Professional Development

In the 'Scholarly Communication' Category...

Molly at ALA Midwinter

Friday, February 8, 2013 2:43 pm

My 2013 Midwinter conference happenings started earlier than they did for most of our ZSR colleagues, as the presenter group for the ACRL Scholarly Communication Roadshows gathered for a planning retreat Friday afternoon. We started these retreats at ALA Annual in NOLA in 2011, and they’ve become a valuable time for us to assess our program and identify new areas of growth. In 2012, we overhauled the original program to better address changes in scholcomm, and to take the program from a half-day to full-day workshop. After 6 iterations of the new program last year, we realized that further restructuring was warranted, and this year we are organizing our workshop around four new themes: Emerging Opportunities, Access, Intellectual Property, and Engagement. We also welcomed two new presenters to our group, one of whom was able to join us in Seattle, giving us new perspective and energy!

Saturday was chock full of scholcomm sessions, and I’m still digesting my pages and pages of notes. I fueled up for my busy day at the ProQuest Serials Solutions breakfast, along with several ZSR colleagues, where incoming ACRL president Steven Bell spoke on the “unbundled, unbooted, disrupted” higher ed environment. Although his ideas were not new to me (I follow his LJ blog), Steven is a compelling speaker and is always worth hearing. First session after breakfast was the ALA Washington Office Update breakout session, where a panel of librarians spoke on the Kirtsaeng v. Wiley case before the Supreme Court. This case hinges upon the first sale doctrine, and whether lawfully obtained, foreign-made works are subject to the right of first sale, which is what allows us to buy and lend, resell, gift, destroy, etc. objects such as books, DVDs, CDs, clothes, furniture, cars, phones, computers, and on and on and on, both as libraries and individuals. Libraries are understandably nervous about the outcome of the case: if the lower courts’ rulings are upheld at the strictest interpretation, no book (or anything else we own) that was published and purchased internationally without a US distributor, or possibly even merely manufactured overseas, could be lent from our collections. But this also means that garage sales, consignment stores, eBay, Etsy, Redbox, used car lots, used book stores, and a host of other businesses would be severely impacted (at the Supreme Court hearings, this was called the “parade of horribles”). Because of the far-reaching implications of the strictest interpretation of first sale, which would apply to goods manufactured only in the US, the consensus is that neither Kirtsaeng nor Wiley will get an outright “win,” with it likely that legislative action might be needed to clarify the first sale doctrine in light of the ruling. Again, I didn’t hear anything new here, but it was sobering nonetheless. Fortunately, the rest of my Saturday was much more positive, as I heard updates on SCOAP3 at the ALCTS Scholarly Communications Discussion Group, and learned about new developments in alt-metrics – the phrase used to describe multiple attempts to liberate faculty from the clutches of the “sainted” Impact Factor using article-level and social impact measurements – at the 10th annual SPARC/ACRL Forum.

Sunday found me in the Westin Hotel all day, barring quick lunch and doughnut breaks! My morning kicked off early with a 3+ hour meeting of the ACRL Research & Scholarly Environment Committee (known as ReSEC; formerly the Scholarly Communications Committee). We heard updates from the field, discussed ACRL projects/events we support, and brainstormed how we might serve as a nexus to connect the different groups – committees, subcommittees, discussion groups, interest groups – working throughout ALA and its divisions on scholcomm issues. I feel good about my participation on this committee, and hope to be reappointed for another two year term. Sunday afternoon I branched out a bit into scholcomm-related group meetings: the ACRL Digital Curation Interest Group and the Digital Humanities Discussion Group. My reasons for attending these two were three-fold: 1) to enhance my knowledge of these issues; 2) to gain perspective on how these issues might be tackled by the Digital Initiatives Librarian we will be hiring, with whom I’ll be working closely; and, 3) to identify groups that ReSEC might want to connect with. I didn’t learn quite as much as I’d hoped, but made a few connections with folks and jotted down some projects happening at other libraries that sound intriguing. I also attended the ACRL Scholarly Communications Discussion Group, which continued the conversation from the Forum about alt-metrics.

I caught a break Monday morning when my ACRL 2013 conference planning committee meeting was canceled, so I made one more pass through the vendor floor to talk to a couple of publisher reps (McGraw-Hill being the main target), and pick up a few (ahem) last books. Because I thought I had committee obligations through Monday, I didn’t leave until early Tuesday morning, which was lucky, as I was able to travel home with several ZSR colleagues; it’s nice to have friends to pass airport hours with! My Midwinter was a worthwhile conference, with good information, good meetings, and good networking all around.

Dallas Day 1: Preconference, y’all!

Saturday, January 21, 2012 12:05 am

ALA Midwinter 2012 has kicked off in Dallas, Texas, home of the Cowboys, the Stars, the Rangers, and – for the weekend – a whole lot of far less athletic (sorry Susan!) but enthusiastic librarians. I arrived yesterday late afternoon, as I needed to be ready to hit the ground running early this morning, as I was co-presenting a preconference for ACRL.

