Against the Grain v31 #5 November 2019 by against-the-grain

c/o Katina Strauch Post Office Box 799 Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482

CHARLESTON CONFERENCE issue volume 31, number 5

ISSN: 1043-2094

NOVember 2019

“Linking Publishers, Vendors and Librarians”

IR-Themed Issue — IRs R Cool Again by Burton Callicott (Head of Research and Instruction, College of Charleston Libraries) <CallicottB@cofc.edu> and Natasha Simons (Associate Director, Australian Research Data Commons) <natasha.simons@ardc.edu.au>

hen they first arrived on the scene, Institutional Repositories (IRs) were like the new kid in school. They drew a lot of attention and, for a time, even sat with the cool kids at lunch. After a few months however, the novelty wore off and IRs settled into a group of friends more suited to their temperament and status — smart, earnest, and a little awkward. Many library administrators who championed repositories and, in a lot of cases, even reconfigured their org charts to accommodate them, continued to support IRs but stopped paying a lot of attention once the buzz has faded and the teaching faculty failed to embrace the idea, let alone an added step in the publication process. Those library leaders who held out, either for financial reasons or due to inertia, and never bought into a repository platform and the additional positions, would wax smug whenever

IRs came up in conversation and state with a suppressed, knowing smile that they never thought they were worth it from the start. A recent and surprising/not surprising push for open access in general and Open Educational Resources (OERs) in particular coupled with the emergence of Plan S, a global trend towards reproducible research and enabling FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) research data means that IRs have been thrust back into the limelight. In the face of the ominous (and confusing and perhaps elitist) “open access” publication hurricane coming out of science centers in Europe, many of the problems that plagued IRs and conveniently justified their lack of attention — inability to acquire consistent and significant content, competition from discipline-specific repositories, lack of sexy, easy, and

If Rumors Were Horses

n July 2018 Eleanor Cook started “phased retirement” at East Carolina University, which is a part-time assignment for three years. The 1st year Eleanor stayed in her position as AD for Discovery & Technology Services while a national search was conducted to replace her. In July 2019 Eleanor moved over to the ECU Music Library as interim head, filling in for David Hursh who is on a medical leave; Eleanor will possibly remain at the Music Library for her last year of phased retirement if David is not able to return. Working at the Music Library has been wonderful, Eleanor says, and she is learning many new things! And in case you were wondering … the new AD for Discovery & Technology Services at ECU is Amanda McLellan who was the head of Application and Digital Services at Joyner. Eleanor says she is thrilled to have one of her former direct reports in that position! Eleanor also sends word that her colleague Angela Dresselhaus joined Innovative in September 2019 as the ERM product owner Rick Anderson is a with over 18 years of academic library experience, most recently at grandpa! His beautiful Eastern Carolina University managing the Electronic Resources granddaughter is named Department. With every new team member, Innovative is focused continued on page 6 Miriam. Congrats Rick!

aggrandizing services offered by academic social media, etc. — have been minimized by the solutions that they offer to the current open access infused scholarly conversation puzzle. In essence, this is the very staid and drab thing that they have always offered: a space for scholarly contributions that is free and open to anyone with access to the Internet. Of course the terms “free” and “open” carry a huge amount of weight and controversy in this context. Many of the contributors to this issue grapple with the implications and subtleties of these concepts — it turns out that freedom is not necessarily free when it comes to scholarly publishing. Other authors outline the more specific ways that IRs can smooth out some of the rough spots of Plan S. And, continued on page 10

What To Look For In This Issue: Writing in Mathematics..................... 60 Hey Vendors, Do You Really Understand Your Marketplace?......... 74 Life is as it is: Flexibility and Change Management....................................... 86 Communicating Library Impact through Annual Reports.................... 90 Food Websites..................................... 88 Interviews Nigel Newton...................................... 44 Dr. Sven Fund.................................... 46 Dr. Anke Beck..................................... 50 Sarah Howard.................................... 54 Profiles Encouraged People and Company Profiles............ 96 Plus more............................... See inside

1043-2094(201911)31:5;1-O

Against the Grain (ISSN: 1043-2094) (USPS: 012-618), Copyright 2017 by the name Against the Grain, LLC is published six times a year in February, April, June, September, November, and December/January by Against the Grain, LLC. Business and Editorial Offices: PO Box 799, 1712 Thompson Ave., Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482. Accounting and Circulation Offices: same. Call (843-509-2848) to subscribe. Periodicals postage is paid at Charleston, SC. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Against the Grain, LLC, PO Box 799, Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482.

Editor:

Katina Strauch (Retired, College of Charleston)

Associate Editors:

Cris Ferguson (Murray State) Tom Gilson (Retired, College of Charleston) John Riley (Consultant)

Research Editors:

Judy Luther (Informed Strategies)

Assistants to the Editor:

Ileana Strauch Toni Nix (Just Right Group, LLC)

Editor At Large:

Dennis Brunning (Retired, Arizona State Univ.)

Contributing Editors:

Glenda Alvin (Tennessee State University) Rick Anderson (University of Utah) Sever Bordeianu (U. of New Mexico) Todd Carpenter (NISO) Eleanor Cook (East Carolina University) Anne Doherty (Choice) Ruth Fischer (SCS / OCLC) Michelle Flinchbaugh (U. of MD Baltimore County) Joyce Dixon-Fyle (DePauw University) Laura Gasaway (Retired, UNC, Chapel Hill) Regina Gong (Lansing Community College) Michael Gruenberg (Gruenberg Consulting, LLC) Chuck Hamaker (Retired, UNC, Charlotte) William M. Hannay (Schiff, Hardin & Waite) Mark Herring (Winthrop University) Bob Holley (Retired, Wayne State University) Donna Jacobs (MUSC) Ramune Kubilius (Northwestern University) Myer Kutz (Myer Kutz Associates, Inc.) Tom Leonhardt Rick Lugg (SCS / OCLC) Jack Montgomery (Western Kentucky University) Bob Nardini (ProQuest) Jim O’Donnell (Arizona State University) Ann Okerson (Center for Research Libraries) Rita Ricketts (Blackwell’s) Jared Seay (College of Charleston) Lindsay Wertman (IGI Global)

ATG Proofreader:

Rebecca Saunders (College of Charleston)

Graphics:

Bowles & Carver, Old English Cuts & Illustrations. Grafton, More Silhouettes. Ehmcke, Graphic Trade Symbols By German Designers. Grafton, Ready-to-Use Old-Fashioned Illustrations. The Chap Book Style.

Production & Ad Sales:

Toni Nix, Just Right Group, LLC., P.O. Box 412, Cottageville, SC 29435, phone: 843-835-8604 fax: 843-835-5892 <justwrite@lowcountry.com>

Advertising information:

Toni Nix, phone: 843-835-8604, fax: 843-835-5892 <justwrite@lowcountry.com>

Publisher:

A. Bruce Strauch

Send correspondence, press releases, etc., to: Katina Strauch, Editor, Against the Grain, LLC Post Office Box 799 Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482 cell: 843-509-2848 <kstrauch@comcast.net>

Against the Grain is indexed in Library Literature, LISA, Ingenta, and The Informed Librarian. Authors’ opinions are to be regarded as their own. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This issue was produced on an iMac using Microsoft Word, and Adobe CS6 Premium software under Mac OS X Mountain Lion. Against the Grain is copyright ©2019 by Katina Strauch

Against the Grain / November 2019

Against The Grain TABLE OF CONTENTS v.31 #5 November 2019 © Katina Strauch

ISSUES, NEWS, & GOINGS ON Rumors.................................................. 1 From Your Editor................................. 6

Letters to the Editor............................. 6 Deadlines............................................... 6

FEATURES IR-Themed Issue – IRs R Cool Again — Guest Editors: Burton Callicott and Natasha Simons

IR-Themed Issue — IRs R Cool Again..................................................... 1

by Burton Callicott and Natasha Simons — IRs are undeniably functional and can shore up the many gaping holes that come with open access.

Future Proofing IRs with Data and Software.............................................. 12 by Natasha Simons and Chris Erdmann — One of the major hurdles in making researchers aware of the existence of the IR is that the IR tends to sit outside of research workflows.

The Golden Age of the Green Ecosystem............................................ 16 A Color-Blind Perspective on Repositories by Micah Vandegrift — The focus is subtly shifting away from access toward discovery.

The Once and Future IR Agenda..... 20

Resolving the Dialectic Aims of Institutional Repositories by Andrew Wesolek — We should think of the dialectical aims of institutional repositories in a Hegelian sense.

IRs: Publication Method of Last Resort.................................................. 24

by Anton Angelo — By underscoring the role IRs and related services can play, we have an opportunity to show our relevance.

Putting the IR in RIMS..................... 26

Towards an Automated Integration Between Institutional Repositories and Research Intelligence Systems by JamieWittenberg — By leveraging faculty annual report citation data to populate an institutional repository, the workflow used by Indiana Univ. models new possibilities.

The Opportunities and Challenges of Research Data and Software for Libraries and Institutional Repositories........................................ 30

by Tom Morrell — Libraries have a unique opportunity to provide solutions for the data and software preservation challenges that plague the scientific community.

Meeting Institutional Goals by Working Beyond Institutional Walls....................32

by John Chodacki and Daniella Lowenberg — Researchers from across the University of California (UC) publish more than 50,000 articles annually. Underlying most of these articles are datasets, many of which have not been published.

NIRDs Unite....................................... 34

Building a Community of Institutional Repository Practitioners in the Northeast by Eleni Castro, Erin Jerome, Colin Lukens, Mikki Simon Macdonald and Lisa A. Palmer — The idea for “Northeast Institutional Repository Day” (NIRD) was conceived by a group of five repository librarians in the northeast.

Getting to Grips with NTROs (visual arts data)............................................. 37

The Role of Repositories and Libraries in Their Management by Dr. Robin Burgess — The literature indicates that there are very few IRs in the arts.

“Institutional” Repositories, Redefined............................................ 40

Reflecting Institutional Commitments to Community Engagement by Amanda Makula — There are countless examples of higher ed institutions partnering with their local cities and communities.

Op Ed — Headwaters........................ 42

Food, Money, and Stability by Kent Anderson — We spend so much time fretting about money that we forget it’s supposed to liberate and empower us, not ensnare us or be hoarded.

Back Talk.......................................... 102

When Spooky is Normal: Lessons Learned While Visiting Chernobyl by Ann Okerson — As we go about our daily chores and deeds, we should remember that the seemingly less urgent tasks of preservation are not ones to be allowed to drift down our to-do lists.

SPECIAL REPORT Eradicating the Written Word.................................................................................10

Power and Symbolism through the Lenses of Book Burnings and Takedowns — A Research Project by Dr Frances Pinter — Frances is looking at what we know about book-burning.

ATG INTERVIEWS & PROFILES Nigel Newton....................................... 44 Founder and Chief Executive, Bloomsbury

Dr. Sven Fund..................................... 46 Managing Director, Knowledge Unlatched

Dr. Anke Beck..................................... 50 CEO, Intech Open

Blurring Lines.................................... 54

The Rise of Virtual Reality/Augmented Reality and the University Librarian by David Parker — An Interview with Sarah Howard of Queensland University of Technology.

Profiles Encouraged........................... 96

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Booklover............................................ 56

Summer Reading by Donna Jacobs — Colson Whitehead’s The Nickel Boys is a powerful read, Donna says.

Reader’s Roundup............................. 57

Monographic Musings & Reference Reviews by Corey Seeman — Two types of reviews in one column – monograph and reference reviews.

Collecting to the Core........................ 60

Writing in Mathematics by Kristine K. Fowler — Monographic works that are essential to the academic library within a particular discipline. Disciplinary trends may shift, but some classics never go out of style.

LEGAL ISSUES Edited by Bruce Strauch and Jack Montgomery

Legally Speaking................................ 63

European Union Promises Big Changes in Copyright Law by Bill Hannay — On March 26, 2019, the EU’s Parliament adopted a new “Directive on Copyright for the Digital Single Market.”

Questions and Answers...................... 64

Copyright Column by Laura N. Gasaway — As always, Lolly features many relevant questions and answers. Can blockchain be used to reduce uncertainty about who authored a work and the date it was produced?

PUBLISHING Bet You Missed It................................. 8 by Bruce Strauch — What do Rudyard Kipling and Judith Krantz have in common?

And They Were There........................ 66

Reports of Meetings — In this issue you’ll find Ramune’s final installment of reports from the 2018 Charleston Conference.

The Scholarly Publishing Scene........ 71

The Maxwell Effect by Myer Kutz — It was November 5, 1991 and we were meeting in Charleston! The overall conference theme was from Gilbert & Sullivan’s Mikado – “And I Am Right, And You are Right, Too-Loo-RaLay.” Ironically this was not the case for Mr. Maxwell, who was found overboard.

BOOKSELLING AND VENDING Both Sides Now: Vendors and Librarians........................................... 74

Hey Vendors, Do You Really Understand Your Marketplace? by Michael Gruenberg — Rodgers and Hammerstein knew best.

Being Earnest with Collections......... 75

Marketing Touchpoints..................... 81

Value Is in the Eye of the Beholder: Building Bridges with User Experience Tools by Jill Heinze — How can you better market your DMP (data management plan)?

Biz of Digital....................................... 83

Advancing Textbook Affordability: Considerations for Open and Affordable Course Materials by Ariana E. Santiago — Ariana has provided ATG readers with an overview of the project she led at the University of Houston.

Developing and Growing a New Repository Service: Part 3 Expansion by Michelle Flinchbaugh — This is Part 3 of a three part series on creating a new repository service.

Institutional Repositories and Knowledge Curation: Revisiting Knowledge Conversion in the Academic Environment by Arjun Sabharwal — This focuses on the IR as a knowledge curation platform.

Life is as it is: Flexibility and Change Management by Corey Seeman — While Corey is going to expand this for subsequent works, there are three areas that we can focus on for this introduction to flexibility in libraries.

Optimizing Library Services............. 78

Squirreling Away: Managing Information Resources & Libraries.....86

TECHNOLOGY AND STANDARDS Considering Games in Libraries and Such.............................................. 72

On using a Game to Actually Teach Something. Part I: The Accidental Learner by Jared Alexander Seay — About a month or so ago my application was accepted for a small teaching grant to create escape rooms for teaching.

Wandering the Web........................... 88

Food Websites by Dan Forrest — It’s always good to learn new and exciting things about food!

Library Analytics: Shaping the Future.................................................. 90

Communicating Library Impact through Annual Reports by Kristin Hall and Janet H. Clarke — Learn about a visual redesign and presentation of the divisional annual report.

Epistemology...................................... 93

The Tests of Time by T. Scott Plutchak — Owners of the servers on which our digital culture resides haven’t made long-term preservation a priority.

Let’s Get Technical............................. 94 Holistic Collection Assessment by Meghan Burke and Gwen Vredevoogd — Marymount University assessed their library collection.

Against the Grain / November 2019

“Linking Publishers, Vendors and Librarians”

Uncommon ...

Against the Grain is your key to the latest news about libraries, publishers, book jobbers, and subscription agents. ATG is a unique collection of reports on the issues, literature, and people that impact the world of books, journals, and electronic information.

Unconventional ...

ATG is published six times a year, in February, April, June, September, November, and December/January. A six-issue subscription is available for only $55 U.S. ($65 Canada, $95 foreign, payable in U.S. dollars), making it an uncommonly good buy for all that it covers. Make checks payable to Against the Grain, LLC and mail to: Against the Grain c/o Katina Strauch Post Office Box 799 Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482 *Wire transfers are available, email <kstrauch@comcast.net> for details, however, credit cards are the preferred alternative to checks ($25 fee applies).

_______________________________________________ City State Zip _______________________________________________ Company Phone _______________________________________________ Email _______________________________________________

REVIEWS

Name _______________________________________________ Address _______________________________________________

CHARLESTON CONFERENCE Issue

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

From Your (renovating) Editor:

gainst my better judgment I was talked into renovating an old house! It’s an old Army machine shop so I didn’t think it would be too bad. Boy was I wrong! This ATG issue, IRs R Cool Again, is guest edited by the amazing team of Burton Callicott and Natasha Simons. We have articles from Burton and Natasha (introduction), Natasha and Chris Erdmann (future proofing IRs) Micah Vandegrift (a color-blind perspective), Andrew Wesolek (resolving the dialectic aims of IRs), Anton Angelo (publication method of last resort), Jamie Wittenberg (IR and RIMS), Tom Morrell (research data and software), John Chodacki and Daniella Lowenberg (working beyond the institutional walls), Eleni Castro, Erin Jerome, Colin Lukens, Mikki Simon Macdonald and Lisa A. Palmer

(NIRDS), Dr. Robin Burgess (visual arts data), and Amanda Makula (partnering with local cities and communities). Clearly there’s a lot to learn about institutional repositories! Scott Plutchak’s Epistemology is about long-term preservation and Kent Anderson says we spend too much time fretting about money. Ann Okerson’s Back Talk is about Chernobybl and lessons learned. We have a special report from Dr. Francis Pinter about intentions and motivations behind book burning. Our interviews are with Nigel Newton, Dr. Anke Beck, and Dr. Sven Fund. David Parker supplements with an interview with Sarah Howard about the rise of virtual reality and augmented reality. The profiles encouraged are all about many of our authors. Our book review section has Corey Seeman’s monograph and reference reviews, and Anne Doherty’s col-

Letters to the Editor Send letters to <kstrauch@comcast.net>, phone 843-509-2848, or snail mail: Against the Grain, Post Office Box 799, Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482. You can also send a letter to the editor from the ATG Homepage at http://www.against-the-grain.com. Dear Editor:

Rumors from page 1

ATG is probably my favorite professional journal and I am very pleased to become one of your guest editors! I’m looking forward to getting started with this project! Barbara Tierney (Head, Research & Information Services Dept., University of Central Florida Libraries) <Barbara.Tierney@ucf.edu>

on bringing together the best library and software expertise to build solutions that help libraries transform to meet the demands of today’s world.

AGAINST THE GRAIN DEADLINES VOLUME 31 & 32 — 2019-2020 2019 Events ALA Midwinter

2020 Events Annual Report, PLA MLA, SLA, Book Expo ALA Annual Reference Publishing Charleston Conference ALA Midwinter

Issue

Ad Reservation Camera-Ready

Dec. 2019-Jan. 2020

Issue

11/07/19

lecting to the core as well as Donna Jacobs’ summer reading recommendation. Legal issues is about the EU Directive on copyright for the digital age by Bill Hannay. Lolly Gasaway answers many questions in her copyright column. Myer Kutz (Scholarly Publishing Scene) brings back many memories of Robert Maxwell. Ramune Kubilius does her usual thorough job of compiling reports from the 2018 Charleston Conference. Jill Heinze’s Marketing Touchpoints is about building bridges, Michael Gruenberg wants to know about the marketplace, Michelle Flinchbaugh continues her articles about creating a new repository, Ariana Santiago discusses advancing textbook affordability, Arjun Sabharwal is interested in institutional repositories and knowledge curation. Dan Forrest in wandering the web reminds us of food websites. In Library Analytics, Kristin Hall and Janet H. Clarke talk about the impact of annual reports. Holistic collection assessment is the subject of Meghan Burke and Gwen Vredevoogd’s Let’s Get Technical. Jared Seay is interested in using games to actually teach something. Oh Bosh! The cement contractors are ringing the bell so they can pour the back porch! Sounds like fun! Meanwhile, life goes on! Happy almost Thanksgiving! Yr. Ed.

11/25/19

Ad Reservation Camera-Ready

February 2020

01/02/20

01/16/20

April 2020

02/20/20

03/12/20

June 2020

04/02/20

04/23/20

September 2020

06/11/20

07/09/20

November 2020

08/13/20

09/03/20

Dec. 2020-Jan. 2021

11/05/20

11/23/20

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT Toni Nix <justwrite@lowcountry.com>; Phone: 843-835-8604; Fax: 843-835-5892; USPS Address: P.O. Box 412, Cottageville, SC 29435; FedEx/UPS ship to: 398 Crab Apple Lane, Ridgeville, SC 29472.

Gosh!!! According to Roger C. Schonfeld in Scholarly Kitchen, Annette Thomas, who was our wonderful keynote speaker last year at the Charleston Conference, has left Clarivate. What does this mean for Clarivate and what exciting new developments will Annette have in store for us!? An interesting article in The Atlantic (October 4, 2019) caught my eye. “College Students Just Want Normal Libraries” by Alia Wong. “Schools have been on a mission to reinvent campus libraries — even though students just want the basics.” I couldn’t agree more! https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/10/college-students-dont-want-fancy-libraries/599455/ When we were putting the program together for the 2019 Charleston Conference, we decided that Michael Mabe was the perfect person to talk about Plan S and what all is going on with it. Michael has agreed to speak saying that he is retired from STM and cannot speak officially as a representative. Meanwhile, let’s continued on page 18

Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Discover

OSA Publishingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s journals account for 40% of total citations and 32% of all articles published in the field of optics and photonics (2018 JCR).

osapublishing.org/library

Bet You Missed It Press Clippings — In the News — Carefully Selected by Your Crack Staff of News Sleuths Column Editor: Bruce Strauch (The Citadel, Emeritus) <bruce.strauch@gmail.com> Editor’s Note: Hey, are y’all reading this? If you know of an article that should be called to Against the Grain’s attention ... send an email to <kstrauch@comcast.net>. We’re listening! — KS

Sharing the Literary Wealth

Big time novelist David Baldacci (38 books) has given $1 million to the Mark Twain House in Hartford, Conn. It will support writing programs and appearances by authors. See — The Associated Press, “Novelist Baldacci gifts $1m to Twain home,” The Post & Courier, July 15, 2019, p.B3.

Obits of Note

Judith Krantz (1928-2019) worked for 27 years for women’s magazines. She began to find her way in a Cosmopolitan article “The Myth of the Multiple Orgasm.” She was 50 when Scruples hit the best-seller list in 1978. Her second, Princess Daisy, sold for $3.2 million, the then highest price ever for a novel. Sex and shopping were her themes, and she sold more than 85 million copies worldwide. Charles Reich (1928-2019) was a Yale Law School professor who found fame with his 1970 hippie utopia manifesto The Greening of America — inspired by his 1967 immersion in the Summer of Love. He sold two million copies, and his lectures became packed. He was also mercilessly ridiculed — and there was much to ridicule. Bellbottoms “give the ankles a special freedom” and “invite dancing in the street.” He left Yale in 1974 and lived in obscurity in San Francisco. See — The Week, July 5-12, 2019, p.35.

Against the Grain / November 2019

Dreary Path to Literary Fame

Herman Melville descended from two grandfathers that were heroes of the Revolution and wealthy. His father squandered the wealth, leaving Melville to toil at crumby jobs. He ran away to sea at 21, deserted and signed onto other ships, lived among the Polynesians. He came away with an awe at the swim naked lifestyle and a hatred of missionaries who were destroying the island lifestyle. He wrote Typee and Omoo which were bowdlerized but published by George Putnam. Even in that form they were condemned by Horace Greeley as “hankering for loose company.” Yet they were well received. He married an heiress and lived on her father’s money while he wrote a series of failed books including Moby Dick, which was blasted by ministers for indecency and because everyone dies. He eked out a living as a customs inspector and died with Billy Budd unfinished. See — William Vollman, “Melville’s Lost Paradise,” Smithsonian, July/ August, 2019, p.92.

Let’s Read Boarding School Novels

Rudyard Kipling, Stalky & Co. (1899) (Kipling savages Brit boarding school system); (2) Alec Waugh, The Loom of Youth (1917)(written at 17, scandalized society with themes of sports obsession and homosexuality); (3) Josephine Tey, Miss Pym Disposes (1947) (murder of a girl in an atmosphere of intense competition); (4) David Benedictus, The Fourth of June (1962) (set at Eton; masturbation + homosexuality + bishop peeping at girls undressing); (5) Sheila Kohler, Cracks (1999) (set in S. Africa; reunion of girls’ swim team; collective memory of year a foreign girl disappeared). See — H.S. Cross, “Five Best,” The Wall Street Journal, Aug. 3-4, 2019, p.C10 (Cross is the author of the recent novel Grievous).

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Ta ke a closer look at.... The CHARLESTON REPORT Business Insights into the Library Market

You Need The Charleston Report...

if you are a publisher, vendor, product developer, merchandiser, consultant or wholesaler who is interested in improving and/or expanding your position in the U.S. library market.

Subscribe today at our discounted rate of only $75.00 The Charleston Company 6180 East Warren Avenue, Denver, CO 80222 Phone: 303-282-9706 • Fax: 303-282-9743

IRs R Cool Again from page 1 like any good collection of IRticles, we include essays that largely ignore the messy stuff and simply explore the ever expanding possibilities and capabilities of IRs from non traditional research objects (NTROs) to providing entries to the surrounding local community. Even those authors who originally planned to write essays critical of IRs found it very difficult to do so once they got a few paragraphs in. To state the obvious, IRs are not sexy. The name itself is quite fitting. IRs are not perfect. Many of them are clunky (especially compared to slickly produced, commercial social media subterfuges) and, largely because there are so many different platforms and so much variety from institution to institution, they do not offer easy ways to integrate and interoperate (a problem that some may say is essentially solved by Google, but that may require another special issue). However, despite all of that, IRs are undeniably functional and provide an obvious and ready-made duct tape of sorts that can shore up the many gaping holes that come with open access and any grand plans to transform/secretly maintain the scholarly publication industry. We hope you find the following IR-themed essays thought provoking and enlightening.

Eradicating the Written Word Power and Symbolism through the Lenses of Book Burnings and Takedowns — A Research Project by Dr Frances Pinter (Senior Research Fellow, School of Advanced Study, University of London) <frances@pinter.org.uk>

ou might well ask why I, a UK publisher who has devoted most of my professional life to broadening access to knowledge, would be interested in book burning. Well, it dates back to travels to communist countries in the seventies and eighties where books that I’d freely studied from were still banned. In the nineties, at the request of George Soros, I was given an unprecedented opportunity to help foster the development of the newly independent publishing sector in thirty post-communist countries, including supporting translations. Over the decades, I felt a perverse, almost macabre interest growing in me about extreme acts against the spread of knowledge — that of book burning. Not just a simple act of destruction, there was more, much more to be understood — if one looked beyond the ashes. Essentially, book burning is about power and symbolism. How is power exercised through book burning? And, how should we understand the symbolic power of book burning? Who does it, and why? To what effect has its use as a tool of control changed over time as technologies of book production improved? Changes such as the growth of literacy, education and increasing availability of multiple and, more recently, digital copies of books have

10 Against the Grain / November 2019

altered the way in which control of knowledge and its dissemination (and destruction) occurs. Book burning isn’t merely a matter of flammable material, it can be a powerful political instrument or just a futile gesture. An historical review of book burning makes clear that these gestures have been a feature of our history throughout the ages. The earliest known papyri burnings date as far back as 1300 BC by the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaton. The earliest known book burnings in China were carried out in 213 BC by the emperor Qin Shi Huang. Millions of books have been burned over the millennia all over the world. You can now see schoolchildren on YouTube burning copies of Catcher in the Rye. Only a few years ago history books were burned by local officials in Northern Siberia because their revisions, though by Russian authors, had been sponsored by the philanthropist George Soros

(a project with which I’d been involved and helped to deliver). And, of course, whole libraries have been burned down. Today, knowledge stored by digital means still has considerable challenges of discoverability, accessibility and preservation. Even if we can solve the technical challenges, how do we protect content from malice and neglect? The phrase “Digital Flames” has emerged from the library community, conjuring up a really dystopian future that none of us want. So, I’m looking at what we know about the intentions and motivations behind book-burning to see if there are lessons to be drawn for protecting our cherished knowledge base.

If you’d like more information about this project or if you want to share your own thoughts and experiences please contact me at

<frances@pinter.org.uk>.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Royal Society Journals Archive Explore some of the most significant scientific discoveries from 1665 to 1996 with a one-time purchase to all Royal Society journals, with no annual maintenance fee.

Find out more at: royalsociety.org/journal-collection or visit PCG at the Charleston Vendor Showcase, booth 21. The first 50 visitors receive a free tote bag

Image: A Lacerta gecko by William Clift, 1816.

Future Proofing IRs with Data and Software by Natasha Simons (Associate Director, Australian Research Data Commons) <natasha.simons@ardc.edu.au> and Chris Erdmann (Library Carpentry Community & Development Director, California Digital Library) <Christopher.Erdmann@ucop.edu> Disclaimer: The views here represented the authors’ personal views and not those of their employers.

ibrarians around the world have contributed a huge amount of energy, expertise, time and enthusiasm into running institutional repositories since they were first initiated over 15 years ago (Smith, 2019).1 A central overarching purpose of these institutional repositories (IRs) has been to capture, describe, make accessible and preserve the research outputs produced at the institution to which the repository belongs. Services have been developed that support the repository to achieve this purpose and the overarching goal of delivering value to the institution and its research community. Initially, outputs held in the repository were publications, specifically the open access versions of published articles. In more recent years, and in line with changes to research policy and practice, the scope of IRs has expanded to include other research objects such as grey literature (conference papers, unpublished reports etc.), research data and software. However, IRs operate in a competitive landscape that includes professional network and profile systems with deposit features such as ResearchGate as well as discipline and generalist repositories. Unfortunately, IRs are underutilised by the research community compared with these other options. They are often seen as a last resort option, even by the institutions they support. This puts IRs at risk despite the sustainability that is inherent in linkage to the institution. In this article, we raise opportunities for IRs to expand further into data and software in order to stand out in a competitive landscape. We consider the advantages and challenges and make suggestions for future proofing to increase the competitiveness of IRs and ensure sustainability.

Meeting the FAIR Data and Software Challenge

Research data management is a major challenge for universities and other research institutions. The need for effective management and availability of data has been highlighted by research funding agencies, scholarly publishers, discipline communities and government. Published articles are still the prime currency for academic tenure and promotion; however, an increasing number of policies from scholarly publishers require a data availability statement that includes the location and access conditions for the data used to support the article findings. The push for data — and more recently, software — availability from publishers supports credibility, verification and reproducibility of research findings in the published article. While a large proportion of research data is made available through the supplementary section of journals, there is a push from sections of the research community away from this option and toward deposit in data and software repositories in order to improve curation and support long term preservation and access. For example, the Commitment Statement in the Earth, Space and Environmental Sciences2 which came out of the AGU Enabling FAIR Data Project (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) signed by a cross section of stakeholders including key scholarly publishers explicitly states: “Publishers will strive to...Direct all core research outputs (data, software, appropriate samples and sample descriptions) to FAIRaligned repositories, following the FAIR Principles (Wilkinson et al, 2016)3 (e.g., using CoreTrustSeal4 certification). This means that supplements will no longer be used as the primary archive for data.” A variety of repositories are available to support long-term access to research data including discipline, generalist and institutional. These

12 Against the Grain / November 2019

repositories differ in a variety of ways including governance, cost, scope, community engagement and so on. The increasing demand for data to be made available in repositories that are FAIR-aligned presents a real opportunity for IRs to grow and increase in value to the research community. Before looking at ways to do this, it’s worthwhile to outline the pros and cons of IRs for data and software deposit.

Advantages and Challenges

When PLOS first announced their data deposit policy in 2013, a group of librarians wrote a letter to PLOS5 to raise the fact that they had not mentioned institutional repositories as an option. The group made a strong case for including IRs as an option, citing their strengths including trust within the research community, expertise of library staff, persistence of the repository (and hence the data deposited), assistance and guidance for researchers, and overall sustainability of the IR as a system and a service. They wrote: “In summary, academic libraries already play an integral role in your efforts to make data more widely accessible and therefore are valuable additions to the established repositories recommended for archiving data related to publications in your journals. Our request is that you include institutional repositories when providing guidance to researchers on how they might comply with your policy.” This is likely to have been an oversight and PLOS responded positively, promptly updating their author guidance to include institutional repositories. However, it is worth noting that IRs were not on the immediate radar and this reflects a deeper issue that many researchers are simply unaware that their institution has an IR. A recent study of Spanish Universities (Borrego, 2017)6 compared article deposit between IRs and ResearchGate (RG). The authors found that researchers preferred to use RG for their articles primarily because they were unaware of the existence of the IR. At the same time, they were aware of the advantages offered by RG. This is not surprising, given the RG marketing strategy as a universal platform for research communities and as a promotional tool. However, it indicates there is a lot more work to do in raising awareness of the IR in general, whether for article or data deposit. One of the major hurdles in making researchers aware of the existence of the IR is that the IR tends to sit outside of research workflows. This makes it challenging as the IR is effectively hidden from view and relies on library or institutional campaigns to raise awareness of its existence, scope and purpose. Even with awareness, researchers are often unwilling to take the extra time to use an IR because it involves taking additional steps to deposit data outside of existing publication workflows. Contrast this to the ease of submitting data to a discipline or generalist repository with publisher integration, where data is deposited as part of the article submission and review process. Many institutions lack a policy that specifically states researchers should (or must) deposit their data in the IR. If they do mention the IR, it’s often listed as the repository of last resort, following discipline options. While researchers often follow discipline lines and institutional policy is challenging to enforce, mention of the IR in such a policy indicates some level of support for the repository from the institution. Without it, awareness of the existence of the IR may escape senior managers and senior researchers at the institution as well as others who could be making use of the repository as a service. A 2012 study of the Australasian community (Simons & Richardson, 2012)7 showed that staffing is a major concern for IRs. Many reposicontinued on page 14

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Bloomsbury Digital Resources is focused on providing essential and cutting edge scholarly content in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Contact us for more information! OnlineSalesUS@bloomsbury.com

Future Proofing IRs with Data and Software from page 12 tories are operated on a part-time basis and for the majority, there is no long-term repository sustainability plan (such as would cover budget, technical upgrades and staffing). Staffing and planning are major factors in providing consistency, quality and sustainability of IR services. The same study showed that technical staffing was also an issue. Often technical upgrades, bug fixes and features are the responsibility of a university IT department. The challenges here include the repository being low on the IT priority list and the specialist knowledge required for the particular IR system. This impacts the ability of the IR to compete on a technical level with other options such as ResearchGate, discipline or generalist repositories.

Implications

Given this (non-exhaustive) list, what would be some good options for IRs to consider to improve uptake and better compete in the research landscape? The following are a few suggestions: 1. Champion FAIR data and software As mentioned in the letter to PLOS, IRs have in their favour that they are trusted. The expertise of the librarians who run them is valuable and a part of this trustworthiness. However, publishers and sections of the research community are looking for a stronger definition of trustworthiness and a way of easily identifying which repositories enable FAIR data and software (e.g., Zenodo Principles).8 The Core Trust Seal certification — while currently still at low levels of adoption among data repositories — is gaining traction as a way of demonstrating to a repository’s users and funders that they have been evaluated by an independent authority and endorsed for their trustworthiness. Publishers are also looking to such certification as a way of guiding authors for data and software deposit. A cohort of data repositories was recently assembled to apply for CoreTrustSeal (CTS) certification as part of the American Geophysical Union Coalition Enabling FAIR Data Project, and other discipline communities are considering following suit. Could IRs consider coming together as a cohort to advance CTS and put themselves clearly on the map as a FAIR data and software deposit option? 2. Participate and leverage Scholix and Make Data Count initiatives The Scholix initiative9 comes from the World Data System and the Research Data Alliance, offering a global framework for linking the data and software held in repositories with the articles held by publishers. It presents an opportunity to showcase data held in the IR alongside the article made available through a publishers’ portal. Are librarians aware of this initiative, and can further steps be taken to expose data- and software-article links to Scholix so that the data and software in IRs is showcased? The Make Data Count project10 is a global initiative to have a standard and fair way to compare metrics for data sharing. Metrics are key to measure research impact and therefore can help demonstrate the value of data deposit. Repositories can contribute to this initiative by submitting COUNTER compliant usage reports of views and downloads to DataCite so that you can see use over time in DataCite search. How can more IRs contribute to MDC? 3. Consider how to spend time Staff time is one of the most valuable assets to an IR. It may be tempting for staff to spend time convincing individual researchers to deposit their data and software into the repository, but is this time well spent? We suggest it is better to spend time advocating that the repository be included in institutional policy and procedures, raising awareness of the IRs existence and value among senior policy makers and staff, working with IT to develop technical features that make the repository more attractive to researchers, collecting feedback and improvement suggestions from researchers and considering how the repository

14 Against the Grain / November 2019

can be included in institutional system workflows, e.g., mention of the IR at the time of writing a Data Management Plan. It is also worth considering how IR staff can be upskilled in new areas such as FAIR data and software in order to apply these concepts to the IR setting. 4. Engage in long term planning While a positive feature of IRs is their sustainability, this is achieved because of their link to the institution. Many IRs lack a long-term plan, and spending time developing one would enable the library to conduct a review and analysis of the IR within the broader environment and plan out budget, staffing, advocacy, policy and a features roadmap. This kind of planning is needed to take the IR forward from a last to a first option for the community it supports.

Conclusion

Institutional Repositories operate in a highly competitive environment. They rely on institutional support for funds and staffing which is potentially at risk given low uptake levels by researchers. We have discussed some of the challenges and opportunities for IRs to expand further in data and software which we hope will contribute to a rich discussion that will help IRs future proof themselves and thrive in a competitive environment.

References

Smith, Ina (2015). Open access infrastructure. UNESCO Publishing. p. 7. ISBN 978-92-3-100075-1. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ ark:/48223/pf0000232204 Coalition for Publishing Data in Earth and Space Sciences (COPDESS). Enabling FAIR Data Project: Author Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.copdess.org/enabling-fair-data-project/author-guidelines/. Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., ... and Bouwman, J. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3. CoreTrustSeal. Retrieved from https://www.coretrustseal.org/. (2015, November 2). Open Letter to PLoS – Libraries Role in Data Curation. Retrieved from https://datacurepublic.wordpress.com/openletter-to-plos-libraries-role-in-data-curation/. Borrego, Á. (2017). Institutional repositories versus ResearchGate: The depositing habits of Spanish researchers. Learned publishing, 30(3), 185-192. Simons, N., and Richardson, J. (2012). New Roles, New Responsibilities: Examining Training Needs of Repository Staff. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 1(2), eP1051. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1051. Zenodo. About: Principles. Retrieved from http://about.zenodo. org/principles/. SCHOLIX. Retrieved from http://www.scholix.org/. Make Data Count. Retrieved from https://makedatacount.org/

Endnotes 1. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232204 2. http://www.copdess.org/enabling-fair-data-project/author-guidelines/ 3. https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618 4. https://www.coretrustseal.org/ 5. https://datacurepublic.wordpress.com/open-letter-to-plos-librariesrole-in-data-curation/ 6. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1099 7. https://jlsc-pub.org/articles/abstract/10.7710/2162-3309.1051/ 8. http://about.zenodo.org/principles/ 9. http://www.scholix.org/ 10. https://makedatacount.org/

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Golden Age of the Green Ecosystem: A Color-Blind Perspective on Repositories by Micah Vandegrift (Open Knowledge Librarian, North Carolina State University) <mlvandeg@ncsu.edu>

lan S ruined everything. Coasting on the OSTP Memo and data skills training through various carpentries and sundry camps, we were all moving along nicely into a data managed future. Sure, we gave up on the SHARE v. CHORUS debate, which was understandable given that the commercial conglomerate publishers had all our money and ability to build a database (still in “beta” after 5 years?) and lobby our lawmakers more quickly and effectively than we ever could (“CHORUS Search,” n.d.). But even so, “public access” to research literature was happening, either covertly through SciHub or overtly through mirror journals, double dipping APCs, and institutional repositories. We had the OA tipping point to point to, after all (Kaiser, 2013). But, with those Europeans and their rush to be competitive in global innovation, all of a sudden we have to figure out how to achieve 100% open access in two-ish years. On top of this, we have the shifting (long overdue) recognition that scholarship is a global endeavor, and that a certain information analytics company is buying up the systems, platforms, and workflows to make an end-to-end scholar centipede of corporate knowledge (Rittman, 2018; Posada & Chen, 2018). Access for all!! (as long as you’re a Pepsi Scholar, not a Coke Scholar). Star and Ruhleder wrote a thing a while back about an “Ecology of Infrastructure” (Star & Ruhleder, 1996). Not surprising in our anthropo-scenic moment of weather uncertainty and tech giantism, systemic environmental metaphors are back in vogue (Korten, 2015; Eichmann-Kalwara, 2018). In the U.S. especially, where our connection to our pristine landscapes invades all our deepest held ideals, discussions that had been peppered with nodes and hubs have evolved pretty quickly to conference panels rife with bio-organic titles. For good or ill, this lingo codeshift may underlie a paradigmatic shift that has allowed us to much more clearly see, trace, and feel the impacts from one end of the scholarly production industry on the other. Elsevier’s acquisition of Mendeley was one thing (who ACTUALLY uses Mendeley anyways?). Their acquisition of bepress, on which libraries had staked their “open” reputations, is another thing entirely. All of this is par for the course if you have been around libraries for any amount of time — consolidation is the bread and butter of information capitalism. But, from an early mid-career point of view in 2019, the OpenCon Generation relies on our patchwork of tools, systems, and platforms and we expect them to conform to our values and principles. To extend the metaphor, the health and biodiversity of the scholarly ecosystem is dependent on whatever happens next in the academy-owned, scholar-led, community-governed space, and Early Career Researchers from all disciplines are agitating for a more open, transparent

16 Against the Grain / November 2019

system (“Invest in Open Infrastructure,” n.d.; “ScholarLed – Open Access Presses,” n.d.; “Good Practice Principles for Scholarly Communication Services,” n.d.). Repository land has had a difficult go of it. Despite the constant labor of working with researchers to identify opportunities for open interventions in their work and interpreting and translating cryptic publisher self-archiving policies, libraries invested deeply in the human (bio/organic + plus a soul!) infrastructure of repository managers/coordinators, scholarly communication librarians, and developers focused on customizing repository platforms to accomodate 6-36 month embargos, automagical workflows, and faceted search (Smart, 2019). Then, Clifford Lynch, the oracle of open, goes and flips the script by updating the agenda, such that “the linkage between journal article open access and institutional repository agendas has been a mistake, and one that has resounded to the detriment of both agendas” (Lynch, 2017). The collective professional gasp was echoed in the hallowed halls of Florida State University Libraries by a particular finger directed at a computer screen. And yet, regardless of any oracular proclamations or new commandments, the short years since 2017 have seen a boom in pre-print archives, the meteoric rise of open educational resources, and the continued glut of things that don’t fit neatly in any category of yesteryear’s scholarly output ending up online with DOIs, and probably often not peer reviewed (“OSF Preprints,” n.d.). The focus is subtly shifting away from access toward that other thing that libraries do really well — discovery (Chiarelli & Johnson, 2019). At the nexus of open discovery, Plan S, and the Universities of California going full ElseNope are two c-words we have generally avoided in InstiRepos: curation and collections. This feels like the moment scholarly communication is really, finally, wholly welcomed into the library org chart with open arms. What if institutional repositories act much less like buckets and much more like sponges? Entertain a thought exercise, if you will. Assume, as is posited in COAR’s NextGen Repositories report, that what matters about the infrastructure that we build/support is standard behaviours and characteristics, rather than customization and differentiation (COAR Next Generation Repositories Working Group, 2017). Now, agreement on declaring licenses at the resource level can be a much lower barrier than choosing between DSpace, Islandora, or Samvera. Assume also that scholarly com-

munication and IR shops are past the awkward teenage phase, and nearing adultiness with all the attendant confidence and a bit more caution. The NextGen repository, then, is not guided by the summer crush of post-print embargoed content needs, but agitating toward a systemic/ systematic evolution. It thinks of itself as a core information asset and data source for the library and the organization. Its spongelike qualities include a deep appreciation for description and documentation, and holding lots more than appears on the surface because its very fabric is porous and holey, soaking in and squishing out protocols (ORCID), layers (web annotation model), and technical principles (batch discovery). In this scenario, the NextGen Repository is not an all seeing panopticon, but a cherubim, living, protecting, delivering, and caring for an evermore essential portion of the scholarly record. Colleagues and researchers Colin Nickels and Hilary Davis propose a concept they titled “scaffolded publishing” “whereby [a scholar] would submit an idea to a conference, get feedback to help develop the idea, then submit a journal manuscript or short-form book manuscript for publication as well as create a digital project or blog post that allowed them to explore other ways to express their scholarship” (Nickels & Davis, 2018). This idea, that many discrete things conjoin to become A Publication, dovetails very nicely with a post-green, sponge-like repository environment. Of course we will always collect Authors Accepted Manuscripts where folks supply them, but thinking of the institutional repository of tomorrow as support for scaffolded publishing frees it from the constraints of Open Access as defined by the Suberian/Harnadian debates of the early 2000s. The institutional repository doesn’t need to be driven by open access. It can function as a single cell in support of a more open scholarly ecosystem by facilitating the sharing and valuation of many new forms of scholarship (that just happen to be accessible online, clearly referenceable, licensed openly, and well documented and described). Maybe, all said, Plan S didn’t ruin anything. As we await actual implementation of the policy, it is clear that the haranguing by the repository community, including LIBER, ARL, and that quirky BOSTON STRONG joint MIT/ Harvard statement, has reignited the fervor of repo believers everywhere and caused some pause to be taken by ScienceEurope and friends (Bourg, Brand, Eow, Finnie, & Suber, 2019). continued on page 18

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

…

A n Annals of Inte rnal M e d icine site lice n se g ive s re ad e rs u n lim ite d acce ss to th e jo u rn al’s p ractice -ch an g in g re se arch , cre d ib le le ad in g -e d g e clin ical re se arch , syste m atic re vie w s, an d n e w sw o rth y article s. In ad d itio n to o rig in al re se arch , su b scrip tio n s in clu d e In the C linic®, a p atie n t m an ag e m e n t se ctio n , an d AC P Jo urnal C lub ®, a fe atu re th at re vie w s th e e vid e n ce o f clin ical stu d ie s fro m m o re th an 1 2 0 le ad in g m e d ical jo u rn als.

