to transform scholarly publishing workplaces and organizational cultures. The resources, which will be hosted at c4disc.org, provide a common framework for analysis, a shared vocabulary, best practices, and training materials to guide individuals and organizations as they address systemic inequities specific to the scholarly publishing community. Originally planned as a presentation at the NC Serials Conference in March 2020, this article introduces the toolkits and explains why an antiracist framework is essential to transforming scholarly publishing.     

Scholarly Communications Training: Professional Development for the Next Generation of Scholars

Abstract

Many campuses are seeing increased needs for support in scholarly communications areas such as open access, research identity management, scholarship metrics, and related topics. This article discusses a professional development program that addresses scholarly communications needs for online and in-person graduate students and faculty at UNC Greensboro (UNCG), through a collaborative, interdepartmental effort that brings together librarians from the departments of Research, Outreach, and Instruction (ROI) and Technical Services. The authors provide a brief overview of the literature related to scholarly communications needs and training in academic libraries and discuss the UNCG program’s inception, modules, format, assessment, and future directions.     

SCOAP3 and Open Access

Abstract

SCOAP3 is an innovative Open Access initiative for publishing in high-energy physics. The model is viewed by many as a potential solution to multiple issues related to the financial crisis, the peer review system, scholarly communication, and the need to support institutional repositories. This installment of “The Balance Point” presents articles written by three Open Access advocates, outlining the SCOAP3 proposal, benefits of participation, and some of the roles libraries, publishers and scientists can play in making important changes to scholarly communication. Contributors discuss scalability and transferability issues of SCOAP3, as well as other matters of concern.     

1985 ALA Midwinter Reports

Abstract

As scholars have become more reliant upon electronic scholarly journals, the long-term preservation of these resources has become a growing and increasingly urgent need. In 2002, JSTOR launched a project which has now become Portico, a new, not-for-profit electronic archiving service established to address the scholarly community's critical need for a reliable means to preserve scholarly e-journals. Portico is focused on preserving the intellectual content of e-journals through source file normalization and format migration. To date, seven publishers have agreed to deposit more than 3,000 journals in the archive, which will be sustained by contributions from publishers and libraries.     

The Missing Model: A “Circle of Gifts”

Abstract

In spite of the search for electronic publishing models, there is apparently already early, energetic scholarly publishing on the networks. Without a great deal of adjustment and even without formal academic recognition, the Net's accessibility and excitement have provided academic "incentives." With thoughtful development, it could provide a highly effective and competitive path to delivering scholarly knowledge. Indeed, there is currently so much momentum that it is difficult to imagine a failure to proceed, short of a deliberate and concerted attempt by universities and scholars to suppress the "thousand flowers" blooming on the scholarly networks, a choice not to support and subsidize academic publishing on the Net.

An effective scholar-based publishing system must recognize and support the widely divers forms of communication necessary for research and scholarship. It should not discriminate against nonlucrative projects or disciplines. It complements the paper-based scholarly efforts of university presses and of academic libraries, which are already beginning to provide networked access and archiving for university-generated scholarship. It creates a linked structure of scholars, societies, and academic institutions. It aims to fulfill another vital objective: retaining for the academy some ownership of its authored intellectual property.

The Missing Model, fledgling and fuzzy, is alive and well and living on the Net. To thrive, the academy needs to thoughtfully nurture it. The Circle of Gifts concept formally entwines the scholarly community, research institutions, scholars, and learned societies in the age-old and time-honored enterprise in which ideas are shared, affordably, by the creators of the ideas.     

Document Delivery as a Supplement or Replacement for Serial Subscriptions

Abstract

Increasing serials costs and shrinking budgets present challenges for academic libraries to continue providing sufficient access to scholarly articles. Rapid document delivery services can serve as an effective means to fill the gap caused by serials cancellations. This column examines several of the existing document delivery service providers and addresses issues involved in their implementation.     

Correctly Linking Researchers to Their Journal Articles: An Overview of Unique Author Identifiers

ABSTRACT

A number of factors can make it difficult to consistently and accurately identify individual researchers and their scholarly activities. One solution is to use unique author identifiers. Many author identifiers are available from inside and outside the library community. This column will, in lay terms, compare Scopus Author ID, ResearcherID, ORCID identifier, and ISNI (International Standard Name Identifier)—some of the more commonly used author identifiers—and explore the advantages and disadvantages of each. It will examine the differences among the four identifiers and their relationships to one another.     

Research Online: Digital Commons as a Publishing Platform at the University of Wollongong, Australia

Since 2006, Research Online, the University of Wollongong's open access institutional repository has utilised Bepress' Digital Commons software to make available published research outputs and digital theses. This article discusses the outcomes of recent academic demand for its use as a publishing tool of university journals and conference proceedings. The Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice is provided as an example. Digital Commons includes the editorial management software, EdiKit, which assists in managing submissions, editorial functions, and peer review. Also considered are changes to scholarly communication patterns arising out of the new open access, electronic only, publication regimes.     

Publication Delay in Iranian Scholarly Journals

Scholarly periodicals in Iran are considered main information resources in the development of knowledge in scholarly areas. About 566 periodicals have publication licenses from the Commission of Scholarly Periodicals Evaluation of Ministry of Science, Research & Technology (MSRT), with sixty-eight published in English. This paper studies the publication delay of twenty-six Iranian scholarly periodicals which are published in Persian in Iran, not those Iranian journals which are published in English in Iran or out of the country. The peer review and scholarly publication processes in Iranian journals are quite lengthy and need improvement. There was no significant relationship between publication delay in Persian scholarly periodicals and their impact factor as presented by the Islamic World Science Citation Center (titled ISC). Finally, the authors offer some solutions for improving the publication system of Iranian scholarly journals and decreasing the publication interval of these journals.     

Discipline-Specific Literature Bases: A View of the APS Model

Abstract

Librarians see the large quantities of literature and the complete writing/publishing/world as a complete system. Changes to one piece (e.g., making publishing or reading electronic) will not fundamentally change the process. The pieces of the system are there, not for technological reasons, but for reasons of authority, validation, and self-correction in the process of scholarly communication. Electronic publishing will cause great changes, but the changes will not eliminate roles that now exist. The changes will be to enhance our abilities to better do that which we do now, whether that be to edit, review, referee, write, or manage the information flow.     

Union Lists: The U.K. Perspective

abstract

Predatory journals are multiplying rapidly, but awareness is increasing in the scholarly community. Publishers, open access advocates, and researchers are exploring new ways to fight back. This column examines different ways members of the research community have chosen to address the problem of fraudulent publishing.