Our preconference, “Scholarly Communications: From Understanding to Engagement,” is an expansion of the ACRL Scholarly Communication 101 Road Show program I helped launch in 2009. Originally a 3 hour workshop at an ACRL national conference, the SC 101 program developed into a 4 hour “road show” workshop that we would present in partnership with local hosts, who in past years were required to provide another 2-3 hours of programming to round out the day. Based on lots of feedback from multiple sites, and our own frustrations with feeling rushed, we held a planning retreat at ALA Annual last June to assess the program, from which came the idea of expanding to a full day. We were also asked to think about how we might offer this programming in conjunction with an ALA conference to enable interested librarians who haven’t participated in a Road Show the opportunity to engage. A preconference at Midwinter seemed like the perfect fit: we had a broader audience to draw from, and we got to test drive the expanded day before taking it out on the road again later this year.

Fortunately, the expanded format works and our preconference was a great success! I was co-presenting with Sarah Shreeves, with whom I presented a Road Show in Minneapolis last May, and another member of our presenter group (there are six of us total), Joy Kirchner, was on hand to assess our new formatting. We had 39 engaged, motivated, talkative attendees, representing institutions from around the US and Canada, with only two repeats from previous Road Shows. The group raised excellent points and asked tough questions, and as should always happen, even though I was the “expert” at the front of the room, I also learned today. And while there are a few kinks to work out in the new full-day format, I am quite confident that we have made the right decision to expand the Road Show, and I’m thankful we had such a great trial run at Midwinter!

At the Table at ACRL

Wednesday, April 6, 2011 10:16 am

As you’ve now realized, there was quite a ZSR contingent at the ACRL 2011 National Conference in Philadelphia last week. I was happily among them, enjoying my third ACRL conference and first real trip to Philly (airport connections don’t count). I arrived last Tuesday afternoon, and without a doubt, my overarching personal theme for this conference was “at the table”…and this is beyond all the great food I enjoyed!

My ACRL started Wednesday with a day-long curriculum planning retreat for the ARL-ACRL Institute on Scholarly Communication faculty. Although I am not an ISC faculty presenter, I was invited to attend the planning retreat as one of the ACRL SC 101 Road Show presenters. Being at the table with 13 others who are doing work similar to mine at various-sized institutions across North America was enlightening and energizing, and I’m still somewhat awed that I was asked to be at that table. After the retreat, I headed to the opening keynote address by filmmaker Tiffany Shlain. Although I cringed when she said that she now only looks online for archival footage for her documentaries, as I know there’s wonderful clips hidden away in archives worldwide, her perspective on accessibility and sharing were interesting. I also liked how she incorporated both video and still images into her slides. I completed my first day by meeting up with ZSR colleagues around three different tables in three different locations to share good food and great laughs.

Thursday found me at the table with several different vendors. My day started early with a SerialsSolutions vendor breakfast where I was introduced to Summon, a very cool search product that Roz discussed in her vendor post. I remember the early days of federated searching while in grad school, and while I could see the promise, the system I tried was clunky, ultimately proving frustrating for its inability to deliver the promise that was so clear. I was encouraged to see that Summon seems to solve those early problems. Feeling positive about vendors post-breakfast, I headed to the exhibit hall for a meeting with a BioMed Central representative to learn more about BMC institutional memberships and Springer’s open access initiatives – promising, but I’ll believe some of it only when I see it. After a disappointing morning session on virtues of “next gen” librarians – all of which I think should be virtues of any professional, regardless of age – and Roz’s fun Cyber Zed Shed session on QR codes, Mary Beth and I headed to an ebrary vendor luncheon to discuss ebooks. Conversation was honest, and driven primarily by suggestions from the librarians in attendance, although if ebrary plans to act on the desires expressed, they have a somewhat tall order ahead! My afternoon found me surveying tables in the Reading Market Terminal as I strolled through after lunch, catching up with a fellow Emerging Leader at a table at the back of the exhibit hall, and sitting on the floor behind a table at a maxed-out session on the Google Books Settlement. I did not hear anything new at the GBS discussion, but was encouraged by how many folks are actively engaged with digital access issues for in-copyright and orphaned books and picked up the Library Copyright Alliance’s updated GBS March Madness chart. My last official conference activity of the day was Raj Patel‘s awesome keynote, where I was thrilled to hear him acknowledging and championing the under-documented and uncompensated roles that women and girls play in our food economy. The evening’s events once again found me in the fun company of our ZSR colleagues, enjoying great food, Da Vinci’s brilliance, and fun music, sometimes on steps and sometimes around tables.