Co re Be ne fits •

G ro u n d -b re akin g re se arch p u b lish e d o n lin e e ve ry w e e k

•

Fle xib le acce ss an d au th e n ticatio n o p tio n s (IP, A th e n s, an d Sh ib b o le th )

•

Pe rp e tu al acce ss fo r p aid -fo r ye ars

•

C O U N TER–co m p lian t u sag e statistics

•

Fu lly se arch ab le , fu ll-te xt o n lin e acce ss to e ve ry issu e p u b lish e d sin ce 1 9 9 3 .

•

M o b ile an d re m o te acce ss

•

A nnals Be yo nd the G uid e line s, a m u ltim e d ia se rie s b ase d o n Be th Israe l D e aco n e ss M e d ical C e n te r G ran d Ro u n d s

•

O n lin e -o n ly su p p le m e n ts, A nnals G rap hic M e d icine , an d A nnals fo r H o sp italists

•

A nnals O n Be ing a D o cto r Se rie s and Sto ry Slam w ith e ssays, p o e m s, an d vid e o th at illu m in ate th e art an d scie n ce o f m e d icin e

Ke y Facts Annals of Inte rnal M e d icine ’s 2 0 1 8 Im p act Facto r is 1 9 .3 1 8 (C larivate A n alytics). W ith 5 7 ,0 5 7 to tal cite s in 2 0 1 8 , Annals is th e m o st cite d g e n e ral in te rn al m e d icin e jo u rn al. Annals acce p ts le ss th an 8 % o f o rig in al re se arch , an d p u b lish e s clin ically fo cu se d o rig in al re se arch th at is valid ate d b y Annals’ e lite te am o f e d ito rs, p e e r re vie w e rs, an d statistician s. A b stracte d an d / o r in d e xe d in BIO SIS Pre vie w s, C A B D ire ct, C h e m ical A b stract Se rvice s, (C A SSI), C IN A H L, C u rre n t C o n te n ts/ Life Scie n ce s, C u rre n t C o n te n ts/ C lin ical M e d icin e , EM BA SE, In d e x M e d icu s, M ED LIN E, Pu b M e d , Scie n ce C itatio n In d e x, Scie n ce C itatio n In d e x Exp an d e d , an d Sco p u s.

Fo r ad d itio nal info rm atio n o r a q uo te , co ntact site lice nse @acp o nline .o rg o r yo ur sub scrip tio n ag e nt.

A nnals.o rg A IM 8 0 0 4

The Golden Age of the Green ... from page 16 It is also apparent that our colleagues on the faculty really want to share their work, be it green, grey, garnet or gold (Zhang & Watson, 2018). The recently released Periodic Table of the Open Research Ecosystem (pardon the shameless self-promotion) proposes that perhaps we’re grown up enough to talk with more nuance about the spectrum of research production (Vandegrift & Vandegrift, 2019). Research documentation and shared scaffolded publishing objects are ripe for the pickin’ even if the Published Work is plucked and potted in a walled garden. But, lets not forget that repositories are a red herring. The real green monsters are academic incentive structures and the glacial pace toward acceptance of public, digital, and open work as central to the scholarly record and therefore worthy of the tenure varsity jacket. Stay vigilant. Where we’re going, we don’t need commercial conglomerate publishers.

Bibliography

Bourg, C., Brand, A., Eow, G., Finnie, E., and Suber, P. (2019, January 18). Spotlight: Harvard Library and MIT Libraries provide recommendations for Plan S implementation [Blog]. Retrieved July 23, 2019, from Scholarly Publishing - MIT Libraries website: https://libraries.mit.edu/scholarly/2019/ spotlight-harvard-library-and-mit-libraries-provide-recommendations-for-plan-s-implementation/. Chiarelli, A., and Johnson, R. (2019, April 24). Perspectives on the open access discovery landscape. Retrieved July 23, 2019, from https://scholarlycommunica-

Rumors from page 6 hear what the fantabulous Mr. Mabe has to say on Wednesday, November 6 from 4:25-5:25 in Grand Ballroom 2 of the Gaillard Center “EuroVision, Plan S Horizon Europe and More.” Voila! The International Association for Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM) has recently announced that its Board has appointed Ian Moss as the organization’s new Chief Executive Officer. Moss who currently serves as Director of Public Affairs for the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) will take up the position in December 2019. STM is the leading global trade association for all involved in scholarly communications. Moss joins the organization at a particularly exciting time, as new publishing models are introduced which alter how researchers publish and share their work. Is the monograph dead? I don’t think so. The world’s two biggest university presses, Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press, have announced the results

18 Against the Grain / November 2019

tions.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2019/04/24/perspectives-on-the-open-access-discovery-landscape/. CHORUS Search. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2019, from http://search.chorusaccess. org/. COAR Next Generation Repositories Working Group. (2017). COAR Next Generation Repositories: Vision and Objectives. Retrieved from Confederation of Open Access Repositories website: http://ngr.coar-repositories.org/. Eichmann-Kalwara, N. (2018, March 8). RECOMMENDED: Designing Digital Scholarship Ecologies [Text]. Retrieved July 23, 2019, from Dh+lib website: https://acrl. ala.org/dh/2018/03/08/recommended-designing-digital-scholarship-ecologies/. Invest in Open Infrastructure. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2019, from Invest in Open Infrastructure website: https://investinopen.org/. Kaiser, J. (2013, August 20). Free Papers Have Reached a Tipping Point, Study Claims [Blog]. Retrieved July 23, 2019, from Science | AAAS website: https://www.sciencemag.org/ news/2013/08/free-papers-have-reached-tipping-point-study-claims. Korten, T. (2015, March 8). In Florida, officials ban term “climate change.” Miami Herald. Retrieved from https://www.miamiherald. com/news/state/florida/article12983720.html. Lynch, C. (2017). Updating the Agenda for Academic Libraries and Scholarly Communications. College and Research Libraries, 78(2). https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.2.126. Nickels, C., and Davis, H. (2018). Raising the Profile of the NCSU Libraries’ Research Support Strategies & Engagement. https:// dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AKD2V.

OSF Preprints. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2019, from https://osf.io/preprints/. Posada, A., and Chen, G. (2018). Inequality in Knowledge Production: The Integration of Academic Infrastructure by Big Publishers. In L. Chan & P. Mounier (Eds.), ELPUB 2018. https://doi.org/10.4000/proceedings. elpub.2018.30. Rittman, M. (Ed.). (2018). The Global Benefits of Open Research. Retrieved from https://www.mdpi.com/books/pdfview/edition/914. ScholarLed- Open Access Presses. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2019, from https://scholarled.org/. Smart, R. (2019). What Is an Institutional Repository to Do? Implementing Open Access Harvesting Workflows. Publications, 7(2), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7020037. SPARC. (n.d.). Good Practice Principles for Scholarly Communication Services. Retrieved July 23, 2019, from SPARC website: https://sparcopen.org/our-work/good-practice-principles-for-scholarly-communication-services/. Star, S. L., and Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/ display/24659918?recSetID=. Vandegrift, M., and Vandegrift, A. (2019, June 30). Periodic Table of the Open Research Ecosystem. https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.3263989. Zhang, L., and Watson, E. (2018). The prevalence of green and grey open access: Where do physical science researchers archive their publications? Scientometrics, 117(3). https:// harvest.usask.ca/handle/10388/11466.

of a joint, global survey into the future of the scholarly monograph. Oxford and Cambridge University Presses together carried out a large-scale survey over the summer. The survey was open to researchers in Humanities and Social Sciences at all stages of their careers and garnered almost 5,000 responses. The results have been released in a report entitled: Researchers’ perspectives on the purpose and value of the monograph. Looking to the future, survey respondents at all stages of their careers declared that the monograph would still have value in ten years’ time. However, they felt that experimentation and evolution would be necessary for it to remain relevant and useful, with a particular desire for improved access and discoverability. http://www.knowledgespeak.com/

RightsLink for Scholarly Communications platform, an e-commerce platform that automates the payment and collection of article publication charges (APCs) for open access content. A preconference on Tuesday before the Charleston Conference — Chaos or Complexity: Transforming Publishing Models in the Plan S era is on my to-listen list! http://www.copyright.com/blog/what-is-transformative-agreement/ www.charlestonlibraryconference.com/https:// sched.com/support/section/guide-for-attendees/

When did Transformative Agreements become “the new new” thing? Or is the new new thing canceling the “big deal”? Read about it on the Copyright Clearance Center website. The amazing Jenn Goodrich as Director of Product Management at CCC, leads the development and evolution of CCC’s transactional licensing services as well as its

Did you know that The Frankfurt Book Fair has a New York office? I recently enjoyed meeting Thomas Minkus and Michelle Claussen from that office. Michelle will be attending the Charleston Conference! https://www.buchmesse.de/en The resourceful Rebecca Seger, formerly of Oxford University Press, has moved to Ithaka S+R as their Vice President, Institutional Participation and Strategic Partnerships as of September 30. continued on page 22

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Our Benelux and Scandinavian Approval Plans are designed to enrich library collections while saving our customers time and effort.

Language and publisher expertise Industry-leading return rate of less than 0.4% Assignment of LC based HARRASSOWITZ subjects Services for special and general collections MARC records Sophisticated expenditure reports Budget tracking feature Assignment of fund and location codes We provide a convenient checklist enabling the library to create approval plan profiles with confidence and ease.

To get started, please contact us at:

service@harrassowitz.de

The Once and Future IR Agenda: Resolving the Dialectic Aims of Institutional Repositories by Andrew Wesolek (Director, DiSC, Digital Scholarship and Communications, Vanderbilt University) <andrew.j.wesolek@vanderbilt.edu>

n our 2016 work, Making Institutional Repositories Work, Callicott, Scherer, and I drew a distinction between institutional repositories and institutional repository initiatives. The former referred to the technical infrastructure of the repository itself, while the latter referred to the holistic suite of infrastructure and services “intended to support the preservation and organization of, and access to, the intellectual output of the institution in which they [institutional repositories themselves] were housed” (XV). In the forward to the book and in subsequent publications, Clifford Lynch and subsequently Scott Plutchak identify the yet unresolved dialectical aims of institutional repositories. By which, they refer to the tension between repositories as vehicles for Green OA, and repositories as platforms to augment the scholarly record by hosting non-traditional research outputs. Both Lynch and Plutchak challenge the former in support of the latter. Our book consisted of case studies and practitioner observations and, as such, largely discussed the ways in which IRs have enabled green OA. This practitioner thinks that IR support for the green OA movement has been impactful, and while I am inclined to agree that the future of IRs is best represented by hosting and preserving new forms of scholarship, I do think they can and should continue to support green OA. To that end, I would like to encourage us to think of the dialectical aims of institutional repositories in a Hegelian sense, which is to say not as thesis and antithesis in static opposition to one another, but as an interplay of movement between the two which reveals them to be interdependent parts of a whole. In this way, we can continue with a conceptualization of institutional repositories as locally-based networked suites of both services and infrastructure, rather than singularly-focused platforms aimed at promoting either Green OA or augmenting the scholarly record. Thinking of repositories in this way encourages further diversification of the scholarly communication ecosystem in terms of both types of scholarly outputs, and versions of traditional outputs. In the early 2000s, Raym Crow and Clifford Lynch published seminal papers offering differing visions for institutional repositories. Crow saw IRs as vehicles to reform the scholarly communication system by serving as part of a “global system of interoperable repositories that provides the foundation for a new disaggregated model of scholarly publishing” (Crow). With this conception, repositories could host openly available (if not always fully Open Access) manuscript versions

20 Against the Grain / November 2019

of traditional scholarly outputs (IE: journal articles), thus exemplifying a new model for community-controlled and openly available scholarly communication. Lynch on the other hand identified institutional repositories as frameworks to preserve and disseminate new forms of digital scholarship, augmenting the scholarly communication system by expanding the scholarly record rather than reforming the traditional scholarly publishing system (Lynch, 2003). As Lynch notes in the forward to Making Institutional Repositories Work and further elaborates in “Updating the agenda for academic libraries” this bifurcated goal of IRs continues to proliferate. Many of the advocacy efforts surrounding the widespread adoption and use of institutional repositories has focused on the benefits to individuals and institutions, citation advantages and research showcasing being examples, bestowed by institutional repositories hosting OA versions of traditional scholarly outputs. However, Lynch describes “the linkage between journal article open access and institutional repository agendas a mistake” (Lynch, 128) and that OA archiving of the scholarly literature is best conducted at the funder or publisher level. Rather than focus on populating repositories with Green OA manuscripts, Lynch thinks that “academic and research libraries need to be spending a lot more time considering the changing nature of the scholarly record, the broader cultural record that underlies it and that enables future scholarship, and how we can collectively exercise effective long-term stewardship over this” (Lynch, 128). This is to say, institutional repositories should deemphasize or perhaps even eliminate their focus on green open access and instead focus on supporting the expanding scholarly record and facilitating scholarship “designed for digital environments” (Lynch, 128). I support this latter point that the future of institutional repositories lies in facilitating new forms of digitally native scholarship — transcending the legacy print-based paradigm of scholarly outputs is one of the great allures of an open access scholarly communication ecosystem. However, I push back on the position that the linkage between green OA hosted at the institutional level and repositories has been a mistake. Instead, I think that green OA has made a substantial impact on the scholarly landscape and will continue to do so in the near term. The green OA agenda has also fueled a proliferation of institutional repositories, thus laying the groundwork for libraries to begin to emphasize the use of these repositories in the

important ways identified by Lynch, meaning as platforms for the preservation and dissemination of new forms of scholarship. To explore the way that these dual roles of institutional repositories actually work in tandem with one another, we can frame the dialectical tension between the IR as vehicle for Green OA and as a vehicle for facilitating an expanded scholarly record in the aforementioned Hegelian sense. That is to say, the truth reveals itself through the dialectical movement and interplay of thesis and antithesis, thus revealing themselves to be differences which are none. In the preface to his Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel explains with the metaphor of the flower bursting forth from the bud: “The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and one might say that the former is refuted by the latter… These forms are not only distinguished from each other, but, as incompatible with each other, they also supplant each other. However, at the same time their fluid nature makes them into moments of organic unity in which they are not only not in conflict with each other and it is this equal necessity which alone constitutes the life of the whole.” (Hegel, 4) Much of the work of institutional repository managers has focused on advocacy and practices surrounding the deposit of open versions of traditional scholarly outputs in repositories. True enough, we have not seen the transformation of the scholarly publishing system imagined over a decade ago resulting from these practices. However, they have had a significant impact on the scholarly communication landscape, as evidenced by the proliferation of IRs and their accompanying services at institutions where download counts often register in the tens or hundreds of thousands. Though no “revolution” per se has taken place, hundreds of thousands of openly available works are being discovered and downloaded through institutional repositories, which has lent credence to those advocating for more openly accessible scholarship on the basis of fairness to those who may not have the resources or support necessary to obtain copyrighted scholarship . We might also look to the recent proliferation of Big Deal cancellations as evidence of change in the scholarly publishing system that is, at least partially, enabled by this advocacy work. The UC system, for example, outlines ways to obtain Elsevier articles after cancelling their Big Deal. The first among these is “Find an Open Access Copy” whether that be through a disciplinary repository, institutional repository, or author’s profile (Office of Scholarly Communication, University of California). continued on page 22

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Once and Future IR Agenda ... from page 20 Moreover, IRs have provided the essential infrastructure, to borrow Lynch’s term, that underpins the adoption of Harvard-style open access policies. The Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions, for example, consists of greater than 100 institutional members, all of whom are committed to using their institutional repositories to support both green and gold open access publishing (COAPI). True enough, policies adopted by these institutions tend not to have “teeth” and compliance can be spotty, but the net result is increased access to thousands of scholarly articles that might otherwise remain behind paywalls, and committed institutional support for SPARC’s advocacy efforts to open research through legislative action. Rather than a condemnation of aims, spotty compliance can be understood as a problem to be solved. Some institutions making progress in this space have seen compliance rates around 50%. Criticisms of the Green OA agenda of institutional repositories, including those of Lynch and Plutchak, often focus on the role of disciplinary repositories and the inherent contradiction of a form of open access that is dependent on the continued existence of traditional subscription models. Disciplinary and funder-supported digital repositories can indeed provide the infrastructure for green open access and may offer some perceived benefits in aggregating similar content from a variety of different institutions. However, their centralized nature makes them vulnerable to for-profit takeovers or potentially governmental suppression. We have seen an example of the former in Elsevier’s acquisition of SSRN, and of the latter in the “guerilla archiving” movements designed to protect accessibility to federal climate data from an incoming hostile U.S. administration (Climate Mirror). The decentralized and largely independent nature of institutional repositories, provided that they

Rumors from page 18 The he’s here/he’s there/he’s everywhere Rick Anderson is a grandpa. Did you catch the picture on page 1? His granddaughter is named Miriam! Congratulations, Rick! The smiling and always upbeat Glenda Alvin is much more than a librarian. She is a seamstress and quiltmaker extraordinaire! A few months ago, I got a huge box from Glenda. Inside was a beautiful handmade quilt of many-colored books! WOW! We are planning to display it in Charleston during the Conference for everyone to admire! Plus here she is in front of another of her many creations! Like wow!

22 Against the Grain / November 2019

are based on open-source platforms, provides immunity to such threats. Plutchak calls attention to an oft-posed critique of green OA by referring to it as “fundamentally parasitic on traditional journals” due to its reliance on the editorial services provided by traditional publishers (Plutchak, 30). The idea here is that green OA, making manuscript versions of closed-access publications openly available, is essentially self-contradicting and as such ineffective as a revolutionary force. This is due to the fact that these manuscripts exist as part of the traditional subscription based publication model and as such could not exist should that model be subverted. However, reflecting back on Hegel’s metaphor, we can consider the green OA agenda of IRs to be like the bud, self-contradictory though it may be, in that it established the foundation of repository services in libraries. In this same way, Hegel’s bud establishes the conditions for the emergence of the flower, though the bud remains self-contradictory in that it exists for something (the emergence of the flower) rather than for itself. By this, I mean the IR infrastructure itself, but also the way that IRs have popularized the idea of libraries as disseminators of scholarship and, through authors rights advocacy and Open Access policies, as partners in the publishing process itself. As is evidenced by the unfolding big deal cancellation movement, and the use of content currently housed in repositories, IRs should continue to host green OA content, despite the inherent contradictions of that movement. In brief, we should embrace these dialectical aims by increasing focus on aspects supported by Lynch without eliminating the focus on green OA. Lynch concludes “Updating the agenda” by reminding us “of the truly central challenge and opportunity for our era: to develop appropriate new genres of scholarly communication for the digital environment” (Lynch, 130). The flower that is a diverse and open scholarly record that transcends the bounds of digital imitations of

Steve Fallon (Steve is an account Vice President, Americas and Strategic Partnerships at De Gruyter) sent us this Rumor! Michael Zeoli and Steve Sutton formerly of Ebsco have joined DeGruyter. DeGruyter is very excited to have them on board! I remember visiting Sven Fund’s office at DeGruyter in Berlin several years ago. There were wonderful pencil and watercolor drawings by his children everywhere! A charming memory. I loved Berlin. Had never been there. Definitely worth a visit! Speaking of the innovative Sven Fund, he is now Managing Director of Knowledge Unlatched, and we have an interview with him in this issue p.46.

print-based outputs is truly a grand opportunity and challenge. The green OA agenda, like the bud bringing forth the flower, fueled the widespread adoption of the technical infrastructure of repositories and complementary education and training surrounding authors’ rights, open access, and intellectual property in online environments. The dialectical aims of institutional repositories, then, reveal themselves to be interdependent parts of a broader whole.

Works Cited

Callicott, B., Scherer, D., and Wesolek, A. (2016). Making institutional repositories work. West Lafayette, ID: Purdue University Press. Climate Mirror (2019). Climate mirror: An open project to mirror public climate datasets. Retrieved from: https://climatemirror.org/. COAPI (2019). Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions Retrieved from: https:// sparcopen.org/coapi/. Crow, R., SPARC (Organization), and Association of Research Libraries. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: A SPARC position paper. Washington, D.C: SPARC. Hegel, G. W. F. (2018). The Phenomenology of Spirit (T. Pinkard, Trans.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Lynch, C. A. (2003). Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure For Scholarship In The Digital Age. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3, 2, 327-336. Lynch, C. (2017). Updating the agenda for academic libraries and scholarly communications. College and Research Libraries, 78, 2, 126-130. Office of Scholarly Communication, University of California (2019). Access to Elsevier Articles. Retreived from https:// osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/open-accessat-uc/publisher-negotiations/alternative-access-to-articles/#askauthor. Plutchak, T. S., and Moore, K. B. (2017). Dialectic: The Aims of Institutional Repositories. The Serials Librarian, 72, 27-35.

Many thanks to the multi-tasking wonder woman Leah Hinds who helped me with many Rumors! BTW, we love Rumors! Please send them to either Leah or me at anytime!! Thanks!! <hindsl@gmail.com> <kstrauch@comcast.net> The prodigious Corey Seeman is a regular contributor to ATG and a talented photographer known for animal pictures, most notably of squirrels. Corey had one of his photos selected for the annual Comedy Wildlife Photography Awards “Having one of my squirrel pictures selected for the Comedy Wildlife Photography Awards is probably my photographic highlight of the year — if not nearly all of the years.” Hey y’all! This website is truly amazing! Highly recommended. https://www.comedywildlifephoto.com/ continued on page 29

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

IRs: Publication Method of Last Resort by Anton Angelo (Research Data Coordinator, University of Canterbury) <Anton.angelo@canterbury.ac.nz>

ust when I thought it was all over for Institutional Repositories, they have shown me a new face that just might provide the stuff to move us to a truly open publishing landscape. It feels as if there is a resurgence in interest in Open Access (OA). Plan S, the research funder’s attempt to disrupt the traditional subscription based business model, has raised the possibility that a more complete transition to a largely OA publishing landscape is one step closer to being achievable. The coalition of research funders who have come up with Plan S includes some very heavy hitters — amongst them national bodies throughout Europe and Scandinavia, the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, and the European Research Council. We’re talking billions and billions of euros of funding. The principles behind Plan S, the manifesto, so to speak, are influencing the minds of many research funders around the world, and the pace of subscribers abandoning their big deals with publishers is increasing as well. So, it would seem OA is sexy again. What I’d like to suggest is that Institutional Repositories (IRs) have a fundamental role to play in the medium term of satisfying and increasing the pace of OA transition, as well as a permanent role within research institutions as a “publisher of last resort.” I didn’t used to think that. I was very much of the mind that IRs were only a tool for the former, a way to put a wedge into big deal subscription packages offered by Big Publishing (as no one is calling it) and would wither away once the glorious revolution was complete. IRs were a transitional tactic designed to attack the profits of the profiteers, opening up research and letting libraries abandon subscriptions. I’ve changed my mind. Firstly though, a digression about the concept of free. Free is a fundamental part of OA, and it comes in many guises. Freeto-read. Free-to-reuse. Free-to-redistribute. Free-to-remix. Free-to-retain. At its heart is the implicit notion that academic discourse is an important thread of freedom of speech. I won’t dwell too long there — there be dragons. The other “frees” however, are worth spending some time thinking about. Open Source has long thought about the notion of free resources. The original Jargon definition of Free Software1 encapsulates the theory and expresses the two main implications. Free as in Beer — no cost. Free as in Speech — a far more nuanced concept, sometimes emphasised as “libre,” implying liberty.2 There’s a third definition of free as well — Free as in Kittens. Although sappy perhaps, this free has a serious implication. You know, you go get

24 Against the Grain / November 2019

a kitten from someone desperate to find homes for an unexpected litter, but you know there is a cat-lifetime of care involved. So, what does that mean to us? Publishing isn’t free, as publishers like to remind us. It’s so not free, one publisher was able to make 2,000,000,000 Euros in profit from it in 2018. However, the demands of OA are that the results of research are at no cost to the end user, and that they are reusable and redistributable (sort of like the Open Source idea of “libre”), plus the added implication that researchers are open to study and analyse results in the way they think is best, without interference from funders, their institutions and other potential oppressors.3

the triangle all over again but this time requiring a cheap and high quality solution. This point is raised again when looking at small scholarly societies that are the bulk of socalled “diamond” OA — free to read and free to publish. Because it is done on the cheap, it’s slow. Certainly the journal I edit is guilty of that, but many are not. Predatory publishing, that takes a small (compared to Big Publishing) fee for sticking your article online with no quality assurance, is fast. Anecdotally I’m aware of researchers who exploit this to get their work up fast. They realise its problematic, but speed is essential for their specific needs, and it serves a purpose. A row could be included for pre-print services like ArXiv, and IRs — and it would look a lot like the one for predatory publishing. The costs for these are met by patrons — mostly libraries — to have somewhere to get an idea into the knowledge-sphere easily and reliably. Speed is important here to keep the momentum of discussion going outside the conference room. My point here is that looking at the speed/ cost/quality triangle, though tempting as it is, is too weak a metaphor on which to base our arguments about OA. Free is complex, and to say that we pay for free by a reliable relationship in low quality or slow speed of delivery isn’t held up in practice — many other things are in play. This contradicts the arguments of Big Publishing So now we return to the role of the IR. I’d like to consider another model of folk wisdom. The Quality/Speed/Cost triangle. I’ve mentioned the power of patronage This was introduced to you by a builder, or a — that IRs are paid for through the goodness mechanic, or an embittered cousin, grandparent of libraries’ hearts. In fact, IRs are a “core or sibling. Pick two, they say — you can have business,” something that libraries must do if any two of a good job, a cheap job, or a fast they hold by their value of equitable informajob, but never all three. The idea is that you tion dissemination.4 Libraries, as I explain to will always have to compromise something, enraptured people at parties, are moving from and it’s your choice on how you’d like to do it. collections of books spread geographically — Let’s apply this to our Open Access dilemma. piles of Marx and Shakespeare — to collections of online, unique material being shared digitally. So are libraries becoming publishers? That’s a bit like asking Table One. The way we’d like to think about cost/speed/quality are Doctoral Table One shows a view Theses published once you put them online, the of the cost/speed/quality real answer to which is, “...kind of?”. triangle, and demonstrates Libraries can play a fundamental role in a rather simplistic view of supporting truly free Open Access to research the world. Let’s take a few by paying for platforms that do so. IRs are an examples. Is Big Publishing obvious start, and they can be put to all sorts of fast? A lot would say no — article turnaround can take use. Let’s look at Dspace, a major open source years — and an argument for IR platform — like many platforms in use, it why that is could be about can integrate with all the major harvesting and refereeing and editing, which indexing services (Google Scholar, OCLC …) continued on page 26 is done for free — invoking

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

IRs: Publication Method ... from page 24 to make work stored there eminently findable. It’s understood by archiving systems committed to permanent retention. And, its relatively straightforward to maintain (at least as much as healthy kittens are). They can also hold all sorts of work that had previously withered away on desktop hard drives or forgotten file folders — conference contributions, posters, research datasets (especially those related to electronic theses). Plan S appears to hold the power for a real tectonic shift. Its demands could shift the thinking of those who hold the power in this relationship — the content creators (and them that pay their bills). Speaking frankly, researchers are more interested in their research than

the neo-liberal economic models that have hijacked their work, and libraries have done a great job in hiding the messy details of the economic transactions behind the hijack. When I tell a researcher than 11/12ths of our collections budget goes towards subscriptions for journals that will just disappear the instant we stop paying for them, their eyes widen. (The other 1/12th, that goes towards the things they think we spend all our time dusting). By putting the focus back on IRs, Plan S revitalises the repository projects we were all hoping were worth the time and investment. By underscoring the role IRs and related services can and (quietly) do play, we have an opportunity here to show our relevance to the research process, and embed our expertise in supporting publishing. Given active and positive management, IRs could even become a spearhead for library

led publishing in general and, for those of us not already doing it, a mechanism to support our obvious and preferred end goal — free to read, free to publish platforms paid for by the academy itself with the money it used to put into publishers’ pockets.

Endnotes 1. http://catb.org/jargon/html/F/free-software.html 2. Ever wondered why Open Office forked when it was picked up by Oracle, and the “free” version was called Libre Office? 3. This has led to a kickback from some saying that mandating OA publishing is actually a limitation on free speech. Those “some” are normally publishers or publishing consultants. 4. I’d argue if libraries are not about equitable information dissemination, then they are essentially just franchises for publishers, online bookshops.

Putting the IR in RIMS: Towards an Automated Integration Between Institutional Repositories and Research Intelligence Systems by Jamie Wittenberg (Indiana University, Bloomington) <jvwitten@indiana.edu>

Introduction

nstitutional repositories are at a turning point. There have been several public and contentious assertions that the institutional repository (IR) is dead,1 but it is more accurate to say that the IR may not continue to exist in the way that we currently conceive of it. In 2017, Ellen Catz Ramsey, Director of Scholarly Services, wrote a blog post addressing why UVA launched a new repository at a time when the value of institutional repositories was being questioned, even by those who initially supported them. She wrote, “As an option for authors whose disciplines are not congregating around an international discipline-based archive, or whose work doesn’t (yet) fit existing scholarly archives, every good research institution will always need the safe haven of a local repository ... Put it in the IR, poof, it’s in the library’s catalog, Google Scholar, and has a persistent link you can cite.” However, Ramsey also writes that IRs have not served their function as clearinghouses for research at an institution. In contrast, Novak and Day at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas assert that “After reading the literature and a self-examination of our repository situation, we believe a new role exists for the IR, a research administrative one” (2018). This contentious, contested new role is inexorably tied to the rise of research information management products in the higher education sector. Libraries have historically collected and analyzed publication

26 Against the Grain / November 2019

data in order to improve services and collections. This data has taken on new significance in the age of data-driven university administration. Publication quantity, venue, and citation counts are often used as a proxy for measuring the impact of research. Thus, publication data enables universities to assess research impact, productivity, co-authorship with other institutions, etc. Furthermore, it allows systems that integrate publication data with funding data to mine publications for keywords that can be matched to grants and, ideally, assist research administration offices in suggesting appropriate funding opportunities to faculty authors. Commercial entities have developed sophisticated software that links faculty biographical data with data on past grant and award activity, publications, co-authorship, and more. The collection and monetization of this data on research activity makes up a lucrative research intelligence market. It is no secret that academic publishers are making headway into the research intelligence market, and it is a logical progression to then develop or acquire faculty activity reporting systems. These systems, often referred to as

research profiling systems, research information management systems (RIMS), or current research information systems (CRIS), are systems that collect and manage data about research activity.2 Elsevier, for example, announced in 2016 that they were rolling out Faculty and Academic Activity Reporting functionality in Pure, their RIMS which enables administrators to track faculty research activity by integrating faculty profile, funding, and publication data (“Pure Faculty Activity Reporting: Making data-based strategic decisions,” 2016). Shortly following Elsevier’s reporting tool, Bryant et al. noted that “RIM adoption [is] growing in countries without strong national reporting mandates, driven by reasons other than compliance, such as improved decision support and improved researcher services” (2017). Commercial ownership of preprint servers and institutional repositories (SSRN, Bepress, Esploro) coupled with the rise of RIMS and their consolidation with faculty profile, reporting, and funding operations systems strategically targets research administration and compliance offices as new continued on page 28

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Inspec Analytics

Precision analytics for research excellence Understand your place in the global engineering research landscape and make strategic decisions about the direction of your projects with a dynamic new tool based on the IET’s renowned Inspec database. Chart your course for research excellence Discover your position in the research landscape and make informed decisions about where you’re heading next. With Inspec Analytics, you can: – monitor the research output of your institution and see how you rank globally; – benchmark your institution against collaborators and competitors to set actionable goals and demonstrate strengths; – identify emerging trends to explore new fields and plan where to focus your resources; – find and monitor collaboration opportunities with academia, industry and government to demonstrate impact.

Visit our booth at the Charleston Library Conference for a demonstration or find out more at inspec-analytics.theiet.org

The Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) is working to engineer a better world. We inspire, inform and influence the global engineering community, supporting technology innovation to meet the needs of society. The Institution of Engineering and Technology is registered as a Charity in England and Wales (No. 211014) and Scotland (No. SC038698). Michael Faraday House, Six Hills Way, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AY, United Kingdom.

Putting the IR in RIMS ... from page 26 customers for commercial publishers. As much as these developments serve commercial publishing interests (and provide potentially chilling data to school administrators), this adoption and consolidation also presents new opportunities for libraries in automating the repository population process and positioning library repositories as central services in the university’s research ecosystem. Libraries are uniquely poised to lead development of community-owned infrastructure that challenges commercial publishers’ strategic consolidation of the apparatus of research and scholarly communication (Schonfeld, 2017).

Indiana University Case Study

At Indiana University, the campus’ response to the implementation of a new open access policy in 2017 created an opportunity for the University Libraries to develop an inhouse RIMS built to facilitate the automated deposit of green open access content into an institutional repository. In 2016, roughly one year before the policy was passed, a new annual reporting system was implemented for the university. This reporting system, Digital Measures Activity Insights (DMAI), is used across the university to standardize faculty annual reports. Each year on January 15th, all university faculty report on their teaching, research, and service activity. As part of the 2017 implementation of a camus Open Access Policy, the University Libraries established a workflow with the DMAI team, administered by the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs. As part of this workflow, the Libraries run a report each year after the annual reporting deadline that results in a CSV file containing citations for every article reported by a faculty member as accepted for publication or published during the last calendar year. In 2018, the IU Libraries Scholarly Communication Department processed 1,591 unique citations with IU Bloomington authors, and in 2019, they processed 2,193. To manage these records, the IU Libraries developed a tool: Bloomington Research Information Tracking Engine (BRITE). The BRITE tool is designed to support librarians in processing faculty annual report citations for articles subject to the Open Access Policy in order to ingest metadata and assets for those citations into the institutional repository IUScholarWorks Open. This repository is one of three managed by the Scholarly Communication department and uses Tind, a cloud-hosted spin-off of open-source CERN software. In order to ingest records, the Scholarly Communication Department must first determine which version of the article is acceptable for deposit, procure the article, then ingest the article and metadata into the repository. This workflow leverages several APIs to automate as much of the process as possible.

Metadata Enhancement

The Crossref API is used to add crucial attributes to incomplete records. Because citations are often user-entered, information may be incomplete, incorrect, or out of order.

28 Against the Grain / November 2019

The Crossref integration enables the Scholarly Communication department to copy accurate metadata to an incomplete record. This is particularly important in ensuring correct author order, ISSN, and DOI for each record.

Open Access Check

When an author has already published an open access version of their article, IUScholarWorks Open points to the open access version of record, rather than archiving the asset. In order to determine whether an open access version is (or will be) available, BRITE integrates with three APIs: Unpaywall, Directory of Open Access Journals, and PubMed. The Unpaywall API harvests metadata from over 50,000 publishers and returns information to BRITE based on whether the article is open access. The Directory of Open Access Journals, a registry of open access journals, returns information to BRITE based on whether the journal is open access. The PubMed API is used to determine whether an article is in PubMedCentral, indicating that it was funded by NIH and subject to their public access requirements. It returns information on PubMedCentral ID to BRITE.

Rights Check and Content Recruitment

In 2018 and 2019, about one-third of IU-authored articles have had an open access version available on the web. For the articles that do not have an open access version available, BRITE leverages the SHERPA/RoMEO API to determine the most permissive version of an article that can be shared in an institutional repository. The record is then tagged with the most permissive version (unknown, preprint, postprint, or offprint) that can be deposited. Depending upon which version can be shared, an email template is sent to the IU author requesting that version for deposit. The email address, author name, journal title, and article titles are pre-populated by BRITE and emails are sent through the BRITE tool.

Deposit

Once authors respond to requests for their final versions, assets are stored in a Box directory using a naming convention that relates each asset to its associated record by way of a unique ID. Metadata-only records, which point to articles previously published openly, and records with these assets are then batch deposited into IUScholarWorks Open, mapping the fields used in DMAI and BRITE to the MARCXML used in the repository. Once the repository is populated, each record is issued another unique ID within the repository. These IDs are then harvested and appended to each record in BRITE. This ensures that every record in BRITE links to a record in the institutional repository. It also enables the Scholarly Communication department to send a final confirmation email to each author, providing them with a link to their repository record.

Conclusion

The modern institutional repository is a local effort but also a collaborative one, integrating with data sources stewarded by institutional and national stakeholders. It

serves as a clearinghouse for published and unpublished research output — a site of preservation and of records management, a local solution for persistent access to institutionally-authored work and a research information management system. It offers a locally-provided solution, often designed to support specific institutional needs, without giving away institutionally-authored work to commercial publishers. By leveraging faculty annual report citation data to populate an institutional repository, the workflow used by Indiana University models new possibilities for institutional repositories as clearinghouses of research output. While this model is not fully automated — it does still require quality control, intervention, escalation of complex cases, and record management — it provides a blueprint for the development of a repository that is part digital asset management system, part records management system, part research information management system. This workflow was designed to address a specific institutional repository use case, but resulted in the development of a RIMS that stores a complete record of every reported publication on the Bloomington campus. Because this workflow is not dependent upon commercial software, it offers several advantages to institutions: 1. It gives campuses local control over quality control when disseminating metadata for faculty-authored articles. 2. It enables institutions to be flexible in selecting or de-selecting research administration workflow components without disrupting the entire administration and compliance ecosystem. 3. It lessens the likelihood that faculty-entered data in RIMS that is ingested into public-facing profile systems will be monetized by commercial entities. 4. It populates the institutional repository and provides a single record for research output on campus while broadening access to faculty-authored research. Bryant et al. wrote in a comprehensive 2017 report on RIMS that “While RIM systems and IRs overlap in functionality, there are characteristic differences. The main purpose of collecting publications as part of RIM is to collect and validate institutional research outputs … the main purpose of an IR is to facilitate open access and reuse of publications...” (p. 52). Although these systems have traditionally run on separate platforms and served different institutional priorities, a future-facing institutional repository is likely to be at least minimally integrated with a RIMS and it is conceivable that going forward there will be wider adoption of systems that offer fully integrated RIMS/repository platforms. There are new technologies and opportunities for a modern IR that revitalize its role and broaden its value at an institution. These products are already emerging in the continued on page 29

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

DSM-5® and essential new resources are available for students and practitioners PsychiatryOnline.org offers the most comprehensive online access available for psychiatric textbooks, journals and professional development tools. This virtual library is a key resource used in the teaching and study of psychiatry, psychology, and other mental health disciplines. It is an essential tool for mental health professionals, used in diagnosis, treatment, and professional development. Contact us for more information or to purchase a subscription: Email: institutions@psych.org Phone: 202-559-3729

Priority Code: AP1913A

Putting the IR in RIMS ... from page 28 commercial sector — it remains to be seen whether locally-owned, open alternatives that prioritize the critical scholarly communication role of libraries will surface.

References Bryant, B., Clements, A., Feltes, C., Groenewegen, D., Huggard, S., Mercer, H., Wright, J. (2017). Research Information Management: Defining RIM and the Library’s Role. Retrieved June 21, 2018, from https:// www.oclc.org/research/publications/2017/ oclcresearch-defining-rim.html. Novak, J., and Day, A. (2018). The IR Has Two Faces: Positioning Institutional Repositories for Success. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 24(2), 157–174. https://doi.or g/10.1080/13614533.2018.1425887 Pure Faculty Activity Reporting: Making data-based strategic decisions. (2016). Retrieved August 19, 2019, from https://www. elsevier.com/research-intelligence/campaigns/ AIR-registration-june-2016. Ramsey, Ellen. (2017, 11). We Launched a New Institutional Repository. Here’s why. Retrieved from The Taper: Copyright and Information Policy at the UVA Library: http:// thetaper.library.virginia.edu/2017/08/11/

Against the Grain / November 2019

we-launched-a-new-institutional-repository-here-s-why.html. Schonfeld, Roger. (2017). Strategy & Integration Among Workflow Providers. Retrieved August 19, 2019, from The Scholarly Kitchen: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet. org/2017/11/07/strategy-integration-workflow-providers/.

Endnotes 1. Eric Van de Velde wrote in a 2016 blog post “With the IR at a dead end, Green OA must pivot towards alternatives that have viable paths forward: personal repositories, disciplinary repositories, social networks, and innovative combinations of all three” http://scitechsociety.blogspot.com/2016/07/ let-ir-rip.html. See also: Poynder, R. (2016, September 22). “Open and Shut?: Q&A with CNI’s Clifford Lynch: Time to re-think the institutional repository?” https://poynder. blogspot.com/2016/09/q-with-cnis-cliffordlynch-time-to-re_22.html 2. There are numerous research profile systems that have been adopted by universities. One resource for comparison of these systems is the “Comparison of research networking tools and research profiling systems” Wikipedia article, available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_research_networking_tools_and_research_profiling_systems.