My Friday at ACRL was scholarly communication-intensive, with multiple sessions and conversations that touched upon the varied issues that fall under the broad SC umbrella. I was quite encouraged by the size of the crowd at an 8:30 session on why SC issues are important to non-ARL libraries. I had a very productive meeting around a tiny table at Old City Coffee with my co-presenter and one of our hosts for an upcoming Road Show in Minneapolis, after which Sarah (my co-presenter) and I headed to a three paper presentation on copyright lies retractions in biomedical publications, and the results of an SC survey. I nodded in agreement with many of the points raised by the authors of the paper on biomedical retractions, as they are a small but concerning problem. (Incidentally, this issue, especially how news media doesn’t always cover the retractions with nearly as much fanfare, is a great conversation starter for LIB 100 classes!) I also want to learn more about the copyright survey distributed to faculty and library staff at the University of Minnesota, as I’d be curious to see if a similar survey at WFU highlighted the same lies. My lunch was delayed in order to join a roundtable discussion on “Fostering a Culture of Sharing on Campus” that pulled together SC, copyright and institutional repository librarians for a fascinating conversation about engaging our faculty and students on SC issues. This roundtable led to an instructive spill-over conversation on the merits of copyright registration for ETDs, and the role of fair use and uncopyrightability of works reproduced within ETDs. Recharged after a late lunch and reflection break, I ended my SC-themed day at an invited paper, “Animating Archives: New Modes of Humanities Scholarship,” that had been commended by one of the ISC faculty at our retreat on Wednesday. Tara McPherson’s work is pushing the boundaries of what journals and books are and can be in digital forms, and I would love to see some of our WFU humanists involved in similar projects in the future. Following an ULS social, which was conveniently in a sports bar so I could easily keep tabs on the Opening Day baseball games (my beloved Red Sox have not started well, sigh), I ended Friday at the All Conference Reception at the National Constitution Center, where I eschewed both the museum exhibit and the table conversation in favor of twirling around the dance floor for a couple of hours!

Saturday’s tables all involved meals with ZSR colleagues as we wrapped up our ACRL experience and trekked home down I-95. Before leaving Philly, I managed one final trip to Reading Terminal Market for breakfast, a session on archiving considerations of born-digital materials, an intense monitoring of conference tweets (whereby I frustratingly realized that despite the interesting content of my session, I wish I’d been at the opposite end of the convention center in a different session…), and the closing keynote by Clinton Kelly, who was quite engaging…perhaps I should watch his show so I’ll be less out of the pop-culture loop?!

All in all, my ACRL experience was energizing, sending me home with new perspectives and ideas. Interestingly, there were fewer blatantly overarching SC sessions, which leads me to speculate – and hope! – that SC issues, which range from publishing to archiving to digital exploration to copyright law to innovation, are assimilating as fundamental issues around which enough interest has been built to require more targeted, specific sessions on the myriad aspects. If so, that would certainly echo and reinforce much of the conversation at the table where my ACRL began.

NSF and Data Management webinar at UNC

Tuesday, November 9, 2010 2:41 pm

Today Molly, Susan and Erik attended an open webinar offered by the Odum institute at UNC. The content of the webinar focused on the recently introduced requirement to have a data management plan for all National Science Foundation (NSF) grants. The requirement, which goes into effect January 18, 2011, has created quite a buzz in the library world as it adds new dimensions to the world of scholarly communications.

My favorite phrase “The codebook from your research is the metadata on your project.” There was a fair amount of interest (with over 60 people online in addition to in-room participants) and the question and answer period focused on wide ranging issues such as technical problems, IRB questions and UNC and non-UNC solutions.

Interestingly, UNC has taken the steps to support both in-process and end-of-grant data archiving using a combination of services. One service mentioned in particular was iRODS, a data sharing and archiving platform developed by the Dice program now housed at UNC.

Representatives from ZSR have been talking with ORSP about how to support WFU NSF researchers.

Scholarly Communication & Liaison Outreach

Tuesday, September 21, 2010 5:44 pm

Today Molly and Mary Beth (and for a while, Lauren C.) watched the ARL-ACRL Institute on Scholarly Communication webinar, “Broader Library Involvement in Building Scholarly Communication Programs.” The goal of the webinar was share examples and provide ideas for institutions who wish to involve liaisons in scholarly communication (SC) outreach across campus. This webinar was a good follow-up to the ideas I shared at the August liaison meeting. The three presenters were Karen Williams, University of Minnesota; Mike Furlough, Penn State; and Doug Way, Green Valley State University.

The main take-away points were:

  • Part of liaisons’ SC outreach efforts should be framed by the question, “What do we do in libraries to help make faculty active in broader, global research communities?”; our faculty are collaborating with researchers at other institutions world-wide, and we should identify how we can support them
  • Institutional ownership for SC issues is essential; cannot be library-owned or -only
  • At UMN, the library has partnered with the research office to design librarian-taught courses for faculty that fulfill government funding agencies’ Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training requirement
  • Arranging a forum for faculty editors to come together at your institution to discuss publishing issues and concerns with SC and collection development staff
  • Emphasize the service an institutional repository supports, not the repository itself
  • Saying “No, we can’t really help with…” will serve us better in the long run than trying to take on supporting new services that go beyond our abilities, boundaries
  • Ultimately challenge will be answering questions of “Who cares? Why are you doing this when you can’t provide me all the journals I want?”
  • Liaison support for SC issues will vary from discipline to discipline

All in all, it was a worthwhile webinar in that it generated new ideas, and confirmed others that have been percolating. Liaisons, stay tuned for more SC outreach info!

“Beyond Impact Factor” Panel at UNC

Wednesday, June 16, 2010 2:13 pm

On Wednesday, June 9, I participated in the “Beyond Impact Factor: Understanding & Supporting Scholarly Work in the New Academy” presentation at UNC-Chapel Hill. Sponsored by the University Libraries Scholarly Communications Committee, five speakers presented various aspects of how changes in scholarly practice and scholarship are – or are not, as is often the case – being recognized within the academy, particularly through tenure and promotion review.

Dean Gary Marchionini, School of Information and Library Science (SILS), framed the day by giving an overview of what we mean when we talk about scholarly work (creating, teaching and serving), the new academy (changes in both forms of expression and institutional structures), and impact (rewarding, attributing and assessing). As news of the University of California and Nature Publishing Group controversy had broken the evening before, participants were keenly aware of how issues that formerly had been understood as fine-grain, library-level problems are increasingly becoming big problems for scholarship. Dean Marchionini concluded by sharing an example of how SILS is trying to measure the impact of dissertation advising by faculty through the MPACT project.

Kevin Smith, Duke University’s Scholarly Communication Officer, next spoke on owning scholarship, and how new forms of scholarship are challenging ownership conventions. Mr. Smith asserted that it will most likely be these new forms of scholarship – online courses, blogging, and digital visualization projects – more so than open access that are going to push tenure reform, as the usual tools for assessing value and impact do not apply. He concluded by promoting the use of Creative Commons licenses for digital scholarship, as attribution will continue to be far more important to scholars than copyright ownership.

Erin O’Meara, UNC’s Electronic Records Archivist, then showcased the Carolina Digital Repository (CDR), UNC’s institutional repository. Under development for close to 5 years, the CDR was pre-soft launched in April. The University Libraries, SILS faculty, and interested UNC faculty have been the core collaborators on the project. One of the strengths of the CDR is the strong collaborative approach taken between technologists and curators to build the repository. Ms. O’Meara acknowledged that there are challenges ahead, some known (meeting actual needs vs. perceived needs) and some unknown, but she believes that the focus on preservation of scholarly output, born-digital special collections, and University records will provide a stable framework within which future problems can be solved successfully.

Following the first break out session, Support for New Forms of Access, I spoke on blogging as scholarship. You can read more about my thoughts in a forthcoming “Future Of” blog post, but the crux of my argument is this: blogging has changed dramatically, not only since its genesis in the late 1990′s, but even within the last five years since the Chronicle of Higher Education published an article titled, “Bloggers Need Not Apply,” and the contributions to scholarship via blogging merit recognition. Although there are problems with evaluating contributions via blogging, the rise of vetted blogging communities (ScienceBlogs) and the evolution of publications via blogs/blogging platforms (In the Library with the Lead Pipe) point to the rising value of blogs as an outlet for scholarship.

Phillip Edwards, SILS instructor, then spoke about experiences coordinating faculty awareness and support surrounding scholarly communication practices at UNC. Through two studies completed by SILS students, and one currently underway with UNC librarians, Mr. Edwards has been assessing open access awareness, open access citation effect, and open access fund application across the campus. He shared data collected through the studies in a series of tables (I’ve got a copy in my office, if anyone is interested), and posed two questions – 1. At the campus-level, how can programs and services be designed to effectively support faculty and students in their writing and publishing practices?; 2. What else might we need to know about publishing practices at UNC in order to address this question? – to launch us in to the second (and final) break out session, Support for New Forms of Scholarship.

Conversations during break out sessions were informative and enlightening, and good questions challenging the assumptions of the speakers sparked thoughtful debate. Although the audience was predominantly from UNC, including several SILS students, all four tobacco road universities were represented. I had a lot of fun returning to my alma mater to speak about a thought-provoking topic, and thoroughly enjoyed having my opinions challenged and expanded through the day’s events!

ScienceOnline2010 Day 2 (Sunday)

Wednesday, January 20, 2010 4:49 pm

The second, and last, day of ScieneOnline2010 started a bit later and more relaxed, as Saturday-only attendees and those with early flights (or long drives) decreased numbers somewhat. The half-day was book-ended by two more yummy meals, with lunch once again featuring one of my favorite area restaurants, Mediterranean Deli. If this conference’s sessions weren’t as great as they are, I still might consider going just for the awesome food…but fortunately I get both!

There were three final sessions Sunday morning; links and highlights are below. I’m still processing the final session, but it was by far the one that generated the most audience engagement, which isn’t surprising given its topic (civility) and what happened (a live demonstration of how debates can quickly become inflamed and uncivil). As before, if you have questions or need clarification/more info, ask!

Broader Impact Done RightKaren James, Kevin Zelnio, Miriam Goldstein, Jeff Ives and Beth Beck

  • broader impact, outreach & education, public engagement & learning are all phrases for grant requirements that funded research disseminate beyond the lab and journals
  • helps to designate people to keep outreach going; sometimes considered outside the mission of research so it can be hard to get researchers engaged
  • keeping sustained online update on projects will result in intended AND unintended benefits
  • be aware of jargon: sometimes it can be useful as a conversation-starter, sometimes it’s a roadblock to understanding
  • recommended that media training be part of a career development program for scientists, grad students
  • if blogging from the field, don’t make assumptions about technology!
  • home internet connections in poor communities aren’t common, but cell phones are pervasive, so think about info distribution along compatible channels
  • Q: cool field research projects are great, but how do you popularize every-day lab science? A: don’t make assumptions that people don’t care – many are fascinated by lab activities, especially if you share your passion!