Rumors from page 22 Ian Singer is no longer at Credo Reference. He is now in New York City as the Chief Strategy Officer at Capira Technologies, LLC, where he will assist the chief executive officer in developing, communicating, executing and sustaining corporate initiatives. https://www.capiratech.com/ The marvelous Jean Shipman is retiring from Elsevier where she was VP Global Library Relations. Jean has had a long and impressive career. She retired as Librarian Emerita & Director for Info Transfer, Center for Medical Innovation, in Salt Lake City, Utah. Good luck and Happy trails, Jean! The ubiquitous Don Hawkins — who will be blogging the Charleston Conference once again this year — has a great set of articles about the opening of the newly redesigned Temple University Charles Library as well as an interview with Stephen Bell, the Associate University Librarian for Research and Instruction Services. Don has written his usual in-depth report and interview. Watch for it in the ATG December-January (ALA Midwinter issue) and online at www.againstthe-grain.com/. continued on page 38

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Opportunities and Challenges of Research Data and Software for Libraries and Institutional Repositories by Tom Morrell (Research Data Specialist, Caltech Library) <tmorrell@caltech.edu>

ong-term availability of data and software generated by researchers is a massive challenge. For libraries, this challenge is also an opportunity to leverage relationships with researchers and utilize expertise in creating metadata and making content available over the long term. At Caltech, a strong research data repository was created by keeping the services simple and providing researchers an easy-to-use platform to share data and software (data.caltech.edu). In just two years of operation, CaltechDATA has received an impressive number of submissions from over 1% of campus researchers in a wide variety of disciplines. The repository has already powered a discipline-specific data resource, custom visualizations, and allowed for rapid development of many new features. The publication and data management practices currently used by the research community are clearly insufficient to maximize the value of research, resulting in inaccessible data, non-reproducible data, and worst of all lost data. Even simple measurements that can easily be stored in a text file, such as the length of a bird beak, present significant challenges for data reproducibility and accessibility. A study looking at 20 years of biological organism measurement data found that on average only 20% percent of data files were available when requested, and availability decreased over time (Vines et al., 2014). Even when data are received, they may not be correct or usable by other researchers. In this case, only 13% of papers had data that could be used to reproduce the analysis from the original work (Andrew et al., 2015). This example shows some of the current challenges for accessing and using research data. Larger and more complex types of data and software will prove even more difficult to preserve and reuse. Depositing data files and software in a repository is the solution to data availability challenges. There are thousands of discipline-specific data repositories that have been developed to store and improve the reusability of research outputs for a specific communities (Pampel et al., 2013). Successful efforts, such as the Protein Data Bank (PDB) for protein structural data, GenBank for genomics data, and WormBase for nematode model organism data, have made large amounts of data available in a standardized way (Benson et al., 2013; Berman, Kleywegt, Nakamura, & Markley, 2014; Lee et al., 2018). However, two major challenges for discipline-specific repositories are scope and funding. The scope of disciplinary-specific repositories is unlikely to be sufficient to meet researcher needs. For example, Caltech researchers publish approximately 4,000 peer-reviewed publications annually, and most rely on significant amounts

30 Against the Grain / November 2019

of data and software. Much of this innovative work is interdisciplinary and simply does not fit into existing disciplinary repositories. If a field is still developing, it is nearly impossible to standardize file formats and experiment-specific metadata. Discipline-specific repositories are also often funded through competitive short-term research grants, making long-term funding challenging. For each new grant a justification must be made as to how funding will have a major new impact on the research community. It can be difficult to get funding for the ongoing and unexciting work of maintaining access to data (Van Horn & Gazzaniga, 2013). The development and promotion of the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reproducible) principles for research data has provided a broader understanding of the requirements for effective data sharing (Wilkinson et al., 2016). Key components of making data FAIR include assigning appropriate metadata, using persistent identifiers, and providing human and machine access to the

data. Efforts are underway to enable researchers to make their data FAIR, and publishers are determining how to include data and software citation as part of publications (Cousijn et al., 2018; McQuilton et al., 2016). The COPDESS â&#x20AC;&#x153;Commitment Statement in the Earth, Space, and Environmental Sciences for Depositing and Sharing Dataâ&#x20AC;? statement makes recommendations to ensure open data, including having journals stop accepting data files and software as supplemental files and directing researchers to put data and software in appropriate repositories (COPDESS, 2019). This commitment statement is a major step in the right direction and has received signatures from most major publishers. While the current statement is solely for geoscience-related data, the quick adoption by publishers suggests it may easily translate to other fields (Stall et al., 2019). The transition to FAIR data in repositories will result in many questions from researchers, especially since a significant amount of data currently stored in supplemental information or on personal computers will need to find a home. One approach to the challenge of increasing data deposit demands is to simplify the

problem. In the current era of limitless and cost-effective cloud storage, the annual price for storing 100 TB of data in geographically-redundant cloud storage is less than the average cost of a single chemistry journal subscription (Romaine, 2019). Open source repository software like Invenio and Dataverse provides community supported ways of managing data. All institutions have access to the technology to store and make files persist over time, but there are two challenging requirements for a successful repository: collecting files and software from researchers and ensuring that content remains available over the long term. Libraries are uniquely positioned to tackle these challenges since they are experts in storing, archiving and describing materials. They have existing relationships with researchers and deep experience with metadata. Libraries also have a history of preserving content and making thoughtful decisions about retention. Existing institutional funding models for libraries solve the major challenge of longterm sustainability common for disciplinary repositories. Similarly, researchers are likely to be more willing to store their data locally at their own institution. Under the auspices of a university library, all data and software at an institution can be captured by the institution and paid for by the institution. Despite many advantages, institutional data storage at a library has traditionally limited the amount of customization available to researchers to support discipline-specific requirements. However, modern repository platforms with persistent identifiers and APIs can balance standardization and customization. Persistent identifiers such as DOIs easily provide federated metadata for discovery and APIs allow access to the underlying data files for customized development. This allows a disciplinary or project repository to easily build custom features on top of data that is stored in the institutional repository. For example, the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) has their data service (tccondata.org) built on the Caltech institutional data repository, CaltechDATA (data.caltech.edu). TCCON maintains their own data processing pipeline and website. They have complete control of how their data files are organized, can embed custom metadata within their files, and can provide private access to data to members of the consortium. However, the public access to files is via DOIs that resolve to CaltechDATA landing pages. At the end of the TCCON data processing pipeline, files are transferred to CaltechDATA automatically using an API. The data files in CaltechDATA can also be accessed programmatically using an API or included in custom visualizations and continued on page 31

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Opportunities and Challenges ... from page 30 other processing pipelines. Even if TCCON ceases operation and the tccondata.org site goes offline, all the important data files will still be accessible via CaltechDATA and the Caltech Library. Another challenge for institutional repositories run by libraries is a limited history of receiving large volumes of data submissions. A 2017 survey from ACRL found that most library institutional repositories receive one or fewer datasets per month (Hudson-Vitale et al., 2017). Library-managed repositories will need to be more efficient in order to tackle the volume of data anticipated from new researchers being required to provide FAIR data to support publications. CaltechDATA has been in operation since summer 2017 and in two years of operation has received over 1,000 records from more than 1% of campus researchers (including faculty, staff, postdocs, and graduate students) from a broad range of disciplines. A one-page deposit form was developed for CaltechDATA that is straightforward, quick, and makes it easy for all authenticated campus researchers to submit files with metadata based on the DataCite schema. The deposit form shows only the most critical fields to the researcher by default, but a complete set of metadata is made available if they want to build a more complex record. Upon submission, the user immediately gets

Against the Grain / November 2019

a DOI that can be included in a publication. All metadata is transmitted to DataCite for aggregation to encourage dataset discovery. Users can also automatically submit software via the CaltechDATA GitHub integration and generate and update records using the CaltechDATA API. Data deposits are encouraged by not having a library approval step, so the submission process can easily scale to thousands of records per year. Although the library does not manually curate record metadata and files, the quality has been remarkably high as the researchers feel responsible for their own CaltechDATA records. Since CaltechDATA records are public, the quality of the submitted data and metadata directly affect the public image of the researcher, encouraging high quality submissions. Even though the underlying CaltechDATA repository is simple, Caltech Library has been able to quickly build new features such as automated metadata updates and visualizations to support researchers and data users. When a dataset in CaltechDATA is cited by a new publication, the publication is automatically linked in the CaltechDATA item’s metadata using CrossRef Event Data. The researcher who submitted the CaltechDATA record can also choose to receive an email notification every time their item is cited. Similarly, when a dataset is referenced by a completed thesis in the CaltechTHESIS repository, the thesis is automatically linked in the CaltechDATA item’s metadata. Project-specific visualizations,

such as our geology thesis map (maps.library. caltech.edu) were developed to show where data were collected over time and to promote Caltech research to the broader community. With the geology thesis map, a visitor views an image of the world and can zoom in to specific sites and retrieve images of the original maps and illustrations generated by Caltech researchers since the 1920s. This feature uses the read API to collect data from the repository. In support of software preservation, Caltech was an early adopter of the CodeMeta standard which allows researchers to provide more complete metadata as part of their code repository. For all software preserved in CaltechDATA the CodeMeta file can be extracted and used to update metadata in the record. CaltechDATA also supports interactive software reuse using Binder, an open-source service that can be used to re-run data analysis in a Jupyter notebook or other programming environment from visitors’ web browser (Morrell, 2019). These new features have been developed outside of the repository software stack, and can conceptually be applied to any API-enabled repository. All these new features could be developed quickly as they don’t impact the basic functionality of the repository. By keeping things simple, library data services can be possible for all institutions. At Caltech, 1 FTE is dedicated to the data repository, with support from liaison librarians for outreach and submission support. continued on page 32

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Opportunities and Challenges ... from page 31 The existing relationships liaison librarians have with researchers is critical for making researchers aware of library data services and providing support for discipline-specific repositories, journal requirements, and metadata creation. The CaltechDATA repository is based on Invenio 3, which is an open-source repository system first developed at CERN. TIND, which provides commercial support for Invenio-based repositories, runs the hosted Invenio instance for Caltech. For libraries that do not want to run their own repository, they can aid researchers submitting data or software to discipline-specific or available general repositories such as Zenodo, Harvard Dataverse, or Dryad. Many of these repositories provide APIs that can be used to automate submissions and access data for reuse. Libraries have a unique opportunity to provide solutions for the data and software preservation challenges that plague the scientific community. Maintaining the record of scientific knowledge, which now includes data and software, requires institutional backing to succeed. By developing simple repository services that are compliant with the FAIR principles, partnering with disciplinary repositories to act as storage agents, and working to meet the needs of researchers, libraries can ensure that research data and software remains open and available for years to come.

Bibliography Andrew, R. L., Albert, A. Y. K., Renaut, S., Rennison, D. J., Bock, D. G., and Vines, T. (2015). Assessing the reproducibility of discriminant function analyses. PeerJ. https:// doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1137

Benson, D. A., Cavanaugh, M., Clark, K., Karsch-Mizrachi, I., Lipman, D. J., Ostell, J., and Sayers, E. W. (2013). GenBank. Nucleic Acids Research, 41(Database issue), D36-42. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1195 Berman, H. M., Kleywegt, G. J., Nakamura, H., and Markley, J. L. (2014). The Protein Data Bank archive as an open data resource. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des., 1009–1014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822014-9770-y COPDESS. (2019). Commitment Statement in the Earth, Space, and Environmental Sciences. Retrieved July 2, 2019, from http:// www.copdess.org/enabling-fair-data-project/ commitment-to-enabling-fair-data-in-theearth-space-and-environmental-sciences/ Cousijn, H., Kenall, A., Ganley, E., Harrison, M., Kernohan, D., Lemberger, T., … Clark, T. (2018). A data citation roadmap for scientific publishers. Scientific Data, 5, 180259–180259. https://doi.org/10.1038/ sdata.2018.259 Hudson-Vitale, C., Imker, H., Johnston, L. R., Carlson, J., Kozlowski, W., Olendorf, R., and Stewart, C. (2017). SPEC Kit 354 Data Curation. Association of Research Libraries. Lee, R. Y. N., Howe, K. L., Harris, T. W., Arnaboldi, V., Cain, S., Chan, J., … Sternberg, P. W. (2018). WormBase 2017: Molting into a new stage. Nucleic Acids Research, 46(D1), D869–D874. https://doi. org/10.1093/nar/gkx998 McQuilton, P., Gonzalez-Beltran, A., Rocca-Serra, P., Thurston, M., Lister, A., Maguire, E., and Sansone, S.-A. (2016). BioSharing: Curated and crowd-sourced metadata standards, databases and data policies in the life sciences. Database, 2016. https://doi. org/10.1093/database/baw075

Morrell, T. E. (2019). caltechlibrary/ caltechdata_usage: Jupyter notebook with visualization of submissions to CaltechDATA (Version v0.0.2). https://doi.org/10.22002/ d1.1250 Pampel, H., Vierkant, P., Scholze, F., Bertelmann, R., Kindling, M., Klump, J., … Dierolf, U. (2013). Making research data repositories visible: The re3data.org registry. PLoS One, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0078080 Romaine, S. B., Barbara Albee, and Sion. (2019, April 4). Deal or No Deal | Periodicals Price Survey 2019. Library Journal. Retrieved from https://www.libraryjournal. com?detailStory=Deal-or-No-Deal-Periodicals-Price-Survey-2019 Stall, S., Yarmey, L., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Hanson, B., Lehnert, K., Nosek, B., … Wyborn, L. (2019). Make scientific data FAIR. Nature, 570(7759), 27. https://doi. org/10.1038/d41586-019-01720-7 Van Horn, J. D., and Gazzaniga, M. S. (2013). Why share data? Lessons learned from the fMRIDC. NeuroImage, 82, 677– 682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.11.010 Vines, T. H., Albert, A. Y. K., Andrew, R. L., Débarre, F., Bock, D. G., Franklin, M. T., … Rennison, D. J. (2014). The availability of research data declines rapidly with article age. Curr. Biol., 24(1), 94–97. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.014 Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, Ij. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., … Mons, B. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data, 3, 160018. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18

Meeting Institutional Goals by Working Beyond Institutional Walls by John Chodacki (California Digital Library, University of California Office of the President) <John.Chaodacki@ucop.edu> and Daniella Lowenberg (California Digital Library, University of California Office of the President) <Daniella.Lowenberg@ucop.edu>

esearchers from across the University of California (UC) publish more than 50,000 articles annually. Underlying most of these articles are datasets, many of which have not been published. Even if these datasets were published, the UC system (like any university) does not have the ability to track or index them. While the scale of the UC’s research outputs may not be typical of other universities, our story and approach to tackling these issues have been similar to those of other colleges and universities. In 2014, in an effort to address this problem, California Digital Library (CDL) set out to develop an easy submission system on top of our digital preservation repository. That system was called Dash. After receiving a Sloan Foundation grant to reimagine Dash as an open source, easy way to publish data, we worked to create an easy and

32 Against the Grain / November 2019

user-friendly interface for UC researchers to publish and preserve their data at UC. The goal was to get as many datasets (suitable for a general repository) as possible. To attain this goal, our team spent years doing mass outreach to UC researchers, building out new features requested by these researchers, and trying to convince publishers and research workflow systems to integrate with Dash. The result? Five hundred deposits over three years. We spent a significant amount of time with researchers to make sure our decisions kept researchers in mind. Despite adopting this researcher-centric approach, we quickly recognized that the project presented several hurdles to executing and building what researchers genuinely value (Narayan & Luca, 2017). So, we realized we had to continued on page 33

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Meeting Institutional Goals by Working Beyond ... from page 32 adjust our approach. As we looked inward and evaluated our journey, we arrived at the following three insights, all of which can be applied to research data management (RDM) programs at other universities of varying types and sizes: 1. Researchers are not institutionally focused Researchers may be influenced by institutional policies and mandates, but the vast majority of them are not aware of or advocates of institutional options. Research is a global enterprise, and the work is focused around disciplines. Ecology researchers are influenced by where other ecologists are publishing and depositing their data. As such, researchers have vocalized their need for community (i.e., discipline-based or cross-disciplinary) solutions (Cragin et al., 2010). To have an institutional data publishing option that collaborators (at other institutions, globally) have not heard of or would want to publish data in is a very real obstacle. Further, to convince researchers to use their institutional offering when they themselves or their collaborators have had success publishing their data in an institution-agnostic, general purpose, or discipline-specific repository is a moot debate. While institutions pour resources into local projects, the value of such resources remains murky to researchers and the adoption rates remain extremely low. 2. Seamless integrations into researcher workflows are not happening Open Access has gained traction and has become the status quo for many researchers in the last decade, but open data publishing still has a way to go. And the way to drive this adoption is by making it seamless for researchers. While operating and iterating on Dash, we approached many organizations asking them if they could utilize our open APIs to build in integrations where researchers could publish their data from various workflows. The technology is there and publishers and tools like online lab notebooks understand this need. But they do not invest in this development. Why? Because our project was for a single institution. If this didn’t happen for an institution the size of University of California, it will continue to not happen for the thousands of others that would love to tackle the same issue. 3. Lack of name recognition Institution-based resources do not have brand recognition. While libraries may not be interested in competing in a popularity contest with researchers, the reality on the ground is that general repositories (both commercial and non-commercial) have gained adoption because they are suggested and promoted by colleagues, publishers and funders (not to mention marketing teams at for profits). As a result, many researchers do not feel they have ownership of institution-based resources. Instead they frequently feel more loyalty to community tools, or even commercial products, that have ambassador and other programs. As trite as it sounds, we are adding an additional hurdle to the success of our research data publishing initiatives by promoting institutionally focused tools that lack a clear and recognizable brand name.

Looking Outward for Community Success Stories

By looking inward and evaluating our projects, we were able to finetune our success metrics and pinpoint the hurdles. We quickly realized we could not go at it alone and embarked on evaluating options in the community. We wanted to find organizations that were best positioned to help us overcome the hurdles and could also be aligned with our values of openness and responsible stewardship. One project that clearly covers these bases is Dryad. Dryad (datadryad.org) is a data publishing repository that was launched by researchers in 2009. Since then, Dryad has not only published but also curated (in accordance with FAIR principles) 28,000 datasets in hundreds of disciplines, from over 900 global journals. Dryad has published more data from University of California each year than Dash could have ever reached. The reasons? Dryad is researcher owned and recognized, integrated into publisher workflows, and endorsed by funder and publisher policies.

Against the Grain / November 2019

In addition, Dryad shares our own institutional values of proper curation, compliance, access, and preservation of research data. So, in May 2018, we partnered with Dryad to drive adoption of research data publishing and tackle the barriers we had faced with Dash: • Curation of Published Research Data Dryad already understands the unique challenges of data curation. They have a team of expert curators who go through every submission, verifying that the research data going to Dryad are in fact usable so that Dryad does not become a dumping ground for various research outputs. Institutions may vary in their capacity for or prioritization of data curation processes (i.e., the ten UC campuses exhibit such variances). But with Dryad we can satisfy the campuses that would like all curation to be handled externally, and we also can engage with the data curation programs at campuses that would like to get involved in the process. By thinking of Dryad as casting a wide net and catching data publications, bringing them into the institutional resources, we can eliminate the resources spent trying to convince researchers to put their data in an institution-based service and rather meet them where they are. • Connections to the Larger Ecosystem Dryad took off not only because it was promoted by research communities, but also because funders and publishers have trusted and promoted Dryad to their researchers who are focused on meeting these mandates. Additionally, revisiting conversations with publishers and tools providers about upgrading integrations to seamless API interactions between their platforms and Dryad has been easier because they see the value in integrating with a general, global option for researchers. • Brand Recognition & Mass Adoption As mentioned above, Dryad has been adopted by various research communities and is a known entity in many fields. The difference between a publisher or funder saying “use your institutional offering” versus “use www.datadryad.org” is incomparable. Adoption has not been a “crisis” for Dryad as it has been for every institutional repository intending to publish data like we do for articles. We will have much more success advocating for a place that is known and trusted than we will for a new service emerging in this space.

Our Path Forward

For CDL, our decision was to retire Dash and fully support Dryad as our institutional data publishing platform. But that may not be the solution for other campuses. Dryad offers ways for campuses to couple the wide net of Dryad with local solutions. That level of flexibility and community-led decision making was another reason why we knew it was a good fit. Of course, other hurdles will arise as the data publishing and open science space grows and matures, but we believe that shifting our focus externally to support a community our researchers have already endorsed is our best way forward for UC. Instead of thinking about this change as giving up on our institutional solution, we are looking to meet researchers where they are at, effectively leveraging our institutional values and services in a way that doesn’t interfere with their workflows. By supporting a larger community effort that meets the needs of our researchers, we can successfully invest in research data publishing.

References

Cragin, M. H., Palmer, C. L., Carlson, J. R., and Witt, M. (2010). Data sharing, small science and institutional repositories. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368(1926), 4023-4038. doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0165 Narayan, B., and Luca, E. (2017). Issues and challenges in researchers’ adoption of open access and institutional repositories: a contextual study of a university repository. Information Research: an international electronic journal, 2017, 22 (4). Handle: http://hdl.handle. net/10453/121438

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

NIRDs Unite: Building a Community of Institutional Repository Practitioners in the Northeast by Eleni Castro (OpenBU and ETD Program Librarian, Boston University) <elenic@bu.edu> and Erin Jerome (Open Access & Institutional Repository Librarian, University of Massachusetts Amherst) <ewjerome@library.umass.edu> and Colin Lukens (Repository Manager, Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication, Harvard University) <colin_lukens@harvard.edu> and Mikki Simon Macdonald (Collections Strategist for Institute Publications, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) <mssimon@mit.edu> and Lisa A. Palmer (Institutional Repository Librarian, University of Massachusetts Medical School) <lisa.palmer@umassmed.edu>

n the northeastern United States, there is a noticeable lack of any organized regional events specifically related to the topic of IRs. With other regions across the country holding similar events — along with recent national discussions and projects proposing a move away from local repositories (Coalition of Networked Information [CNI], 2017; Weinraub, Alagna, Caizzi, Quinn, & Schaefer, 2018) — starting a regional community of practice could prove beneficial in the long-term for repository managers and their institutions. Repository managers have a vested interest in the ongoing success of the repositories they manage; have genuine policy, copyright, and self-archiving concerns; and have developed robust workflows to manage their IRs’ unique content and needs. At the end of the day, how do we communicate the value of the work we do to external stakeholders, our broader institution, and library administration? The idea for “Northeast Institutional Repository Day” (NIRD) was conceived by a group of five repository librarians in the northeast. The organizers sent out a pre-conference online survey to the IR community in November 2018 to see if fellow repository practitioners had an interest in attending and/or participating in such a day and the response was a resounding, “Yes!” The survey results suggested that building a stronger regional network of repository managers would foster meaningful discussions on the merits and effectiveness of IRs. As we began to move forward with setting a date for the first Northeast Institutional Repository Day (Figure 1), we wanted to ensure that our local community was interested in attending a one-day event devoted to institutional repositories. NIRD took its inspiration from other long running regional IR days, such as the Southern Mississippi Institutional Repository Conference (SMIRC, est. 2015) and the Northwest IR User Group Meeting (NWIRUG, est. 2016). Given the density of institutions in the northeast, we thought the northeast was ready for a regional IR day of its own. The pre-conference survey was distributed to various national and regional discussion lists (both platform specific and platform-agnostic) and received 109 responses. 57.5% of respondents indicated that they would be able to attend a one-day conference in Boston and 40.6% indicated that they might be able to attend such an event. The positive response to the survey helped us get funding and sponsorship from our institutions as well.

Figure 1. The Northeast Institutional Repository Day website https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/neirug/2019/ To make this event meaningful to our local IR community, we asked survey respondents to identify the pressing issues or questions they face in their day-to-day work. We received 89 unique responses to this question. The responses were so varied and specific that it is difficult to point to obvious trends among our survey respondents. However, multiple users mentioned an interest in community-owned or community-built infrastructure, a need for which came crashing to the forefront of repository administrator conversations after Elsevier’s acquisition of bepress in August 2017. Metadata (management, creation, standardization), preservation, outreach, and data were also mentioned by a number of respondents. With the exception of a few mentions of migration from specific platforms (both open source and proprietary hosted), most of these responses were platform agnostic and represented issues that all repository managers encounter regardless of our institution or platform. We also gave respondents a chance to share their thoughts, suggestions, or questions for the organizers and received 31 responses. Given that this was our first time organizing an event of this type and that we had budget, space, and time limitations, we could not accommodate all of the suggested format requests (interactive workshops, roundtables, platform demonstrations). These suggestions have given us ideas for possible future iterations of this event. Early on in our planning process, we made the decision to make this a community-led conference and not to have vendor-led presentations or vendor-sponsored events incorporated into the NIRD19 program. We limited presentation types to lightning talks (5-10 minutes), continued on page 36

34 Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Trial Now The MIT Press Direct The MIT Press is known for pushing the boundaries of scholarly publishing in science, technology, and the arts in active partnership with innovators in the scholarly community. Our new institutional ebook platform is no exception: •

DRM-free: users can print, copy/paste, and download PDFs by chapter

•

Unlimited simultaneous users

•

Tiered pricing based on library budget and FTE

•

Subscription and perpetual options

•

OCLC MARC records and KBART files

•

COUNTER usage statistics and SUSHI reports

•

No ongoing maintenance fees

•

Consortia discounts available

•

Full and subject collections available

Visit us for additional details, updates, and information about free trials.

direct.mitpress.org

NIRDs Unite: Building a Community of Institutional ... from page 34 panels (45-minute collections of brief presentations followed by a moderated Q & A), and presentations (20 minutes). We received a total of 19 proposals from individuals working with IRs and digital collections in New England and the Mid-Atlantic states. These presenters came from a wide range of institutions — large universities, small private liberal arts schools, and a non-profit research institute. The Planning Committee was dedicated to creating a welcoming a supportive space for NIRD attendees, and to this end we established a code of conduct (https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/neirug/conduct.html). The NIRD planning committee accepted a total of 14 presentations and lightning talks, which made for a full agenda for the day. Five presentations addressed policy development, hosting undergraduate non-text-based content, accessibility, and outreach. We accepted seven lightning talks that addressed undergraduate content, electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs), wikidata and IRs, publisher self-archiving jargon, refreshing your repository, and open access policy compliance. We converted two remaining platform-specific proposals — migrating from Digital Commons to figshare and building the open source (Islandora) infrastructure — into longer lunchtime talks that required pre-registration by attendees. We were also able to secure Kathleen Shearer (Director of Coalition of Open Access Repositories) to give our keynote, “Open is not enough! Sustainability, inclusiveness, and innovation in scholarly communication,” which provided a high-level overview of the current open access repository landscape and how next-generation repositories can be more sustainable and inclusive going forward. In order to ensure that we could make the first NIRD free while remaining within our budget, we capped the event at 100 attendees. One hundred attendees from 57 distinct institutions and organizations registered. We estimate that we had a total of roughly 97 attendees on the day of the event, counting no-shows and local walk-ins. Twitter activity during the day for the event’s hashtag, #NIRD19, was positive and encouraging (Figure 2).

the survey into broad categories, solicited presentations from those categories, and approved presentations that reflected attendee interests. Overall, everyone who completed the follow-up survey enjoyed having a day completely devoted to repositories; one mentioned that it was their favorite conference of the year, and another attendee referred to the event as an “inclusive hub.” Other attendees asked that future versions of the event build in some “unconference” time, roundtables, and additional time for networking and discussion of pertinent issues and platform specific topics in a less formal, possibly birds of a feather style, setting. Several respondents indicated that they were glad that the focus of the conference was at the grassroots community level and not vendor-based, in terms of sponsorship and presentations. The positive feedback we received from attendees has been encouraging post-conference and we hope to continue holding the NIRD as a regular event for the northeast repository manager community. We are currently exploring the possibility of adding NIRD-sponsored, smaller unstructured meetings throughout the year or as a pre-conference event in order to keep the momentum of this new regional community of interest going.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank our host, Boston University Libraries, for the generous support that allowed us to realize the idea of NIRD. We would also like to thank individual BU units/staff for providing guidance and logistical support leading up to, and on the day of the event: Cathy Annunciata, BU Catering on the Charles staff, BU Events staff, BU Facilities staff, BU Learning & Event Technology Services staff, Richard Larkin, Cathy McLaughlin, Ellen Phillips, and Vika Zafrin. Also, a huge thank you to the Mugar Greene Scholars for generously providing the graphics and posters for our event, particularly Michelle Niebur for the NIRD logo and to Sam West for her graphic design contributions. We would like to thank The Lamar Soutter Library, University of Massachusetts Medical School for financial support to cover the travel expenses of the keynote speaker through the National Network of Libraries of Medicine, New England Region (NNLM NER); and for website hosting. And we thank our wonderful keynote speaker, Kathleen Shearer, and the various presenters whose contributions made the first Northeast Institutional Repository Day possible.

References List

Figure 2. A sample of #NIRD19 Twitter activity Thirty-six attendees completed our NIRD follow-up survey. 83% of respondents were extremely satisfied with the event and 13.89% were moderately satisfied. We feel that a major reason for this success is that the planning committee reacted to the needs and wishes of our audience, as expressed in the pre-conference survey. We adjudicated

36 Against the Grain / November 2019

Coalition for Network Information (CNI). (May 2017). Rethinking Institutional Repository Strategies. Report of a CNI Executive Roundtable, Held April 2 & 3, 2017. Retrieved from https://www.cni. org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/CNI-rethinking-irs-exec-rndtbl.report. S17.v1.pdf. Portland State University. (2019). Northwest IR User Group. Retrieved from https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/nwirug/. University of Massachusetts Medical School. (2019). Agenda Northeast Institutional Repository Day 2019. Retrieved from https:// escholarship.umassmed.edu/neirug/agenda.html. University of Massachusetts Medical School. (2019). Northeast Institutional Repository Day 2019. Retrieved from https://escholarship. umassmed.edu/neirug/2019/. University of Southern Mississippi. (2019). Southern Miss Institutional Repository Conference. Retrieved from https://www.lib. usm.edu/smirc/. Weinraub, E., Alagna, L., Caizzi, C., Quinn, B., and Schaefer, S. (2018). Beyond the Repository: Integrating Local Preservation Systems with National Distribution Services. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.21985/N28M2Z.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Getting to Grips with NTROs (visual arts data): The Role of Repositories and Libraries in Their Management by Dr. Robin Burgess (The University of New South Wales) <r.burgess@unsw.edu.au>

his essay will comment on NTROs and visual arts data and the role of repositories and libraries in their management; examples will be cited from the literature. By its very nature, research in the visual arts is highly complex and varied, often comprising a wide variety of outputs and formats that present researchers, libraries, and technology teams with many discipline-specific issues. Examples include sketch books, paintings, architectural plans, physical artifacts, and modelling algorithms. Additionally, the methods and processes that generate this type of research information are just as varied and complex. Research in the visual arts relies heavily on sketchbooks, logbooks, journals, and workbooks. The physical nature of research in the arts presents researchers and curators with significant problems with security and preservation issues while also greatly increasing the risk of data loss and deterioration. Appropriate curation and management of research objects/data in the visual arts is essential to • satisfy funding requirements and demands for open access; • reduce its lack of discoverability or loss; • enable other researchers to test the reliability and validity of the data and the research method; • enable greater impact of research and make tracking more accurate; and • extend collaborative opportunities between researchers and teams working on similar and related projects to create new research opportunities. IRs are primarily tasked with offering a place to manage and disseminate materials; a means for increasing an institution’s visibility, status and public value; and a means for evaluating the university’s research output (Rockman et al, 2005; Bonilla-Calero, 2013, Rumsey, 2006). According to Rumsey, an IR is an open access “searchable, digital archive of materials emanating from an institution, usually scholarly but not limited to journal articles, which are usually available in their entirety” (Rumsey, 2006). In Australia, by 2006 all Australian universities had established IR services (Simons & Richardson, 2012). According to Simons and Richardson the most common types of information stored in IRs is scholarly research outputs at 79%, followed by research data (Simons & Richardson, 2012). The benefits of IRs include: • centralising, preserving and longterm curation of an institution’s output • increasing visibility and dissemination

Against the Grain / November 2019

• supporting learning, teaching and research • standardising records • tracking and analysing research performance and estimating the impact of publications • breaking down publishers’ costs and permissions • developing of value-added services e.g., statistics, citations • identifying and measuring the degree of collaboration between disciplines

NTROs and the Institutional Repository

The literature indicates that there are very few IRs in the arts yet digital content in these disciplines are proportionally higher than in other areas (Cooke, 2007; White & Hemming, 2010; Gray, 2009). According to White and Hemming, while showcasing research outputs has been at the core of visual arts, its representation within an IR setting has its own unique challenges and is somewhat limited. A common thread in the literature is the role an IR can have in ensuring visual arts is perceived as a valid research output (Nadim & Randall, 2013; Gray, 2009). Some of the key findings regarding the arts’ unique challenges were as follows (Sheppard, 2008; Cooke, 2007; Gray, 2009; White & Hemming, 2010): • often involves multiple items • produced through a combination of collaborative and independent work • work already accessible online • access management, notable when researchers are keen to promote their work they are worried about people reproducing copies • quality of reproduction is a concern • ability to capture size and scale of the work is complex • collaborative works need to be recorded accurately — copyright complexities • metadata and its ability to contextualise a work A number of projects and initiatives in the United Kingdom (UK) attempted to address some of these challenges. In 1996 the Visual Arts Data Services (VADS) was established with the aim of promoting and encouraging best practice in the creation and management of digital resources in the visual arts (Flynn, 2009). In 2009 one of the major projects that looked into visual arts in IRs was the KULTUR project, which developed a model for IR start-up that aimed to address the needs of the UK Higher Education Arts Sector. It is important to note that prior to KULTUR, none of the UK’s specialist higher education

providers had an IR. The aims of KULTUR were to: • establish a model of shared practice • establish a model for rights issues • investigate metadata, preservation and curation of material • ensure the IR is reaching out to audiences • set up pilot IRs It was identified early on that art research is practice-based and that the usual methods to measure impact generally are not suitable for this discipline. The most common works were installations, photographs and videos, with exhibitions the main medium of dissemination (Sheppard, 2008). An element of the project involved exploring a metadata schema for the IR model. When developing this schema, it was evident that various user needs had to be taken into consideration (Sheppard, 2009). According to Simons and Richardson, describing a work of art might be more effective if an extensive metadata schema is used as multimedia content generally requires more descriptive metadata than a book or journal article (Simons & Richardson, 2013). Some of the fields could include time period, dimensions, orientation, techniques used, style or period, cultural context, inscriptions, conservation treatment, etc. The KULTUR project was the first of three projects over a five year period — KULTUR, Kultivate and KAPTUR (Nadim & Randall, 2013), which all focused on the visual arts. From 2013 to 2014 an additional project came out of the Kultivate work, that of VADS4R which looked at the development of training packages for researchers in understanding the data and research outputs produced through visual arts research (Burgess, 2017). Another project concerned with understanding NTROs was conducted by Goldsmiths University, which looked at what were termed “defiant objects” (Nadim & Randall, 2013). These are as follows: • Non-text-based objects — associated with creative research and can include paintings, drawings, films, videos, exhibitions, designs, performances, textiles, compositions, scores, installations etc. IRs in general do not allow the proper recording of these items. • Other text-based objects — textbased items that can struggle with conventional classification e.g., creative writing, pamphlets, exhibition catalogues, book reviews, translations, scholarly editions, grey literature, magazine articles, blogs etc. continued on page 38

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Getting to Grips with NTROs ... from page 37 • Multiple/iterated objects — complexities between versions or the distinction between work and surrogates. • Multimedia uploads Overall the project had the following key recommendations: • use common terms and descriptions • include a glossary • include additional metadata • provide clear guidance Lastly, one of the other key areas that came out of the literature was a need to ensure the IR appeals to the visual arts community. It is important to consider the visual impact of an IR if you wish to allure art researchers. If visual manipulation is not possible, customization could incorporate various plug-ins, creating unique layouts, customising metadata and changing workflows (Blankenship & Haines).

Conclusion

Visual arts research data and NTROs are valuable resources, and with appropriate curation and management, have much to offer learning, teaching, and research. NTROs can be characterized as tangible and intangible, digital and physical, heterogeneous and infinite, and complex and complicated. They do not always fit into the natural scheme of management. However, the development of policies, procedures, systems (IRs), and training can provide an innovative and flexible approach for these outputs. These approaches support appropriate curation and management of outputs to alleviate the issues surrounding funder requirements, elements of time and discoverability, and at the

Rumors from page 29 The Charleston Conference is pleased to offer a new career service to conference attendees at this years’ annual meeting, called the Charleston Conference Career Center. We at ATG are very excited about the New Career Center, organized by the innovative Aaisha Haykal, Manager of Archival Services at the Avery Research Center at the College of Charleston. The career center will have its debut on Tuesday, November 5th 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM at the Gaillard Center at the 2019 Charleston Conference. The Career Center will also be held on Wednesday, November 6: 5:45 PM to Friday, November 8 at 1:30 PM in the Francis Marion Hotel. We have had many requests for such a service in Charleston. The Career Center will offer: 1) Handouts on resume building and cover letters; 2) Resume

38 Against the Grain / November 2019

same time improve the impact of research and create new collaborative opportunities for the institutes. NTROs should also be considered as highly as outputs generated from the STEM subjects. They may not be generating a new scientific discovery, but they are evoking discussion, making people think and showcasing a creative/visual side towards research. Therefore, they also need to be managed accordingly.

References

Burgess, R. (2017). From Kaptur to VADS4R: Exploring Research Data Management in the Visual Arts. From “Curating Research Data Management: A Handbook of Current Practice” Volume two. ACRL. Bonilla-Calero, A. (2014). Institutional repositories as complementary tools to evaluate the quantity and quality of research outputs. Library Review, 63(1/2), 46-59. doi:doi:10.1108/ LR-052013-0058 Chan, D. L. H., Kwok, C. S. Y., and Yip, S. K. F. (2005). Changing roles of reference librarians: the case of the HKUST Institutional Repository. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 268-282. doi:10.1108/00907320510611302 Cooke, J. (2007). A visual arts perspective on open access institutional repositories. Paper presented at the Digital Archive Fever: 23rd CHArt (Computers and the History of Art) Annual Conference, Birkbeck, London. http:// research.gold.ac.uk/140/ Flynn, M. (2009). An emerging picture: some recent UK digital visual arts initiatives. Art Libraries Journal, 34(1), 22-26. Giesecke, J. (2011). Institutional Repositories: Keys to Success. Journal of Library Administration, 51(56), 529-542. doi:10.10 80/01930826.2011.589340 Gray, A. (2009). Institutional Repositories

and cover letter review by appointment; 3) General career consulting by experienced Charleston Conference attendees; 4) Posted job announcements; and 5) A place to post your resume/CV. This is our first year and we appreciate your help, advice and cooperation! https://against-the-grain.com/2019/08/ atg-newsflash-the-charleston-conference-career-center-debuts/ Aaisha was also a 2018 Up and Comer Award winner. This year we have ten new up and comers who were nominated and selected. Erin Gallagher <gallaghere@ufl.edu> is our up and comer conference director. And guess what? ATG Media and Kanopy are thrilled to announce the third annual round of winners of the Charleston Conference’s Up and Comer awards. Who exactly is an “Up and Comer,” you ask? They are librarians, library staff, vendors, publishers, MLIS students, instructors, consultants, and researchers who

for Creative and Applied Arts Research: The Kultur Project. ARIADNE(60). Jain, P. (2011). New trends and future applications/directions of institutional repositories in academic institutions. Library Review, 60(2), 125-141. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/00242531111113078 Jenkins, B., Breakstone, E., and Hixson, C. (2005). Content in, content out: the dual roles of the reference librarian in institutional repositories. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 312-324. Nadim, T. and Randall, R. (2013). Defiant Objects Project Report. Retrieved from London: http://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/8731 Rockman, I. F., and Bailey Jr, C. W. (2005). The role of reference librarians in institutional repositories. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 259-267. Rumsey, S. (2006). The purpose of institutional repositories in UK higher education: A repository manager’s view. International Journal of Information Management, 26(3), 181-186. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. ijinfomgt.2006.01.002 Sheppard, V. (2008). Kultur Project: User Survey Report. Retrieved from http:// kultur.eprints.org/docs/Survey%20report%20 final%20Aug%2008.pdf Sheppard, V. (2009). Metadata Report Final. Retrieved from http://kultur.eprints.org/ Metadata%20report%20Final.pdf Simons, N., and Richardson, J. (2012). New Roles, New Responsibilities: Examining Training Needs of Repository Staff. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 1(2), eP1051. Simons, N., and Richardson, J. (2013). New Content in Digital Repositories: The Changing Research Landscape. White, W., and Hemming, C. (2010). KULTUR: showcasing art through institutional repositories. Art Libraries Journal, 35(3), 30-34.

are new to their field or are in the early years of their profession. They are passionate about the future of libraries and the enormous impact library services have on communities around the globe. They innovate, inspire, collaborate, and take risks. We are particularly pleased to announce an exciting new partnership with Kanopy for the 2019 class of Up and Comers! Our friends at Kanopy will sponsor the registration costs for the top ten Up and Comers to attend the 2019 Charleston Conference. The 2019 Up and Comers will be recognized in the December-January issue of Against the Grain, and these ten brilliant rising stars will be profiled in the same issue. They will also be honored at the First Time Attendees and Up and Comers Reception at the Charleston Conference. Here are our up and comers for 2019: Meghan Cook, University of South Florida Libraries; Moon Kim, Ohio State University Libraries; Ariana E. Santiago, continued on page 69

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

“Institutional” Repositories, Redefined: Reflecting Institutional Commitments to Community Engagement by Amanda Makula (Digital Initiatives Librarian, Copley Library, University of San Diego) <amakula@sandiego.edu>

here are countless examples of higher ed institutions partnering with their local cities and communities, but the following three cases have something unique in common. Can you guess what it is? In 2016, the James E. Brooks Library of Central Washington University (CWU) engaged its university community and members of the local public in a poetry project that featured a bilingual (Chinese and English) poetry reading in the library. The project sought to bring awareness to the ways in which the Chinese community in the university’s town (Ellensburg) and home state (Washington) have been persecuted and excluded from historical accounts, as well as to recognize and celebrate the Chinese language, culture, and contributions of Chinese immigrants to the development of Ellensburg and the Pacific Northwest. Both the planning and delivery of the program included wide representation from both the university (students, international students, faculty, librarians, visiting scholars) and the local public (Hogan, 2018). Albertsons Library at Boise State University planned and hosted a month-long juried art exhibit in 2015 as a way to engage the Boise community’s flourishing arts scene and celebrate the library’s 50th anniversary. Approximately half of the 27 artists chosen by blind review for the exhibit represented the university community; the other half came from the local community. At its conclusion, viewers and artists alike expressed positive experiences with the exhibit and its collaboration between the university and the Boise public (Sherman, Watson & Hervochon, 2017). At my own institution, the San Diego Lowrider Archival Project (https://digital.sandiego.edu/lowriders/) is a collaboration between Copley Library at the University of San Diego (USD); a faculty member in Ethnic Studies who researches lowriding; the director of community engagement at a local non-profit and himself a founding member and former president of a lowrider car club; and the city’s lowrider community, particularly the Logan Heights neighborhood. The project documents the history of lowriding in San Diego and the surrounding borderlands from its inception in the mid-twentieth century to the present day by preserving and showcasing materials such as photographs, car club documents (e.g., official records and meeting minutes), dance posters, memorabilia, lowrider art, etc. These artifacts reflect defining qualities of the lowrider movement — creativity, independence, cultural pride, resistance, activism, community service, collectivism, tradition and ritual, and cultural continuity — and until now, they have mostly been part of individuals’ personal collections without a central point of access. Seeking to engage and inspire key constituents and community members — current and future lowriders, educators and elders, regional car club members, students and employees at USD, and the public — the project goes beyond preserving a historical legacy. It aims to impact present-day participants by encouraging relationship formation and bridge-building across diverse groups (Makula, Laughtin-Dunker, & Mann, 2018). Here’s the commonality: each of these three examples of university outreach to the local community utilize the institutional repository (IR). The Brooks Library archived the audio recording of the poetry reading in its IR, ScholarWorks@CWU (https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/ lib_poetry2016/1/). Albertsons Library curated the artists’ works in an online IR gallery, with metadata descriptors to enhance discoverability and viewers’ understanding of the pieces (http://scholarworks.boisestate. edu/anniversary_exhibition/). And at the University of San Diego, the Lowrider Archival Project is a signature collection (https://digital. sandiego.edu/lowriders/) in Digital USD, the school’s IR, featuring 334 images across 36 car clubs. At this writing, the collection has generated nearly 400 downloads and 4,000 metadata page hits. College and university collaboration with the outside public community is nothing new, but featuring that collaboration in the institutional

40 Against the Grain / November 2019

repository is, at least as evidenced by the dearth of examples in the library literature. Why? Yes, it’s true that by their very name, IRs are intended to capture the intellectual and creative output of their parent institution. As the Coalition for Networked Information (CNI) decreed in its 2017 executive roundtable report, “the priority for IRs is to capture all types of content produced by the institutional community” (emphasis mine) (p. 5). But this has proved problematic. Numerous articles and essays highlight the challenges of obtaining content from members of the institution, and therefore “institutional repositories remain an underutilised resource in many universities” (Narayan & Luca, 2017, para. 7). Difficulties harvesting internal content are likely due to a variety of factors: limited faculty time and buy-in, ineffective marketing, competition from subject repositories and/or academic social networking sites, confusion interpreting publishers’ copyright policies or lack of access to preprints, poorly designed or unfriendly user interfaces, etc. In the midst of these challenges, is it time for a paradigm shift? Do we need to look at the IR with fresh eyes, to redefine what it is and how it should operate? Perhaps IRs need to become more flexible, more adaptable to their unique institutional contexts, to derive their purpose not from the library community, but from their parent institution. After all, while the IR may be managed by library faculty or staff, it is a university-wide endeavor. Its vitality and relevancy hinges on the participation of constituents across campus. On a practical level, in an era of ubiquitous budget cuts and the need for services and activities to prove their worth, tying the purpose and value of the IR to the priorities of the institution simply makes smart business sense. If the IR makes explicit the ways in which it can help fulfill the institution’s strategic plan, the greater the likelihood that it will be recognized, supported, and embraced as an integral component of the university. Take the University of San Diego, for example. My institution places a high value on community engagement. Our strategic plan, Envisioning 2024 (https://www.sandiego.edu/envisioning-2024/overview/), proclaims: “to be a great international university we must first be an anchor institution for our local community... We have an obligation to elevate our engagement across our campus and into our San Diego communities.” This institutional focus on the local community has meant that our IR needed to evolve from a university-centric operation to a broader, more expansive one, aligning itself with external entities. Rather than restricting content to university-produced material, Digital USD needed to welcome items borne from partnerships with the outside community. The library’s Scholarly Communication Committee incorporated this institutional emphasis on community engagement into a new mission statement for the IR: Digital USD publishes, preserves, and provides open online access to the scholarship, creative work, original data sets, and archival material produced by or affiliated with the University of San Diego community. By curating and sharing these historical and current intellectual activities, Digital USD showcases and connects the unique contributions of the university’s faculty, staff, and students to an audience worldwide, fueling new research, discoveries, and knowledge. Digital USD supports Envisioning 2024: The Strategic Plan for the University of San Diego, with special attention to the following pathways: • Anchor Institution: Digital USD is an institution-wide, collaborative endeavor, featuring a wide range of projects across campus, as well as partnerships with the local community and outside organizations continued on page 41