Article-level metricsPeter Binfield

(NOTE: I am not a fan of the deification bestowed upon traditional impact factors by many in academe, so I was biased toward liking author- or article-driven metrics heading into this session. I also generally am not one to get overly excited about data. But the data shared are BEAUTIFUL. Just saying…)

  • PLoS (Public Library of Science, largest OA non-profit publisher) developed article-level metrics (ALM) that move beyond the concept of the journal (which is where traditional impact factors (IF) are stuck)
  • “is this good chocolate?” [photo of heart-shaped chocolate box] vs. “is this bad chocolate?” [photo of chocolate bars] – can only determine by tasting the chocolate, not by the packaging
  • journals are just pretty boxes: might indicate that contents are good, but certainly not the only way to tell
  • worth of papers – and hence individuals – often based on IF which is journal-level not article-level
  • ALM could include citations, web use, expert ratings, social bookmarking, community rating, media/blog coverage, commenting activity
    • essentially a basket of individual metrics, all informative at some level, and collectively hard to “game”
  • ALM not just about scholarly evaluation but also way to filter and discover content
  • IF = The Flintstones, ALM = The Jetsons
  • really haven’t had negative reaction from authors, although if ALM replicated widely authors who rely on IF and think they have weight because they publish in high IF journals may be in for a rude surprise
  • authors and readers don’t yet have a good context for judging usefulness, so PLoS provides journal-level metrics on average downloads to help frame ALM
  • still have a lot to do, but ALM could be the start of something important in scholarly publishing

Online Civility and Its (Muppethugging) DiscontentsJanet Stemwedel, Sheril Kirshenbaum and Dr.Isis

(NOTE: Some of the links from the wiki page include language NSFW.)

  • definition of civility at your site is personal
  • know your audience and conduct appropriately
  • only 18% of people claim to know a scientist personally; media is warping perceptions
  • civility online impacts credibility offline
  • civility does not necessarily equal politeness: you can say something in polite language that is uncivil
  • a good working definition of civility might be to take each other seriously, assume good faith, and not immediately dismiss
  • language that makes people feel unwelcome: technical, jargon, profane, religious
  • respect doesn’t eliminate disagreement, it sparks deeper engagement
  • sometimes disengagement is the way to go, but at other times, silence runs the risk of being read as assent
  • danger of conflating incivility with heated discussion in blogosphere
  • groundrules will shape people’s perception of their ability to interact, so must think about how and if to lay them

ScienceOnline2010 Day 1 (Saturday)

Tuesday, January 19, 2010 3:58 pm

The first official day of ScienceOnline2010 began with early morning registration and breakfast, where I had my first encounter with doughnut muffins. Who knew such treats existed?! For those who are curious, it was shaped like a muffin, with dense cake-like dough, entirely covered in sugar. Not a bad start to my day!

To give a bit of context, ScienceOnline2010 is a small conference, with 267 attendees (thanks Bora for attendee #s correction!). All events are held at Sigma Xi in RTP, so even though you certainly don’t interact with everyone, you generally see them, and I bumped into fellow ZSR attendee Sarah Jeong several times. This was my third year at the conference, and it was exciting to reconnect with folks I met in previous years. I was also pleased to see that there were more librarians in attendance – and presenting – this year!

There were three sessions before lunch (provided by Saladelia and delicious as always!), and three in the afternoon; links to the wiki page for each session plus highlights from my notes are below. If you have questions about anything, ask!

From Blog to Book: Using Blogs and Social Networks to Develop Your Professional WritingTom Levenson, Brian Switek and Rebecca Skloot

  • use your blog as as writing lab to develop your voice and your audience, as well as a promotional platform
  • reach out to other blogs with audiences who otherwise wouldn’t hear of your book early
  • getting book deals often relies on happenstance of who you know, who you meet; online presence increases chances
  • finding YOUR voice is more important than your subject matter in some respects
  • who do you read? if you aspire to follow one of their paths, read from professional stance to analyze what they do
  • Q: can you make any money? A: welcome to our hobby!

Science in the CloudJohn Hogenesch

  • more data from more sources requires more collaboration, as well as massive and ever-growing computational resources
  • academe typically responds by buying storage and clusters, which works great…for a while; too dependent upon unstable variables: IT staff “demigods”, facilities, depreciation, usage (can’t see into future)
  • cloud computing offers three principle services
    • software as a service (SAAS)
    • infrastructure as a service (IAAS)
    • platform as a service (PAAS)
  • familiar SAAS use case: email
    • evolved from server-side (Pine) to client (Eudora) to cloud (Gmail)
  • SAAS collaboration examples include Basecamp, Google Groups, Google Wave, wikis, Google Docs
  • IAAS use case: RNA sequencing
    • problems include sheer magnitude of data; scope of problem only getting bigger
    • BLAT on Amazon Web service one solution
  • PAAS use case: publishing in the cloud
  • Q: is cloud computing opening research to others who don’t have access? A: yes because in-house data clusters are not easily distributed or shared
  • some concern that funders are less willing to award grants that ask for money for cloud computing costs, even though those costs may be lower than implementing a local data solution, as there are privacy concerns as well as differences in capital costs vs. design costs

Legal Aspects of Publishing, Sharing and Blogging ScienceVictoria Stodden

  • copyright is a strong barrier to scientists’ ideal sharing context
  • Q: are blog comments under the copyright of the commenter or blog author? A: the commenter holds copyright, which makes moderation/removal of inappropriate comments by blog author potential copyright violation, unless there is a clear statement/disclaimer exerting non-exclusive license to do so
  • in the UK, blog comment moderation opens the author to libel responsibilities
  • if you don’t want copyright protection, you must actively dis-avail through licenses, such as those available through Creative Commons (CC)
  • CC licenses do not clarify/define “noncommercial”
  • patents are also a barrier to sharing, as you cannot publish about potentially patentable work until patent is secured or you risk not getting the patent
  • Stodden is advocating the use of attribution-only licenses for all elements of scientific work, including code and data, so it can be reused at will
  • stewardship of raw data, both archiving and sharing, already huge issues and it will only get worse

Scientists! What Can Your Librarian Do For You?Stephanie Willen Brown and Dorothea Salo

  • researchers spend too much time poking around in different places (i.e., PubMed, Google, Google Scholar) trying to access full text
  • direct quote from researcher in room: “if I cannot get it fast and free, I won’t read it” – authors need to think about this as they write
  • rather than ask how to get scientists to library, librarians need to turn the question around and ask how to get into scientists’ environment
  • researcher in the room made suggestions for librarians to offer publishing support that includes:
    • data on number of colleagues at institutional also publishing in x-journal
    • citation style knowledge/assistance
    • submission requirement knowledge/assistance
  • scientists’ ideas about librarians calcified either as walking wallets for journals or bun-toting shushers; instead we need to be known as information policy on legs
  • conversations with colleagues are important for bridging gaps between librarians and scientists
  • if you are concerned about data management, talk to your librarian NOW
  • if your institution won’t accept non-peer reviewed literature in the institutional repository (IR), or if it doesn’t have an IR, talk to your librarian NOW
  • institutional nature of IRs forced on us a bit by publishers who require posting to institutional servers
  • IR point of failure on both ends – librarian and researcher – is ingest; we have a long way to go to improve

Open Access Publishing and Freeing the Scientific Literature (or Why Freedom is about more than just not paying for things)Jonathan Eisen

  • one impediment to openness is institutions’ desire to recover money from research investment
  • fair use is size dependent when thinking of open educational resources (e.g., courses on iTunes U)
  • institutional archives/IRs serve many purposes beyond journal articles, so they need multiple outlets
  • how we pay for access in movement to openness will not always be equitable

Online Reference ManagersJohn Dupuis and Christina Pikas moderating, with Kevin Emamy, Jason Hoyt, Trevor Owens and Michael Habib (Scopus)

(NOTE: I attended this session to learn about other free programs besides Zotero, so my notes below are just highlights of each. Q&A with the panel didn’t provide any enlightenment beyond that which Giz brought to our Zotero class last week.)

  • CiteULike (sponsored by Springer)
    • tracks social bookmarking of research papers
    • can copy papers from others’ libraries
  • Mendeley
    • similar to last.fm – surveys what you download and makes suggestions
    • pulls metadata to aggregate readership statistics
  • Zotero
    • can mine your own research history
    • drag and drop references into text fields and citation is auto-generated
  • 2collab (Elsevier)
    • not currently open to users due to spam
    • hoped it would be discovery tool closely related to Scopus and ScienceDirest
    • author IDs (from databases) populate author profiles on 2collab

ScienceOnline2010 Preconference Day

Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:04 am

I am in the Durham/RTP area this weekend attending the ScienceOnline2010 conference. This is the fourth year of the conference, and my third year of attendance. Although the conference doesn’t officially start until Saturday, there was a series of workshops, food tours and lab tours on Friday for early arrivals, and a gala reception Friday evening with the keynote speaker.

I kicked off this year’s conference with a morning workshop on institutional repositories (IRs) at the Park Research Center in RTP. Dorothea Salo, librarian at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, led the session “Repositories for Fun & Profit.” In keeping with the relaxed atmosphere of the conference, an official lecture was quickly dismissed in favor of a guided conversation among our small but interesting group: 4 researchers, 4 librarians and 1 consultant.

Our conversation focused on questions/topics posted to the wiki prior to the workshop, and one of the big points we discussed is the growing need for access to data sets. Unfortunately most repository systems, including DSpace, are not able to adequately handle large data sets, as the IR structures do not provide the necessary flexibility. In light of this, and other issues, several prominent early IR adopters in the United States are exploring the possibilities of system migration.

In relation to IRs, we also talked about the importance of working with graduate students to educate the next generation of faculty about scholarly communication issues. Dorothea promoted the benefits of electronic theses and dissertations (ETD) archiving requirements for achieving the dual goals of educating students and populatingIRs. I was quite proud to learn that Wake Forest was ahead of UW-Madison in implementing a required ETD program!

Another point of discussion focused on Open Access (OA) policies, both funder/government and faculty-driven. Dorothea shared that she believes that as the novelty of faculty policies such as those passed at Harvard, MIT and Stanford begins to wear off, more OA policies will be implemented as people realize that the sky hasn’t fallen.