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

“Institutional” Repositories, Redefined ... from page 40 • Engaged Scholarship: Digital USD shares the academic excellence of the university with the entire world, promoting the discovery, integration, and formation of new knowledge • Access and Inclusion: Digital USD promotes free, open, unrestricted access to and discovery of its materials, and seeks to include a diversity of voices and perspectives • Practice Changemaking: Digital USD celebrates changemaking by showcasing endeavors characterized by active citizenship, positive social change, innovation, and community engagement This mission statement signaled a new conception of the IR. No longer was it defined primarily as a platform, a system, or a service. Instead, now it was understood as a bridge between the University of San Diego and the outside world, an instrument helping to build and nurture institutional-community relationships, foster collaboration, and cultivate goodwill. This broader scope meant more opportunities for content and more opportunities to engage new affiliates. As a result, Digital USD began to expand. Over the past few years, our IR has become host not only to the lowrider project mentioned previously, but also to the Nonprofit Institute’s reports and best practice library (https://digital.sandiego.edu/ npi/), a wealth of materials by and about local and state community organizations. (Fun fact: the most-often downloaded item in the entire IR is the “Sample Advisory Board Invitation Letter/Email” in the Governance collection by the Nonprofit Institute: https://digital.sandiego. edu/npi-bpl-governance/14/). Digital USD was also used to showcase videotaped oral history conversations between undergraduate students in a Business Ethics course and local social entrepreneurs (https:// digital.sandiego.edu/phil332/), a project supported by the university’s Changemaker Hub, itself an outgrowth of the Envisioning 2024 plan. USD is certainly not alone in its emphasis on community engagement. A 2019 research report conducted by the Thriving Cities Lab at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture at the University of Virginia surveyed 100 urban universities and discovered that 74% articulate a commitment to public service in their mission statements and 94% commit to community engagement in their strategic plan (Yates & Accardi, p. 14). According to Dr. Joshua Yates, one of the report’s authors, “Over the past three decades, urban university-community partnerships have moved from dispersed and provisional ad hoc relationships to intentional and systematic institutional commitments” (as cited in Jones, 2019, para. 4). If your own institution is turning its attention toward the local community, you may be thinking about how to pivot the IR outward, beyond the campus and into the surrounding neighborhood, community, and city. Based on my experiences reimagining Digital USD, here are a few suggestions to get started: 1. Look for existing relationships between the institution and the public, such as: • Partnerships between faculty members and community organizations, both research and teaching projects • Offices or institutes on campus that work with community populations • Courses that involve interactions with community participants • Connections between the university and local public schools and/or public libraries • Events, such as a lecture series, that brings together university members and community attendees 2. Meet with the university representatives of these projects to exchange information Learn more about the project: when it started, what exactly it does, what kinds of content it produces, etc. Demonstrate the IR and highlight its key capabilities. Listen to their needs, concerns, and questions. Discuss whether or not the project is appropriate for a permanent, open access platform, including the importance of community participants’ informed consent. (If a project involves private, sensitive information, the IR is not a good choice.) Discuss how you will communicate the IR and

Against the Grain / November 2019

its role to the community participants, how you will obtain their permission and encourage their active involvement. 3. If the IR is deemed an appropriate venue, develop a method for intake and curation of materials and metadata There are many questions to consider at the implementation stage. How will you obtain and ingest the material into the IR? Who will lead this process? Who will supply the metadata? (And what metadata should you capture?) Will there be a mechanism for participants to report errors or request changes? What happens when new materials are created after the initial ingest, or when existing ones are updated? 4. Share! It’s crucial to get the word out, both to members of the institution and members of the community. Think about how you can celebrate new collections in interesting ways. At USD, we selected ten images from the lowrider project and created postcards from them, which we distributed at the annual Chicano Park Day festival and at a special lowrider event at the Logan Heights public library branch. They’ve been a big hit and have helped bring awareness to the collection in Digital USD. Maybe your IR is flourishing, and you have more content than you can ever possibly hope to ingest. Maybe your institution has priorities other than partnerships with the public. Maybe you are consumed by a technical project, such as a migration to a new platform. In these cases, it’s probably not the right time to reimagine your IR. On the other hand, if you are looking for new ways to grow your IR, to expand its scope and its impact, and if your institution is doing creative, innovative things beyond its campus: this is your chance! Conditions are ripe to consider how to increase the relevancy of the IR with materials created by university-community partnerships. Are you doing this already, or about to embark on the journey? Let me know; I want to hear about it! <amakula@sandiego.edu>

References Coalition for Networked Information. (2017, May). Rethinking Institutional Repository Strategies: Report of a CNI Executive Roundtable. Retrieved from https://www.cni.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ CNI-rethinking-irs-exec-rndtbl.report.S17.v1.pdf. Digital USD. (2019). About this repository. Retrieved from https:// digital.sandiego.edu/about.html. Hogan, G. (2018). From “Chinese Exclusion” to Chinese Inclusion: Poetic justice in Central Washington University Library. Chinese Librarianship: an International Electronic Journal, 46, 13-24. Retrieved from http://www.iclc.us/cliej/cl46.htm. Jones, L. (2019, April 24). Research survey: Universities highly intentional about community engagement. Diverse: Issues in higher education. Retrieved from https://diverseeducation.com/article/144273/. Makula, A., Laughtin-Dunker, K., and Mann, P. (2018). The right to be forgotten: Scholarly communication and ethics. [Presentation slides]. Conference presentation at the California Academic & Research Libraries conference, Redwood City, CA. Retrieved from http://conf2018.carl-acrl.org/conference-proceedings/. Narayan, B. and Luca, E. (2017). Issues and challenges in researchers’ adoption of open access and institutional repositories: a contextual study of a university repository. In Proceedings of RAILS - Research Applications, Information and Library Studies, 2016, School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, 6-8 December, 2016. Information Research, 22(4). Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/22-4/rails/rails1608.html. Sherman, A., Watson, E., and Hervochon, G. (2017). Planning a juried art exhibit in an academic library and providing digital access in an institutional repository. PNLA Quarterly, 81(2), 20-29. Retrieved from https://pnla.org/pnla-quarterly/archive/2015-2017/. University of San Diego. (2019). Pathways to 2024. In Envisioning 2024. Retrieved from https://www.sandiego.edu/envisioning-2024/ pathways/. Yates, J. J. and Accardi, M. (2019). Field guide for urban-university-community partnerships. Thriving Cities Lab: Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, University of Virginia. Retrieved from https:// iasculture.org/research/publications/thriving-cities-field-guide.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Op Ed — Opinions and Editorials

Headwaters — Food, Money, and Stability Column Editor: Kent Anderson (Founder, Caldera Publishing Solutions, 290 Turnpike Road, #366, Westborough, MA 01581-2843; Phone: 774-288-9464) <kent@caldera-publishing.com> “Listen, and take my advice. Don’t overlook the money part of it. I’ve been poor and I’ve been rich. Rich is better!” — Beatrice Kaufman Column Editor’s Note: This essay is an updated, revised, and expanded version of a post published on “The Geyser,” an e-newsletter written by the author and available at https://thegeyser.substack.com. — KA

ne of my guilty pleasures is watching Chef Robert Irvine’s “Restaurant: Impossible.” After a hiatus, it’s back this year, with three episodes each Saturday night — a “behind the scenes” rehash of a prior episode, a new episode, and a “revisit” years after the previous makeover to see how things are faring. The premise of the show has Irvine and his crew visiting failing restaurants. Over two days and with a budget of $10,000, they revamp them, solve management issues, address staff shortcomings, and fix the menu and kitchen. Very often, the distress of facing a business that is not viable has created discord, depression, and desperation for the owners. The downward spiral is what Irvine is there to stop and reverse. His approach is classic “tough love” with a heaping helping of training, education, and inspiration. In most cases, there are excellent people trapped in circumstances that have gotten beyond their abilities to handle. While the show is certainly not to everyone’s taste, what Irvine demonstrates are two important business fundamentals — positioning and execution. These two aspects of business are core to any initiative. Positioning has to do with how a business exists relative to its customers and what it provides them. Execution has to do with how well it does these things. The payoff moment of each episode is seeing how the business has done after an Irvine rehab. You are told how the business grew, revenues improved, etc. Because not everything works out, sometimes the needle doesn’t move much — but it usually does. The “revisits” have been especially encouraging. Surely

42 Against the Grain / November 2019

hand-picked, some failing restaurants have turned into multi-million-dollar successes. It’s especially heartening to see entire families thriving once again after struggling, their lives dominated by the worries of foreclosure and failure. With these no longer hovering over their relationships and health, new people emerge — marriages are filled with warmth again, parents and children can enjoy one another once more, and work and life mesh in greater harmony. The essential and unashamed motivator for Irvine is — wait for it — money. In Irvine’s book, if the restaurants don’t make money, they shouldn’t exist. The ability to make a profit is, to him, a virtue born of discipline and service. That is, the discipline to position and execute well, which manifests as service to customers. Service means giving people something unique they want, like, and respect. To put his approach to profitability into action, Irvine takes novice restauranteurs through the simple “thirds” of a restaurant business — food costs = 1/3, overhead and profit = 1/3, and staff and salaries = 1/3. These are guidelines, not hard-and-fast rules. Slip below these, and trouble is brewing, while really successful restaurants can price items so that profits increase without sacrificing food quality or staff longevity and happiness. What makes all this so poignant to me? We’re living within a business culture (scholarly communications) that is often squeamish about profit or revenues or success — where profit margins are shamed and businesses are punished for doing what businesses are meant to do, which is to make money. Irvine’s show puts a human face on how a struggling business shatters lives, and how a thriving business gives people power, confidence, stability, and self-respect. Good salaries, good benefits, stability, and growth make for happy, proud, confident people who can help others realize the same benefits. In our world, we have institutions with billions in the bank arguing over contracts

with publishers whose only sin has been running their businesses well, atop a general demonization of profit. We also have a broader social order that for the last 40 years has delivered more benefits to the top 1% than to the bottom 90% in aggregate gains, despite incredible increases in productivity. Watching “the little guys and gals” running restaurants go from rags to riches shows how a more equitable society could only be good for the people in it. So, it’s reassuring for me to see a sensible person like Irvine come in, give no-nonsense advice like, “You’re in business to make money,” and see someone help people struggling to make ends meet find their way to success. The happiness beaming from people who have found their way to prosperity? That’s far better than piles of money locked away in investment funds, stock portfolios, retirement accounts, and so forth. We spend so much time fretting about money that I think we forget it’s supposed to liberate and empower us, not ensnare us or be hoarded. To that point, I’ll end with this quote about money from Yuval Noah Harari, author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind: . . . money is . . . the apogee of human tolerance. Money is more open-minded than language, state laws, cultural codes, religious beliefs, and social habits. Money is the only trust system created by humans that can bridge almost any cultural gap, and that does not discriminate on the basis of religion, gender, race, age, or sexual orientation. Thanks to money, even people who don’t know each other and don’t trust each other can nevertheless cooperate effectively.

Kent Anderson is the CEO and founder of Caldera Publishing Solutions, editor of “The Geyser,” a past-President of the Society of Scholarly Publishing, and founder of “The Scholarly Kitchen.” He has worked as an executive of a technology startup, and as a publishing executive at numerous non-profits, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the Massachusetts Medical Society, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Interviews Nigel Newton Founder and Chief Executive of Bloomsbury Publishing by Tom Gilson (Associate Editor, Against the Grain) <gilsont@cofc.edu> and Katina Strauch (Editor, Against the Grain) <kstrauch@comcast.net> ATG: Mr. Newton, what was it about a career in publishing that attracted you? When you founded Bloomsbury in 1986, what factors led you to think it was the right time to establish a new publishing house? What did you see that perhaps others did not? NN: Publishing was irresistible to me because it was about books. 1986 seemed a good moment to start Bloomsbury because the publishing industry was having one of its periodic fits of conglomeration as companies rushed to buy each other over. It felt to me that there was an opportunity for a new medium sized independent publisher of quality. It was also a good time for me as I was approaching 30 and I thought I’d better get on with it. The opportunity I saw was that some staff and some authors were more inspired by the human scale of a medium sized publisher than by a large one and that everyone was inspired by great books as opposed to OK books. ATG: How did you envision Bloomsbury separating itself from the established publishers of the time? What was unique about your concept for Bloomsbury? Were there innovative changes that you planned to bring to the industry? NN: The mission of Bloomsbury from the start and to this day was to be a publisher of works of excellence and originality. This set us apart from the commercial publishing houses, though it put us in direct competition with smaller firms of quality and the literary imprints within conglomerates. One thing that was unique about Bloomsbury was the sense of style which my colleagues Liz Calder, David Reynolds, and Alan Wherry brought to how we published books. Firstly, there was the design of our books with reading ribbons in every novel, head and tail bands, wide flaps, putting the word Bloomsbury on the front of every book, and our wonderful logo of Diana, Roman Goddess of Hunting, as she hunted in the form of searching for the best authors of our time. We courted the book trade and literary press with amazing author dinners that Liz Calder, Salman Rushdie’s editor at Jonathan Cape before she joined us, had a gift of throwing together. We were good at parties, too, and took our staff and authors to sales conferences in places like Berlin, Versailles and Venice. I remember first meeting Khaled Hosseini when he came as an unknown writer to our sales conference in Eastbourne on the British coast. We also put 5% of the equity of the company aside in the Bloomsbury Author’s Trust to be divided up among our future authors when we floated the company in an IPO on the London Stock Exchange in 1994. This extra financial

44 Against the Grain / November 2019

reward was popular with authors and attracted considerable press attention. ATG: Can you tell us about the early years? What major challenges did you face? How did you and the company meet those challenges? NN: They were tremendous fun. Because British Telecom took 12 weeks to connect a new phone in 1986, we rented a new-fangled thing called a car phone, the predecessor of cell phones. It had a huge battery — the size of a car battery — and a full handset like a landline with a spiral cord. The 12 or so of us in our first year stood in an orderly line to use that one phone to phone our authors including Margaret Atwood, David Guterson and Scott Turow. Another challenge about 11 years out was our bank. I can, on application, advise any budding publishing entrepreneurs which British high street bank to avoid. Their successors were marvellous and took over the “Gringotts phenomenon” as the originating publisher of Harry Potter which had already started when we left the last bank. ATG: In another interview you said that the success of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone led to the start of Bloomsbury in America and also allowed investment in the new area of academic and professional publishing. Can you tell us more about those two ventures? NN: I worried that territorial copyright would not be respected by internet retailers and feared U.S. editions of Bloomsbury books flooding the U.K. market. I thought we better have our own U.S. editions so that wouldn’t happen. John Sargent at Macmillan USA was tremendously helpful in providing sales, distribution and advice as my colleagues Alan Wherry and Lisa Gallagher set up Bloomsbury USA in the Flatiron Building in Manhattan. In fact, I was wrong and internet retailers have respected territorial copyright in the main.

But it’s great having 100 Bloomsbury personnel at 1385 Broadway publishing great authors like Sarah J. Maas and Johan Hari. We have had three New York Times bestsellers so far this year. Regarding our entry into academic and professional publishing, we saw a tremendous opportunity to balance the volatile bestseller-oriented Bloomsbury trade frontlist with the steadier characteristics of high-quality publishing in the humanities and social sciences. It has worked brilliantly for Bloomsbury. Jonathan Glasspool and his Bloomsbury Academic colleagues worldwide have created through ten acquisitions and organic growth one of the finest academic publishers in the world in only a decade. And the opportunity our now huge and high-quality academic back catalogue has created in digital resources has been exceptional. ATG: After taking the plunge into the academic and professional market what surprised you the most? Were there instances where things didn’t work out as you anticipated? NN: One of the most surprising discoveries I have made is just how much pressure there is on librarians to work to exceedingly tight budgets, and to balance so many competing priorities. Our products compete with STEM subjects for budget but seeing the impact of this on decision-making is sobering. It’s reassuring to see so much interest in and enthusiasm for the subjects we publish in, and I hope that the arts, humanities, and social sciences receive the support they need because they are vital for civilized society, now more than ever. ATG: Evidently, the move into the academic and professional market has been a success. Bloomsbury reported 13% growth in academic revenue in early 2019. To what do you attribute your success? What have been your proudest achievements in this area? Have there been any disappointments? NN: Shrewd acquisitions, excellence of the publishing programs of those acquisitions, and hiring or inheriting great colleagues helped maintain that excellence as Bloomsbury absorbed different presses into our own academic program. Proudest moments: Berg, as the first acquisition and the originating publisher of the Dartmouth-winning Berg Fashion Library; Continuum as our largest acquisition, and the acquisition of Hart, which has a superb reputation for the quality of its legal publishing; also the launch of Bloomsbury Digital Resources which realizes a dream of having a division that makes our academic publishing so much more discoverable through digital technologies, thereby serving the global community of students, researchers, librarians, and authors. ATG: Speaking of Bloomsbury Digital Resources, could you expand on that bit? What continued on page 45

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Interview — Nigel Newton from page 44 were the drivers behind a digital only division and how did you see Bloomsbury differentiating itself from publishers that were already established in this space? NN: We want to provide content in ways that are innovative, not for the sake of innovation itself, but where it provides a real benefit to the user. Digital resources are clearly the best way of achieving that aim and, as online products are entirely different beasts from print, it made good sense to establish a division that is fully focused and attuned to the special needs of libraries; and also to the development and evolution of digital resources that meet the needs of their users. A great example of this comes from one of our flagship products, Drama Online, which has a tool that enables students to locate monologues that meet very specific requirements for actors, in addition to supplying landmark works, such as the Arden Shakespeare and Methuen Drama texts. Our new products must meet very specific criteria, the first being that they must fill a gap or offer something unique. A good example is Screen Studies, where we’ve heard repeatedly that screenplays are actually quite hard to come by in the institutional market. Another, of course, is Bloomsbury Fashion Central where the component products cover fashion, costume, and textiles in a way that is unprecedented and serving what is a relatively new but growing discipline. We’re also very interested in experimenting with offering textbooks online and we’ve seen tremendous early success with Bloomsbury Applied Visual Arts, a textbook platform that responds to the needs of visual learners, not only in terms of content, but also how that content is rendered — with lots of images, visual cues, and less text. We’re also offering Fairchild Books Library now in the U.S. We acquired Fairchild Books, the market leader for fashion textbooks, in 2012 and it has performed strongly for us, but the challenges students face when acquiring learning materials are well documented. This project enables libraries to supply these core texts on a subscription model that should generate high usage while also supporting their student constituency and aligning with textbook affordability mandates. We’re fortunate that a lot of librarians get what we’re trying to do with our range of digital resources and much of the feedback has been extraordinarily positive; and when it isn’t, we listen and we fix what needs fixing. There hasn’t been too much of that, fortunately, but you’ve got to be flexible, especially with the various kinds of pressures being placed on libraries now, with budget being only one of many. And any librarian reading this who doesn’t already subscribe to Drama Online should do so now! It’s great — users love it — and we’re very proud of it. ATG: Although you publish numerous digital products, Bloomsbury still seems very much committed to print. Do you see that remaining true for the foreseeable future? Do you think digital and print co-exist in the long term?

Against the Grain / November 2019

NN: I do, in fact, see us committed to print. We know from conducting focus groups and our ongoing conversations with librarians, faculty, and students that print, particularly in the humanities, is still very much in demand. What we’ve heard repeatedly — and this seems to be very much in line with our peers — is that students enjoy the ease of search and discoverability of electronic resources but then often request print for more immersive reading. And maybe the greatest surprise here is that that is just as true of those matriculating now, the so-called born digital generation, as it is for those who preceded them. So there is clearly something inherently “human” about the print format that seems more nature than nurture. As someone who has always loved the printed book, I find that comforting. ATG: There has also been some concern expressed about the viability of the scholarly monograph going forward. From your experience in the academic market, do you share those concerns? Why or why not? NN: While it’s true we’ve all been bemoaning the death of the monograph for several decades now, I believe it’s viable — at least in the medium term — for two reasons: the first is that I think as long as there is research being conducted within a given discipline there is going to be some format for communicating that scholarship. For the foreseeable future, that format is the monograph, whether in print or digital. The second reason harkens back to your question about the revenue growth of Bloomsbury Academic. One piece of that growth happens to come from monograph publishing and Bloomsbury Collections, our eBook platform which hosts a large number of monographs, has actually seen tremendous growth over the past five years. And that’s not coming only from emerging markets such as China, it’s a global trend. That speaks to the continued resilience of the monograph as a format, whether acquired as part of a collection module or at the individual title level, as well as the quality of the content we’re publishing. ATG: We notice that you have new content partnerships with Taylor and Francis and Human Kinetics, a leading sports science publisher. Can you tell us about those arrangements? NN: We try to be as innovative as possible and partnerships often make the most sense to get unique content. We already work with Faber on Drama Online and Screen Studies and with the Royal Institute of British Architects on Bloomsbury Architecture Library. Partnerships are very much in line with the way we approach the business generally and we see great benefit from continuing down that path. Our collaboration with T&F will draw on their extensive academic content for subject-specific digital hubs that will be created by Bloomsbury. The idea being that we can create digital products in areas where we share strengths and where working together makes for the most compelling value proposition from the point of view of both librarians and end users. Within Bloomsbury, and within Digital Resources in particular, we have a broad range of partnerships and it’s often more sensible to view competitors as opportunities rather than threats.

The objective is always to provide great content that is easily discoverable and meets research needs — that’s the entire goal at the end of the day and why we do what we do. With Human Kinetics, we work in a different way as we don’t actually publish academic titles in their subject area. HK are without doubt the market leader in educational sport and physical activity titles. They have the content, but we have the technology, sales and marketing solution, which should be a perfect marriage. We are uniquely placed in our ability to offer not only a technology solution, but also access to the market, which many partners would struggle to reach. What’s especially fantastic about HK is that this content has never previously been available to libraries in this format: it’s not only text and images but they have great video content that enhances and augments the text in a way that is simply not possible with print. ATG: It seems that expansion has always been part of your publishing strategy. Do you have any future expansion plans that you can share, especially in the area of academic and professional publishing? NN: We’ll continue to expand through acquisition as well as organically. What we’re looking for is the quality of the publishing program. Our acquisitions always have a singular focus that is highly regarded and has been recognized by the market: for example, IB Tauris with Middle East Studies. But we’ve also recently expanded to provide sales and marketing services to other publishers seeking access to the markets that our global teams can provide. Earlier this year we began representing the proprietary eBook platforms of both Rowman & Littlefield (Select Collections) and Manchester University Press (manchesterhive). And, as noted earlier, we’re also now able to provide white label services so that’s another form of expanding our footprint in the academic sphere. ATG: Before we end, we have to ask, how important are libraries in Bloomsbury’s marketing strategy? Do you see libraries continuing to be a relevant as you plan Bloomsbury’s future? NN: Absolutely. We’re deeply committed to serving the needs of libraries not just in the near term but for the long haul. Print of course will continue to be a core component of our publishing program and that still represents the majority format of our sales to the library market. But our digital resources have grown in the double digits during the past couple of years and we see that growth continuing. Given that digital products are living things, you can’t grow and evolve them as required unless you’re deeply committed to investing in the ongoing needs of libraries. We have a librarian on staff, for example, who is responsible for the enormous amount of work involved in ensuring that our metadata is meeting the needs of libraries. And we have a library advisory board from whom we seek advice. I sit on the advisory board of the library of Cambridge University (my alma mater) so I’m in touch with the issues that libraries currently face. While Cambridge is one of the larger continued on page 49

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Interviews Dr. Sven Fund Managing Director of Knowledge Unlatched by Tom Gilson (Associate Editor, Against the Grain) <gilsont@cofc.edu> and Katina Strauch (Editor, Against the Grain) <kstrauch@comcast.net> ATG: Sven, Knowledge Unlatched has been an innovator in the open access space since its founding. But for those who aren’t familiar with Knowledge Unlatched, can you tell us what is unique about your approach? SF: Knowledge Unlatched (KU) has set out to create the missing link between the many initiatives and publishers that want to publish open access and the institutions that are willing to support it financially. Our mission is to make OA work and build a bridge between funders and publishers, and we see our role as a provider of pragmatic solutions. Today, KU works with more than 575 libraries and over 100 publishers — from very small to large — worldwide. With their help, we have made more than 1,450 books and 20 journals open access. ATG: Can you tell us a little more about the “nuts and bolts” of how Knowledge Unlatched creates this missing link? How does KU enable the necessary interaction between libraries and publishers to create these open access collections? SF: In our view, there is neither a lack of willingness by librarians to invest in Open Access, nor do publishers refrain from publishing more content OA. But in a fragmented marketplace, it is sometimes difficult for those players to match. KU helps by providing open platforms and introducing sustainable business models that both sides benefit from. Since 2013, KU has successfully managed six pledging rounds. That creates experience and trust, and we are happy to share this with the scholarly publishing community. ATG: We know that your model has evolved since Knowledge Unlatched first launched its Pilot Collection in 2013. Can you give us an update? How have your collection offerings grown? What would you say are the major additions? SF: Indeed, KU has grown quite a bit since Frances Pinter and many supporters launched it in 2013. By now, Knowledge Unlatched is a marketplace with more than 20 different offerings that we developed with our partners. Through KU, libraries can support OA for both books and journals in HSS as well as in STEM. In addition, we have developed KU Open Funding, which supports researchers in finding the right OA publication offer for their publication needs and KU Open Analytics, which measures and reports the impact of OA worldwide. So, we really focus on the transactional side and strive to create as much transparency to libraries as possible. ATG: You mentioned developing more than 20 different offerings with your partners. Can you tell us more about them? Which which would you say have gotten the most

46 Against the Grain / November 2019

positive response? And what exactly is KU Open Funding? How does it work? SF: Our OA offerings support either freeing up scholarly content (“unlatching” content) or supporting open infrastructures (i.e., hosting platforms). These include, for example, two impressive OA book programs by IntechOpen, a well-known STEM publisher — one focused on Engineering and one on Physics — but also Routledge’s complete frontlist in African Studies and Gender Studies. With HAU Books, we want to unlatch a prestigious book program in Anthropology, and our partner transcript has made its entire Political Science program Open Access with our help. The same holds true for a mixed package of HSS books in French, collected by a large number of French university presses under the umbrella of OpenEdition. And then there are German-language packages in IT Law and in Romance studies from leading publishers in those fields. Further, with LatestThinking and Morressier, we venture into Open Access for completely new categories — videos and academic posters. On the infrastructure side, we have developed a package with our hosting partner since KU’s launch, OAPEN. We also hope to fund the Open Research Library, which introduces unique benefits for participating libraries. With every product, we try to improve our business models and test new offerings, which is only possible if both publishers and libraries support us in these experiments. Open Access is still fluid, and all players need to experiment. KU Open Funding is one of these experiments. It is a marketplace bringing institutions, researchers and OA publishers together to give researchers the option to filter through a list of predefined publishing offers, which have been approved by his/her library or institution. We developed this platform because we saw a need for more transparency around Book Processing Charges (BPCs). By the way, there is the same need for Author Processing Charges (APC), but the segment is less fragmented and already

better developed. To see how KU Open Funding works and helps libraries organize their OA workflows, libraries may register for free. ATG: Supporting your numerous collections, Knowledge Unlatched offers various tools and services for stakeholders in the OA community. Can you tell us about those? SF: I see three generations of offerings in KU’s portfolio. There is, of course, KU Select, our flagship collection to which many publishers and libraries contribute on an annual basis. The second generation are what we call KU Partner projects, a development that started with Language Science Press and Luminos. When we were asked to promote OA collections that do not have their own library sales force, we happily agreed. Here, we see a lot of possibilities to develop relationships with small and very focused publishers such as, for example, Language Science Press to those able to provide broader offerings such as, for example, Routledge and IntechOpen. Finally, we saw ourselves confronted with the demand for analytical and consolidation tools, particularly from librarians, who want to see the impact of their budgetary investments. In this context, we also began developing the third generation of KU offerings focused on the OA infrastructure itself, including the Open Research Library, which we launched in a beta version earlier this year. ATG: It sounds like you are offering some valuable services to other OA publishers through your KU Partner Projects. How did that project get started? Exactly what type services does KU provide to your partners? Is this the program that has enabled you to have the more than 20 different offerings you referenced earlier? SF: KU Partners grew out of KU’s signature product, which we call KU Select. Some publishers wanted to offer their full collections on a specific subject, not just a few titles. This path allows us to mold packages geared at specific libraries or a specific audience, whose needs and financial resources vary greatly. For KU, this is an important driver for growth and differentiation. ATG: When talking to prospective libraries and publishers about your collections and services, what advantages do you emphasize? In short, why should they participate? SF: Libraries, for good reasons, see open access as a better future for academic publishing — and most publishers agree with that view. It reduces the complexity of an intransparent, two-sided market into a straightforward relation that offers benefits for all participants if executed properly. First and foremost, OA continued on page 48

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Visit Choice at Table #69 at the Charleston Conference Vendor Expo for product info and to pick up a conference essentials kit.*

Compare products and create lists

New and updated reviews

Cardstack polling option

In depth (1500+ word) reviews

Gather and compile feedback

Save searches and set alerts

Discover Choice and The Charleston Company collaborate to present the trusted, searchable, peer-reviewed guide to academic databases, websites, and tools. ccAdvisor offers librarians and instructors unprecedented search abilities, saving countless hours of research. Online and accessible from any internet-connected device. www.choice360.org/products

*Available while supplies last.

Interview — Sven Fund from page 46 creates free access to scholarly content that was in the past published behind paywalls. Researchers in smaller institutions and in countries less well off than the US, the UK and Germany, for example, benefit a great deal from open science, and KU engages actively with the Global South to make the content that has been opened known. At the same time, we offer products that libraries can trust and need for their faculty. Our Title Selection Committee of over 180 librarians from all over the world works hard to secure quality standards and relevance to a wide range of institutions supporting research. Finally, many publishers we work with have come to view Open Access as a business model that works for them, too. It has always been important to us to create a sustainable system for scholarly publishing, so that publishers approach it with an evolutionary rather than a disruptive mindset. ATG: Please tell us more about the title selection committee. Besides the more than 180 librarians you just noted, are there any others involved i.e., faculty subject specialists, publishers, etc.? How do titles come to the attention of the committee? Can others outside the committee recommend titles for consideration? SF: The group is self-coordinated. Librarians can join by application, and they are admitted to the platform where title voting takes place. The same holds true for faculty subject specialists. The more experts from the library side join, the better. And since we use technology for the selection process, we don’t have a bottleneck for having more people join. Titles are proposed by publishers, but there are also mechanisms in which we ask libraries to determine publishers, programs and even individual titles they would like to see in one of our collections. Publishers do not participate in the selection process, as they have a vested interest to promote their own titles. ATG: We noticed that in 2016, the legal structure for Knowledge Unlatched was changed from a British Community Interest Company (CIC) to a German GmbH. What is the difference in these legal structures? And how has it impacted the operation of the company? SF: That is correct. In 2016 Frances Pinter handed the company over to me, and I relocated the legal entity to Berlin, where I am based. In this process, I consulted with lawyers and tax advisors and discussed the best setup for a small, lean yet pretty international company. Their recommendation was to choose a GmbH (comparable to an LLC in the US) to avoid high administrative costs. When it comes to how KU works with libraries and publishers, the impact on our modus operandi has been zero. We have not changed the margin KU operates on since its launch, and there are no plans to do so.

48 Against the Grain / November 2019

KU is like a small independent bookstore. Our operating margins are very tight. There is a constant battle to cover our internal costs so we can keep offering our services and the benefits they provide. Minimizing the reporting burden that comes from being non-profit helps us keep our overheads low. I also take no compensation in my role as CEO as part of my personal commitment to make KU work. ATG: Sven, some fear that this change in status to a German GmbH has resulted in the over-commercialization of Knowledge Unlatched. Your response? SF: I wished this would not be a discussion about legal structures —which I am not an expert in and frankly am not interested in — but about impact. I feel that the legal status of a company and its ethics are not mutually inclusive — one can be quite inefficient and wasteful with resources as a non-profit. In 2018, KU has generated a profit of 46.600€ after taxes on a revenue line of two million euros. I know very few people who would enter significant financial risk with their own savings. ATG: While KU Research works closely with Knowledge Unlatched, you all operate independently. Can you explain the nature of the relationship? Are you currently working on any joint projects? SF: Correct, KU Research and Knowledge Unlatched are two different organizations. KU Research is run by Cameron Neylon, it is the CIC within which KU was founded. After I acquired Knowledge Unlatched, Cameron and his team focused solely on research projects — and the work they are doing is both groundbreaking and impressive. Knowledge Unlatched GmbH is the legal entity for the operations we discussed earlier. ATG: Recently, Knowledge Unlatched banded together with several international partners to form the Open Research Library. Can you tell us about that initiative? Who are your partners and what do you hope to accomplish? SF: Open Research Library (ORL) aims to become a central hub for content funded through KU. When we discussed this with our technology partner BiblioLabs, we felt that it was a good idea to include other OA books as well, since the process would not involve any drastic changes technologically, but it would add significant value. After consultation with librarians and our publisher partners, we decided to take this step. ORL will be as open as possible regarding metadata, content data and — if legally possible — usage data. Funding will work through a pledging mechanism, like for other KU partners, but using the platform and funding it are completely independent of each other. ORL is and will remain freely available to any researcher and library anywhere in the world, whether they decide to support it or not. The libraries that do decide to support its infrastructure will have added benefits, including, for example, their institution’s micro-site within the platform. In short, ORL tries to make use of what is out there already — technology from

BiblioLabs, discovery systems, metadata and content data supplied to us by different partners, and integration with networks like the Researcher App and DPLA. I find it hard to understand some of the criticism we have received for this project. Our conversations with libraries around the world indicate that they see a need for this. We all share a common goal: to make researchers’ lives easier, and that’s the vision for ORL. It is also important to add here that we will continue to work with other hosting platforms, independent of ORL, including, of course, OAPEN, JSTOR and Project MUSE. ATG: From what you’ve said and what we’ve read, it appears that the goal is for the ORL to create “a central hub” providing “one search and hosting interface” to provide access and discoverability to all types of OA content, not just KU collections. Are we on target? Or are we overstating things? SF: Well, this is at least what many libraries and researchers ask us to do. It is a big task that requires more parties involved than just KU, but I feel we are on the right track. In my mind, a higher degree of centralization is needed to fully deliver on the promises of Open Access. Interoperability and true openness of platforms and models are key — no exclusivities, no hidden hurdles. That is what we are trying to accomplish with ORL. ATG: Part of your plan for ORL is to expand its offerings with research videos and posters. Can you elaborate? Are any other formats under consideration for inclusion in the ORL? SF: The core motivation for us to launch ORL was the demand from libraries funding open access through KU to find all content in one place. With two brand new pledging offerings — posters by Morressier and research videos by Latest Thinking — we will incorporate two new non-book categories into ORL. In principle, any type of content used by researchers can be hosted. ATG: Are there any other new initiatives that you plan to “unlatch” in the coming months? We’d love a scoop. SF: We have been quite busy over the past two years, with KU Open Analytics, KU Open Funding, ORL and several new publisher collections, including, for example, Routledge’s Gender Studies and African Studies and IntechOpen’s Engineering and Physics collections. This diversity is often misunderstood as hyperactivity on our end, but I feel that doesn’t describe it well. A lot is happening in Open Access, and we are trying to keep up with what researchers, libraries and publishers expect from us. We will see a number of new content offerings by publishers in 2020 as well as some renewals of collections launched in the past. It is really gratifying to see what libraries and publishers have built together — top content that seeks for continued OA funding and that is expanding in volume. A concrete next step is our support for Berghahn’s journal flip of 13 titles in Anthropology — a massive project under the Libraria initiative. We feel that more needs continued on page 49

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Interview — Sven Fund from page 48 to be done for journals in HSS, and this model is really promising. ATG: From a broader perspective, what should we be looking for from OA publishing? How do you see it evolving in the next few years? SF: We need to focus more on the researcher! The OA space had to work out the internal relationship between those involved in the publication process, and a lot has been achieved. But now we need to shift the attention back to those we are doing this for: researchers in their daily work. I am pleased to see that more and more libraries and publishers support open access in tangible ways, and my impression is that there is no decrease in their willingness to experiment. We expect this to be a stable pattern. One question mark for me is the likely impact of a cooling world economy on library budgets, particularly more innovative things like open access. I am confident that many libraries and publishers have made OA a core element of their mission and will therefore continue to expand their support. But librarians will have to make hard choices, and we need to support them with our work in the best possible way.

Against the Grain / November 2019

ATG: It sounds like you think both OA and Knowledge Unlatched are sustainable in the long term. Aside from decreasing library budgets, do you see any other threats to either OA’s or KU’s viability? And you note that librarians will have to make hard choices. What hard choices do you mean? Will publishers have to make similar hard choices? SF: The hardest choice on the library side, it seems to me, is that librarians have to consider canceling the Big Deals. That is not necessarily something that is negative for them, but spending budgets in smaller increments requires much more knowhow and work. Going down this avenue means to devote more resources, and that is simply not possible in many institutions, if libraries lack the backing from above. The vast majority of publishers seems willing to publish OA. They understand that it is important to many authors and almost all funders and customers. At a certain point, they will have to adapt their organizations to a changing landscape. There are still publishers today that invest in more institutional sales force. I doubt this is a good idea. But I am not worried about publishers. When it comes to digitizing their content and testing business models, they have proven they can adapt quickly. ATG: Sven, thanks so much. We really appreciate you agreeing to do this interview. We’ve learned a lot.

Interview — Nigel Newton from page 45 libraries globally, it isn’t immune to the broad changes taking place that are having an impact on the ways that libraries and librarians function. And I hope you won’t mind if I plug the fact that we have annually offered a travel scholarship to the Charleston Conference for early career librarians in the humanities. So we work with and invest in libraries and librarians in a number of ways. ATG: One final question, we always wonder how busy executives get re-energized and ready for the next challenge. Are there any activities or hobbies that you turn to for relaxation and fun? NN: Well, er, um, reading. And walking and music, the gym, and my family. Holidays are good and whoever invented the weekend was a genius. ATG: Mr. Newton we are delighted that you were able to take time out of a very busy schedule to talk to us. Thank you so much!

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Interviews Dr. Anke Beck CEO of Intech Open by Tom Gilson (Associate Editor, Against the Grain) <gilsont@cofc.edu> and Katina Strauch (Editor, Against the Grain) <kstrauch@comcast.net> ATG: Dr. Beck, you have had an impressive career in publishing, most recently as the managing director for the German publisher De Gruyter. What was it about IntechOpen that led you to move on from a major player in the field like De Gruyter to “the first native scientific publisher of Open Access books”? Please tell us about IntechOpen and what unique challenges and opportunities you see in this new position? AB: For many years I have believed in Open Access as a means of democratising knowledge. In my past role, I oversaw the transition to open but was keen to move to a digital first and dynamic fully Open Access publisher. Open Access tends to focus on journals but I believe there is an opportunity for books as well; for both Social Science and STEM books. Although in general I believe that content is the key and the format is secondary, books have advantages such as giving ideas more space to flourish and an editor who curates the content. The bringing together of chapters into one coherent overview is helpful for the reader, but we also hear from authors that it introduces them to peers and ideas that sit alongside their own in a way that conferences do but other print outputs do not. In my first year here, I have observed a hardworking team and have learned that small publishers by no means work less than larger ones. We have fewer people to delegate to and everyone just rolls up their sleeves and gets involved. There are excellent workflows in place that give us the opportunity to concentrate on establishing or focusing our publishing programs and on working with new partners. My knowledge of journal workflows allowed me to see opportunities — for example, we now publish chapters as they are ready rather than waiting to publish the whole book in one go. This means the research is available to discover, read and cite immediately, without delay, which we know is important to researchers. Through this workflow, the “book” and “journal” products grow even closer together. ATG: Have your expectations been fulfilled so far? What has surprised you about IntechOpen? What are the key differences between an OA monograph publisher and a more traditional book publisher? AB: My disappointment is that the commitment to Open Access is still a challenge across the industry and around the world. Most mandates, whether from funders or governments, still focus on journals and I would like to see a change in this mindset. I hope that as part of the commitment to move away from impact factors, funders become more format-agnostic and include books in their mandates. In my view, libraries play an important role in changing the perception of Open Access on

50 Against the Grain / November 2019

the one hand, but also in making Open Access happen while not losing their main task to curate content on the other. We are working with Knowledge Unlatched, who collaborate with librarians to fund Open Access books, for example. They do an excellent job of bridging gaps of the national funding boundaries for Open Access. This is just one example, but I think that more can be done, and librarians are a large part of the solution. ATG: Can you tell us about IntechOpen’s business model? What separates you from the other publishers in the OA monograph space? AB: Generally speaking, there is a shift from subscription-based funding to research-funded academic output. We try to be at the heart of that change. That means, we pay great attention whether we are compliant with as many funders as possible. This funder can be either a research funder, but also a funder from the industry. The majority of Open Access book publishers operate in the humanities space and, although we publish some humanities and social sciences content, the large part of our publishing output is in STEM topics. Secondly, we publish original research and — unlike other OA publishers — do not bundle content from cc-by licensed journals content in books. We really do work with authors and editors. We publish collected works, monographs, and short works, and are also about to introduce a concept for Major Reference Works, where we assemble more than 100 OA articles on a single subject. And as I’ve mentioned earlier, we bring knowledge of journal workflows and apply the parts we believe benefit the author and reader, and the research endeavour overall. We display citations and downloads for each book as well as each chapter publicly on our website, but also inform each author individually about the success of his / her chapter: how many times the chapter was read, where it was read, downloaded and cited. That is pretty unique among OA book publishers.

ATG: IntechOpen divested its online journals in 2016 and now concentrates on producing OA monographs. This runs counter to what one would expect from a science publisher. What caused the shift? What was it that IntechOpen saw in the potential of OA monographs in today’s marketplace that others may have missed? AB: It is true that the journals were sold in 2016 but I was not at the company then. In any case, what remained was the digital workflow which could be easily adapted to a book workflow. A journal publishes loosely-related content and publishers are very careful not to dilute their impact factor once they have one. It is a mathematical exercise as we all know and does not say anything about the quality or the attractiveness of the individual article. The digital age can take us beyond that information. A book can be regarded as a special issue in a journal or as a book. By giving it an ISBN, it receives more opportunities to be marketed. Also: in our experience, authors appreciate if you pre-contextualize information they need to know for them. There is so much information out there that curated content offers a real value to readers. ATG: How many OA books are in your current catalog? What would you say are you major subject strengths? Do you have an annual goal in terms of the number of OA books IntechOpen publishes? AB: We are on our way to hit 5,000 Open Access books this year. The majority of publications are in Physical Sciences and Engineering & Technology with more than 2,000 titles, then Health Sciences with about 1,300 Open Access books, followed by Life Sciences. And we feel there is great potential to grow in other areas. I’m pleased to say that I represent the largest Open Access book publisher. However, it is not simply the number of books itself that is significant, but also the fact that it is purely gold Open Access content. It is not “content hosting on behalf of” other publishers on one platform do, nor is it mixed with green Open Access content. That adds up nicely for some OA book publishers but is not how we understand our mission. I am thrilled that OASPA has recently accepted us as a member. And we will soon be uploading about 2000 of our books to the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB), and will gradually add more. The goal is to add 1,200 books per year, and I do not see any reason this should not be possible — as long as the reviewers are satisfied with the scholarly content. We are not short of ideas and opportunities to grow both in quantity but also in quality. continued on page 51

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Interview — Dr. Anke Beck from page 50 ATG: How do you decide what books to publish? Is there a selection committee or board composed of librarians and publishers? Who is responsible for peer review? AB: At IntechOpen, the book concept is generally developed by an Internal Handling Editor, a member of IntechOpen staff, who will search for a recognized expert in the field to act as an External Editor. Once an External Editor has been appointed by the Internal Handling Editor, the book is open for submissions. Prior to submitting a full chapter, authors are first asked to submit a chapter proposal in the form of an abstract which is then assessed by the External Editor for its suitability in terms of the overall scope and direction of the book. The final manuscript is also reviewed and subject to a plagiarism check, and authors receive a full reviewer report. Finally, we provide full XML Typesetting, technical editing, English language copyediting and proofreading to ensure quality. In addition, we do have general scientific advisory boards. However, people who have worked with me in the past know that I strongly believe that quality in publishing matters, and I believe that competent advisors play a big role in this quality assurance. So yes, we do work with a board, but we plan to establish additional subject related academics as well as a board of librarians and representatives of funders and work closely with them to give us and the authors direction. ATG: Looking over your press releases, IntechOpen has taken many unique and perhaps unusual steps at collaboration with Knowledge Unlatched; online first publication, indexing Open Access books, and other initiatives. What do these collaborations say about how you rank your priorities? AB: Scientific progress is driven by collaboration and we believe that if we want to continue to provide knowledge without boundaries, we must work with others to try new initiatives, reach new partners and support the academics who publish with us. It is true that community building is part of our strategy and we apply what we learn to our overall workflows. The cooperation with KU gives authors the opportunity to publish Open Access knowing that the funding is already secured, in this case, by librarians. The librarians do exactly the same thing as they would for “normal book collections”: they finance the dissemination of knowledge in a crowdfunding model to the reader, but here it’s in reverse order: the librarians tell us which subject they are interested in and we must guarantee the quality of the publication. Knowledge Unlatched collects the money and administrates it. Library contacts at this level and at this scale is certainly not our domain. I think it is the perfect distribution of labour: all three parties do what they are good at: libraries curate, KU collects and administers, and we publish. But if you ask me more generally, I strongly believe that we have to rethink how the industry collaborates. The market is small, it is under pressure and quickly

Against the Grain / November 2019

changing. We need to collaborate to come to good solutions for all; there is not much time and money for each of us to reinvent the wheel. ATG: Do you have any partnerships with other OA publishers or traditional publishers? Are there plans to do so in the future? AB: Yes, we would love to form partnerships with other publishers. I think the current environment in publishing offers opportunities for increased cooperation. Let’s not forget that compared to Elsevier, Springer, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley-Blackwell, the rest is all quite small. Some “swarm intelligence” is needed to compete and survive. We know a great deal about Open Access publishing while others may still need to embrace that, but those others may have more expertise in different geographical or subject markets than we do. I am sure that we could complement each other. There are talks under way, but it is a bit premature to talk about that publicly. ATG: Can you tell us more about why you feel the industry needs to rethink how it collaborates? And what would that collaboration look like? What type creative partnerships do you envision? AB: Our strength is not only a deep knowledge of the Open Access market, but also the utilization of the right workflows and technologies, a good sense of the — let’s call it “author psychology” — and contacts to funders inside and outside of the academic research market. Others, and I’m not necessarily talking about other publishers here, may have a better understanding of author behavior as they measure it on other platforms. There may be organizations or societies who want to move quickly into Open Access, either because they want to or have to. That, for example, would make a good match. ATG: You told another interviewer that you planned to lead IntechOpen forward “in a way that enhanced the quality of scientific information.” Can you talk about your strategy for making this happen? AB: The most important thing in any publishing strategy is to bring authors what they want, which is service and convenience. We need to curate our data well, need to become more granular in our search options. That is costly and the needs (which are primarily the reseacher’s needs not ours) must be explained to the funders as they or “somebody” has to come up for the costs. Above all, we need to listen to academics to understand their needs and develop systems and workflows that support them. It is the academics who create, read, and cite the content, so if we do not correctly interpret what they want we will have no strategy and may as well go home! I see our role to enable more scientific analysis and to assist the creation of more research, not to prevent research. That happens largely through the quality of digital data and sharing it with researchers. I may add that my appointment in the Rat für digitale Infrastruktur der Bundesrepublik (Council for the Digital Infrastructure in Germany) gives me further insights and makes me even more sensible for what researchers and funders need. That informs the digital road-map we have to pursue.