Following the workshop and a lunch break, I wove my way through Duke Forest in Durham to the Duke Lemur Center for an afternoon lab tour. The Duke Lemur Center is the largest lemur preserve worldwide, housing 210 prosimian primates – 190 of which are lemurs, the others are prosimians from Sri Lanka and Vietnam – including the largest collection of aye-ayes (17 of 40 in captivity), and Romeo, the ONLY diademed sifaka living in captivity. The goals of the center are research, education and conservation, as lemurs are endangered species. Lemurs are found only on Madagascar, and it is believed that there are approximately 70 different species on the island. All lemurs are prosimians, but not all prosimians are lemurs. Some species are diurnal, others nocturnal, and one species, mongoose lemurs, switch between diurnal and nocturnal seasonally.

Currently, the diurnal lemurs are housed in temperature-protected enclosures, but after temperatures are sustained above 45 degrees (mid-April or so), the lemurs are released to live in the forest on the preserve. At mealtimes, they are gathered by a signal (e.g., beating a tambourine ), and they are fed specialized diets which, depending on the species, might include grub worms, bananas, collard greens, or Monkey Chow (made by Purina!). The nocturnal lemurs live in a separate facility at all times, where their “day” has been flip-flopped: bright lights simulating sunlight come on around midnight, prompting them to sleep while researchers normally sleep, and go off around 9:45am, waking them at “night” to facilitate research during normal business hours.

I learned a LOT of fascinating facts about lemurs that I won’t share here, but here is one fun fact: there are only two primate species with blue eyes: blue-eyed lemurs and humans. Some would include spider monkeys as a third, although their eyes are more gray-blue than true blue. As a blue-eyed human primate, I found this particular fact most interesting! The center is available for tours year round (call ahead to schedule), and if you ever have the opportunity, I strongly encourage you to go!

After the lemur tour, I took advantage of my proximity to Duke’s campus to scoot over to Perkins Library for a late-afternoon meeting with Kevin Smith, Duke University’s Scholarly Communications Officer, and Will Cross, a current UNC MILS student interning with Kevin who also works at UNC’s House Undergraduate Library. I had not been to Perkins in over 10 years, so after chatting about OA policy implementation strategies and Will’s post-graduation plans, Kevin gave me a quick tour, highlighting The Link, which combines IT support service (similar to The Bridge) as well as a Mac lab, study space with funky furniture, and class, seminar and group study rooms. VERY cool space!

By the end of the day, I was too tired to drive back to RTP for the gala reception (I’m staying in Durham), but as it was hosted at RTP Headquarters, I am sure it was a lovely affair. I also know that by being at a blogging-oriented conference, I’ll find plenty of coverage of what I missed!

Roz at LOEX: Why Does Google Scholar Sometimes ask for Money?

Saturday, May 3, 2008 12:38 pm

This excellent presentation was done by two librarians at NCSU: Scott Warren, the Assoc. Director of the Textiles Library and Engineering Sciences and Kim Duckett, Digital Technologies and Learning Librarian.

What they have done is to expand on our discussion of the economics of information and scholarly publishing for an upper-level english class on communication in the sciences. Here’s what they do:

  • Want to convey to students that their tuition $$ goes to things that the general public cannot afford. They are privileged by their association with an institution and a library and that can give them a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
  • Focus on Discovery (what Google Scholar is for) and Access (what the library pays for)
  • Find that students who run into a fee from a Google Scholar link move on to something else until they find something for free.
  • They focus on discussing with the students WHY articles, journals and databases cost money — the library is a business — we purchase these things on their behalf (and with their money)
  • They provide a larger context to peer review discussion including rejection rates, page rates, ‘not all journals are created equal,’ royalties, ownership, etc. to give them a sense of the culture of scholarly publishing, not just the process
  • Ask Why can publishers charge so much? and Why do we pay it?
  • Ask If we pay so much, do you think the publishers are giving it away for free on the web??
  • Kim uses a great deep web metaphor to explain how Google scholar works vs. online databases

While we already do some of what they are doing in our LIB100 classes — this encouraged me to give it more context — business models make sense to students (they pay, for example, for iTunes songs) so work with that. Especially for our LIB200 classes, this discussion becomes even more important to have.

Good metaphor: the journal is the CD, the journal article is the MP3 of one of the songs….


Pages
About
Categories
2007 ACRL Baltimore
2007 ALA Annual
2007 ALA Gaming Symposium
2007 ALA Midwinter
2007 ASERL New Age of Discovery
2007 Charleston Conference
2007 ECU Gaming Presentation
2007 ELUNA
2007 Evidence Based Librarianship
2007 Innovations in Instruction
2007 Kilgour Symposium
2007 LAUNC-CH Conference
2007 LITA National Forum
2007 NASIG Conference
2007 North Carolina Library Association
2007 North Carolina Serials Conference
2007 OCLC International ILLiad Conference
2007 Open Repositories
2007 SAA Chicago
2007 SAMM
2007 SOLINET NC User Group
2007 UNC TLT
2007_ASIST
2008
2008 Leadership Institute for Academic Librarians
2008 ACRL Immersion
2008 ACRL/LAMA JVI
2008 ALA Annual
2008 ALA Midwinter
2008 ASIS&T
2008 First-Year Experience Conference
2008 Lilly Conference
2008 LITA
2008 NASIG Conference
2008 NCAECT
2008 NCLA RTSS
2008 North Carolina Serials Conference
2008 ONIX for Serials Webinar
2008 Open Access Day
2008 SPARC Digital Repositories
2008 Tri-IT Meeting
2009
2009 ACRL Seattle
2009 ALA Annual
2009 ALA Annual Chicago
2009 ALA Midwinter
2009 ARLIS/NA
2009 Big Read
2009 code4lib
2009 Educause
2009 Handheld Librarian
2009 LAUNC-CH Conference
2009 LAUNCH-CH Research Forum
2009 Lilly Conference
2009 LITA National Forum
2009 NASIG Conference
2009 NCLA Biennial Conference
2009 NISOForum
2009 OCLC International ILLiad Conference
2009 RBMS Charlottesville
2009 SCLA
2009 UNC TLT
2010
2010 ALA Annual
2010 ALA Midwinter
2010 ATLA
2010 Code4Lib
2010 EDUCAUSE Southeast
2010 Handheld Librarian
2010 ILLiad Conference
2010 LAUNC-CH Research Forum
2010 LITA National Forum
2010 Metrolina
2010 NASIG Conference
2010 North Carolina Serials Conference
2010 RBMS
2010 Sakai Conference
2011 ACRL Philadelphia
2011 ALA Annual
2011 ALA Midwinter
2011 CurateCamp
2011 Illiad Conference
2012 SNCA Annual Conference
ACRL
ACRL 2013
ACRL New England Chapter
ACRL-ANSS
ACRL-STS
ALA Annual
ALA Annual 2013
ALA Editions
ALA Midwinter
ALA Midwinter 2012
ALA Midwinter 2014
ALCTS Webinars for Preservation Week
ALFMO
APALA
ARL Assessment Seminar 2014
ARLIS
ASERL
ASU
Audio streaming
authority control
Berkman Webinar
bibliographic control
Book Repair Workshops
Career Development for Women Leaders Program
CASE Conference
cataloging
Celebration: Entrepreneurial Conference
Charleston Conference
CIT Showcase
CITsymposium2008
Coalition for Networked Information
code4lib
commons
Conference Planning
Conferences
Copyright Conference
costs
COSWL
CurateGear 2013
CurateGear 2014
Designing Libraries II Conference
DigCCurr 2007
Digital Forsyth
Digital Humanities Symposium
Disaster Recovery
Discovery tools
E-books
EDUCAUSE
Educause SE
EDUCAUSE_SERC07
Electronic Resources and Libraries
Embedded Librarians
Entrepreneurial Conference
ERM Systems
evidence based librarianship
FDLP
FRBR
Future of Libraries
Gaming in Libraries
General
GODORT
Google Scholar
govdocs
Handheld Librarian Online Conference
Hurricane Preparedness/Solinet 3-part Workshop
ILS
information design
information ethics
Information Literacy
innovation
Innovation in Instruction
Innovative Library Classroom Conference
Inspiration
Institute for Research Design in Librarianship
instruction
IRB101
Journal reading group
Keynote
LAMS Customer Service Workshop
LAUNC-CH
Leadership
Learning spaces
LibQUAL
Library 2.0
Library Assessment Conference
Library of Congress
licensing
Lilly Conference
LITA
LITA National Forum
LOEX
LOEX2008
Lyrasis
Management
Marketing
Mentoring Committee
MERLOT
metadata
Metrolina 2008
MOUG 09
MOUG 2010
Music Library Assoc. 07
Music Library Assoc. 09
Music Library Assoc. 2010
NASIG
National Library of Medicine
NC-LITe
NCCU Conference on Digital Libraries
NCICU
NCLA
NCLA Biennial Conference 2013
NCPC
NCSLA
NEDCC/SAA
NHPRC-Electronic Records Research Fellowships Symposium
NISO
North Carolina Serial Conference 2014
Offsite Storage Project
OLE Project
online catalogs
online course
OPAC
open access
Peabody Library Leadership Institute
plagiarism
Podcasting
Preservation
Preservation Activities
Preserving Forsyth LSTA Grant
Professional Development Center
rare books
RDA/FRBR
Reserves
RITS
RTSS 08
RUSA-CODES
SAA Class New York
SAMM 2008
SAMM 2009
Scholarly Communication
ScienceOnline2010
Social Stratification in the Deep South
Social Stratification in the Deep South 2009
Society of American Archivists
Society of North Carolina Archivists
SOLINET
Southeast Music Library Association
Southeast Music Library Association 08
Southeast Music Library Association 09
SPARC webinar
subject headings
Sun Webinar Series
tagging
TALA Conference
Technical Services
technology
ThinkTank Conference
Training
ULG
Uncategorized
user studies
Vendors
video-assisted learning
visual literacy
WakeSpace
Web 2.0
Webinar
WebWise
WFU China Initiative
Wikis
Women's History Symposium 2007
workshops
WSS
ZSR Library Leadership Retreat
Tags
Archives
October 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007

Powered by WordPress.org, protected by Akismet. Blog with WordPress.com.