ATG: Digital Science recently posted a report on the state of Open Access monographs. One of the challenges they noted for publishers of OA monographs is discoverability and inclusion in library catalogs. How is IntechOpen addressing these concerns? AB: Our books and chapters are indexed in various repositories. We believe in the widest possible distribution. That’s why we try to export our data for free usability to as many platforms as possible. See it — use it — spread the word further. This is what the mission of an OA publisher should be. We have extremely active social feeds to try to reach wide audiences. All chapters have DOIs and we are also in the process of including our books in the DOAB. We also make Zip files available and we export to libraries so they can better include the data into their catalogues. This is an industry-wide issue and libraries play such an important role. We would love to be a part of the solution and to work with partners, including libraries, to improve the situation. ATG: IntechOpen has been criticized for the high price (more than $1,000) of authoring a chapter in one of its books. How do you respond? AB: It is a myth that our prices are high, particularly given our technical and personal service to researchers we offer. HSS subjects have about the same or possibly slightly lower costs — maybe because they only offer pdf files in most of the cases, and when you compare our price to other STEM publishers, we are definitely on the non-expensive side. Also, we include many services in our APC that other publishing houses would charge extra for, including the creation of xml files, technical editing, and language copy editing. And of course all chapters have the “online first” option, we can release each chapter once it is ready. In fact, a recent Simba report highlights us as being at the cheaper end of STEM Open Access publishing and comparative overviews like this one https://www. openaccess.cam.ac.uk/paying-open-access/ how-much-do-publishers-charge-open-access support this as well. Like other publishers, we have discount options in place for multiple chapters or for institutions. In our cooperation with Knowledge Unlatched, we also closely coordinate our discount structure for libraries. If KU grants discounts to libraries which have pledged a certain amount of money, we, of course, acknowledge that discount for authors from that university, too. ATG: IntechOpen works with a number of globally-recognized funders ranging from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to the European Commission to the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Can you tell us what role funders like this play in your publishing program? AB: Funders have a huge role in encouraging academics to publish in Open Access formats and also in moving away from impact factors and journals. Many funders now say they are less interested in the venue of publication than the idea or output, and I would continued on page 54

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Adam Matthew Digital is the proud publishers of carefully curated and unique digital collections, spanning the Humanities and Social Sciences. Developed by our dedicated editorial teams, and through the innovative use of technology, our collections bring the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leading archives and libraries to academic communities across the globe.

Collections publishing this year Shakespeareâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Globe Archive Theatres, Players & Performance

Socialism on Film

Module III: Culture & Society

Ethnomusicology

Global Field Recordings

America in World War Two

Oral Histories and Personal Accounts

Food and Drink in History Module I

Sex & Sexuality

Module I: Research Collections from The Kinsey Institute Library & Special Collections

New collections for 2020 Foreign Office Files for Southeast Asia, 1963-1980

Cold War in the Pacific, Trade Relations, and the Post-Independence Period

Poverty, Philanthropy and Social Conditions in Victorian Britain Mass Observation Module I: 1980s

Nineteenth Century Literary Society The John Murray Publishing Archive

Early Modern England

Society, Culture and Everyday Life, 1500-1700

Medical Services and Warfare Module II: 1928-1949

Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Literature and Culture East India Company

Module IV: Correspondence -Early Voyages, Formation and Conflict

Sex & Sexuality:

Module II: Self-Expression, Community and Identity

Food and Drink in History Module II

For more information please visit www.amdigital.co.uk

Interview — Dr. Anke Beck from page 51 love to see this reflected in Open Access mandates. The incentives structure around publishing needs to change and that is down to funders, too. I also see an important role in working with private funders. My home country, Germany, for example, has a large number of private foundations that support the publication of academic knowledge. However, not all of them have “caught the wave” of digital publishing. For example, some of them still have a reference to the weight of the paper in their application forms. I am sure we will get there, but it takes a while. ATG: Are all your OA books funded or are there other books which are not supported by the OA funding model which are published regardless? AB: Yes, there are. We take special pride in supporting women in science through our program of the same name. Open Access in general helps to remove barriers and allows everyone to access valuable information, but particularly in this program we do not want to exclude talent for any reason. The goal for the program is to charge zero APCs. The interest in publishing in this program is high, but we cannot cover all the costs. In order to allow

for the highest number of publications and the highest visibility of women in science, we are looking for sponsorship from foundations and companies. But librarians can also pledge to the program via Knowledge Unlatched. ATG: As you look out over the next three to five years, what role do you see for OA monographs in the world of scientific publishing? What changes and innovations do you anticipate in that world? And how do you see IntechOpen contributing to those changes and innovations? AB: Already we see that academics interact with single figures, or datasets, as well as with articles or chapters rather than the whole package as we have created it. In the future, publishers will move further into curating knowledge by connecting different aspects of research using new technologies and with machine learning. Publishing already sees itself as a service industry but we will move even further into this, working with academics and digital development to serve our communities in new and more technological ways. I think we will see many changes in how content will be created, how people will work together, what a publication even IS and how we will review it. There’s a reason why AI is a buzzword: it will play a major role in both the creation of and validation of content. I would like my company to give itself room to experiment with these new ways to arrive at new knowledge,

even if not financially successful in the beginning. I think it is generally important to allow yourself a dosage of experimentation. ATG: We like to end our interviews by asking what you like to do in those rare moments of downtime. Do you have any favorite hobbies or leisure activities that you particularly enjoy? AB: I really like to do things that make me look at and think about things differently — wine tastings, for example, where you pair wine and salty chocolate. Try it! It has surprising results. I like classical, but “crazy” music. If you have ever heard John Adams’ “Harmonielehre” then you know what is awe-inspiring to me, but possibly not inspiring for everybody’s ears. I also, honestly, still do enjoy a good academic talk with a good hypothesis and sharp conclusions. In general, I like to leave a talk, a concert or a wine tasting thinking “oh gee, I was not aware that this was possible.” Either that or to swim, where it’s just me and the water. ATG: Thank you for taking time out of what we know must be a busy schedule to talk to us. AB: It was a pleasure. Thank you for the questions.

Blurring Lines — The Rise of Virtual Reality/ Augmented Reality and the University Librarian An Interview with Sarah Howard of Queensland University of Technology Column Editor: David Parker (Senior Director Product Management, Alexander Street, a ProQuest Company; Phone: 201-673-8784) <dparker@alexanderstreet.com>

irtual reality, as an educational technology, is still in its infancy. The term itself, virtual reality/augmented reality, is understood by its advocates and its newest adopters to mean different things: 360 video, Google cardboard attachments for mobile devices, browser-based, interactive simulations, headset-and-haptic enabled, software-driven virtual environments and immersive caves offer a continuum of experiences and opportunities for adoption. And if one attends an academic conference in a field that is leading in the adoption of virtual reality for learning, such as nursing, medicine, architecture or engineering, examples of each of these technologies will be on display. From the perspective of the library and the “virtual reality expert librarian,” virtual reality often connotes a physical space (3D Printers, Makerspaces) and/or an expertise in procuring, managing and educating users in the use of software, hardware and various other devices. Organizations that serve the institution and the library specifically, such as ProQuest where I am employed, are engaged with supporting the curation, acquisition, hosting and delivery of virtual reality content, although our decision to license, curate and deliver hinges on the degree to which our customers are coalescing around a content type, e.g., 360 videos. What will the role of the educational technology company be that exists to serve the library as virtual reality becomes more widely deployed across universities and classrooms? This question led me to the positing of a hypothetical continuum of provisioning and deploying, with the library/patron/institution taking up a space on the continuum deploying the virtual reality technology and the educational technology company, such as ProQuest, providing virtual reality content and platform services. To begin exploring the efficacy of the concept of a continuum of provisioning and deploying, I reached out to Sarah Howard of Queensland University of Technology and conducted the following interview.

Sarah, please describe your role and your library, particularly as concerns support for virtual reality in support of course learning. SH: I am the Liaison Librarian at the Queensland University of Technology Library (QUT) (Brisbane, Australia) and I support the School of Nursing and the School of Optometry and Vision Science in the Faculty of Health. The three main areas of support I offer to the Schools is in information and digital literacy, research, and collection development. I am also currently the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) Digital Dexterity Champion for QUT. This new exciting role enables me to be part of the CAUL community of practice whereby I share resources and develop skills, whilst also leading the promotion of digital skills within the QUT Library team. In 2017, in addition to my Liaison Librarian role at QUT, I was extremely fortunate to lead a project entitled continued on page 55

54 Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Blurring Lines from page 54

SPECIAL OFFER

Virtual Reality Content for Higher Education Curriculum. A collaboration between QUT Library and ProQuest, the project aimed to explore Virtual Reality resources and the use of it in higher education. How did you become interested in virtual reality for learning? SH: I have had a passion for the use of mobile technology in education for almost 10 years. It started when I first discovered the numerous possibilities a mobile device, such as the iPhone, could provide. Beginning with QR Codes, I was fascinated how such a simple tool could connect students with print and online information. I then discovered Augmented Reality and learnt how AR provided a more advanced option of layered information. 360 videos and basic Virtual Reality also emerged for me around this time, and I just couldn’t get enough of these exciting innovations. The possibilities for the use of AR, 360 videos and VR in higher education was very exciting for me all that time ago, and still is to this day. Please describe an early implementation of virtual reality/augmented reality at QUT: SH: I am unaware of the very first instance of implementation at QUT, but I do know that the Faculty of Health, the Faculty of Science and Engineering, and the Faculty of Creative Industries have been ultising this technology for some time. For example, the School of Clinical Science within the Faculty of Health have explored and used Virtual Reality and 3D technology for over five years. Academics and researchers in the area of medical imaging have utlised fully immersive VR programs to assist students with their radiographic technical skills. Does the metaphor of a continuum of adoption hold true for QUT? Can you give examples of increasing complexity of virtual reality deployment in courses at QUT? SH: It certainly does. Personally, I have seen a steady rise in the uptake in the use of VR, AR and 360 videos within QUT courses and research over the past two years. QUT Library initially had one VR headset for staff and students to use, and one small set of plastic headsets for mobile phone use; but with the increasing demands across all Faculties, the Library has needed to expand the collection of hardware to meet the growing needs of our staff and students. We are currently seeking to expand the collection of headsets even further, as our headsets are constantly booked out. Requests for VR content, and advice on what VR content to use, has particularly increased in the past 12 months. Librarians are working with their academics to seek appropriate content that can be used within curriculums. The variety of platforms that VR can be found within can be limiting, as particular hardware may be required to support that specific content e.g., Microsoft HoloLens. Libraries and/or universities may not yet have the variety of hardware to meet the needs of the content required. Using VR headsets within large lectures or workshops can be frustrating for both the academic and the students, as VR headsets are currently designed for individual use. QUT Library can assist academics to project VR content within large lecture theatres (using a high-powered VR headset, Oculus Rift, and gaming laptop, Alienware) but academics understandably want their students to have a more immersive experience. QUT Library has purchased a number of basic plastic headsets (Merge) and created four “class sets” for academics to borrow and distribute within a lecture/tutorial; however more often than not students have to share the headset as even four class sets are not enough for a large group. Students need to also have their own mobile device and a reliable WiFi connection to view content such as 360 video. Please describe a selection of the key vendors you have worked with in supporting faculty with their virtual reality requirements. SH: QUT Library reached out to the numerous publishers and vendors we already have established associations with over the past couple of years, to seek their interest and projected development of content in this area. The majority advised us that although they were interested they were not yet established in this area. Having said this, QUT Library has worked with not only ProQuest but also with Pri-

New subscribers benefit from a deep discount on a one-year trial *

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF BRITISH AND IRISH HISTORY

The largest and most authoritative index of British and Irish history The Bibliography (BBIH) is the most comprehensive and authoritative guide to what’s been published on about British and Irish history, covering the Roman period to the present day. Over 600,000 records of books, chapters and articles relating to British and Irish history 12,000 references added annually Over 750 journals and series regularly checked

No student, lecturer or researcher should be without the wonderful BBIH. Professor Sir David Cannadine, Dodge Professor of History, Princeton University,

*Only valid for institutions that have not held a subscription to BBIH in the last five years.

Brepols Online Databases

brepolis@brepols.net – www.brepolis.net https://about.brepolis.net

continued on page 56

Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Blurring Lines from page 55 mal Pictures (Anatomy.TV). We are aware of other companies such as OVID that also offer AR and virtual simulation content. QUT Library owns a growing collection of VR headsets to support VR content, such as Oculus (Rift and Quest), PlayStation, and 80 pairs of basic plastic headsets for mobile phones. We use the Oculus, PlayStation and Steam platforms and associated content to mainly support VR requirements. What do you see as the specific opportunities for library services companies in support of virtual reality? Indexing/metadata standards, platforms, aggregation, curation, others? SH: When an academic seeks advice from their librarian for VR content, it can be a frustrating experience for both parties. The librarian, for example, will need to explore a variety of platforms to seek the content, and even when content is located, the supporting hardware (VR headset) needs to be available. For example, I was recently approached by one of my nursing academics for VR anatomy

content. She was particularly interested in a specific resource, but it turned out to only be available for the Microsoft HoloLens headset, of which we don’t have within our library collection. We offered her other VR content, anatomy content that was available on the platforms supported by the headsets we have in our collection, but unfortunately the content did not meet her needs. It would be ideal for library service companies to understand what the specific content need is and to create content that can be used across all, if not many, headsets. To make the content easily found and available at an affordable price would be the cherry on top! Where will QUT be in five years, in ten years as concerns learning and virtual reality? SH: The interest and use of VR in various curriculums within QUT has rapidly increased over the past couple of years, and I know it will continue to grow as content options increase and expensive headsets become more affordable. Our new Pro Vice-Chancellor (Digital Learning), Prof Kevin Ashford-Rowe, joined QUT earlier this year and has a tremendous interest in Virtual and Augmented Reality. Prof Ashford-Rowe has already enabled many

opportunities for academics and professional staff to progress in this innovative area and supports ongoing advancement. With the support of our leaders and the ongoing increasing interest in this space, I believe VR will be an important part of our learning and teaching at QUT for years to come. What closing advice do you have for educational technology services companies interested in the opportunity virtual reality presents? SH: VR is currently viewed as something new and exciting to use. I hope that in the future VR will be an ordinary tool to select and use within learning and teaching, just as eBooks, journals and videos are today. There will also be a wide range of content available for all levels of education, and it will be accessible to all and via any headset (which will be affordable to all!). My advice is to continue to seek feedback from academics and professional staff from around the world regarding content requirements. What do they need? What is available now that they want to use but can’t (platform, cost, accessibility issues etc.)? Making the required content available on a platform that can be easily found and used would be ideal.

Booklover — Summer Reading Column Editor: Donna Jacobs (Retired, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425) <donna.jacobs55@gmail.com> Summer is over. It has been a HOT one. The world is spinning a little off its axis. Reading choices have been a little intense. Colson Whitehead was featured on a July episode of CBS Sunday Morning. The discussion of his new novel The Nickel Boys stuck with me. I had the opportunity to be in Vermont this summer, where the air was just a bit cooler than the humid steamy environment of the South Carolina Lowcountry. While wandering through Bear Pond Books in Montpelier, Vermont, I noticed that Whitehead’s book was the staff pick. I bought a signed first edition. It is a powerful read based on a real story about a reform school. Will cause you to pause. Seek it out. Social conflict and turmoil must be the theme as I had already decided to read a poem written by Wole Soyinka entitled “Civilian and Soldier.” Soyinka, “who in a wide cultural perspective and with poetic overtones fashions the drama of existence,” won the 1986 Nobel Prize in Literature becoming the first African to win the prestigious award. He used the opportunity afforded by the Nobel ceremony to deliver an acceptance speech dedicated to the atrocities of apartheid in South Africa and to Nelson Mandela who devoted his life to not only exposing the ills of apartheid but also to diligently seeking a better opportunity for his people. One biographical sketch suggests that Soyinka’s acceptance speech moved the world to reason with his words and the ultimate release of Mandela. Akinwande Oluwole “Wole” Soyinka was born in 1934 in Abeokuta, Nigeria, the second child of Samuel Ayodele and Grace Eniola Soyinka. His father was the headmaster of St. Peters School and this position afforded the large family the luxuries of electricity and radio. He attended primary school in his hometown where his facility with literary composition was initially recognized and awarded. He continued with secondary education at Government College in Ibadan, at the time one of the elite Nigerian secondary schools. Soyinka moved to Lagos once his studies were complete and worked as a clerk while writing radio plays and short stories. From 1952-1954, he attended University College in Ibadan and then relocated to the University of Leeds to continue studying English literature under the mentorship of Wilson Knight. Soyinka immersed himself in academic pursuits, social justice causes and political affairs

56 Against the Grain / November 2019

in his country, theater, and writing — all of which he pursued with a passion that won him fellowships, academic positions, awards, literary acclaim and imprisonment. His works of drama and poetry are written in English and reflect the influence of his Yoruba culture. I leave you with “Civilian and Soldier”: “My apparition rose from the fall of lead, Declared, ‘I am a civilian.’ It only served To aggravate your fright. For how could I Have risen, a being of this world, in that hour Of impartial death! And I thought also: nor is Your quarrel of this world. You stood still For both eternities, and oh I heard the lesson Of your training sessions, cautioning Scorch earth behind you, do not leave A dubious neutral to the rear. Reiteration Of my civilian quandary, burrowing earth From the lead festival of your more eager friends Worked the worse on your confusion, and when You brought the gun to bear on me, and death Twitched me gently in the eye, your plight And all of you came clear to me. I hope some day Intent upon my trade of living, to be checked In stride by your apparition in a trench, Signaling, I am a soldier. No hesitation then But I shall shoot you clean and fair With meat and bread, a gourd of wine A bunch of breasts from either arm, and that Lone question – do you friend, even now, know What it is all about?”

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Reader’s Roundup: Monographic Musings & Reference Reviews Column Editor: Corey Seeman (Director, Kresge Library Services, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan; Phone: 734-764-9969) <cseeman@umich.edu> Twitter @cseeman Column Editor’s Note: Since this is the Charleston Conference issue, there may be new readers. If you are a new reader — hello, greetings and salutations. If you are a repeat visitor, then I send my surprised thank you for sticking with me! Since the last issue, we have combined two different columns into one. On the one hand, it could be like a wonderful BOGO offer. On the other hand…well, let’s not go there. This column was formerly just the Monographic Musings column in Against the Grain. But as of now, we have also included reference reviews in this column as well (though I do not have any with this batch —should be next time). So, I have decided with this change in focus (or an expanded one), maybe a change in title might be in order. And so, it is with great pleasure that I introduce you to the second Reader’s Roundup column. This will continue to feature an interesting mix of titles that cover a variety of librarian topics, but also new reference works for your collection as well. Hopefully, each column will feature both library-focused works (in Monographic Musings) and reference works (in Reference Reviews). The title reflects that we have both types of reviews in a single location. Thanks to my great reviewers for getting items for this column: Jennifer Matthews, Michelle Polchow, Steven W. Sowards, and Katherine Swart. As a reminder, I have introduced a standard rating reference. Being a big fan of Ebert and Siskel (may they both rest in peace), I loved the way that they presented a clear way to show if something was worth watching. Roger Ebert used four stars (for his newspaper reviews in the Chicago Sun Times) to let you know quickly if this is something worth the time and money. So to that end, I have created the ATG Reviewer Rating that would be used from book to book. I came up with this rating to reflect our collaborative collections and resource sharing means. I think it helps classify the importance of these books. • I need this book on my nightstand. (This book is so good, that I want a copy close at hand when I am in bed.) • I need this on my desk. (This book is so valuable, that I want my own copy at my desk that I will share with no one.) • I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.) • I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it with three to five days via my network catalog.) • I’ll use my money elsewhere. (Just not sure this is a useful book for my library or my network.) If you would like to be a reviewer for Against the Grain, please write me at <cseeman@umich.edu>. If you have a book you would like to see reviewed in a future column, please also write me directly. Happy reading and be nutty! — CS

Burgess, John T, and Emily J. M. Knox, eds. Foundations of Information Ethics. Chicago: ALA Neal-Schumann, 2019. 978-0-8389-1722-0, 168 pages. $54.99 pb. Reviewed by Steven W. Sowards (Associate Director for Collections, Michigan State University Libraries, East Lansing MI) <sowards@msu.edu> Information ethics (IE) provides a philosophical system to explore the “domain of information” in order to “provide normative, or morally

Against the Grain / November 2019

guiding, principles” (p. 3). Intended primarily as a textbook for MLIS classes, this book starts with concepts and applies them to difficult cases. This clear and intelligent presentation has potential value for many information professionals, for whom ethical analysis may begin and end with a casual endorsement of “Melvil Dewey’s library faith, the belief that access to high-quality reading material is intrinsically good and will have positive effects …” (p. 7). While a universal ethics remains the ideal, the book begins with four “Western ethical frameworks” — while recognizing their limitations and origins in a colonial-era past. Chapter 10 covers “cognitive justice and intercultural information ethics” as a remedy and counterpoint. As a framework, deontology relies on piety; consequentialism examines outcomes; character ethics considers personal ethical practice; and contractual ethics looks for collective moral guidelines. Journalistic ethics, computer ethics, and library and information science ethics also contribute to the foundation of IE. Thirteen chapters are grouped in three clusters. The first cluster is an overview and history of information ethics in a context of ethics at large. Chapters in the second cluster take up specific topics. Information access includes First Amendment concepts, but also hard cases such as dissemination of information about bomb-making technology. Privacy becomes a concern as we see access to information grow into unfettered digital surveillance. Information discourse promotes a place at the table for all parties. Intellectual property (IP) issues pertain to copyright and patent law. Data and big data capacities have implications for other topics such as privacy. Cybersecurity includes discussion of “ethical hacking.” The two chapters in the third cluster bring in global and intercultural perspectives, and the concept of global digital citizenship. The final chapter identifies emerging challenges: algorithmic bias; social media behavior; precision marketing; technological unemployment; disinformation and fake news; open data; 3-D printing and its regulation; and predictive analytics. Each chapter ends with several dozen citations to books, articles, government publications, data tables, online news, legal texts, and web sites. In passing, three dozen “major thinkers” from Aristotle to Robert Hauptman (who wrote the Foreword to this book) are introduced in summary paragraphs. Readers see three primary source documents: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, an excerpt from John Stuart Mill’s essay “On Liberty,” and an 1890 legal text on privacy. Sixteen case studies offer real life situations, with questions for discussion. The contributors are primarily American academics, including MLIS faculty. The content is aimed at librarians, faculty and students in MLIS programs, and information science professionals. All readers can be ethical advocates in a 21st-century environment that often asks “can we do it?” rather than “should we do it?” Readers are assumed to be in the United States: for example, legal discussions cite specifics like 17 USC 107. Given the complex subject of the work and growing importance in the everyday lives of librarians, tools are added to make this a more useful. A glossary and list of acronyms could have helped define terms such as ICT (information and communication technologies) and IIE (intercultural information ethics). There is also a short glossary about IP. There is no equivalent recent publication. Robert Hauptman’s Scope of Information Ethics (2019) goes beyond LIS topics and is not aimed at students. Ethics is only one of the Six Issues Facing Libraries Today, from John Budd (2017). Luciano Floridi’s Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Information (2016) covers a wider range of philosophical topics. continued on page 58

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Book Reviews from page 57 ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)

Diamant-Cohen, Betsy. Mother Goose on the Loose: Updated. Chicago: ALA Editions, 2019. 9780838916469, 208 pages. $69.99 ($62.99 for ALA Members). Reviewed by Katherine Swart (Collection Development Librarian, Hekman Library, Calvin University) <kswart20@calvin.edu> Mention Jean Piaget to any educator, and you will receive knowing nods and maybe even a mention of his theory of cognitive development, which mapped out the stages of learning from infancy to adulthood. As one of the forerunners in child development studies, Piaget was soon met with L. S. Vytgosky’s work promoting, among other things, the importance of parents and teachers in early childhood development. Around the same time we have Howard Gardner introducing his research on multiple intelligences, and the little-known Barbara Cass-Beggs writing about the importance of music to infant development. Librarian Betsy Diamant-Cohen took her son to one of Cass-Beggs’ “Your Baby Needs Music” classes and was so convinced by its efficacy that she then studied under Cass-Beggs to become certified in her “Listen, Like, Learn” method. Diamant-Cohen went on to develop her own music-based early childhood development program called “Mother Goose on the Loose” (MGOL). A long-time children’s librarian at the Enoch Pratt Free Libraries in Baltimore, MD, Diamant-Cohen perfected her program over time, presented at many conferences, and eventually spread the program to other public libraries with her first Mother Goose on the Loose book in 2011. In subsequent years the program has proven popular and effective not only at public libraries but also at children’s hospitals, museums, and elementary schools. A few years ago the American Library Association asked Diamant-Cohen to update her original book, and Mother Goose on the Loose: Updated was published in 2019. In this revised edition Diamant-Cohen retains the core of her time-tested program, but updates the book with new research supporting early literacy skills, methods of adapting her program for children with special needs, and ways to include digital media in her program. The result is a magnificent tool for librarians and educators who work with infants and toddlers. Essentially, “Mother Goose on the Loose” is a 30-minute group activity for parents and children ages 0-24 months. A librarian follows a script of short nursery rhymes and uses simple visuals on a felt board. Parents and children repeat the rhymes using hand and body motions, music, scarves, and other props. All of this structured play helps children build essential skills that will enable language development, early literacy, and school readiness, not to mention a slew of other benefits. This book provides an introduction to MGOL, research that backs up the effectiveness of the program, and detailed instructions for planning, running, evaluating, and adapting MGOL sessions. The book ends with five ready-to-present programs, templates for the felt board pictures, and a complete index of rhymes. Throughout the text Diamant-Cohen adds hints about “what to say when...,” as just about anything can happen when working with small children. The author also suggests ways to adapt traditional Mother Goose rhymes that might sound offensive to some audiences (e.g., removing the word master from the Baa Baa Black Sheep rhyme). Diamant-Cohen shares loads of research going back to Piaget and up through present scholarship. It’s almost overwhelming at times just how much documentation she provides for why every detail of the MGOL program is proven to be beneficial. The near over-documentation is, perhaps, my only criticism of the book, though. While writing

58 Against the Grain / November 2019

the review, I was delighted to find supplemental resources available at https://mgol.net. In case you still aren’t convinced that the program works, Diamant-Cohen floods her website with even more research citations, video testimonials from parents, and a monthly newsletter. As a visual learner, I found the videos especially helpful — both clips of Diamant-Cohen’s conference presentations and samples of actual MGOL sessions. This book is going to be most useful for children’s librarians at public libraries, but I will also be sharing it with early childhood education faculty and students at my college. ATG Reviewer Rating: If I were (or worked with) a children’s librarian... I need this on my desk. (This book is so valuable, that I want my own copy at my desk that I will share with no one.)

Edwards, Kimberley and Michelle Leonard. Assessment Strategies in Technical Services. Chicago: ALA Editions, 2019. 9780838918579, 272 pages. $69.99. Reviewed by Jennifer Matthews (Collection Strategy Librarian, Rowan University) <matthewsj@rowan.edu> Technical services work has seen a plethora of change over the last several decades. This is particularly true when one examines the movement from an entirely print-focused operation to one that revolves more around electronic resources. Accordingly, the way that technical services staff can assist in the assessment of resources, budgets, workflows and more can play a critical role in the efficiency of any library’s overall spending and proof of value, especially as university budgets continue to tighten. This collection of topics on assessment covers a wide array of areas starting with the basics such as electronic resource budgets, workflows, vendors, and collaborative initiatives and moves on to using multiple data sets for assessment, preservation assessment, ways to save with your serials, how to build a data warehouse and benchmarking techniques for improving the metadata process. Each instance is told from a real-life case study by a variety of authors. The editors are Kimberely Edwards, Information Analyst for Technical Services at George Mason University. Edwards received her MLIS at the University of Kentucky and has taught and presented on collection analysis and assessment tools and techniques at a variety of conferences. Michelle Leonard is a tenured librarian at the Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, at the University of Florida. She was the co-author of Implementing and Assessing Use-Driven Acquisitions (2010) and has also presented on assessment and collection-building at numerous conferences. Together they have pulled together a group of authors with a wide array of experiences in assessment to share. One of the particularly strong chapters was written by Kristen Calvert (Head of Content Organization and Management at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, NC) and Whitney Jordan’s (Acquisitions Librarian at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, NC). In their chapter on “Serials and Continuing Resources,” Calvert and Jordan provide many interesting measures to consider when reviewing serials including both individual and big deal packages. Their experience was particularly well noted during their case study and post assessment review that is in the book. The lessons learned, particularly the questions they asked, were thoughtful and they included a section on Human Resources. So often libraries are so absorbed in the necessary target dollar amount that they may not also consider the human cost and we should. This reminder is a poignant one as a large cutback in print titles could mean staff retraining and examining reclassification guidelines at your location. In conjunction with this as one assesses the collection for retention or not one may have to assess their staff for skill sets and retraining. Nina Servizzi’s (Associate Dean for Knowledge, Access, and Resource Management Services at the Division of Libraries, New York University) chapter “The Future of Technical Services: Data Governance and Analysis” discussed the need for building a data warehouse. continued on page 60

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The ASME Digital Collection is ASME’s

Features of The ASME Digital Collection include:

authoritative, online reference for the mechanical

•

Powerful search tools that retrieve content simultaneously from journals, conference proceedings, and eBooks

•

Advanced filtering tools to refine search results by keywords, topics, journal citation, and date range

•

Topic Collections for specific subject areas

•

Enhanced user experience (UX), providing simplified navigation and inline figures & tables

•

Responsive web pages for better desktop and mobile experience

•

Links to CrossRef, Google Scholar, and Web of Science to discover citing articles

•

Tools for citation export

engineering and related research communities. It provides unparalleled depth, breadth, and quality of peer-reviewed content: •

ASME’s Journals from 1959—present

•

ASME’s Conference Proceedings from 2000—present, plus select proceedings back to 1955

•

Ability to share links by social media and email

ASME’s eBooks from 1993—present,

•

Email alerts for saved searches and newly published content

plus select titles back to 1944

•

COUNTER/SUSHI compliant

•

Shibboleth institutional login

•

Indexed in leading abstracting and indexing (A&I) services

For more information, visit asmedigitalcollection.asme.org

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers®

ASME®

To order ASME Subscription Packages contact Warren Adams phone: 1.973.244.2223 • email: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org

Book Reviews from page 58 Too often, when technical services is asked for assessment reports they are rebuilding the same reports from scratch year after year. Servizzi lays out a seven-step process that details a more efficient way to manage this information and make data more accessible and apparent to the library’s key stakeholders. The chapters throughout this book provide case studies that show how technical services is key in the assessment picture of demonstrating library value. Through their collective experiences perhaps even more institutions will find success at demonstrating this at their various locations. ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this on my desk. (This book is so valuable, that I want my own copy at my desk that I will share with no one.)

Hakala-Ausperk, Catherine. Win ’Em Over. Chicago: American Library Association, 2019. 978-0-8389-1811-1, 48 pages. $19.99 Reviewed by Michelle Polchow (Electronic Resources Librarian, University of California, Davis) <mpolchow@ucdavis.edu> A professional promotion is great news! Now that you have the job, do you (and others) wonder if you’re up to the task? Hakala-Ausperk’s

new book is a confidence builder for anyone facing a new job, especially with the need to establish leadership skills. Even more so, this book even helps with that potentially awkward experience of receiving an internal promotion where you suddenly become the boss of your friends and colleagues. This brief book is presented in workbook format. The author acts in the role of mentor or career coach, providing space for reflection, visualizing exercises, recognizing your accomplishments and creating a plan to meet the challenges ahead of you. Given the author’s extensive and diversified set of experiences earned over 30+ years in the field (including library service work, management, administration and as an iSchool instructor for Kent State University), she’s written this book that will help a large variety of younger professionals. The leadership planners focus on successful team building by developing strong and effective library leaders. Features in Win ’Em Over, such as “Walking the Plank” exercises and suggestions to “push yourself to try something new,” can fundamentally shape your career, not just launch a new job. In this era when libraries face challenges as never before, it’s gratifying to discover a book focused on the development of human resources and recognizes this is one of the library’s paramount investments. Editor’s Note: We do not condone writing in the print materials found in our collection — so if you are using this book from a collection, please record your answers in a notebook! ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it with three to five days via my network catalog.)

Collecting to the Core — Writing in Mathematics by Kristine K. Fowler (Mathematics Librarian, University of Minnesota; Mathematics Subject Editor, Resources for College Libraries) <fowle013@umn.edu> Column Editor: Anne Doherty (Resources for College Libraries Project Editor, CHOICE/ACRL) <adoherty@ala-choice.org> Column Editor’s Note: The “Collecting to the Core” column highlights monographic works that are essential to the academic library within a particular discipline, inspired by the Resources for College Libraries bibliography (online at http://www.rclweb.net). In each essay, subject specialists introduce and explain the classic titles and topics that continue to remain relevant to the undergraduate curriculum and library collection. Disciplinary trends may shift, but some classics never go out of style. — AD “We’re being WEC[k]ed.” Such is the slang at the University of Minnesota School of Mathematics in developing and codifying a Writing-Enriched Curriculum; mathematics departments elsewhere have gone or are going through similar processes. Despite the misconception that math is the opposite of words, the effort to explicitly use effective writing in learning math concepts and communicating math research is of long standing. Evidence can be seen in current interdisciplinary education emphases such as STEAM (science, technology, engineering, the arts,

60 Against the Grain / November 2019

and mathematics), in iterations of the writing across the curriculum movement, in math style guides, and in the many prizes established over the years to recognize excellent math writing. This article will highlight some of the key resources around writing in mathematics, in its various aspects.

Educational Aspects

The intentional focus on integrating written communication objectives into teaching and learning has had many labels (and acronyms), with somewhat differing emphases: writing across the curriculum (WAC), writing to learn, writing in the disciplines (WID). A seminal general source is Writing Across the Curriculum: A Guide to Developing Programs, edited by Susan H. McLeod and Margot Soven.1 David R. Russell traced the progression of writing-enriched education in Writing in the Academic Disciplines: A Curricular History, with a particular focus on 1970-2000 in the 2002 second edition.2 He notes that “though it may seem surprising at first glance, mathematics has been a leader in this regard,” particularly in the shift to departmental programs that can create more lasting institutional change than an individual instructor’s efforts.3 John Meier and Thomas Rishel provide direction for math-specific implementation in their 1998 Writing in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics, advocating “sensible, well-formed writing assignments which are

consistent with the pedagogical style and goals of a course.”4 With many practical suggestions and exercises teachers can use, they address how to incorporate writing into courses, while also discussing why. The short answer: “Writing requires thinking, and thinking is what we, as teachers, want to encourage…. We hope to convince you that to get students to absorb mathematics, or any other subject, better, you need to have them think about, then write about that subject.”5 Many more ready-to-use suggestions are provided via the Mathematical Association of America’s (MAA) Classroom Resource Materials series, specifically Annalisa Crannell et al.’s Writing Projects for Mathematics Courses: Crushed Clowns, Cars, and Coffee to Go.6 The lively projects utilize a range of skills and are indexed by undergraduate course, from pre-calculus through differential equations. Franco Vivaldi’s Mathematical Writing provides the basis of a dedicated undergraduate course, modeled on one he has taught, including examples and exercises (some of which have solutions/hints provided).7 It should be mentioned that in some mathematical contexts, “writing” refers specifically to the writing of proofs; indeed, the math course most likely to be explicitly identified as writing-intensive is often a course in logic/ proof-writing that forms a transition from lowcontinued on page 62

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Ovid®

Discover premium resources and tools to support the needs of all of your library patrons. Ovid® is the leading information search, discovery, and management solution providing a single online destination for seamlessly accessing and working with premium online journals, books, and databases from the world’s leading publishers.

Key products from Ovid: •

LWW Health Library Collections – 20+ specialties available!

•

Ovid® Discovery

AudioDigest Platinum

•

Ovid® Emcare

•

GIDEON: Global Infectious Diseases & Epidemiology Online Network

•

Ovid® Nursing Edge

•

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI)

•

Visible Body®: 3D Human Anatomy Modeling Interactive Programs

•

And more!

•

5MinuteConsult.com

•

Acland’s Video Atlas of Human Anatomy

•

Bates’ Visual Guide to Physical Examination

•

Visit Wolters Kluwer at the Charleston Conference!

Stop by table #141 at the Vendor Showcase to meet your Ovid Representative and learn about our latest products and services.

Collecting to the Core from page 60 er to upper level undergraduate mathematics. Ulrich Daepp and Pamela Gorkin’s Reading, Writing, and Proving: A Closer Look at Mathematics is in this vein, which makes clear the intertwined nature of mathematical reasoning and its written expression.8 This connection is built into the Process Standard for Communication outlined in the highly influential Principles and Standards for School Mathematics for pre-kindergarten through grade 12 from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics: “Students who have opportunities, encouragement, and support for speaking, writing, reading, and listening in mathematics classes reap dual benefits: they communicate to learn mathematics, and they learn to communicate mathematically.”9

Stylistic Aspects

That there are many different perspectives on what constitutes good mathematical communication is exemplified by the process leading up to the publication of How to Write Mathematics (American Mathematical Society, 1973).10 Originally intended to be a consensus “pamphlet on expository writing of books and papers at the research level and at the level of graduate texts” by a high-powered AMS committee, it ended up as a compilation of four individual essays on the topic by the four committee members: Norman Steenrod, Paul Halmos, Menahem Schiffer, and Jean Dieudonné. Halmos, always entertaining to read, begins his essay with “There Is No Recipe and What It Is.” Many of the recommendations, like the shared emphasis on rewriting, could be applicable to any subject; but each author discusses some specifically mathematical concerns, from the ordering of theorems to the level of detail that should be included in proofs. There are several book-length guides to the subject, such as A Primer of Mathematical Writing: Being a Disquisition on Having Your Ideas Recorded, Typeset, Published, Read, and Appreciated from the very prolific Steven Krantz.11 He addresses the gamut from writing in TeX, the typesetting system invented by and for mathematicians, to the different style and organizational requirements for a research paper versus an opinion piece. Nicholas Higham’s Handbook of Writing for the Mathematical Sciences gives an overlapping perspective on some of the same topics, as well as unique ones like preparing a research poster and writing and defending a thesis.12 The chapter offering advice for those mathematicians for whom English is a second language is very relevant to this very international scholarly community.

62 Against the Grain / November 2019

Naturally there are various internet resources for math writing. A rich source for educators is the MAA’s mathcomm.org, which originated in the MIT Department of Mathematics and provides a collection of resources aimed at engaging students, including “General Principles of Mathematical Communication,” a list of resources for “Writing to Learn: Using Writing to Help Students Learn Math,” and more.13

Exemplars

The Internet also serves as a source of written mathematics in traditional and emerging formats, such as Evelyn Lamb’s “Roots of Unity” blog on the Scientific American web site and the Simons Foundation’s Quanta Magazine, which both present current mathematics for a general audience.14-15 Terry Tao’s blog section “On Writing” addresses the issues directly, while his many posts and research publications can be mined for excellent prose.16 Both the MAA and the AMS, as well as other organizations, regularly give prizes for excellent math writing, which are convenient for identifying good examples. For instance, the Joseph L. Doob Prize recognizes research-level books that attain the “highest standard” in exposition and the Euler Book Prize recognizes “exceptionally well written books with a positive impact on the public’s view of mathematics.” The most recent Doob Prize was awarded to John Friedlander and Henryk Iwaniec for their book Opera de Cribro and the 2019 Euler Book Prize winner was Cathy O’Neil for Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy.17-18 For a sampler of outstanding recent short pieces, see the annual series The Best Writing on Mathematics, edited by Mircea Pitici since 2010.19 Intentionally non-technical and drawn from a wide variety of sources, including Nature and The New York Times as well as The Mathematical Intelligencer, the selections are meant to be enjoyed by the general reader. Famous mathematicians are among the writers represented, as are early-career academics, science journalists, and others. Topics range from current news controversies, such as Moon Duchin on mathematical tests for gerrymandering, to foundational aspects of mathematics, such as John H. Conway on “unsettleable arithmetical problems.” Including the above resources in library collections will support students, faculty, and programs with written works about writing in mathematics. Whether these very fine pieces all follow the advice for how to write mathematics well is a proof left for the interested reader.

Endnotes 1. McLeod, Susan H. and Margot Soven, eds. Writing Across the Curriculum: A Guide to Developing Programs. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992. Available in the WAC Clearinghouse Landmark Publications in Writing Studies: https://wac.colostate.edu/books/landmarks/ mcleod-soven/ 2. Russell, David R. Writing in the Academic Disciplines: A Curricular History. 2nd ed. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2002. 3. Ibid, 320. 4. Meier, John, and Thomas Rishel. Writing in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America, 1998, p. x.* 5. Ibid, 5. 6. Crannell, Annalisa, et al. Writing Projects for Mathematics Courses: Crushed Clowns, Cars, and Coffee to Go. Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America, 2004.* 7. Vivaldi, Franco. Mathematical Writing. London: Springer, 2014.* 8. Daepp, Ulrich, and Pamela Gorkin. Reading, Writing, and Proving: A Closer Look at Mathematics. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2011. 9. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000, p. 60.* 10. Steenrod, Norman E, et al. How to Write Mathematics. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, 1973. 11. Krantz, Steven G. A Primer of Mathematical Writing: Being a Disquisition on Having Your Ideas Recorded, Typeset, Published, Read, and Appreciated. 2nd ed. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, 2017.* 12. Higham, Nicholas J. Handbook of Writing for the Mathematical Sciences. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 1998.* 13. Mathematical Association of America. “Mathematical Communication” http://mathcomm.org/. 14. Lamb, Evelyn. Roots of Unity (blog). Accessed June 28, 2019. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/roots-of-unity/ 15. Quanta Magazine. Accessed June 28, 2019. https://www.quantamagazine.org/ 16. Tao, Terence (blog). Accessed June 28, 2019. https://terrytao.wordpress.com/ 17. Friedlander, John and Henryk Iwaniec. Opera de Cribro. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, 2010. 18. O’Neil, Cathy. Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. London: Penguin Books, 2018. 19. Pitici, Mircea, ed. The Best Writing on Mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011- .* *Editor’s note: An asterisk (*) denotes a title selected for Resources for College Libraries.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

LEGAL ISSUES Section Editors: Bruce Strauch (The Citadel) <strauchb@citadel.edu> Jack Montgomery (Western Kentucky University) <jack.montgomery@wku.edu>

Legally Speaking — European Union Promises Big Changes in Copyright Law by Bill Hannay (Partner, Schiff Hardin LLP, Chicago, IL) <whannay@schiffhardin.com> Controversy Continues over New EU Directive, But it Does Create Safe Harbors for Librarians On March 26, 2019, the EU’s Parliament adopted a new “Directive on Copyright for the Digital Single Market.” The leadership of the EU claims that the directive will modernize and improve copyright rules on a market-wide basis, but the voting was anything but unanimous. It passed 60% to 40% (or 348 in favor, 274 against). Five countries refused to approve the directive: Italy, Finland, Sweden, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, and three other countries (Belgium, Estonia and Slovenia) abstained. See generally https:// ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/modernisation-eu-copyright-rules. The EU leadership claims that the new law will have three major benefits: (1) it will ensure better choice and access to content online and across borders; (2) it will improve copyright rules for research, education and cultural heritage purposes; and (3) it will achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright. The Council of the European Union (a separate body consisting of government ministers from each EU country) officially approved the directive in April, and it went “into force” on June 7th, 2019. However, it will not be fully operative until the completion of the “transposition” phase in which each EU member state is given time to enact its own internal laws to implement the directive. (The member states will have until June 7th, 2021 to do so.) It will be a bit complicated if the dissenting states continue to oppose the directive. If a member state fails to pass the required national legislation (or if the national legislation does not adequately comply with the requirements of the directive), the EU’s executive branch (called the European Commission) may initiate legal action against the member state in the European Court of Justice. According to the EU’s website, Europe “needs modern copyright rules fit for the digital age” and the new Directive on Copyright “will make sure consumers and creators can make the most of the digital world.” Moreover,

Against the Grain / November 2019

the Directive “will help European copyright industries to flourish in a Digital Single Market and European authors to reach new audiences, while making European works widely accessible to European citizens, also across borders.” The Directive’s aim is to “ensure a good balance between copyright and relevant public policy objectives such as education, research, innovation and the needs of persons with disabilities.” The five countries that voted against the new directive expressed strong but polite disagreement with the leadership, issuing their own Joint Statement commenting as follows: We believe that the Directive in its current form is a step back for the Digital Single Market rather than a step forward. Most notably we regret that the Directive does not strike the right balance between the protection of right holders and the interests of EU citizens and companies. It therefore risks to hinder innovation rather than promote it and to have a negative impact the competitiveness of the European Digital Single Market. Furthermore, we feel that the Directive lacks legal clarity, will lead to legal uncertainty for many stakeholders concerned and may encroach upon EU citizens’ rights.1 Poland has even gone so far as to bring suit against the European Parliament over the Directive. The country’s Deputy Foreign Minister is quoted as saying: “This system may result in adopting regulations that are analogous to preventive censorship, which is forbidden not only in the Polish constitution but also in the EU treaties.”2 The chief problems with the Directive are contained in Articles 11 and 13 in the original draft (now re-numbered Articles 15 and 17). Article 11 establishes a socalled “link tax,” which will allow publishers to charge platforms such as Google to “link” to publications and display news stories. Article 13 would impose liability

on any platforms for displaying content that infringes on someone’s copyright. The big platforms — such as Facebook, Google, YouTube, Wikipedia, and others — and their customers fear that the Directive will significantly deform and destroy the way the sites currently function. While the Directive says that content platforms cannot be liable for what they’re hosting, that exemption is entirely dependent upon the sites’ efforts to remove anything that infringes on someone else’s copyrighted works, like books, magazine articles, music or pirated movies. Sites can only be safe if they proactively ensure that copyrighted content is not making its way onto the site. The platforms (and everyday users) are of the view that this is a fool’s errand. There is no effective way to detect and prevent millions of users from uploading a copyrighted photo, sound clip, video scene, or other potentially protected work. Platforms would have to install and implement some sort of mass filter, which doesn’t currently exist and would, as one commentator noted, “be ripe for abuse by copyright trolls and would make millions of mistakes.” For those of you worried about the impact of this new law on the viral creative process known as “memes,” the EU says to stop worrying. Certain tweaks to Article 13 of the law were made earlier this year in order — theoretically — to make memes safe “for purposes of quotation, criticism, review, caricature, parody and pastiche.” As is often the case with large-scale law reform projects, there are good things accompanying the new Directive as well as the seeming censorship of the previously free-wheeling Internet. Of greatest relevance to libraries and research institutions, the new Directive will allow libraries and other cultural heritage institutions, like archives or museums, to make copies of EU cultural heritage protected by copyright and related rights to preserve it, using modern digital techniques. The Directive will also make it easier for cultural heritage institutions to conclude licenses with collecting societies, which cover all the out-of-print (or out-of-commerce) works in their collections. This should significantly facilitate the use of works that are no longer commercially available, while ensuring that continued on page 64

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Legally Speaking from page 63 the rights of copyright-holders are fully safeguarded. This will make it possible for cultural heritage institutions to digitize and make available their collections of out-of-commerce works for the benefit of European culture and of all citizens. The mechanics of this process will be aided by an exception included in the Directive that will apply in specific cases when no collective management organization exists that can license the use of out-of-commerce works to cultural heritage institutions. Moreover, the Directive addresses the situation in which a work of art is no longer protected by copyright, i.e., falls into what the legal terminology calls “public domain.” In such cases, anyone should be free to make, use and share copies of that work, be it a photo, an old painting or a statue. However, this is not currently always the case, because some Member States provide copyright protection to copies of those works of art. The new Directive will make sure that all users are able to disseminate online — with full legal certainty — copies of works of art that are in the public domain. For instance, anybody will be able to copy, use and share online photos of paintings, sculptures and works of art in the public domain available on the web and reuse them, including for commercial purposes or to upload them in Wikipedia.

In addition to these defenses or exceptions to copyright violations, the Directive deals across the board with a number of other copyright exceptions. Currently, many of these exceptions to copyright law are currently “optional” and do not necessarily apply across borders. Also, some of them need to be re-assessed in light of today’s technological realities. Therefore, the Directive on Copyright seeks to modernize copyright rules and make key exceptions and limitations applicable throughout the EU, especially those in the areas of teaching, research, and (as noted above) preservation of cultural heritage. Text and data mining (“TDM”) is an automated process which allows information to be gathered through the high speed machine reading of massive amounts of data and texts. The new rules will allow researchers to apply this technology on large numbers of scientific journals that their research organizations have subscribed to, with no need to ask for authorization for text and data mining purposes. The new teaching exception will cover digital uses of copyright-protected content for the purpose of illustration for teaching. For example, the exception will ensure that educational establishments (such as colleges, universities, and schools) can make available teaching material or online courses to distance students in other Member States through a secure electronic environment, e.g., a university’s intranet or a school’s virtual learning environment.

But neither the “bad” aspects of the new Directive nor the good ones will be implemented in the near future, until EU member states enact their own “transposition” laws implementing the directive and until the lawsuits challenging the Directive make their way through the courts. In the meantime, you can still dream a little meme with me and publish it on the Internet without worrying about copyright violations. Oh, hey, I forgot, the EU leadership says that memes will still be protected even under the new Directive. So, naught to worry.

William M. Hannay is a partner in the Chicago-based law firm, Schiff Hardin LLP, and is a frequent contributor to Against the Grain and a regular speaker at the Charleston Conference. He can be reached at <whannay@schiffhardin.com>. Endnotes 1. https://www.permanentrepresentations. nl/binaries/nlatio/documents/policynotes/2019/02/20/joint-statement-regardingthe-copyright-directive/II-39+Declaration+ NL+ea+on+Copyright+DSM.pdf 2. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-

Questions & Answers — Copyright Column Column Editor: Laura N. Gasaway (Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, University of North CarolinaChapel Hill School of Law, Chapel Hill, NC 27599; Phone: 919-962-2295; Fax: 919-962-1193) <laura_gasaway@unc.edu> www.unc.edu/~unclng/gasaway.htm QUESTION: A publisher asks about blockchain and whether it could be used to reduce uncertainty about who authored a work and the date it was produced. ANSWER: Blockchain is the technology behind cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin. It is an open ledger of information that can be used to record and track transactions, which are exchanged and verified on a peer-to-peer network. The significance of distributed ledger technology is that it ensures the integrity of the ledger by crowdsourcing oversight and thus removes the need for a central authority. There may be an opportunity to use blockchain to solve the determination of authorship and production date if it is built on the sustainability of copyright registration information. Some have argued that use of blockchain could actually reduce the number of people needed to maintain archives. Blockchain may actually have more application for trademark and patent law, because of the greater flexibility in copyright law. For example, registration is not required to claim rights in a copyrighted work as opposed to a patent. In order sue for copyright infringement; however, one must register the copyright, so registration is still very important.

64 Against the Grain / November 2019

An updated blockchain secured and distributed may provide assistance in recording rights that are created in original works of authorship. It has the potential to reduce costs by speeding up registration processes and for clearing rights. Some even argue that it may have the potential to replace the current copyright system currently in use at the U.S. Copyright Office. At present, blockchain’s use in copyright is merely in the discussion stage. Proponents say that as the technology becomes mainstream, developers will have to collaborate to develop standards and interoperability protocols. The European Union Intellectual Property Office and the U.S. Congress currently are looking into the capabilities of blockchain. QUESTION: A high school librarian asks whether it is permissible to use a student’s picture from a previous presentation. ANSWER: To answer this question requires further analysis of the question. By picture, does the librarian mean photograph of the student or a photograph that the student used in a presentation? I will assume that the presentation is for a course that meets the requirements of section 110(1) of the Copyright

Act (in a nonprofit educational institution, in a classroom, with students and teachers present at the same place as a part of instruction). If it is a photograph of the student who delivered the first presentation, then answer is easy. It is the photographer rather than the student who owns the copyright, absent a transfer of rights. Because of privacy concerns, however, the student should be asked about using his or her image in a later presentation unless the school has students and parents agree to a blanket permission to use their photographs. Assuming that the second presentation is also for a class, reusing another type of photograph from the first student’s presentation is also covered by section 110(1) that allows the use of photographs in a nonprofit educational institution, in a classroom etc., as a part of instruction. If the first presentation contained original photographs taken by the student, it would be polite to seek permission to reuse the photo. Regardless of who took the photograph, if the presentation is posted on the web, permission to use it should be obtained unless the image is in the public domain. continued on page 65

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

New to Chicago

American Journal of Health Economics A q uart erly jo u r nal o f the Am eri can Soc ie ty o f He a lth Ec o no mis ts

New in january 2020

Environmental and Energy policy and The Economy An an n ual jo u r nal o f the Nat i on al Bure au o f Ec o no mic Re s e arc h

S ub sc ri be to th e C ompl e te C h i c ago Pac kage ( C C P) to sav e up to 5 0 % on th e c ompre h e n si v e c ol le c ti on of journ al s f rom th e U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago Press. The CCP is designed t o m e e t th e c on te n t n e e ds of your i n sti tuti on b y prov i di n g e le c tron i c ac c e s s to 8 3 ti tl e s f rom a w i de ran g e of di sc i pl i n e s.

Le a r n m o re at journ al s.uchicago. edu, o r by calli ng (8 7 7 ) 705-18 7 8 (US & C anad a) or (7 7 3) 753-3347 ( i ntl ).

Questions & Answers from page 64 QUESTION: Audible announced that it would create the Audible Captions program to transcribe a book’s audio in order to create a text to run along with the audio. A reading teacher asks why publishers are objecting to this since the purpose is to help children “who are not reading to engage through listening.” ANSWER: The Association of American Publishers (AAP) filed suit against Audible on August 23, 2019, to halt Audible’s plan to implement the Audible Captions program. Although it did not join the suit, the Authors Guild later issued a letter supporting the AAP suit. Publishers claim that their contracts with Audible are limited to voice recording and playback. They believe that including captions violates their rights of reproduction, distribution and display. Audible posits that it is too soon to file suit since the program had not yet been introduced to the public. Despite this, on August 28 Audible stipulated to the court that it would not introduce the Audible Captions program to the works from a group of major publishers until the copyright and licensing issues raised in the suit are resolved. It will go forward with the program for Audible and Amazon original works and for works in the public domain, however. QUESTION: A children’s librarian asks about the recent copyright litigation involving the song “Baby Shark.”

Against the Grain / November 2019

ANSWER: The “Baby Shark” song is quite popular with toddlers but is very irritating to others of us. It became popular based on a 2016 posting on YouTube that has millions of views. The origins of the song itself are somewhat unclear, but a musician, Johnny Only, sued Pinkfong in South Korea this summer claiming copyright infringement of his “Baby Shark” song that he published on YouTube in 2011. There is an argument that the tune was a campfire folk song in the United States for many years before “Baby Shark.” SmartStudy, the company behind the Pinkfong brand, claims that the tune is in the public domain. In order to succeed in the suit, Johnny Only will have to prove that the second song is substantially to “Baby Shark” and that he created the work that is not in the public domain. The issue will be decided in South Korean courts, so it bears watching. QUESTION: A publisher asks when the modernization of the U.S. Copyright Office will be completed. ANSWER: That is an excellent question. Recently, Thom Tillis, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina who is chair of the Senate Judiciary’s Intellectual Property Subcommittee, wrote to the Copyright Office questioning the slow progress of modernizing the public recordation and registration system and implementing a new Copyright Enterprise System. It is slated to be completed in 2023, which Senator Tillis said was too long. Senator Tillis says that information technology experts indicate that the modernized

registration system could be implemented in 8-12 weeks. A new system would speed the registration process from the current 1-7 months for electronically submitted claims and 1-18 months for claims received via email. The times are longer for both if correspondence is required. A new system would provide “real-time data and what needs to be tweaked within weeks, not months or years.” According to Register of Copyrights, Karyn Temple, the Copyright Office has dedicated 25 employees to reduce the average pendency times by 40% within the last two years and to eliminate the backlog of workable claims. The Office believes that long-term planning for IT and other infrastructure upgrades could be improved if Congress gave the Copyright Office authority to use unobligated fee balances from previous budget cycles. This is a crucial issue for both copyright industries and for users of copyrighted works. Copyright is extremely important not only to copyright producers but also to society. According to Senator Tillis, copyright industries contribute $1.3 trillion to the U.S. gross domestic product and represent almost 7% of the entire economy. These industries employ about 5.7 million American workers with average salaries of almost $100,000 annually. The Tillis letter may be found at: https:// www.tillis.senate.gov/2019/7/senator-tillis-its-time-for-congress-to-modernize-the-unitedstates-copyright-office.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

And They Were There Reports of Meetings — 38th Annual Charleston Conference Column Editors: Ramune K. Kubilius (Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> and Sever Bordeianu (Head, Print Resources Section, University Libraries, MSC05 3020, 1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001; Phone: 505-277-2645; Fax: 505-277-9813) <sbordeia@unm.edu>

Issues in Book and Serial Acquisition, “Oh, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?” Charleston Gaillard Center, Francis Marion Hotel, Embassy Suites Historic Downtown, and Courtyard Marriott Historic District — Charleston, SC, November 5-9, 2018 Charleston Conference Reports compiled by: Ramune K. Kubilius (Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> Column Editor’s Note: Thanks to all of the Charleston Conference attendees who agreed to write short reports highlighting sessions they attended at the 2018 Charleston Conference. Attempts were made to provide a broad coverage of sessions, but there are always more sessions than there are reporters. Some presenters posted their slides and handouts in the online conference schedule. Please visit the conference site, http://www.charlestonlibraryconference.com/, and link to selected videos, interviews, as well as to blog reports written by Charleston Conference blogger, Donald Hawkins. The 2018 Charleston Conference Proceedings will be published in 2019, in partnership with Purdue University Press: http://www.thepress. purdue.edu/series/charleston. In this issue of ATG you will find the final installment of 2018 conference reports. The first four installments can be found in ATG v.31#1, February 2019, v.31#2, April 2019, v.31#3, June 2019 and v.31#4, September 2019. Watch for reports from the 2019 Charleston Conference to begin publishing next year. — RKK

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2018 LIVELY DISCUSSIONS The eBook Story: The Key to a Happy Ending — Presented by Katy Aronoff (Ex Libris), Denise Branch (Virginia Commonwealth University), Evelyn Elias (Taylor & Francis), and Emma Waecker (EBSCO Information Services) — http://sched.co/GB33 Reported by Christine Fischer (UNC Greensboro) <cmfische@uncg.edu> The content of this session was centered around three areas of focus relating to electronic books: metadata, management, and models. Branch outlined advantages and disadvantages of eBooks and described the workflow as a complicated ecosystem. Providing insight into the evidence-based acquisitions model, Elias explained that it affects authors because they do not receive royalties until a title is selected. Publisher metadata provided through ONIX for Books is less prone to error and is designed for international communication, but Waecker indicated that it is provided by only forty percent of publishers, while sixty percent continue to rely upon Excel templates which offer fewer data fields. From the library system perspective Aranoff talked about the difficulties of receiving data from many sources and managing a large knowledge base. She described the multiple interactions with a title throughout an eBook’s life cycle. The presenters provided sticky notes and invited attendees to write advantages and challenges they experience with eBooks and then to bring the notes up to a board to be arranged into categories. The discussion engaged everyone and included both librarians and publishers.

The Library’s Impactful Role in Supporting Student Success Today: Case studies and open discussions — Presented by Michael Rodriguez (University of Connecticut, moderator), Penny Beile (University of Central Florida), Patricia Hudson (Oxford University Press), Raymond Pun (Alder Graduate School of Education), Ian Singer (Credo Reference), and David Tyckoson (California State University, Fresno) — https://sched.co/GB37 Reported by David Gibbs (California State University, Sacramento) <david.gibbs@csus.edu> Libraries and publishers, called upon to quantify their impact on student success, have largely come up short on demonstrating direct value added. These panelists presented moderate success stories. Tyckson and his colleagues found a somewhat weak but positive correlation between number of books checked out and student GPAs. On the other hand, library instruction did not lead to higher grades. Beile was able to demonstrate that library users at her university had better grades and was able to secure funding based on this finding. She also demonstrated that students in classes using open educational resources (OER) and affordable textbooks were somewhat less likely to drop out. On the basis of this evidence, she was able to secure a position dedicated to textbook affordability and student success. Singer described a program in Arkansas that demonstrated that intervening with high school seniors led to better first-year college retention rates and less need for remediation. Pun argued that the decline in high school librarians has led to a greater need for bibliographic instruction in college. Hudson described a global study of the ways in which students find and use both free and paid reference sources. It found that students generally rely on free reference sources for quick, factual information, but a majority rely on library-acquired reference sources for more in-depth research, and are more engaged with these resources.

Managing the Changing Climate of Business Collections — Presented by Heather Howard (Purdue University), Katharine Macy (Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis), and Alyson Vaaler (Texas A&M University) — https://sched.co/GB32 Reported by Angel Clemons (University of Louisville) <angel.clemons@louisville.edu> This session was a Lively Lunch discussion and consisted of three brief presentations. Macy, in her presentation Determining Value through Collection Assessment, discussed points to consider when managing business collections to meet user needs. She suggested conducting a stakeholder analysis of faculty and students using surveys and outreach, identifying key metrics (e.g., price history, use, cost per use, content coverage, portion of spend, and core resource identification), and setting priorities for both continued on page 67

66 Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

NOTE: This is the version without the landing page URL

8 Library Services That Will...

Make You Smile. 1) Publishing Sources - Almost 200,000 at our disposal 2) New Title Selection Plan - Immediate notiﬁcation 3) Electronic Ordering - Simple online ordering system 4) Early Release Program - Immediate availability guarantee 5) Cataloging - We do the busy-work for you 6) Comprehensive Reporting - Up-to-the-minute

“ Things always go smoothly with Emery-Pratt. Their people are knowledgeable, and always provide friendly, rapid service.” Cameron University Lawton, OK

order status

7) Duplicate Order Alert - We’re on guard, you avoid hassles

8) Paperback Reinforcement & Binding Avoid expensive wear & obsolescence

For more details, visit: emery-pratt.com

Dependability. Reliability. Smileability. 1966 W M 21, Owosso, MI 48867-9317 Phone: 800 248-3887 • Fax: 800 523-6379

emery-pratt.com

And They Were There from page 66 new and existing resources. Howard, in her presentation Critical Librarianship and New Resource Selection, advocated for using the concepts of critical librarianship (i.e., “a movement of library workers dedicated to bringing social justice principles into our work in libraries” — critlib.org) to evaluate resources during selection. Howard suggested digging deep into how a resource’s information was obtained to determine if groups or individuals were left out of the data or were harmed during the collection process. Librarians should consider how the information was acquired, who owns the company, who will have access to the information, and who won’t. Vaaler, in her presentation Accessibility: How & Why, discussed the implications of the Section 508 amendment of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which “mandates that all electronic and information technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by the federal government be accessible to people with disabilities.” This amendment should be of concern to universities as some institutions receive funding from federal agencies for grants and initiatives. Universities can confirm a product’s accessibility through contract language, VPATS (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template), self-assessment, and user testing.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2018 AFTERNOON CONCURRENT SESSIONS Is the Future of Collection Management More Like a Fire Ant or An Accordion? — Presented by Boaz Nadav-Manes (Brown University) — https://sched.co/GB4X Reported by Danielle Aloia (New York Medical College) <daloia@nymc.edu>

Against the Grain / November 2019

This session focused on the work of the presenter from his first automated workflow tool, POOF! created at Cornell, which OCLC subsequently purchased, to now at Brown. He wants to create a similar system but a more collaborative system. How do you bring in vendor systems and resource sharing deals into the picture? Is it like an accordion that expands and breathes air into perceptions and thereby creating music? Or a fire ant that works in a data-driven environment, with the queen controlling everything? Can there be a collaborative model that looks at user behavior, what is being used, who owns what, and vendor activity? His library is in a large network, but is it worth it since there is a movement away from lots of selectors to a concentrated few?

Turn the Page: The New Data Realities for Librarians — Presented by Darby Orcutt (North Carolina State University), Jill Parchuck (Yale University), and Karen Phillips (Sage Publishing) — https://sched.co/GB4e Reported by Matthew Benzing (Miami University) <benzinmm@miamioh.edu> Phillips hosted the discussion by Orcutt and Parchuk. Parchuk talked about a survey of Yale faculty and their data management practices. Among other things the survey showed that data is spread about on campus in many physical locations, and is hared through a number of outlets, including websites, emails, and file servers. There is a lack of uniformity in how faculty are handling data. Most faculty said that they had sufficient resources for their data needs, but would like to see an institutional repository, more training, more assistance and secure storage. Orcutt noted the big shift to data on the internet: computer readers now outnumber human readers, and libraries no longer invest in information that cannot be accessed through computers. Data intensive continued on page 68

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

And They Were There from page 67 researchers don’t come to the library, we need to make ourselves more useful by hiring data literate staff and offering new data-centric services.

Who’s Counting? Measuring Usage of Untraditional Databases Subscriptions — Presented by Steve Cramer (UNC Greensboro), Cynthia Cronin-Kardon (University of Pennsylvania), Dan Gingert (PrivCo), Richard Landry (Sage), and John Quealy (SPGlobal.com) — https://sched.co/GB4U Reported by Angel Clemons (University of Louisville) <angel.clemons@louisville.edu> This panel of presenters explored the challenges of measuring usage of databases when the content cannot be reflected in traditional COUNTER reports and how value can be conveyed in the absence of these statistics. Cramer and Cronin-Kardon presented from the librarian’s perspective, while Gingert, Landry, and Quealy presented from the vendor’s perspective. Cramer and Cronin-Kardon laid out the challenges and questions that must be considered when dealing with non-traditional databases (e.g., What are we counting? Users or datapoints? What is a download — a full balance sheet, a company report, etc.? Is there a way to standardize usage?). Gingert, Landry and Quealy spoke about the challenge of measuring the value of non-commoditized data, the role of subjectivity in usage statistics, the responsibility of the data publisher to convey the value of their product, and what are effective measures of usage for their products.

Data is Approaching: The changing culture of data citation, elaboration, and transparency lies ahead — Presented by Amy Forrester (DataONE), Robert Sandusky (University of Illinois at Chicago), Amy Schuler (Cary Institute for Ecosystem Studies), and Heather Staines (Hypothes.is) — https://sched.co/GB4w Reported by Matthew Benzing (Miami University) <benzinmm@miamioh.edu> Presenters engaged in a freewheeling discussion, highlighting the various routes by which a person can end up in the data profession, and the many ways in which the culture has already changed by giving brief summations of their careers. Much of the discussion touched on the FAIR guidelines and how different strategies can help repositories and portals meet those standards. There is a need for a better infrastructure as well as a need for changes in culture and workflows to make data more accessible. The discussion also raised questions about where FAIR applies and doesn’t apply. Are archives required to meet FAIR guidelines?

Buy, Subscribe, or Borrow? Consumers’ Use Preferences for Information Products — Presented by Moonhee Cho (University of Tennessee) and Xiaohua Zhu (University of Tennessee, Knoxville) — https://sched.co/GB4q Note: Moonhee Choo did not present in this session. Reported by Danielle Aloia (New York Medical College) <daloia@nymc.edu> Zhu, the solo presenter in this session discussed the results of a survey about digital rights and consumption. There are five typical configurations of DRM with different rights and limitations: Purchase outright, DRM enabled, Hosted, Subscription, Subscription w/hosted only content. Downloadability is very important for any device — the right to possess. The ability to sell was seen not as important but may be because there is no way to sell a digital item. Two surveys were conducted, one with students and the other with members of MTurk (an Amazon service).

68 Against the Grain / November 2019

Students were less likely to buy; they prefer to rent movies. MTurk respondents prefer renting physical items and subscriptions for movies. For favorite authors, students prefer to buy print, whereas MTurk users prefer print and online equally.

Textbooks are expensive but adopting OERs can be challenging: Two models for libraries to provide e-book text access — Presented by Brian Boling (Temple University), Karen Kohn (Temple University), Russell Michalak (Goldey-Beacom College), and Monica Rysavy (Goldey-Beacom College) — https://sched.co/GB4j Reported by Nicole Eva (University of Lethbridge) <nicole.eva@uleth.ca> The speakers from Temple University described a process where they figured out what assigned textbooks the library already had. They obtained a list of required texts from the bookstore, translated those titles to ISBNs, and compared them against the library holdings (with the help of an API). In addition, they developed a criteria to potentially purchase additional eBooks of required texts: they had to be available on eBook central as either unlimited or nonlinear users, and have been assigned for more than one semester. The first semester they did this they purchased 38 titles. They could then publicize to students, faculty, and liaison librarians that those books were available through the library. They found that 73% of the books were used, and those that were used received very high usage. The presenters from Goldey-Beacon decided that rather than pursuing open texts, they would concentrate on reducing existing textbook costs by partnering with a textbook rental company to negotiate a site license.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2018 AFTERNOON PLENARY Charleston Premiers: Five Minute Previews of the New and Noteworthy — Presented by Trey Shelton (University of Florida) — https://sched.co/G662 Participating Companies: Wiley — Gwen Taylor Code Ocean — Travis Howard Hewgley The HistoryMakers — Dionti Davis OpenAthens — Phil Leahy and Rob Scaysbrook Third Iron — Gina McCue Elsevier — Nikhil Joshi EBSCO — David Podboy Pagemajik — Jon White

Reported by Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> Shelton again moderated the popular session that, as described in its abstract, “offered publishers and vendors the chance to showcase their newest and most innovative products, platforms, and/or content.” Some met the five minute challenge with dynamic and succinct presentations, while others, whose products fill a nice niche, did not necessarily do them justice in the five minute presentations. Leahy spoke for OpenAthens, describing Wayfinder (https://docs. openathens.net/display/public/OAAccess/OpenAthens+Wayfinder) as a federated search solution for people who claim “If I’m asked to log in, I don’t read the article.” Taylor described the Wiley Research Academy, a self-paced, modular and competency-based interactive e-learning course with 14 learning paths and over 50 hours of content, that attempts to meet the challenges for researchers whose career success is measured by their research and publishing records. Hewgley described the shareability of Code Ocean and output tools, e.g., its Git integration and Dataverse partnership. Davis enthusiastically described The History Makers, the largest oral history archive, with its 15 subjects, family memoirs, section continued on page 69

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Essential reading from berghahn DISASTER UPON DISASTER

BORN A SLAVE, DIED A PIONEER

Exploring the Gap Between Knowledge, Policy and Practice

Nathan Harrison and the Historical Archaeology of Legend

Edited by Susanna M. Hoffman and Roberto E. Barrios “An important contribution to the applied anthropological research on disasters for it brings together experiences and reflections of various key players in the field—anthropologists, practitioners, and other constituents.” • Qiaoyun Zhang, Shanghai University

Seth Mallios Few people in the history of the United States embody ideals of the American Dream more than Nathan Harrison. This book uses spectacular recent discoveries from the Nathan Harrison cabin site to offer new insights and perspectives into this most American biography.

NEW SERIES: Catastrophes in Context

REPAIR, BROKENNESS, BREAKTHROUGH Ethnographic Responses Edited by Francisco Martínez and Patrick Laviolette “What I like about this book is its richness in ideas, it opens up a wide range of issues and associations, it invites the reader to see surprising linkages and new aspects of the seemingly trivial everyday.” • Orvar Löfgren, University of Lund NEW SERIES: Politics of Repair

INVISIBLE FOUNDERS How Two Centuries of African American Families Transformed a Plantation into a College Lynn Rainville Literal and metaphorical excavations at Sweet Briar College reveal how African American labor enabled the transformation of Sweet Briar Plantation into a private women’s college in 1906.

TESTIMONIES OF RESISTANCE Representations of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Sonderkommando Edited by Nicholas Chare and Dominic Williams “Testimonies of Resistance is an important volume that addresses a topic that has not been explored in sufficient depth so far, connecting it to crucial debates on the “gray zone,” resistance, and moral action. It is a vital contribution to the field of Holocaust Studies and beyond.” • Svenja Bethke, University of Leicester

CIVIL–MILITARY ENTANGLEMENTS Anthropological Perspectives Edited by Birgitte Refslund Sørensen and Eyal Ben-Ari Contributors to this volume demonstrate how military and civilian domains are constituted through entanglements undermining the classic civil-military binary and manifest themselves in unexpected places and manners. Follow us on Twitter: @BerghahnBooks

berghahn

www.berghahnbooks.com

N E W YO R K . O X F O R D

And They Were There from page 68

Rumors from page 38

for the K-12 audience, and more. McCue described Third Iron’s LibKey as 21st century content linking, highlighting its restful API, available since 2017 that can be ingested in Primo, for example, skipping the resolving page, and opening up in Browzine. Podboy described Ebsco’s Holdings IQ that provides a single data source for all applications (different sources, multiple input). Joshi described Elsevier’s Mendeley Data that helps address researchers’ desire to benefit from publishing with data sets as they are viewed, a holistic approach to research data management. White described the one year old Pagemajik that is a fully automated content management system for articles ready to be sent for peer review, with a task dashboard that helps restructure Word documents and supports reliability scoring. By audience vote, the best design and most impactful went to “The History Makers,” while the most innovative was shared by “Pagemajik” and “Code Ocean” (the second won last year, too). The Charleston Conference blog report about this session by Donald Hawkins can be found at: https://www.against-the-grain.com/2018/11/charleston-premiers-new-and-noteworthy/.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2018 MORNING PLENARY The Long Arm of the Law — Presented by Ann Okerson (Center for Research Libraries), Kenneth Crews (Gipson Hoffman & Pancione), and William Hannay (Schiff Hardin LLP) — https://sched.co/G665 Reported by Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> continued on page 70

Against the Grain / November 2019

University of Houston Libraries; Negeen Aghassibake, University of Washington Health Sciences Library; Colin Nickels, North Carolina State University Libraries; Lindsay Barnett, Cushing/Whitney Medical Library, Yale University; Victoria Seng, University of Kentucky; Elizabeth Cope, University of Tennessee Knoxville; Phil Willke, State Library of Ohio; and Jocelyn Lewis, George Mason University. Congratulations and hip hip hooray! In other exciting news, the Charleston Library Conference (CLC) and The Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) are partnering to provide a scholarship exchange program for Up and Comers and SSP Fellows to attend their respective annual meetings. Fellows and Up and Comers submit an essay to enter the competition. In the first phase of the exchange, current SSP Fellows were tasked with answering, “How will the needs of emerging professionals/academics change scholarly communications in the future?” Fellow Lynnee Argabright’s essay addressing the influence of emerging professionals and academics expectations of immediate access on scholarly communication has been selected as the exchange’s first winner. Lynnee will receive free registration for the 2019 Charleston Library Conference, held November 4-8. To make the most of this opportunity, Lynnee will also be assigned a “meeting mentor” to assist with networking and navigating the conference. Her essay and the essays of future winners will be published on The Scholarly Kitchen and in Against the Grain. 2019 Up and Comer winners will be eligible to participate in a themed essay competition to win continued on page 89

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

And They Were There from page 69 Crews and Hannay were introduced in this established conference session by Okerson. The first is a copyright expert in academe, having set up the first copyright office at Indiana University. He focused on news from the international arena, U.S. statutes, and Copyright Office Regulations. WIPO, an international agency of the UN, with 191 member countries, while protecting works, is going into the exceptions business. The Music Modernization Act has a new section that provides quasi-copyright protection. Hannay spoke about topics “as his whimsy took him,” provided redux on developments since last year on the “Right to be Forgotten,” school districts that claim “pornography is not education,” the latest developments with publishers suing ResearchGate, and a State of Georgia re-redux. In his annual musical moment, he sang “Course packets, we got ’em here!”… Audience members’ questions included topics like these: the Benobo selfie (accidental work or automatic copyright), the challenges of global listservs and emails of foreign participants (in light of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR))… As always, it was interesting to hear about legal ramifications of the work we do, but equally satisfying that experts who spoke at this, the ninth annual, session are following and analyzing the complicated legal world of rights, copyright, and so much more. (Better them than many of us). The Charleston Conference blog report about this session by Donald Hawkins can be found at: https://www.against-the-grain.com/2018/11/ the-friday-keynote-the-long-arm-of-the-law/.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2018 NEAPOLITAN SESSIONS Going it Alone: Why University Presses are Creating Their Own EBook Collections — Presented by Heather Staines (Hypothes.is), Terry Ehling (MIT Press), Sharla Lair (LYRASIS), and Charles Watkinson (University of Michigan) — https://sched.co/G8SN Reported by Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> In 2019, two university presses, MIT Press and University of Michigan Press, will launch their own eBook offerings for direct sale to institutions, others may fall suit. It was interesting for librarians in the audience to hear what led to this move. Watkinson shared reasons that include digital enrichment, reconnecting with partners, sustaining the open source community. It is especially important for performing arts, classics, the humanities to be “bleeding edge” regarding publishing. Michigan will still work with aggregators, with an embargo and SUPO model. Its platform is annually audited for accessibility by a Michigan State University team. Lyriasis is a partner. Ehling shared that MIT has partners, ranging from Silverchair, YEWNO, MUSE, JSTOR, IEEE. As a press, MIT wants to retain control over its brand (at least the front list), and experiment, be heterogenous, be consistent with its value system, be data driven, operationalize, consolidate, increase the number of OA titles. Lair talked about the “book experience.” Audience questions abounded-about the impact on discoverability, making available single titles, course adoption, increase in publisher responsibilities (MARC, KBART, marketing).

Springing into Collections: Best Practices for Inheriting an Academic Library Collections Budget — Presented by Anthony Watkinson (CIBER Research), Kevin Garewal (Harvard Law School Library), Sean Kennedy (University of Akron), Charles Lyons (SUNY Buffalo State), and Richard Wisneski (University at Buffalo Libraries) — https://sched.co/G8SP Reported by Nicole Eva (University of Lethbridge) <nicole.eva@uleth.ca>

70 Against the Grain / November 2019

Panelists offered various suggestions to make collection management easier. These included grouping subject fund allocations in larger clusters so that those making selections could work collaboratively within that larger budget; building up a 5-10% carryover to help smooth out the variances; trying to create predictability and reliability in costs wherever possible (for example, using deposit accounts and plans which can be turned off and on; turning off DDA in the summer). Some metrics discussed included cost per view of media, and comparing print usage to eBook usage by LC class, though the difficulty of measuring eBook usage was noted (clicks may not equal checkouts). One library mentioned stopping their approval plan, as the usage on auto shipped titles was much lower than those placed with a firm order. Most of the strategies and ideas mentioned by this panel echoed themes noted elsewhere in the conference, which provided some good reinforcement to the trends.

Closing Session and Poll-A-Palooza — Presented by Barbara Meyers Ford (Meyers Consulting Services (MCS)), Erin Gallagher (Reed College), Stephen Rhind Tutt (Fairfax House Group, LLC), and Anthony Watkinson (CIBER Research) — https://sched.co/G667 Reported by Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> Gallagher started the “all out crazy party,” closing out the Charleston Conference, for the fifth time. She had the lunchtime participants vote, using Poll Everywhere, on which types of sessions they liked best (pretty close: concurrent, lively lunch, and happy hour). As always, audience laughter erupted upon seeing polling results on the screen. The buzzwords in 2018, per the audience, were “fake deal,” “OER,” “blockchain,” and even “diarruption.” There were a series of general questions about scholarly communication issues and practices at attendees’ libraries (e.g., use of virtual reality), as well as some that were Charleston-specific (e.g., best food eaten). What programs discussed at the conference might be implemented? Diversity, Green Glass, 200 line Python scripts for weeding. Hottest topics? Zines and blockchain. As the questions neared the end, audience members were irreverent. Regarding desired conference changes? Longer lunch breaks and more concurrent sessions. Suggested 2019 conference themes? Cats, dogs, diversity, herding, and justice… Rhind-Tutt bravely took on the difficult task of summing up the 2018 conference (his takeaways). He was very complimentary of the Joris van Rossum session on blockchain, and counted about 30 sessions on “open,” quite a few on analytics (CDL, quantify metrics, author analytics). Textbooks crossed his radar-sessions such as inclusive licensing models, expectations of library textbook holdings. Expanding roles of libraries? Standards, metadata, social function, and supporting research. Watkinson introduced Meyers Ford who briefly shared that she has already begun framing a new session for 2019, involving journals and libraries and information, i.e., the history of journals. It was promoted as “A Journal Carol in 3 Parts,” coming in November 2019. The Charleston Conference blog report about this session by Donald Hawkins can be found at: https://www.against-the-grain. com/2018/11/closing-session-and-poll-a-palooza/.

Well, this completes the reports we received from the 2018 Charleston Conference. Again, we’d like to send a big thank you to all of the attendees who agreed to write short reports that highlight sessions they attended. Presentation material (PowerPoint slides, handouts) and taped session links from many of the 2018 sessions are available online. Visit the Conference Website at www.charlestonlibraryconference.com. — KS

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

An eBook works for Shakespeare. For patient care, you need a database. The R2 Digital Library database takes health sciences eBooks beyond a routine web search. Visit R2library.com for a free trial.

customerservice@r2library.com • R2library.com • 800.345.6425

The Scholarly Publishing Scene — The Maxwell Effect Column Editor: Myer Kutz (President, Myer Kutz Associates, Inc.) <myerkutz@aol.com>

could say that I’ve been remiss during my years writing this column in not talking about Robert Maxwell, who reigned over the hugely successful Pergamon Press for nearly 40 years, except for four years in the 1960s, when Saul Steinberg of Leasco Data Processing wrested control away from Maxwell. (Maxwell had wanted to mount Pergamon journals on Leasco’s computers so they could be distributed electronically — an idea 25 years ahead of its time.) Maxwell, justifiably, was one of the key figures — if not the key figure — in the rise of the commercial STM journal publishing business in the years after World War II. It was a time when the scope and size of government and university sponsorship of scientific research in one discipline after another accelerated dramatically. I’m prompted to write about Maxwell because his name has surfaced in press accounts of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and Epstein’s having been found dead in a federal holding pen. The two men are linked through Maxwell’s daughter, Ghislaine, the youngest of his nine children and his companion on his travels to the United States.

Against the Grain / November 2019

As of this writing, in August 2019, shortly after Epstein’s death, there has been a spate of articles about Ghislaine’s having been a British socialite, linked with Prince Andrew, Donald Trump and Bill Clinton; Epstein’s girlfriend, after her move to New York in the early 1990s; and later allegedly the procurer of underage girls, which she denies. When her father is mentioned, the focus is often on his having been a media mogul considered a rival to Rupert Murdoch. Sometimes, his founding of Pergamon Press goes entirely unmentioned. STM publishing isn’t sexy enough, apparently. Pergamon’s founding dates back to 1951. During World War II, Maxwell, a poor Czech Jew, was part of a group of European exiles who fought for the British army. After the war, when he worked for British intelligence in Berlin, he got a foot into publishing by importing Springer Verlag publications into the UK. At that time, the British government, petitioned by eminent scientists to fix the sorry state of British scientific journal publishing, formed a joint venture with Butterworths and Springer.

Maxwell was hired to run the new organization together with Paul Rosbaud, an Austrian metallurgist who had spied for the British on Nazi scientific activities and smuggled reports on German weaponry. When Butterworths abandoned the joint venture in 1951, Maxwell and Rosbaud bought it for 13,000 pounds. They named their new company Pergamon, after an ancient city near the Aegean Sea, which became highly influential during the Hellenistic Period. (Rosbaud left the company in 1956.) It’s not an exaggeration to say that Maxwell supercharged Pergamon’s STM journal publishing. (The company also published reference books.) He expanded the journal list by introducing a new title whenever researchers and practitioners began to work on a new scientific or technical discipline or sub-discipline. He easily outstripped competitors. By 1959, Pergamon was publishing 40 journals, four times as many as Elsevier was publishing in English. By 1965, Pergamon’s journal list numbered 150. Elsevier didn’t reach 50 until four years later. In the 1970s, Maxwell launched a boatload of life science journals — a hundred in 1974 alone, according to one account. (These numbers come from a June continued on page 72

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

The Scholarly Publishing Scene from page 71 27, 2017 long-form Guardian article, “Is the Staggeringly Profitable Business of Scientific Publishing Bad for Science?” by Stephen Buranyi.) So much publishing activity could be justified by two insights: that journals covering the same discipline or sub-discipline don’t actually compete for subscribers and readers (papers are unique, after all) and subscription prices can be raised even as more and more journals are being published — providing, of course, that libraries have the wherewithal. Maxwell knew how to make his journals succeed. Titles often started with “International Journal of,” a feature which recognized the growing globalization of scientific and technical work and research. He was adept at drawing journal editors and contributors close to him. According to a brief memoir written by Brian Cox, who worked at Pergamon for three decades, Maxwell himself made telephone calls to them and correspondence appeared above his signature. And he wasn’t bashful about wining and dining them, often at Pergamon’s splendid headquarters at a 53room mansion, Headington Hill Hall, to which the company began migrating in 1959 from its original base in London. It had been built for the Morrells, a local brewery family, who lived there for 114 years, until it was used as a military hospital during World War II, then as a rehabilitation center after the war ended. Maxwell leased Headington Hill Hall from the Oxford City Council, which had bought it from the Morrells. He and his wife renovated the property. Maxwell was mercurial and autocratic. According to Brian Cox, Maxwell’s office was located in the mansion’s largest room. His desk was in the corner furthest from the door. To reach the desk, you would have to traverse a great expanse of floor. Upon arrival, you would

be asked a question. The correct answer would allow you to be seated and you would be given something to drink. Give the wrong answer, and you would have to remain standing. Whatever his temperament and the way he treated his subordinates, he did know how to run a journal publishing business. Sales results were terrific. According to Brian Cox, journal circulation grew by five to ten percent each year during the 1960s. Prices must have increased, as well. One advantage of continually growing the number of titles, Cox notes, was that older, established titles would subsidize newer titles that were still finding their audience. If you were to propose a candidate for founder of the modern commercial journal publishing business, could you find a better candidate than Robert Maxwell? He was cosmopolitan; he’s said to have spoken nine languages and he spoke BBC English. He was no doubt able to exhibit enthusiasm for scientific discovery and for the means of reporting on discoveries. He was adept at deferring to the wishes of scientists and he knew how to pamper them with his nosh and his wines. He managed to become the confidant of his authors and editors, through flattery, no doubt, and with his continual telephoning and correspondence. He recognized an obligation to please editors and authors with speed of journal article publication, as well as with the physical quality of his journals. He was fearless in expanding Pergamon’s journal portfolio. There were his insights about pricing and competition. He ran his company like a dictator so that, I presume everything would be done his way, which in his mind — and the results spoke for themselves — was the right, and only way to get done what had to be done. Unfortunately there was also a great appetite for status, fame, and fortune. Maxwell was driven around in a Rolls-Royce; there was a helicopter and a 200-foot yacht, called the Lady Ghislaine. He served as a Labour Member of Parliament from 1964 to 1970.

He bought the London based Mirror Group Newspapers in 1984 . He bought the American publisher, Macmillian, for $2.6 billion. He was chairman of a British professional football team. He owned, among other properties, Nimbus Records, Prentice Hall Information Services and the Berlitz language schools. He also owned a half-share of MTV in Europe and other European television interests. In 1990, he founded a transnational newspaper, The European, which I can actually remember reading. (It folded in December 1998.) His reputation, outside of STM journal publishing was in bad shape. Except for the Mirror Group, British press barons refused to sell their properties to him. The satirical weekly, Private Eye, called him the “Bouncing Czech,” a nickname Prime Minister Harold Wilson had bestowed on him when he was an MP. He was continuously litigious. In 1991, Maxwell was so much in debt (he’d recently scooped up the NY Daily News when it was in bad straights, not a smart financial move) that he had to sell Pergamon. Elsevier bought the company, which published thousands of reference works, in addition to the journals, for 440 million pounds — something like a billion pounds today — which strikes me as a steal. Then his life really ended. He went missing off his yacht near the Canary Islands and was later fished out of the sea. It was, most likely, suicide. He was facing not only mounting debts, but also the impending revelation that he had bilked his employees’ pension funds. (Conspiracy theories still abound, however, perhaps due to allegations that he was an agent of Israel’s Mossad.) His death and disgrace may be the things he’ll be remembered for, more so, I would guess, than for his Pergamon stewardship — for better or worse, depending on where you stand on the creation of modern commercial STM journal publishing.

Considering Games in Libraries and Such — On using a Game to Actually Teach Something. Part I: The Accidental Learner Column Editor: Jared Alexander Seay (Media & Services Coordinator, Addlestone Library, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC 29424; Phone: 843-953-1428) <seayj@cofc.edu> blogs.cofc.edu/seayj

oes using a game to teach actually work? If so, to what degree does it work? Without fully admitting (yet) to a full-blown existential crisis, such thoughts of imparting knowledge to students using the medium of games or gaming or gamification has given me pause. I suppose this often happens when one starts to apply a pet pedagogy only to find that real life is a bit more complicated than what’s on paper. It’s not unlike the feeling one gets after acquiring a new puppy, and thoughts of

72 Against the Grain / November 2019

“what was I thinking” pop up during moments of cleaning “accidents” off the carpet and finding your third pair of chewed up shoes. It is that moment of fleeting panic when you realize you are fully committed now and turning back would be as painful as chucking the whole idea. Though this may not be an existential crisis, I think it is at least a panic attack. About a month or so ago my application was accepted for a small teaching grant to create escape rooms for teaching. The application

narrative is a bit more complicated than your traditional escape game experience. But, without getting into details, let’s just say that my concept includes several game mechanics in addition to traditional escape games. The concept is, I believe, sound. But, of course, now it is time to make it work practically. Practical application: a tricky thing that. Throughout this column, and most of my waking life, I have extolled the virtues of the continued on page 73

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

America’s War on Drugs Mission Galapagos Smashing the Glass Ceiling: The Gender Gap

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks …and many more!

…and many more!

NEW

ATG_Nov19_FOD_HalfPage_final.indd 1

PRODUCERS!

Considering Games ... from page 72

application of games to teaching. To be sure, I am still convinced that is the case — having read theory and applied it aplenty off the record. I am now in the position of proving it in an official way. Now I have to find my money and put it where my mouth is. Finding the money was the easy part. Finding my mouth … well … So, how does one go about turning a traditional lecture lesson into a game anyway? How about turning a game into a lesson? Do you make something fun into a learning experience or do you make a learning experience fun? What if you could do both? What if you have no clue? Or what if you have a clue, but no leads? Fortunately, I have two grant colleagues who are in this boat with me and share my burden. We spent many hours contemplating these very questions. Theme before content? Content before theme? Mechanics in there somewhere. Fun and learning integrated. Where to start? Fortunately, fate and a crazy — yet practical — project intervened this summer to assist. Because, when one is up against an unyielding project, what better way to stimulate one’s brain than to add another project that is easy, stimulating and way more fun? Earlier this summer I was “contracted” to produce an escape game for a Science Summer Camp. My teenage children have regularly at-

Against the Grain / November 2019

NEW

PLATFORM!

tended this summer camp for years, and I heard that the camp director was looking for some “fun” activities that she could offer for electives. I seized on this, immediately seeing a chance to gain some experience in creating an escape room and a ready-made (and willing) group of play testers. And the best part is this activity did not have to actually “teach” anything. I was told that this was to be a “fun” “elective” activity among a myriad of other such fun stuff available to the campers. The goal was just “fun.” Pressure off! The theme for this summer camp was Mars and Stars. Basically, it was about the science and adventure of space exploration — particularly that involving the red planet and Martian colonization. Escape rooms traditionally have some sort of hyperbolic issue that involves getting out of the room before you die in some horrible or interesting way. Your demise could come by being eaten by zombies or suffocation by drowning or air lock malfunction or just being caught by bad guys or the warden, or the police or the gestapo or a disgruntled alien. So, naturally my first thought was that this should be a crash landing on Mars survival scenario. What could more anxiety producing than that? And so it was that I spent the better part of six weeks concocting such an escape room adventure. My participants were science campers from ages 11 to 17 who were theoretically doing the game in three or more similar age groups. With the pressure off to actually teach something, I was free to make this activity just

NEW

9/6/19 11:23 AM

TITLES!

mindless fun. So, of course I set out to make it more than that. I don’t think fun is ever really mindless. It does not have to have a point. But, it can be — and should be — inspiring… if only to the game designer...as indeed, it was. I think my biggest take-away from this — a grand insight about designing any creative production — is that content may be king, but experience is the goddess. Whether designing a game or a lesson plan or a birthday party, content alone does not make it a successful event. Indeed, content is integral to the core concept, but it is the experience that hooks the participants and stays with them. The event succeeds or fails according to the special sauce — the positive experiences and take away memories of the participants and students or party folk. I recently read a quote about public speaking that said, “Before you can get their minds, you have to grab their emotions.” Indeed, it is not only a war that has been lost by not securing “hearts and minds.” Now I shall not go into detail about what I actually did to pull off the whole “having fun while learning” thing. I must save something for part two after all. To be sure, this was my first attempt at a “learning” escape room, and I am sure it was far from perfect. Still, I concentrated on the “fun” and engaging aspect of the game, and my escape game ended up being heavy on theater and theme. The learning aspect was intertwined with role-play, and puzzles and carcontinued on page 80

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Both Sides Now: Vendors and Librarians — Hey Vendors, Do You Really Understand Your Marketplace? Column Editor: Michael Gruenberg (Managing Partner, Gruenberg Consulting, LLC) <michael.gruenberg@verizon.net> www.gruenbergconsulting.com

ne of the great joys of having a consulting business is that one never knows what project or question will unearth itself each day. Since I spent the majority of my sales management years working for a number of major information industry companies, my daily plans were pretty much set for me. Customer/prospect meetings with the sales reps, preparation of sales projections and analysis for my manager, trips to the home office, etc., were all part of a daily, monthly, yearly schedule. Same stuff; different day pretty much sums it up. In my current role as an independent consultant, the opportunities presented to me for my consultation usually involve Negotiation Skills classes for librarians and vendors, speaking about my book at various library meetings and of course, sales force assessment. Although recently, I was asked by a librarian friend of mine to take some time to speak to a particular vendor. She wanted me to talk to them about that vendor’s inability to understand a new marketplace where they were trying to sell their product. Apparently, the vendor in question has a product that is being used in the library market on a corporate library level. In attending the various ALA and SLA meetings they noticed that the University market had potential for their data and decided to immediately call on libraries at Universities with little success. As is so often the case, the intent is good, but the execution of the task left much to be desired. Apparently, the vendor did not understand there is a vast difference between selling the same product to corporate as opposed to public sector. My background in the information industry began with selling microfiche copies of documents filed at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) by public companies. That morphed into the information to be sold being contained on CDs and then of course, online. Our company was based in New York, so at the outset of my sales career I was given a territory of accounts to sell in NYC and in addition I was responsible for a territory in New England. Banks, financial companies, brokers were my prime prospects. Unfortunately, many of those “prospects” in New York were customers already so they didn’t need to see me unless I had something new to sell. And the ones that remained seemed uninterested. I exhausted my prospect list in the city and set off for New England. Given that there were few, if any large financial institutions in Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine, I concentrated my efforts in Boston. So, on a regular basis I took the air shuttle from New York to Boston to sell my wares. And although I had some minor victories in selling there, my overall performance was less than stellar.

74 Against the Grain / November 2019

On a particular rainy and cold November afternoon that saw many a door closed on my smiling face, I ducked into the public library on my way to catch the T out to the airport. While warming up and drying out in the library, I noticed that they had a significant paper collection or corporate reports. To make a long story short, I convinced the librarian that I was the person to help convert all those reports from paper to fiche, by doing so, I would save the library a ton of money and the collection would now be complete for all their users. The order was forthcoming I was told. Flying home that afternoon, I was quite pleased with myself. I turned a negative day into a positive one with an apparent order that would ensure my employment with the company. That joy turned into grief when I realized that the public library was not in my territory. I learned early on in my sales career that a sales rep’s territory is as sacred as marriage, family and sports affiliation. In actuality, I sold to a prospect not in my territory. As the plane descended into LaGuardia that evening at dusk, I saw my commission ascending up and out of my needy pockets. Yikes! What was I to do? In sales parlance, we say that commissions are paid on “signed orders” not “mind orders” which means that unless you present the company with an order that is approved by the customer in your assigned territory, it really doesn’t exist. I knew that the order that I was about to secure would not be mailed into the NY office for a few days. This would give me time to contact some universities and public libraries to ascertain if there really was a market for our data. If my premise was correct that such a demand truly existed, then I could present myself to my boss as the person to sell in this market especially since there was no one else on staff interested in this position. If I were to become the Public Sector salesperson, I would have new territory and be paid a fat commission for my magnificent sale. In the song, “Up on Cripple Creek” by the Band, the phrase “good luck had just stung me” comes to mind because that week, a significant order came in through the mail from a major University library in New York, without the assistance of a sales rep. With that order and my soon to arrive order, I felt that I had good standing to ask my boss to create that territory and give me that market to sell our data. I did the research by calling various university libraries, visiting the ones in New York and started the process to ascertain what they would buy, why they would buy it and what they expected to pay for the service the company was able to provide. When the public library order came in, I presented my case to my boss and the rest, as they say was “history.”

I became the first Public Sector salesperson for the company, With my new role, I deepened myself in learning the intricacies of the public sector market and as a result, became the most successful salesperson in the history of the company. There was no question about that market that I couldn’t answer and I knew that the customers appreciated my diligence in learning about their needs and budgets. All of which brings us back to the vendor who wanted to sell to a university library, but did not have the wherewithal to understand that market. So there are a number of steps a vendor should take when undertaking the task of selling their product into a new market. Clearly, the thought process for the vendor in this case was good because it is always wise to expand the universe of potential buyers. However, expanding the potential market is one thing, successful expansion is yet another. You don’t just expand for the sake of expanding. Careful research has to be part of the process. At the outset of the proposed expansion is realizing that “you know that you don’t know.” That means you realize that you need to learn something new. In my business career, I was never leery of people who knew that they didn’t know. On the other hand, it was tough to deal with people who didn’t know that they didn’t know and thus, were unable to learn. Other than hire a consultant such as me to educate them, a vendor looking to sell in a new market needs to talk to the target audience about their needs. Not the needs that the vendor envisions, but the needs as defined by the potential customer. Too often, companies go through elaborate machinations in developing a new product or service without first analyzing the market potential and speaking to the very people to whom they will target their sales projections. So the first step is to talk to your market. An added benefit that results from talking to your new market is that it helps develop a stronger relationship between the library and the vendor. And after all, relationship selling is the key to success for any seller. And libraries are always open to the concept of helping a vendor improve their offering to the library community. Secondly, the vendor has to understand that the sales cycle for selling to the public sector is vastly different from selling to the corporate sector. Having false expectations of the time it takes to prospect, present, follow-up and close the order will frustrate both the sales rep and their manager. It will probably take more time to close an order when selling to a university or public library as opposed to a corporate sale. Pricing is yet another consideration. Many information companies in the information industry that sell their data to both public sector and corporate markets realize that by providing continued on page 75

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Both Sides Now ... from page 74 their product to students on an undergraduate and graduate level they are in fact, training those students on the use of their data with the expectation that when those students enter the job market, they will request those resources at their new job. So it is in the best interest of both parties to offer the university library their product at a reduced cost from what would be charged in other markets. This acknowledges the funding difficulties faced by most university libraries, gets the vendors product into the library and begins to train those students on the virtues of the data as presented by the company. And finally, the most important part involves the people that must be hired to sell in the public sector market. Sales reps in the information industry that sell to corporate libraries need to be differentiated from the ones selected to sell to universities and public libraries. I have seen over the years companies making the mistake of saying their reps can sell in all markets. Usually, that is not the case. To ensure success, hire people familiar with the markets you want to sell in. If you hire the right people, the vendor has a good chance of success. As a post script to the story, I contacted the sales rep who was working for the vendor in question. We had a few conversations, but in the end, he told me that his manager did not want to invest the time and money to learn more about the public sector market. At the last conversation that I had with my university librarian friend who suggested that I speak to the vendor, a sale had not been consummated. In closing the song that best describes my thoughts on the topic at hand that ran though my mind as I wrote this column for ATG was from the musical, “The King and I” written by Rodgers and Hammerstein as sung by Julie Andrews, “Getting to Know You.” The lyrics say “Getting to know you; getting to know all about you; getting to like you; getting to hope you like me.” Sounds simple, but the first rule in successful selling is to create a positive relationship with the customer and getting to know about them to understand their needs and fulfill them.

Mike is currently the Managing Partner of Gruenberg Consulting, LLC, a firm he founded in January 2012 after a successful career as a senior sales executive in the information industry. His firm is devoted to provide clients with sales staff analysis, market research, executive coaching, trade show preparedness, product placement and best practices advice for improving negotiation skills for librarians and salespeople. His book, “Buying and Selling Information: A Guide for Information Professionals and Salespeople to Build Mutual Success” has become the definitive book on negotiation skills and is available on Amazon, Information Today in print and eBook, Amazon Kindle, B&N Nook, Kobo, Apple iBooks, OverDrive, 3M Cloud Library, Gale (GVRL), MyiLibrary, ebrary, EBSCO, Blio, and Chegg. www. gruenbergconsulting.com

Against the Grain / November 2019

Being Earnest with Collections — Advancing Textbook Affordability: Considerations for Open and Affordable Course Materials by Ariana E. Santiago (Open Educational Resources Coordinator, University of Houston, 4333 University Drive, Houston, TX, 77204) <asantiago2@uh.edu> Column Editor: Michael A. Arthur (Associate Professor, Head, Resource Acquisition & Discovery, The University of Alabama Libraries, Box 870266, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487; Phone: 205-348-1493) <maarthur@ua.edu> Column Editor’s Note: This edition of Being Earnest with Collections explores Open Educational Resources and the challenges libraries face when trying to help address the high costs associated with textbooks. In the article, Ariana Santiago has provided ATG readers with an overview of the project she has lead at the University of Houston. She provides comparisons between OER and library funded resources, outlines the pros and cons, and provides practical advice for other libraries considering similar programs. OER has been explored here at The University of Alabama though we have not stepped in at the level seen in Houston. On a personal note, I have known Ariana for several years and remember when she made the decision to become a librarian. She has now moved from being in a staff level position at the University of Central Florida to her current role as an up and coming leader in our profession. I am happy to have this contribution to the Being Earnest with Collections column. I am sure others will find some key takeaways from this article. — MA

extbook costs are widely recognized in higher education as a significant burden to students, preventing many from being able to access required course materials. A solution to this problem that is seeing growing success is to replace costly textbooks with open educational resources (OER) — learning materials made freely available via open licenses — so that all students benefit from having immediate access to resources that support their academic success. Along with OER, many replace traditional textbooks with other resources that are freely available to students, though are not openly-licensed, such as journals, eBooks, and other resources licensed through the library, and websites, videos, and other resources that are freely-available online. Should an institution’s OER program focus on resources that are truly OER, or be inclusive of non-OER resources (which will be referred to here as “affordable course content”)? Grant programs, often spearheaded by the academic library, have emerged as a leading strategy in encouraging adoption of OER or affordable course content in order to eliminate textbook costs. There is wide variety in the scope and structure of such grant programs, including whether they are intended only for

OER adoption or are inclusive of non-OER affordable resources. For example, the University of Arkansas OER Course Materials Conversion Program offers faculty “extra compensation funding to encourage moving from high cost commercially published textbooks to open educational resources (OER)” at three different levels, distinguished by whether the faculty adopt, adapt, or create OER (University of Arkansas, 2019). Miami University also focuses its program on OER adoption, offering professional development funds to faculty who replace traditional required materials with OER and assess the impact on course outcomes and student learning (Miami University, n.d.). Others, like Kansas State University’s Open/Alternative Textbook Initiative, provide funding for the adoption of “free alternatives to traditional print textbooks,” which can include any combination of open access textbooks, library resources, OER, multimedia resources found on the open web, or faculty-authored materials (Kansas State University, 2019). Similarly, the University of Oklahoma’s Alternative Textbook Grant can be applied towards the adoption of OER or library resources, though they specify that grants for library resource use are “applied to the purchase of multiple concurrent licenses” rather than awarded to faculty directly (University of Oklahoma, 2019). Many more examples are available in the “OER & Textbook Affordability Initiatives” document created by Grand Valley State University Libraries (Yahne, J., Rander, J., and Ruen, M., n.d.). At the University of Houston, our Alternative Textbook Incentive Program (ATIP) takes a broad approach to resource type, awarding instructors for replacing required commercial textbooks with adoption, adaptation, or creation of OER, assembly of library-sponsored or freely available resources, or any combination thereof (University of Houston Libraries, n.d.). Launched in 2018, our incentive program is new and growing: in the first two ATIP cohorts, we have awarded thirty-nine alternative textbook projects which will result in an estimated student savings of over $960,000 by the end of the 2019-20 academic year. As an institution that has recently implemented a grant program to advance textbook affordability, we have seen some benefits and drawbacks to both OER and affordable course content. Based continued on page 76

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Being Earnest with Collections from page 75 on our experience with ATIP, I offer thoughts on how these resource types impact adoption and implementation, with considerations for why your institution might support OER, affordable course content, or both.

Flexibility in Implementation

A significant benefit of OER is the flexibility provided by open licenses, as they offer automatic permission to use the content in a variety of ways. The permissions allowed by open licenses are often referred to as the “5R activities” (Wiley, n.d.), which are the abilities to retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute. These permissions allow faculty the flexibility to incorporate content into their course without the barrier of understanding how to comply with complex copyright terms. For example, the permission to redistribute allows OER to be shared with all students, whether by distributing printed copies, uploading document files in the learning management system, or sharing links to the resources — abilities which cannot be assumed with material protected under traditional “all rights reserved” copyright. The ability to reuse content ensures that it can be utilized for a variety of purposes — for example, assigned as course readings, incorporated into class activities or assignments, used for study purposes, and other innovative uses that may be restricted or constrained by vendor licenses for library content. These permissions, along with the ability to retain the content, greatly benefit students by granting free and perpetual access to the material without violating copyright. This has immediately practical implications; for example, students have access to course materials on the first day of class, can download copies to their personal devices for use when they don’t have reliable internet access, and can keep the material to refer back to after the course has concluded, all of which further students’ potential for academic success. OER remove many barriers and concerns associated with traditional copyright while allowing faculty and students much greater freedom in how course content can be used. Additionally, OER typically use Creative Commons licenses, for which the license deeds are relatively clear and easy to understand. In contrast, when embedding library resources in the curriculum, the wide array of license terms can make it unclear to faculty how to access and use the materials for their course. Although it takes some training to educate faculty on Creative Commons licenses, they ultimately remove many frustrations simply by being straightforward and consistent to all users.

Customizing Content

Focusing a grant program on OER rather than affordable course content can maximize the benefits of OER by making use of the abilities to revise and remix content. While affordable course content meets the goal of reducing textbook costs for students, it does not come with permission to adapt the content, meaning faculty will need to carefully curate and select resources that meet their course goals. This limitation is of particular concern when necessary content cannot be identified within existing licensed resources. Promoting OER opens up the possibilities to adapt existing content due to the built-in permissions to revise and remix. OER adaptations, whether they be minor edits or significant undertakings, allow faculty to truly customize course materials without having to write an entirely new textbook themselves. This can mean adding local context, ensuring cultural relevance, or including student perspectives within the resources. Additionally, faculty can create entirely customized course materials by creating their own OER, which many grant programs fund separately from adoption or adaptation. At the University of Houston, we have seen significant interest in adapting OER to meet specific course needs. These projects take shape in a variety of ways, for example: adapting an OpenStax textbook by reorganizing and removing some chapters, but adding no new content; pulling together chapters from multiple open textbooks, and adding some new content, to create a customized open textbook; and modifying existing OER and adding exercises and assignments to create an open lab manual. All of these cases make use of open license permissions by building on existing works, which would not be possible in the traditional environment of library resources. The extent to which OER can transform teaching and learning is evident in light of OER-enabled pedagogy, which Wiley and Hilton

76 Against the Grain / November 2019

(2018) define as “the set of teaching and learning practices that are only possible or practical in the context of the 5R permissions which are characteristic of OER” (p. 135). OER-enabled pedagogy, often referred to as “open pedagogy,” typically involves students in the process of creating or revising OER. Students might write articles for Wikipedia, develop supplementary materials for an open textbook (such as study guides, test banks, tutorials, etc.), or contribute chapters to an open textbook. Often these activities contribute not only to students’ own learning, but to the learning experience of students who take the course in the future. Prioritizing OER efforts not only eliminates textbook costs for students, it allows for innovations and enhancements to the student learning experience that are just not possible with affordable course content.

Generating Buy-in

Although OER opens the door to flexible implementation of course materials and innovative adaptations of content, faculty buy-in is a common barrier to achieving those results. You might be starting at the ground level with raising awareness about OER before making progress on replacing commercial textbooks with OER. Specific concerns that may need to be addressed when educating the campus community include: understanding the difference between OER and free online resources; the OER production process, including how they are funded, authored, and reviewed; how to identify and evaluate OER; and lack of ancillary materials for OER, among others. The SPARC “OER Mythbusting” resource (SPARC, 2017) addresses top myths about OER in North American higher education, and is a useful tool in developing training opportunities. In a risk-averse environment, OER may still feel too new or bleeding edge, where library resources are more familiar. Faculty are used to searching for traditional library materials and incorporating them into their course curricula. Thus, it is a natural step to apply this same process for replacing commercial textbooks with affordable content. Faculty who have no interest in pursuing using OER in their courses may be interested in switching to a library licensed DRM-free eBook instead of their standard textbook, or assembling electronic course packs from library journal articles. If you aim to eliminate textbook costs for as many courses and students as possible, focusing on affordable course content is likely a quicker way to get there due to the existing knowledge and familiarity with these types of resources. The trade-off is that affordable course content comes with the expected limitations and frustrations of traditional copyright. Putting the focus on “affordable” does not take advantage of the unique benefits of “open.” This has proven to be true at the University of Houston, where our Alternative Textbook Incentive Program sees more activity in adoption of affordable course content rather than adoption of OER. Those faculty who are engaged with OER tend to adapt or create, rather than simply adopt open resources. If you want to focus on OER rather than affordable course content, it is necessary to put time into educating faculty and other stakeholders.

Navigating Affordable Course Content

It’s true that replacing costly textbooks with library-licensed resources meets immediate needs for students without being “open,” however, this approach faces different challenges in implementation. At the University of Houston, we are beginning to identify unique challenges as a result of increased use of library materials to replace textbooks. As mentioned previously, it may be unclear to faculty if and how their students can access desired resources: for example, how many users can access an e-book simultaneously? What can they do within the bounds of copyright? Etc. It requires working with library staff to find out, which is an added layer of communication and takes more time for the faculty to achieve their goal. For those without knowledge of the variety of vendors and license terms, this can be a complicated barrier to integrating course materials, compared to Creative Commons licenses which are clearly labelled for all users. The University of Houston uses the electronic course reserves system, Ares, to host copyrighted course materials in the learning management system, Blackboard. The growth of our Alternative Textbook Incentive Program and subsequent promotion of course reserves as a necessary tool have highlighted the fact that many faculty are entirely continued on page 77

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Being Earnest with Collections from page 76 unaware of course reserves. Not only does awareness of course reserves need to be raised, but faculty compiling library materials as the primary textbook will need to get accustomed to including course reserves in their course development process. Of additional concern is the unclear definition of “OER” within our program, which strives to prioritize OER but currently sees significant use of affordable course content. This is reflected in informal communications with faculty, some of whom refer to both OER and library materials as “OER” when either resource type is used to replace a commercial textbook. Our primary goal of reducing textbook costs, coupled with high value of the open ethos and promotion of OER, seems to have led to a conflation of these ideas and inconsistent understandings of what the “open” in OER means. If your program supports both OER and affordable course content, it is important to clearly define and communicate those terms.

Visit us at the Charleston Conference Table 108

IMF eLIBRARY

OER, or Affordable Course Content?

When considering OER and affordable course content, there is no one “best option.” Both are valuable resources that can eliminate textbook costs for students. Whether you want to focus support around one or the other depends on you institutional context and goals. If your institution is heavily invested in advancing the open ecosystem, you can make a strong statement in support of open education by developing a program specifically intended to encourage the adoption, adaptation, and creation of OER. A focus on OER advances not only the cost savings benefit for students, but the mission of the open education movement: to provide free and perpetual access to quality learning materials for all. Rewarding faculty for using OER in place of a commercial textbook signals the institution’s support and contributions towards the open education movement, particularly when faculty create OER and share those back to the broader community for re-use and adaptation. If reducing textbook costs is the primary goal, whether or not it is achieved with open resources, then supporting affordable course content might take precedence over OER. Starting with the familiarity of using library resources allows more people to get on board, especially considering faculty who aren’t yet comfortable with the idea of OER. Many programs take a hybrid approach, utilizing the advantages of both OER and affordable course content. This can increase awareness of OER while still working to lower textbook costs for students, and importantly, a hybrid approach presents even more options for individual faculty members to choose from when seeking to make course materials more affordable for students.

References

Kansas State University. (2019). The Open/Alternative Textbook Initiative. Retrieved from https://www.lib.k-state.edu/open-textbook. Miami University. (n.d.). Open Educational Resources Initiatives. Retrieved from https://miamioh.edu/academic-affairs/teaching/open-educres/oer-initiatives/index.html. SPARC. (2017). OER Mythbusting. Washington DC: SPARC. Retrieved from https://sparcopen.org/our-work/oer-mythbusting. University of Arkansas. (2019). University Libraries: Open Educational Resources. Retrieved from https://libraries.uark.edu/oer. University of Houston Libraries. (n.d.). Incentive Program. Retrieved from https://libraries.uh.edu/oer/incentive. University of Oklahoma. (2019). Alternative Textbook Grant. Retrieved from http://guides.ou.edu/atg. Wiley, D. (n.d.). Defining the “Open” in Open Content and Open Educational Resources. Retrieved from https://www.opencontent.org/definition. Wiley, D. and Hilton, J. (2018). Defining OER-enabled pedagogy. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(4), 133-147. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v19i4.3601. Yahne, J., Rander, J., and Ruen, M. (n.d.). OER & Textbook Affordability Initiatives. Grand Valley State University Libraries. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cVFDRaqrz595T3EWvPoKRvd3mlOIaLrllqRPgY7nNZo/edit#.

Free Access Coming Soon!

elibrary.IMF.org

• 19,000+ publications • Archive to 1946 • Recommended reading lists • Simple browse and full-text search ... And more

Global economic knowledge at your fingertips.

I N T E R N AT I O N A L M O N E TA R Y F U N D

Optimizing Library Services — Institutional Repositories and Knowledge Curation: Revisiting Knowledge Conversion in the Academic Environment by Arjun Sabharwal (Associate Professor/Digital Initiatives Librarian, University of Toledo, USA) <Arjun.Sabharwal@utoledo.edu> Column Editors: Caroline J. Campbell (Marketing Manager, IGI Global) <ccampbell@igi-global.com> and Lindsay Wertman (Managing Director, IGI Global) <lwertman@igi-global.com> www.igi-global.com Column Editors’ Note: This column features IGI Global author, Arjun Sabharwal, Associate Professor/Digital Initiatives Librarian for the University of Toledo, USA, and a contributor to the publications Managing Knowledge and Scholarly Assets in Academic Libraries, edited by Bhojaraju Gunjal from National Institute of Technology Rourkela, India, and Digital Curation: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice, edited by Information Resources Management Association, USA. — CC & LW

he ubiquity and importance of institutional repositories (IRs) in higher education have significantly increased over the past two decades, as IRs have become recognized tools for curating organizational records, digitized heritage collections, research data, and scholarly publications — in other words, organizational knowledge. Knowledge curation combines commitments to long-term preservation with teaching and making institutional records more accessible for scholarly and public inquiries in order to inspire sustained discourse. In contrast, knowledge conversion represents the latent but truly epistemological dimension of knowledge curation with a focus on knowledge acquisition. Knowledge acquisition is an outcome of research, observation, experiments, analysis, collaboration, and presentation, and it evolves in personal (tacit) and shared (explicit) forms, resulting from learning and communication. Knowledge conversion is, in fact, a human curation practice through acquiring, interpreting, and communicating knowledge within an organization, surrounding communities, and communication networks beyond. Institutional repositories play a clearly defined role in this context, as curation involves critical selection, knowledge organization, and communication. However, not all knowledge-focused fields utilize an IR. For example, knowledge as it is understood in philosophy, psychology, ethnography, social sciences, and humanities evolves independently of such tools until scholars incorporate them into their practices. As such, this article focuses on using the IR as a knowledge curation platform and, more specifically, as a knowledge conversion tool in the higher education environment to handle a broad range of data, information, and knowledge. The article first presents a

78 Against the Grain / November 2019

conceptual framework of key concepts, and then it addresses the role of IRs in the four modes of knowledge conversion.

Conceptual Framework

Knowledge curation, knowledge conversion, knowledge architecture, and institutional repositories are related concepts. At the heart of knowledge curation are knowledge and curation. The Oxford Dictionary defines knowledge as “Facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject” (Oxford University Press, 2019). Curation means “guardianship” (Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, 1971 “curation”) focused on selection, organization, presentation, and care of artifacts (in museums) and manuscripts (in archives) in collections and exhibitions. Knowledge curation means “The selection of a subset of information based on particular criteria that is distributed to users” (IGI Global, 2019, “What is knowledge Curation”). Murray and Wheaton (2015) have defined knowledge curation as “the care and feeding of an organization’s critical knowledge” (para. 2) with two dimensions: an explicit dimension dealing with technology used to record information; and a tacit dimension focused on knowing recorded information. To this end, knowledge conversion (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) refers to the interaction between tacit (personal and intangible) and explicit (tangible and transmittable) states of knowledge. A university’s knowledge architecture (Applehans, Globe, and Laugero, 1999; Rebentisch and Feretti, 1995) is its framework for incorporating content (data, information and knowledge), people (researchers, faculty, students, administrators, technologists, information specialists, and others who create share, and curate content), and technologies (databases and digital repositories) used to curate knowledge. As a part of such an architecture, the IR “is a set of services that a university offers to the members of its community for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members” (Lynch, 2003, “Defining Institutional Repositories” section, para. 1). An IR is also a “knowledge curation platform…to enable researchers and experts in a particular field to define, detail and explore the knowledge within that field via a quality-driven collaborative

curation process” (Gorza, Tudorache and Dumontier, 2013, p. 1). IRs are vital elements in the tool chain for knowledge management “in the process of capturing, distributing, and effectively using knowledge” (Davenport, 1994; Davenport and Prusak, 1998). In his elaborate definition for knowledge management, Duhon (1998) includes identification, capture, evaluation, retrieval, and sharing of organizational assets (including documents, policies, and procedures) in databases with previously uncaptured employee expertise and experience. Young (2009) defines knowledge management as “the discipline of enabling individuals, teams and entire organisations to collectively and systematically create, share, and apply knowledge” (para. 2). Deshpande et al. (2017) define academic knowledge management as “a set of processes that provides academic(s) the most effective way to create and organize knowledge, share this knowledge, and foster its application…which supports the achievement of the goals related to their missions” (p. 8). IRs are not just information retrieval mechanisms but curation platforms ensuring long-term access to organizational assets, they are important components in the systematic management and curation of organizational knowledge. “By virtue of their association with archives and digital curation, IRs play a transformative role in academic knowledge management,” which is vital to knowledge activities including the acquisition, creation, conversion, sharing, dissemination, transfer, preservation, and reuse of knowledge in higher education (Sabharwal, 2017; see also Sabharwal, 2010).

The Knowledge in Knowledge Curation and Conversion

Universities and scholarship evolve and revolve around humanistic knowledge and scientific research, which require rich source data, information, and knowledge obtained through observation, fieldwork, interviews, research, analysis, interpretation, and scientifically sound methodology, which serve as a foundation for continued scholarship. Knowledge creation is a cyclical process. In fields like ethnography, sociology, philosophy, folklore, and history (particularly, oral history), humans are the sole sources of rich local (and tacit) knowledge and other data and information that requires further analysis and interpretation. continued on page 79

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Optimizing Library Services from page 78 Once published, however, explicit knowledge does not necessarily circle back to the sources who may not be available for future input in some fields. Researchers are able to customarily share their data, information, and knowledge through formal publication, informal correspondence or discussions, classroom teaching and other channels of verbal communication (such as workshops and conferences), or curation using a subject or an IR. How knowledge becomes an object of curation may be evident in how it relates to the concepts of data and information. Zeleny (1987) and Ackoff (1989) have presented frameworks for clarifying data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. Building on Zeleny’s work, Ackoff (1989) has developed a framework for systematic thinking that distinguishes data, information, and knowledge and is illustrative for present purposes: Data are symbols that represent properties of objects, events and their environments…they are products of observation…Information is inferred from data…[It] is contained in descriptions, answers to questions that begin with such words as who, what, when, where, and how many…Knowledge is know-how…[which] makes possible the transformation of information into instructions. (p. 3-4) Ackoff also asserts that data, information, and knowledge may be available as sources of new data, information, and knowledge, thus underscoring the cyclical nature of knowledge creation. The systematic differentiation of knowledge from data and information facilitates the treatment of knowledge (in explicit form) as a self-defined object of curation (in the form of written documents, worksheets, databases, shape files, and non-textual media) while much personal knowledge (in tacit form) remains intangible or socialized via verbal discussions. Effective curation of knowledge then ensures fruitful conversion of knowledge discussed next.

Knowledge Conversion and the Institutional Repository

While it is possible for IRs to contain and represent tacit knowledge in limited form, such as lecture or field notes, they are designed to contain explicit (shared, printed, communicated) knowledge and can facilitate knowledge conversion between tacit and explicit forms. Several commonly known platforms have been in use for decades, such as DSpace, Digital Commons, Fedora Commons, Islandora, Hydra, Omeka, and CONTENTdm. Owing to their unique architectures and capabilities, some are more suitable for curating scholarly research (e.g., Digital Commons) while others are ideal for curating digitized heritage collection (e.g. Omeka) in a digital humanities context. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) have analyzed the four modes of knowledge conversion, but it is necessary to interject the role of the institutional repository in order that each of these

Against the Grain / November 2019

modes fits into the framework of knowledge curation via such repository. Socialization, in most cases, retains tacit knowledge in that form. It is a “process of sharing experience and thereby creating tacit knowledge such as shared mental models and technical skills” (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995, p. 62). A digital curator can hold workshops to train others to use the IR platform and share anecdotes, personal experiences, and even some horror stories related to content migration, metadata transformation, and reference transactions. Using the IR is essential in order to get points across to the audience favoring visual content also, but the purpose of the platform in this case is not to convert knowledge. In some cases, training materials may appear in published in technical publications, books, webinars, and posters, but these forms no longer fall under socialization. Presentations and social media conversations involve a high degree of socialization, but the inclusion of some media (slide presentations, podcasts, YouTube videos, images, visualizations, etc.) indicates the use of externalization, which converts tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. “It is an essential knowledge creation process in that tacit knowledge becomes explicit, taking the shapes of metaphors, analogies, concepts, hypotheses, or models” (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995, p. 64). Researchers present new knowledge resulting from research, surveys, interviews, and experimentations at conferences and publish in various forms, and universities have begun to encourage faculty to upload their post-prints (within legal limits set by publishers and copyright terms) into their IRs. However, such cases may truly be considered post-conversion activities unless authors voluntarily use the IR as a self-publishing avenue. Open access (especially Green OA) publishing is likely to enable IRs to become a part of the externalization process, which can convert authors’ tacit knowledge into explicit form. Archives are also increasing their efforts to make some institutional records available to the public, which is another demonstration in knowledge curation because data and information have been shared in reports, supporting decision making and other actionable knowledge by organizational leaders (chairs, deans, directors, and senior administrators). Combination retains knowledge in explicit form. It is a “process of systemizing concepts into a knowledge system. This mode of conversion involves combining different bodies of explicit knowledge. Individuals exchange and combine knowledge through such media as documents, meetings, telephone conversations, or computerized communication networks” (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995, p. 67). The IR serves as an ideal tool in knowledge curation since all contents in the combination process may be accessible. Data, information, and knowledge presented in digital form are accessible to anyone at the organization preparing reports and other studies. Finally, internalization represents the reversal of the conversion process. It is the “process of embodying explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge and is closely related to ‘learning by doing.’ When experiences through social-

ization, externalization, and combination are internalized into individuals’ tacit knowledge bases in the form of shared mental models or technical know-how, they become valuable assets” (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995, p. 70). This method allows trainees to study data and information published in the IR in order to develop new (tacit) knowledge, which authors can eventually pass on to others through the methods described above.

Conclusion

Institutional repositories are vital to knowledge curation in the digital environment, and the discussion of knowledge conversion has presented a systematic view of the roles IRs have in creating and sharing knowledge through digital technology. Knowledge conversion is a knowledge curation process allowing researchers, teaching faculty, administrators, staff, donors (of special collections and archival records), interviewees (in oral histories), cultural informants (in ethnography and folklore) to share data, information, and knowledge with a wider audience in a variety of ways known to academics and practitioners in the business community and various industries. There is, however, a vast epistemological ground in the social sciences (e.g., anthropology, ethnography) and the humanities (e.g., philosophy, history) where knowledge creation does not rely on curation technologies (such as IRs). In fact, authors may decide to curate their own works in their institutional repositories well after publishing in a formal venue such as a journal, conference proceeding, or book chapter. The use of the IR represents interests related to historical reflection and preservation, which is where finalized reports and data are available for viewing and further study. Knowledge curation through the IR further supports collaboration across organizational units that have relied for very long on data silos and departmental databases.

References

Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From Data to Wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16, 3-9. Applehans, W., Globe, A., and Laugero, G. (1999). Managing Knowledge: A Practical Web-based Approach. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Curation. (1971). In The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Davenport, T. H. (1994). Saving IT’s Soul: Human-Centered Information Management. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 119-131. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/ login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbig&AN=edsbig.A14913078&site=eds-live. Davenport, T. H., and Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press. Deshpande, D., Bhosale, N. P., and Londhe, R. J. (2017). Enhancing Academic Research with Knowledge Management Principles. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. continued on page 80

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Optimizing Library Services from page 79 Duhon, B. (1998). It’s All in Our Heads. Inform, 12(8), 8-13. Groza, T., Tudorache, T., and Dumontier, M. (2013). State of the art and open challenges in community-driven knowledge curation. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 46(1), 1-4. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2012.11.007 IGI Global. 2019. “What is Knowledge Curation?” In Info-Sci Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/ knowledge-curation/42291. Knowledge. (2019). In Oxford Living Dictionaries. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/knowledge. Lynch, C. A. (2003). Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure For Scholarship In The Digital Age. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3(2), 327-336. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/42865. Milton, N. (2005). Knowledge Management for Teams and Projects. Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing. Murray, A., and Wheaton, K. (2015). Welcome to Curation 2.0. KMWorld, 25(1). Retrieved from http://www.kmworld.com/ Articles/Column/The-Future-of-the-Future/ Welcome-to-Curation-2.0-108249.aspx Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press. Rebentisch, E., and Feretti, M. (1995). A knowledge asset-based view of technology transfer in international joint ventures J. Eng. Technol. Manage, (12), 1-25.

Considering Games ... from page 73 tography skills and deep thinking and colorful lights. By all accounts all of the participants had a blast, had fun and did learn a great deal about the science and necessities and danger and adventure in planning and executing a mission to Mars. The trick seemed to be that it was not necessarily fun to learn about those Mars and space things. But, in the process of having fun in the experience (by surviving a crash landing on Mars), the participants learned things — not the least of which was cooperation and problem solving under pressure. Indeed, hearts and minds were grabbed. So, this games in education thing can actually work. I look forward to applying it directly to teaching library skills. Seeing my students having fun in a library instruction class is a particular secret fantasy of mine. I can hardly wait. Learning may not always be fun. But, one can more easily learn something while having fun. So, up with the online catalog and bring on the smoke machine!

80 Against the Grain / November 2019

Sabharwal, A. (2010). Digital Directions in Academic Knowledge Management: Visions and Opportunities for Digital Initiatives at the University of Toledo. Paper presented at the Special Libraries Association 2010 Annual Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana. Sabharwal, A. (2017). The Transformative Role of Institutional Repositories in Academic Knowledge Management. In B. Gunjal and M. Padmaja (Eds.), Managing Knowledge and Scholarly Assets in Academic Libraries (pp. 127-155). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Young, R. (2009). Definition of Knowledge Management. Retrieved from http:// www.knowledge-management-online.com/ Definition-of-Knowledge-Management.html Zeleny, M. (1987). Management support systems: Towards integrated knowledge management. Human Systems Management, 7(1), 59-70. Retrieved from http://www.milanzeleny. com/ documents/publications/mss.pdf.

Recommended Readings

Armbruster, C., and Romary, L. (2012). Comparing Repository Types: Challenges and Barriers for Subject-Based Repositories, Research Repositories, National Repository Systems and Institutional Repositories in Serving Scholarly Communication. In C. Wei, Y. Li, and C. Gwo (Eds.), Multimedia Storage and Retrieval Innovations for Digital Library Systems (pp. 329-341). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0900-6.ch017 Axford, M., and Renfro, C. (2015). Personal Knowledge Management in Outreach and Instruction. International Journal of Digital Library Systems (IJDLS), 5(1), 16-30. doi:10.4018/IJDLS.2015010103 Belikov, O., and Kimmons, R. M. (2019). Scholarly Identity in an Increasingly Open and Digitally Connected World. In M. Khosrow-Pour, D.B.A. (Ed.), Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Library Science, Information Management, and Scholarly Inquiry (pp. 579-588). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-7659-4.ch046 Bielenia-Grajewska, M. (2019). Knowledge Management From the Metaphorical Perspective. In M. Khosrow-Pour, D.B.A. (Ed.), Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Library Science, Information Management, and Scholarly Inquiry (pp. 402-411). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-52257659-4.ch032 Fteimi, N., Basten, D., and Lehner, F. (2019). Advancing Automated Content Analysis in Knowledge Management Research: The Use of Compound Concepts.

International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), 15(1), 53-68. doi:10.4018/ IJKM.2019010104 González-Pérez, L. I., Ramírez-Montoya, M., and García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2018). User Experience in Institutional Repositories: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), 9(1), 70-86. doi:10.4018/IJHCITP.2018010105 Kisielnicki, J., and Sobolewska, O. (2019). Technical Infrastructure of Network Organizations. In Knowledge Management and Innovation in Network Organizations: Emerging Research and Opportunities (pp. 5585). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/9781-5225-5930-6.ch003. Säisä, M. E., Tiura, K., and Matikainen, R. (2019). Agile Project Management in University-Industry Collaboration Projects. International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), 10(2), 8-15. doi:10.4018/IJITPM.2019040102 Wimmer, H., Du, J., and Rada, R. (2019). Knowledge Portals: A Review. International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), 15(1), 1-18. doi:10.4018/IJKM.2019010101 Zhang, Y., Deng, Q., Xing, C., Sun, Y., and Whitney, M. (2012). A Service Component Model and Implementation for Institutional Repositories. In X. Liu, and Y. Li (Eds.), Advanced Design Approaches to Emerging Software Systems: Principles, Methodologies and Tools (pp. 61-81). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-735-7.ch004.

Column Editor’s End Note: As the curation and dissemination of knowledge is critical to the education of all researchers and professionals working within information and knowledge management fields, IGI Global continues to publish innovative, peer-reviewed research within Library & Information Science. With a collection of over 600+ titles in timely topics including collection development, acquisitions, archiving, technology, administration and leadership, and more, all of these titles are featured in IGI Global’s InfoSci-Library and Information Science database. To learn more, visit: www.igi-global.com/eresources. Additionally, IGI Global invites researchers within these fields of research to submit a book proposal or submit a chapter to one of our publications. To learn more about these publishing opportunities, please visit: www.igi-global. com/publish.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

6180 East Warren Avenue • Denver, CO 80222 Phone: 303-282-9706 • Fax: 303-282-9743

Subscribe to The Charleston ADVISOR Today!

The Charleston

ADVISOR

Critical Reviews of Web Products for Information Professionals

comparative reviews...reports from “The Charleston Advisor serves up timely editorials and columns, the field...interviews with industry standalone and comparative reviews, and press releases, among other features. Produced by folks with impeccable library and players...opinion editorials... publishing credentials ...[t]his is a title you should consider...” comparative reviews...reports from the field...interviews with industry players...opinion editorials... — Magazines for Libraries, eleventh edition, edited by Cheryl LaGuardia with consulting editors Bill Katz and Linda Sternberg Katz (Bowker, 2002).

• Over 750 reviews now available • Web edition and database provided with all subscriptions • Unlimited IP filtered or name/password access • Full backfile included • Comparative reviews of aggregators featured • Leading opinions in every issue

$295.00 for libraries $495.00 for all others

✓Yes! Enter My Subscription For One Year. ❏ Yes, I am Interested in being a Reviewer. ❏ Name_____________________________________________ Title_________________________________________ Organization___________________________________________________________________________________ Address________________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip__________________________________________________________________________________ Phone_____________________________________________ Fax_________________________________________ Email_________________________________________Signature_________________________________________

Marketing Touchpoints — Value Is in the Eye of the Beholder: Building Bridges with User Experience Tools Column Editor: Jill Heinze (Director, User Experience, University of Virginia Library, Charlottesville, VA 22904; Phone: 434-243-1368) <jill.ux@virginia.edu>

s the reader of my column called Marketing Touchpoints, you may be surprised to know that marketing isn’t explicitly in my job description. Yes, I’ve studied, published, and spoken about marketing libraries for more than fifteen years, but I spend my days at the University of Virginia Library as the Director of User Experience (UX). For some in the UX field, it’s sacrilege to conflate user experience with marketing — UX professionals are supposed to identify and advocate for user needs, while marketers, they argue, are charged with pushing organizational goals and services onto people. The Interaction Design Foundation puts it this way, “Marketing is focused on ultimately increasing the sales of the product (i.e., conversion), and directly feeds into the bottomline of the company. UX design, on the other hand, is focused on building the best experience for the user, regardless of whether it ultimately adds to the company’s bottomline.”1 I concede that there is an innate tension between these fields (which is a subject ripe for another article). However, when done well, I firmly believe marketing and UX can complement one another to serve the greater good by informing the creation and distribution of services that people need, want, and value. In this way, the two worlds are simpatico. In fact, since embarking on my UX career, I’ve discovered a number of tools in the UX repertoire that can be equally handy in building marketing strategies. I recently had a terrific opportunity to explore this UX/marketing synergy in delivering a webinar for the National Network of Libraries of Medicine (NNLM). I was invited to talk with medical librarians about how they can better market their data management plan (DMP) services. DMPs are documents increasingly required by research fund-

Against the Grain / November 2019

ing agencies that prompt researchers to describe in detail the data they intend to acquire, along with how they plan to describe, store, share, and preserve that data. Though DMP consultation services are not universal library offerings, librarians have recognized for many years that these kinds of research data services are attractive opportunities to fill voids in researcher support at their institutions. As Carol Tenopir et al. asserted in a 2012 ACRL white paper, “As science becomes more collaborative, data-intensive, and computational, academic researchers are faced with a range of data management needs. Combine these needs with funding directives that require data management planning, and there is both a need and an imperative for research data services in colleges and universities. Academic libraries may be ideal centers for research data service activities on campuses, providing unique opportunities for academic libraries to become even more active participants in the knowledge creation cycle in their institution.”2 While implementing such services have proven complicated in many respects, librarians certainly have much to love philosophically in providing data management planning support. This service fits seamlessly into our shared worldview that information should be organized and made readily available to support research integrity and further the research enterprise. Herein lies the risk librarians face in successfully marketing these services – Since DMPs are an intuitive fit for us, we can easily become blind to researchers’ reality in which DMPs are sometimes perceived as mysterious, questionably worthwhile, and cumbersome. I was particularly struck by research conducted by Hunt and Bakker who analyzed continued on page 82

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Marketing Touchpoints from page 81 public health researcher needs at the University of Minnesota.3 Overall, they discovered that researchers considered data management an afterthought, but they also unearthed nuanced insights into these researchers’ mindsets, which are invaluable to librarians seeking to forge new inroads to these users. They found, for example, a fascinating range of reasons why public health researchers are hesitant to manage and share their data: “Those who had never shared their underlying data expressed that they did not think anyone would care to see the data, had concerns over how the data would be used in the future (e.g., informed consent restrictions and ability of others to interpret the data), or were open to it as long as controls were in place to screen users of the data.”4 Other DMP blockers identified include a perception it’s too time-consuming, and beliefs that data didn’t fit neatly into common data types. Another study of researchers who produce qualitative data conducted by Mannheimer et al. yielded a similarly rich view of their concerns, including great skepticism that data will be properly understood without the original context, and ethical dilemmas related to maintaining confidentiality and anonymity.5 Among those for whom marketing means informing more people in more ways about their services, it’s easy to see how that approach falls short in light of research like this. If, for example, like my webinar attendees you want to get the word out about your DMP service, you can’t simply create more communications without recognizing that there are researchers in your audience who don’t even think their data is worth maintaining or that they can ethically share their data. Your messages won’t even have a chance to resonate if you don’t directly address these beliefs. The first and primary marketing challenge, then, is to adopt your users’ perspective, which is where UX tools can be a great help. One tool I recommend is a user journey map.6 A journey map is a means of visualizing the steps, or actions, a representative user (graduate student, clinician, etc.) takes to accomplish their goal. In the case of a potential DMP user, you may consider examining the sequential steps users take to complete a grant proposal. Importantly, along with the actions taken, you would gather information about how the user feels and what they think at each milestone so that you can pick up on those otherwise obscured experiences that have tremendous influence on whether users are receptive to your service. I adapted an example user journey map template (Fig. 1) from the Nielsen/ Norman Group and simplified it somewhat.7 To use this template, you would first specify the representative user in question, along with the scenario of interest and the user’s goals within that scenario. This provides a workable scope of inquiry for you to then identify key steps with actions the user takes to achieve the goal. Each step should be fleshed out by noting the user’s thoughts and feelings as they proceed. This information can be derived from user data you already have and supplemented with details from interviews or other custom user research you may need to conduct to derive an accurate, complete understanding of what it’s like to accomplish the goal from the perspective you selected. Then, with each step, note any useful insights you glean that could inform how you communicate or design your service.

Figure 1: Simplified User Journey Map

82 Against the Grain / November 2019

More than just learning where and when you might communicate about your service, building a journey map will help you build empathy and deep awareness so that you’re able to affect meaningful change throughout your marketing planning process, which includes everything from how you structure and deliver your services to how you position them so they correspond with what users directly experience. To illustrate this point, let’s return to our DMP example and the article about qualitative researchers by Mannheimer et al.. In it, the authors proposed three ways in which academic librarians can overcome hurdles to data deposits. One such hurdle and related recommendation concerns faculty researchers obtaining informed consent from research participants so that they can confidently share their data at the end of their projects without fear of an ethical violation: “Data repositories and academic libraries can educate institutional review boards (IRBs) and researchers about planning for appropriate informed consent processes.”8 In following this recommendation, librarians would target their DMP marketing on another user base (in this case the IRB staff) at a critical step in the user journey, and adjust their outreach and communication strategies so that they align with practical and emotional realities (like the sense of ethical unease) by focusing on the topic of consent rather than DMPs only. In effect, this represents a shift in marketing approach beyond ‘getting the word out’ about your services. It’s this mindset that you should adopt as you follow your users’ journeys. You don’t know exactly where those journeys will lead, but don’t be afraid to follow them into uncharted territory as you explore how to better market your services.

Endnotes 1. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/how-tochange-your-career-from-marketing-to-ux-design 2. Tenopir, C., Birch, B., Allard, S. (2012) Academic Libraries and Research Data Services. Association of College & Research Libraries. Available at: http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/ files/content/publications/whitepapers/Tenopir_Birch_Allard.pdf (accessed 28 June 2019), 3. 3. Hunt, S., and Bakker, C. (2018). A qualitative analysis of the information science needs of public health researchers in an academic setting. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106(2), 184–197. doi: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.316 4. Ibid., 188. 5. Mannheimer, S., Pienta, A., Kirilova, D., Elman, C., and Wutich, A. (2019). Qualitative Data Sharing: Data Repositories and Academic Libraries as Key Partners in Addressing Challenges. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(5), 643–664. https://doi. org/10.1177/0002764218784991, 644 6. The Nielsen/Norman Group provides a concise but thorough overview of what a Journey Map is and how and when it should be used. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/customer-journey-mapping/ 7. Ibid. 8. Mannheimer, 648.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Biz of Digital — Developing and Growing a New Repository Service: Part 3 Expansion by Column Editor: Michelle Flinchbaugh (Acquisitions and Digital Scholarship Services Librarian, Albin O. Kuhn Library & Gallery, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250; Phone: 410-455-6754; Fax: 410-455-1598) <flinchba@umbc.edu> Column Editor’s Note: This is Part 3 of a 3 part series on Creating a New Repository Service. Part 1: Getting Started appeared in the June 2019 issue (v.31#3). Part 2: Procedures for Library Submissions appeared in the September 2019 issue (v.31#4). This is Part 3, which completes the series. — MF

Introduction

The University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), a research-intensive institution with 546 full-time, 292 part-time

faculty, was utilizing the Maryland Shared Open Access Repository (MD-SOAR) DSpace platform to develop repository services. Few faculty would self-submit, so the library was

developing processes, procedures, and documentation for doing submissions in the library. A librarian shifting duties to work full-time on a new repository, the Digital Scholarship Services (DSS) Librarian, was eight months into a soft roll-out with minimal outreach only to individual faculty members, and she was the only staff working on the repository. Despite the limited outreach, and that the system and services hadn’t been rolled-out to all of campus, a robust flow of submissions for her to process and enter had developed. The system needed to be rolled-out to all of campus, and staffing needed to be added—both were done simultaneously at the beginning of the fall 2018 semester.

Expanding Service to the Entire Campus

First, the implementation of the system was announced to all of campus. Then the DSS Librarian attempted to tell all of the faculty on campus about the new system. First, she sent an email to email list for academic department chairs asking to present at one of their meetings in the coming year. Most didn’t respond, but she was scheduled into a few departments’ meetings. She then began contacting department chairs for the remaining departments individually, and continued with this through an entire semester. She was able to set up many more presentations at departmental meetings, but still the vast majority of departments, 68%, didn’t respond. For those departments where she wasn’t invited to present, she emailed a flier to all of the faculty in the department. Later she began contacting campus centers about ScholarWorks@UMBC. Via these presentations and contacts, and ongoing processing of new UMBC publications via Google Scholar Alerts, at the end of the first year 91% of UMBC’s academic departments had at least one work in ScholarWorks@UMBC. All of the major academic administrative units (the Provost’s Office, Deans’ Offices) and 18 centers also had works in ScholarWorks@UMBC.

Hiring Help

The amount of time that the DSS Librarian had to process and enter new submissions was insufficient to handle incoming submissions as soon as she began receiving long lists of publications. She notified both her supervisor and other administrators that she was only able to add a little more than 20 items per month, and of the number of submissions she had, and requested a student and began developing and preparing processes and documentation for a student to do the data entry work, and also possibly some processing of submissions. Figure 1: Fields in the submission spreadsheet that student assistant uses to input items into the IR

Against the Grain / November 2019

continued on page 84

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Biz of Digital from page 83 The challenge of having a student do data entry work was in how to convey information to the student on what to enter without entering all of the data on the item. The first attempt at this was a simple list of items to enter, along with a link to the item’s metadata record on the publisher’s site. Metadata values readily available on the publisher’s site (author, abstract, keywords, etc.) weren’t included in the list of items to enter since the student assistant could readily find, whereas information not available or that requires a judgement call was included in the list. Relying on copying and pasting from the publisher’s metadata record where possible speeds up both the processing of items and their submission to the system. However, using a list, the librarian noted that there were inconsistencies in what information she included and didn’t include, some because of the nature of the work and others because of which versions of the work were available and what metadata was available, and yet others because she simply didn’t prepare the items consistently. Unhappy with the list, she switched to spreadsheet with columns, and decided most information that could be found in metadata records and the work itself wouldn’t be included in the spreadsheet, limiting the spreadsheet to links to works and metadata about works and information not readily available in metadata or on the work, or that required a judgement call. (See Figure 1.) The spreadsheet was supplemented with detailed documentation on entering and completing items from a spreadsheet, available here: https://wiki.umbc.edu/display/ library/Entering+and+Completing+Items+from+a+Spreadsheet%2C+Full+Procedure and a metadata chart to use as a short guide on what to look for and where to put it a record. (See Figure 2.) To finish, the Dublin Core element was added to all lines in the “Where to put it column” to facilitate editing in administration which is done entirely by Dublin Core element. In addition to providing these resources for the student assistant, after hire, the DSS Librarian spent a great deal of time training the student assistant, in steps, and checking and correcting work until it was done correctly. Initial training was only the submission processes utilizing the submission form. When that was mastered, the student was trained in utilizing administrative capabilities to edit metadata and map items to additional collections, then how to use the administrative capabilities to correct an error. In a final phase of training the student learned to add rights statements, change a Creative Commons license version, and embargo an item for automatic release when the embargo ends. Once the student had worked through a substantive backlog of items to be entered, the DSS Librarian also trained the student to determine if an item is in-scope for the repository, to check rights and then enter those works that can be posted into a spreadsheet

84 Against the Grain / November 2019

Figure 2: Guide for what to look for and where to put when entering items into IR for future entry. Substantive documentation was created covering this. The portion on scope covers theses and dissertations, CVs, obituaries, and abstracts with no full text, the requirement that an author must be affiliated with UMBC or the article about UMBC or someone affiliated with it. The section on checking rights is broken down by format, and covers Creative Commons licenses, open access, U.S. Federal Government publications. A final section covers determining which collections to add an item to. The full procedures is available here: https://wiki.umbc.edu/pages/ viewpage.action?title=Preparing+a+Spreadsheet+of+Items+to+Enter&spaceKey=library. Additional detail could be added to spell out some situations and decisions not covered, but this already extensive procedure is very challenging for someone just beginning this work. Training on it best divided up, a new staff person doing the steps they know, and the DSS Librarian doing the rest. This would

allow for training in more manageable phases and better mastery of the work.

Still Needing more Help

To date, the DSS Librarian has barely scratched the surface of outreach and much more can be done, but the bulk of her time has been spent on a perpetual backlog of items to process and enter for faculty. The current backlog of works to check rights and enter is reaching nearly 1,200. With the DSS Librarian working full-time plus the half-time student assistant, the maximum monthly rate of processing has been 256 per month so that this constitutes nearly a 5 month backlog. Additionally, they continue processing Google Scholar Alerts, and a commitment was made to re-visit publications website annually to add new materials that were added to them. The student assistant won’t be available during breaks, and graduates in a just a year and half. At the date of this writing, the DSS Librarian continued on page 85

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Come see us at table # 99 at the Charleston Vendor Showcase For more information on how to support or participate in the archive contact us at info@clockss.org. CLOCKSS Archive is a dark archive that ensures the long-term survival of web-based scholarly publications, governed by and for its stakeholders. The archive includes over ▪280 Participating Publishers ▪300 Library Supporters ▪25,000 journal titles ▪33,400,000 journal articles ▪188,000 ebooks ▪53 journals have been triggered as open access

CLOCKSS is the first archive to be re-certified by the Council of Research Libraries for our Trusted Repository Audit Checklist (TRAC). Our score was upgraded for Organizational Infrastructure to the top score of 5. We maintained our top score of 5 for Technologies, Technical Infrastructure, Security. Our total score of 14 out of 15 is the highest score of any of the archives that have been certified.

https://www.clockss.org Biz of Digital from page 84 has requested a full-time line to hire a staff person which was promised if/when there is enough work to justify doing so.

Workflows

One workflow for loading ETDs, and second bifurcated workflow, first checking rights and finding info and filing it into a spreadsheet, and then using the spreadsheet to enter items was developed. These two workflows handle 90% of items going into the repository. However, some items don’t fit well into the spreadsheet because of their nature, and require utilizing Dublin Core elements not normally utilized, or entering multiple values into Dublin Core element where there is usually only one. Other items may be serials, multivolume sets, art, video, symposia with video of multiple presentation given by different people. Modified spreadsheets were developed, or will be developed to be used in these instances. At some point in the future, items that are particularly time consuming to enter manually (for example, works with more than ten authors) may also be loaded, depending on our ability to develop automated methods of reformatting data accurately.

Against the Grain / November 2019

Future Plans

With the large backlog of work, methods for making work more efficient are a high priority. In the short term, Macro Express can quickly automate some data entry tasks, making the entry of new submissions less time-consuming. The DSS Librarian has read articles on how other libraries have automated the submission processes using citation managers and spreadsheets to batch load new submissions, and in the future will investigate if what other libraries have done will work at UMBC and with MD-SOAR. Another high priority is further extending outreach. Additional outreach needs to be done to professional programs, and faculty and programs located at distant locations in either Baltimore City or at University of Maryland System’s Shady Grove campus. Outreach also needs to be done to lecture series, campus awards, and student publications and research forums. Finally, outreach to new faculty six months to a year after they come to UMBC needs to be put in place. Finally, an annual email needs to go to faculty affiliated with each department and center reminding them to send materials. Works in the repository also need to be promoted. A plan to have the system automatically tweet all new items has stalled. UMBC

Library’s Committee of Social Media and Outreach will promote items on social media, but interesting items have to be identified and sent to them. Other means of promotion are also possible, but it’s been difficult to find time for this with a perpetual large waitlist of materials to process and add. The Digital Service Librarian has also been working the MD-SOAR Governance Group toward enhancements to solve various inefficiencies and problems related to the system configuration. A current effort is being made to standardize how metadata indicates that an item is a preprint or postprint and to select enhancements to move forward. A new extended submission form is desirable, and additionally tweaks to the indexing and display, and field configuration would be of value. Another area needing work is resolving inconsistencies in metadata as procedures have changed over time. In some instances, we’ve learned, in others, reached agreements not previously realized, so there have been inconsistencies between how we entered records six months ago and how we enter them now, and at some point hope to do a large scale batch edit of our metadata to make records consistent. Of particular importance is putting in place some type of authority control on the names continued on page 87

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Squirreling Away: Managing Information Resources & Libraries — Life is as it is: Flexibility and Change Management Column Editor: Corey Seeman (Director, Kresge Library Services, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan; Phone: 734-764-9969) <cseeman@umich.edu> Twitter @cseeman

ne of the most difficult aspects of job or your library. in the context of your institutional culture and any change that we strive to navigate Once again, you might ask yourself where I identity. Through these six terms, I hope to through is the loss of control. As we am going with this? Well, I am going to make explore how to best manage your operation move into any new endeavor, career, place, liv- a profound a potentially controversial state- in less than optimal conditions (and let’s face ing arrangement or professional situation, we ment. Simply put, life is different with a dog. it, most libraries are operating in exactly that realize that one of the most difficult aspects is Very different. When you go to an adoption “place.”) For this column, I am going to write the need to relearn those elements that we were event, there are pictures in your mind of what about the need for flexibility by all parties and fairly confident we had under control. This is your life with a pet will look like. The reality what it all means at individual libraries. By the one area where many things break down may often a bit different. So as you raise your flexibility, we can describe this as the opposite and we revert to the way that we did things in puppy or kitten (or other type of furry family of rigidity — that inability to bend or change the past, even if it is not working. member), you will likely have some trials and for any reason. There are many instances where it would tribulations. However, if you have the right This balance between flexibility and ribe wonderful if we controlled how everything mindset, you can accentuate the positive while gidity, can be one of the biggest obstacles to played out in our lives. If you could write eliminating the negative. With the right mind- overcome when managing any unit through a script or story of your life, it might be a set, you can enjoy the good parts and manage change (be it large or small). Luckily, we complete joy. But every time we introduce the things that are a surprise. After all, that is learned something nearly twenty years ago other elements into our lives, our ownership what Nature’s Miracle is for. Adopting a dog that enables us to roll with the punches quite and control is lessened. When we live with or a puppy is work for certain. However, it is well. And it is a means that I aspire to use someone else or get married, you simply have more good than bad. Does it change your life? day in and day out as I face the changes that to change the way that you function. When Absolutely. So what is the best way to manage come my way. Mrs. Pirkola, my older son’s you have kids or are dealing with parents, you this? By embracing the flexibility that is need- 2nd Grade teacher, preached flexibility every have to change your priorities and what time we met. To this day, we reference you might want to do. When you bring her and her rules when trying to sort a pet into your house, the very same through life as it comes towards us. dynamic plays out. She wanted our son to be more flexible in dealing with things that happened in Recently, we kinda celebrated the the classroom. In turn, she taught our nine-month-old birthday of my puppy, whole family how to handle the curves Runyon. He is a catahoula leopard that life throws our way. mix that we adopted from Bottle Babies Rescue of Allen Park, Michigan Flexibility can play itself out in a in May. We previously had adopted number of different ways to support an adult dog, and he came practically a group or unit’s change. It becomes trained and house broken. Puppies are a critical tool in the manager’s kit to different. While Runyon looked older ensure that no matter what happens to than he was, we found out too late, after the library, that it can still serve and we had fallen in love with the pooch at function to support its community. the adoption event. At that event, we This may run counter to the way that It’s Runyon Jones (our new puppy) — May 4th, 2019 were told and told again about the need libraries operate. We have established (adoption day) with a toy squirrel. for training, the cost associated with and universal rules, especially with having a dog, and the need for patience with a ed when you bring a puppy into your home. cataloging, that can be restrictive for sure. young dog. But he seemed so calm and comWhat does Flexibility Look Flexibility Rules posed at the event, we did not think it would be a problem. Like in Libraries? So with that it is time for my third colWhile I am going to expand this for subIn fact the person who was fostering him umn on change management in libraries. I told us three things that made us feel great have long thought about this as an important sequent works, there are three areas that I about the soon-to-be newest member of our topic that seems to be under-appreciated and think we can focus on for this introduction to household. First, he was housetrained. Sec- under-explored in the professional library flexibility in libraries. There has been a few ond, he got along very well with cats. And literature. Having recently navigated my own articles that have shown up in library literature third, he knew algebra. Turns out, all three operation from a traditional library a few years on this subject, but relatively few considering things were not exactly true. He was not house- ago to one that is virtually virtual, the time is the amount of change that our profession trained. All he wants to do is play with the cat definitely now to think about this important has gone through over the past twenty years. (much to Cosmo’s annoyance). And we have topic with the vantage point of what we did Sarah Sutton (2013) wrote in a summary of seen no evidence that he knows algebra — or well, what we did poorly, and what we might articles on serials literature from 2010-2011 that articles show “creating workflows flexible even basic math for that matter. I might have do differently. As a structure for these articles (and hope- enough to change as those needs and desires misunderstood that element during the chaos of the day. The disconnect from where we fully something a bit more down the road), I change.”1 Martin Kesselman in an editorial thought we were going and where we needed to have broken down change management into from 2018 focuses on the fact that our path go is one of the hardest aspects of pet adoption. six key terms: inevitability, rapidity, flexibil- forward might not be as clear with changes It is also one of the hardest aspects of going ity, hospitality, accountability, and empathy. in technology, libraries and the communities through any type of change in your life, your These terms are particularly important to use continued on page 87

86 Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Squirreling Away from page 86 we serve.2 The most successful libraries in navigating through change are likely the ones that have the greatest ability to be flexible given the changes that our profession is being asked to take on. Here are three areas where flexibility has been key in the way we have faced change. First, flexibility in the services we provide is one of the most important aspects to consider with library change management. There are certain aspects of our work and the services we provide where we need to make sure that we are aligned with our community needs. It seems that much of the literature about marketing in libraries (and elsewhere) is about how to successfully increase adoption or use of a service or product that you are providing vs. providing what is desired. One instance that we have had to change is our desire of managing course reserves in our new library. Taking into consideration the lack of space and the desire not to hire evening staff to work onsite, we opted to change course and not bring back course reserves to our library portfolio. We aspired to move items into electronic format if possible — but as you know, this can be difficult with course adoption texts, let alone textbooks. We had to balance between what we felt we could do with what the needs are in our community and moved accordingly. It would be nice if we could provide this, but it did not meet our abilities and resources. Second, flexibility with collections is certainly a key aspect to change management. Over the past eight years in our library, we have had flat or declining collections budgets. Even in a flat year, that means cuts to cover inflation for the resources that you are planning to keep. The flexibility involved here is to ensure that your cuts are balanced and that redundancies are eliminated first. While you can work on a straight cost per use model, this will likely not tell the entire story. Resources targeted for faculty and researchers will likely be far less commonly used than ones geared to student use. Additionally, there might be resources that had been staples in the library collection since before you arrived — and represent the core holdings of many libraries. But if they are not being used, then that is an opportunity for you to make changes that reflect your reality at the library. Third, flexibility with people might be the most important aspect of navigating through change in any organization. I believe that change is an extremely personal construct that will impact different people in vastly unique ways. In our staff of just under twenty, we had some people who saw relatively little change in their day to day life with our transformation — as well as some who had to learn nearly a completely new job. But long before this change, I preached flexibility in the workplace for one simple reason. My premise is that if I am flexible with my team, they in turn may be flexible with our users and the community we

Against the Grain / November 2019

serve. Conversely, if I were rigid or rule bound with my team, it would be difficult to expect them to be flexible with our community. Additionally, a great number of the ways that we may be flexible with our teams can create a better working environment. Giving your team the freedom and flexibility to navigate through these changes as they see fit enables the library group to better serve your community. While there will be aspects of library change that are fairly rigid, especially with space and budget constraints, creating a flexible environment will pay dividends for you and your team. So just like that cute puppy, kitten, dog, cat or other pet you bring home from an adoption event, there is a great deal of joy that will come

your way. But the more rigid you are in bringing this new being into your family, the more likely you will be disappointed and troubled with the results. Pets can be a great deal of work, but all of it is worth it when they are curled up with you when you are working on your late articles — right?

Corey Seeman is the Director, Kresge Library Services at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He is also the new editor for this column that intends to provide an eclectic exploration of business and management topics relative to the intersection of publishing, librarianship and the information industry. No business degree required! He may be reached at <cseeman@umich.edu> or via twitter at @cseeman.

Endnotes 1. Sutton, Sarah. “Flexibility in the Face of Change.” Library Resources & Technical

Services, vol. 57, no. 2, Apr. 2013, pp. 77–86. EBSCOhost, doi:10.5860/lrts.57n1.77. 2. Kesselman, Martin A. “Hot Tech Trends in Libraries: Flexibility and Changeability Is the New Sustainability.” Library Hi Tech News, vol. 35, no. 8, Sept. 2018, pp. 1–5. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1108/LHTN-09-2018-0062.

Biz of Digital from page 85 of UMBC authors. The system automatically creates author pages, but creates an additional author page for every different form of a name. A decision to put authority control in place for UMBC author names would collate their works all on one author page. Repository training for faculty was developed and scheduled, but with very little interest in self-submission on campus, no one rsvp’ed and the training session was cancelled. The University of Maryland, College Park, has had some success with a workshop on authors’ rights, and important rights issues directly pertinent to the repository can be addressed in that type of workshop, so in the future, the DSS Librarian hopes to develop and offer such a workshop. Moving from a part-time student assistant with diminishing returns on training to a fulltime staff person is also highly desirable. That would facilitate much more work getting done at a higher quality. This would also allow the DSS Librarian to shift from spending most of her time doing staff-level production work (or correcting the student assistant’s work), to doing further outreach and promotion of the repository and the works in it, refining procedures and documentation, and batch

clean-up of the data in the system. At present, the Digital Scholarship Service Librarian can only take on a single project each summer. More time would also allow her to develop and offer workshops and do more outreach. Additionally, she could develop other digital scholarship services in consultation with library management and write grant proposals toward obtaining funding for startup costs.

Conclusions

The gradual implementation was good preparation for extending the repository service to all of campus, and moving to a production mode where many more items would be processed and added each month. Basic procedures were in place, allowing a shift in focus from legal and technical issues to people, from how to do work to working with staff to increase production. It also gave the novice DSS Librarian time to learn. In 18 months since the implementation of ScholarWorks@ UMBC, 1,683 items have been added, bringing the total number of works to 2,773, and there have been 4,145 visits to ScholarWorks@ UMBC. This is a strong start, but in time UMBC could potentially be adding 4,000+ items per year to the repository.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Wandering the Web — Food Websites by Dan Forrest (Faculty Subject Specialist, Western Kentucky University Libraries) Column Editor: Jack G. Montgomery (Professor, Coordinator, Collection Services, Western Kentucky University Libraries, Bowling Green, Kentucky) <jack.montgomery@wku.edu> Column Editor’s Note: Professor Forrest is a well-known local gourmand, food expert and restaurant reviewer with an extensive knowledge of all things food and cooking. As food and food preparation has taken on a new and exciting place in American culture and has a significant subject presence on the Web, I wanted to get his thoughts on what sites might hold a special value. — JM

What’s Cooking on the Web Now

The past decade and a half has seen the internet explode in size and ubiquity. Where once searchers relied on a few large databases of recipes and food information, now a simple Google search of ingredient + recipe will yield an overwhelming number of results. Food sites have also grown more specialized and sophisticated. The recipe sites are still there, but there are sites devoted to particular cuisines, techniques, and individual creative voices. Here are some of them:

General

Serious Eats: the Destination for Delicious https://www.seriouseats.com/ epitomizes the modern food website. It features a large collection of recipes searchable by ingredient, technique, cuisine, and more. It also features more in depth articles about particular dishes, techniques, and kitchen gear. Video tutorials and an award-winning podcast also make this site bookmark-worthy. Part of the Gizmodo family of websites, The Takeout https://thetakeout.com/ has recipes and feature articles, but also restaurant and food industry news, video interviews and cooking demos. It also has articles and info on beverages (both alcoholic and non). Eater https://www.eater.com/ expands its food coverage to include restaurants, with both best of lists and industry news. Print and video recipes are also available, as well as grocery guides and gadget reviews. Munchies https://www.vice.com/en_us/section/food is the food branch of the Vice media empire. Offbeat food news, recipes, cooking and travel videos, as well as longer form items can be found here. The Daily Meal https://www.thedailymeal. com/ is “All Things Food & Drink,” and it covers grocery stores, restaurants, as well as recipe and food information. Lots of geographic info (i.e., best X restaurants in all 50 states) and videos too. The Southern Foodways Alliance https:// www.southernfoodways.org/ explores the history and culture of food in the American South. Their site includes many in-depth articles on important people, foods, and locations in the south. There is also a large video library, a

88 Against the Grain / November 2019

podcast, oral history projects, and trails for foods like gumbo, tamales, and barbecue. The Kitchn https://www.thekitchn.com/ has plenty of recipes of course, but also includes shopping recommendations, videos, interviews with chefs and cookbook authors, as well as kitchen décor and design suggestions. The website delish https:// www.delish.com/ has a large searchable database of recipes, menus, and suggestions for holidays and special occasions. Food news, interviews with chefs, kitchen tips, and videos are here as well. New York magazine’s Grub Street http:// www.grubstreet.com/ is a Big Apple-centric food blog, providing news about restaurants and the food industry in the city. But since any New Yorker will tell you they are located at the center of everything, Grub Street also covers national and international food stories, about chefs, cuisines, and particular foods.

Recipes

The Food Network site https://www.foodnetwork.com/ includes a schedule and info about all its shows. It also contains a large recipe database that is searchable by ingredient, meal, and chef/show. There are many videos, including clips from many of the network’s shows as well as web exclusive material. Articles about seasonal and special occasion cooking and kitchen gear recommendations are also to be found. From the same folks that produce Gourmet and Bon Appetit magazines, Epicurious https://www.epicurious.com/ is a recipe website that archives a lot of their recipes as well as food videos, special occasion plans, and expert advice. Allrecipes magazine likewise has a companion website https://www.allrecipes.com/ which contains recipes searchable by ingredient, dish, cuisine, cooking method, and more. The site also contains content from their TV show as well as reference guides and nutrition information. America’s Test Kitchen from Cook’s Illustrated https://www.americastestkitchen. com/ is the only site with a fee to use (after a free trial period). The current season of videos and recipes from the television show is available for free. If you are only going to pay for one cooking site, this is the one. ATK takes a Consumer Reports style methodology both to recipes and product reviews. They are always careful to explain why they have chosen a particular cooking method or kitchen tool, how they tested it, and how it compared to the others.

Specific Foods

Culture magazine https://culturecheesemag.com/ is “the word on cheese,” and their website has plenty of information for lovers of the curd. Recipes that use cheese as well as ones on how to make it are featured along with a blog, longer pieces (both print and video), and even travel information for those who want to find the good stuff wherever they go. Chocablog http://www. chocablog.com/ is one of the longest-running chocolate sites on the net. In addition to recipes (both sweet and savory), they also review many types of chocolate and provide longer pieces on specific kinds and brands. Video how-tos and factory tours help illuminate all the corners of the chocolate world. Make Sushi http://www.makesushi.com/ will help you do just that. From a basic beginner’s guide to elaborate tutorials and a large number of searchable recipes, this site has everything you need to roll your own. A blog and detailed shopping guide of both equipment and ingredients provide even more useful information. Steve Raichlen is familiar to many barbecue fans for his long-running PBS shows. His website Barbecue Bible https://barbecuebible. com/ is perfect for the amateur grill master. There are plenty of recipes as well as longer articles about specific techniques and styles of barbecue. A shopping guide provides plenty of options for books, cookers, equipment, and ingredients. His blog includes longer pieces about barbecue history and famous pitmasters, as well as reviews and recommendations for barbecue restaurants around the country.

History

Atlas Obscura, famous for its cataloging of curious destinations, has a sister site for interesting and offbeat tales of food around the world and throughout history, Gastro Obscura. https://www.atlasobscura.com/gastro The Food Timeline is just what it says, a list of food items and their dates of discovery/ invention. http://www.foodtimeline.org/ Also includes info and recipes for most of them. You will boggle at the four thousand year gap between the invention of noodles and that of instant ramen.

Travel

Eating new and different foods is a big part of vacation travel for many people. There are several types of websites that provide information for travelers to a city or particular area. Let’s plan a hypothetical trip to Louisville, continued on page 89

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Wandering the Web from page 88 Kentucky. Every state has a tourism site, and most have information on food, from local producers and makers to the local dishes that every native craves. Kentucky’s site https:// www.kentuckytourism.com/ky-taste/ features several trails, such as Bourbon, Barbecue, and Beer Cheese. The local Convention and Visitors’ Bureau https://www.gotolouisville.com/ culinary/ will have plenty of tips on things to do, eateries to try, and events to enjoy. Local newspapers like the Courier-Journal https:// www.courier-journal.com/entertainment/dining/ and alternative publications such as LEO Weekly https://www.leoweekly.com/category/ food-drink/ provide plenty for info on the local food scene, usually with much greater depth and context than a traveler would glean from Yelp or other online reviews.

Awards

The James Beard awards are America’s premier culinary prizes. https://www.jamesbeard.org/ has lists of all the past winners and nominees in categories such as restaurant, chef, book, media, and leadership as well as information on upcoming events and programs. A century ago the Michelin Tire Company began publishing a guide to hotels and restaurants around France to encourage motorists to get out and explore. Today the Michelin Guide https://guide.michelin.com/en is acknowledged to be the top guide to the best restaurants in the world. Restaurants are searchable by region/ country, cuisine, and chef to help you plan your gastronomic journey of a lifetime.

Government Sites

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have a Food Safety page https://www. cdc.gov/foodsafety that provides information on safe food handling and storage as well as current food recalls around the country. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s https://www.nutrition.gov/ gives information on healthy eating for Americans, with nutritional information for many common food items and recommended diets for people with certain medical conditions.

Chef pages

Real foodies all have a favorite chef or two. Maybe their cooking style matches your own,

Rumors from page 69 a free registration for the 2020 SSP Annual Meeting to be held May 27-29 in Boston, MA. We appreciate all your comments on this new initiative between Charleston and SSP. Andrew McAfee’s book More from Less: The Surprising Story of How We Learned to Prosper Using Fewer Resources — and

Against the Grain / November 2019

or perhaps you just find them entertaining. Here are two examples of chef websites. Alton Brown https://altonbrown.com/ shot to fame as the host of Food Network’s Good Eats. With a background in video production as well as food, his shows and his site are a great source for interesting and informative recipes and primers on technique, as well as his blog and podcast. Ree Drummond https://thepioneerwoman. com/ began her blog about cooking on a ranch in rural Oklahoma as a creative outlet for herself. It has grown into a TV show, legions of fans, and a brand found across the country. The site still has plenty of recipes and video how-tos as well as updates on the family and Ree’s busy itinerary.

What Happens Next (Scribner). Is that a good Charleston Conference theme for 2020? I like it. Do you? We have a great lineup for the 2019 Charleston Conference! Please don’t miss the Charleston Premiers — Five Minute Previews of the New and Noteworthy, hosted by the marvelous Trey Shelton, University of Florida. Companies/products selected for participation include: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM): ACM Digital Li-

App

Many websites (including several of the ones above) have app versions. Some of these even include shopping lists and nutrition info for use in the grocery store. If you like seafood and only download one food app, make it Seafood Watch from the Monterey Bay Aquarium https://www.seafoodwatch.org/. It lists most types of seafood you are likely to encounter at a restaurant or fishmonger, and it will tell you whether it’s a good choice from an environmental perspective or whether it should be avoided. It also recommends safer/ healthier alternatives.

brary; Atypon: Manuscripts; Atypon: Scitrus; Cambridge University Press: Open Engage; Casalini Libri: Torossa; Covidence: Collaboration Platform; McGraw Hill Professional, Medical: Teaching Cases; McGraw-Hill: AccessEngineering; Morressier: Morressier Premium Discovery; JoVE: JoVE Core; JSTOR: Collaborative Open Access ebook pilot project; and University of Toronto Press: The New Jewish Press (NJP). Whew!!! See you here!!

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Library Analytics: Shaping the Future — Communicating Library Impact through Annual Reports by Kristin Hall (Instructional Designer, Stony Brook University Libraries, Stony Brook University Libraries) and Janet H. Clarke (Associate Dean, Research & User Engagement, Stony Brook University Libraries) Column Editors: John McDonald (EBSCO Information Services) <johnmcdonald@ebsco.com> and Kathleen McEvoy (EBSCO Information Services) <kmcevoy@ebsco.com>

cademic libraries, like other units of higher education institutions, need to demonstrate value to their institutions. This is accomplished through a variety of methods, from formal publications and presentations to informal one-on-one conversations and social media posts. As discussed elsewhere about library assessment websites,1 annual reports are another key method of communicating library value to stakeholders. Annual reports are formal documents for an organization. They may be for internal or external purposes and provide a forum for communicating the goals, accomplishments, and directions of a unit or organization. At Stony Brook University Libraries, the Research & User Engagement division — which encompasses or oversees liaison activities (information literacy instruction and research support), access services, and campus outreach — publishes annual reports on its activities, accomplishments, and goals. For over a decade, the primary purpose of the report was to inform the Dean of Libraries as well as RUE members of its output. It served as a handy source of statistics when University Administration requested certain data points, but mostly, it was an internal document. Over the years, with the intent to make the Libraries, and especially RUE divisional work — because of its outward-facing mission — more visible and relevant to external stakeholders (such as University Administration), we tried to make it more user-friendly with graphics and charts that added some data visualization, but it continued to be very jargony and inward-focused. ACRL’s 2010 Value of Academic Libraries and 2017 Academic Library Impact reports, which clearly describe the imperative to communicate to our external stakeholders in deliberate, intentional ways, helped us reconceptualize the entire report in concrete and effective ways. We also drew from theories such as multimedia learning and cognitive load theory to design the annual report. ACRL has identified specific areas of institutional missions that academic libraries can and do impact, and should explore to further increase their value: student enrollment, retention, graduation rates; student success, achievement, learning, experience, engagement; faculty research productivity, grant proposals, grant funding, teaching; and institutional reputation and prestige. These research agenda areas should be used to shape or revise library missions, visions, and strategic directions in collections, services, and programming to ensure that academic libraries

90 Against the Grain / November 2019

contribute maximum value to institutional outcomes (ACRL, 2010). The Impact Report outlines six priority research and action areas that can help libraries more effectively communicate their contributions to institutional missions. 1). Communicating the library’s impact to the institution requires libraries to present the library’s contributions using terminology that is easily understandable by the institutional/ higher education stakeholders, raise awareness of the library’s participation in missional areas to those outside of the library, and leverage the library’s unique position of serving all students and majors. 2). Matching library assessment to the institution’s mission requires libraries to work with campus partners and departments to collaborate on common issues and goals, work with teaching and learning support services as well as faculty and students to build a culture of assessment, and align assessment activities to the institution’s strategic directions. 3). Including library data in institutional data collection requires libraries to have their data included in the systematic data collection processes and analyses of the institution to better connect the library with research, teaching, learning, and student success. 4). Impact on student success has become the most significant way for institutions to demonstrate their value to their stakeholders, and libraries can quantify their impact in this area with data and assessment of library resources, programs, spaces, library instruction for student success, and other data points. 5). Libraries must show the ways they contribute to critical thinking, student learning and engagement, and use spaces, collections, and programs to enhance learning and engagement. 6). And libraries must collaborate with other partners and units on campus and at other institutions to improve student learning and success. The Impact Report stresses that the first priority area — communicating the library’s contribution to the institution — is the most important, and that the other five areas support this priority area in more specific ways (46). Indeed, a library that is adequately achieving the other five priority areas, but isn’t communicating its value effectively, through reports and other methods, may still fail to demonstrate its value to its stakeholders, which would be extremely unfortunate. Lewin and Passonneau (2012) noted that “[i]nstitutions will not place high value on libraries if stakeholders cannot discern the positive impact library activities have on scholarship and teaching activities” (p. 91). Moreover, at least half of the 10 “next

steps” identified in the white paper, Library Integration in Institutional Learning Analytics (Institute of Museum and Library Services, 2018, p. 7), involve communicating value or prioritizing user stories or impact narratives to further facilitate greater library integration with institutional data and analysis of student learning and success. With these ACRL recommendations in mind, we then applied multimedia learning theory to guide the visual redesign and presentation of our divisional annual report. We wanted to present a report that external stakeholders could view, process and easily understand the impact the University Library had on the University community.

Multimedia Learning Theory

Multimedia learning theory developed by Richard Mayer (2009) is based on several assumptions including what Mayer calls the active processing or SOI framework (selecting, organizing and integrating information), limited capacity of working memory and dual coding. This theory is guided by several principles with the fundamental belief that individuals learn better with words and pictures than with words alone. It guides the creation of multimedia materials to help foster learning while reducing extraneous processing. The SOI framework developed by Mayer (2009) is a way to describe active processing during learning. This includes selecting relevant information, organizing this information in a meaningful way and integrating this new knowledge into existing schemas. When learning new information, our working memory has a limited capacity in what it can process at one time. Research has found the average person can hold seven plus or minus two pieces of information in working memory at any one time (Miller 1956). When there is too much information to process beyond what an individual’s working memory can handle, they can experience a cognitive overload (Sweller, 1988). This is especially true when the viewer has limited background knowledge (in this case, academic library work) and when information is unorganized. The viewer is using their working memory to figure out the meaning and/or organize the information in a way that makes sense to them. If this is too complicated, the viewer may overlook important information or possibly give up reviewing the material completely. This cognitive load can be reduced by organizing information continued on page 91

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Library Analytics ... from page 90 for the viewer, grouping relevant information together (chunking), drawing attention and emphasizing important information, and removing any information that is not essential. The third assumption of Richard Mayer’s theory is Dual Coding. This means presenting information using words and visuals (whether this is spoken or written words and static or moving images). Dual coding helps the viewer process and retain information more effectively.2 When the presenter uses meaningful words and appropriate images together, they are organizing and chunking information for the reader which can help the viewer process information better. Organization of information in a meaningful way was essential. We organized each area within the division focusing on the mission, vision and goals outlined in the Libraries’ strategic plan. Each area highlighted their accomplishments for the year for each goal and provided statistics and images to support these accomplishments in the higher education language of student and faculty success. Each section was set up in the same way so the areas were easily recognizable as the viewer turns the pages. This design was intentional so the viewer does not use valuable working memory trying to figure out where to find information or have to unpack library jargon. (See Figure 1.) Icons were created and used throughout the annual report. These icons allow the viewer to easily recognize each area including academic engagement, access and user services, research and emerging technologies, campus engagement and assessment. (See Figure 2.) Icons were also used on the back cover of the report to maximize the impact of the report’s highlights and to reinforce the dual coding utilized throughout the report. (See Figure 3.) Another aspect of organizing information for the viewer is to emphasize important information. This was shown throughout the report by using larger font, bold colors and strategically placing

Figure 1. Consistent organization in all sections, linking accomplishments back to the Libraries’ strategic plan.

Figure 3. Strategic use of icons and dual coding principles on the back cover of report for additional emphasis. this information where viewers would be drawn. Rather than listing all of our statistics, we organized and emphasized the numbers that we knew were important for our external stakeholders to recognize. (See Figure 4.)

Redesign Outcomes

Figure 2. Use of icons and dual coding to brand the unit titles.

Against the Grain / November 2019

Using the ACRL’s Impact Report as a roadmap, then, the principal goal of the newly redesigned report was to communicate the library’s contribution to the University’s mission of student success, faculty research and productivity, and diversity. These contributions are clearly out-

lined first, strategically framing the rest of the document (Stony Brook University Libraries, 3). In addition, the new design accomplished the following: • We highlighted data points and library assessment that matched or resonated with the University’s mission, such as campus partnerships that accomplished mutual goals for student and faculty success. • We included data points that directly contributed to the University’s data collection, such as continued on page 92

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Library Analytics ... from page 91 the library’s direct role in high impact educational practices such as the general education learning outcomes. • We quantified the Libraries’ impact by highlighting data points that could be easily understood by external stakeholders. • We showed the Libraries’ year-round efforts at campus engagement, highlighting new programming and increased attendance at events. • We recognized new campus and external partnerships to demonstrate the Libraries’ active engagement with the communities it serves.

Challenges

As with any project, there were some procedural and technical challenges in creating the annual report. There were some obstacles in obtaining and/or gaining access to data. Different units had different ways of reporting and there was inconsistency in the way information was reported (example: health sciences instruction statistics vs. main campus instruction statistics). This required us to edit and rewrite some areas to obtain a cohesive report. In addition, connecting the report to our strategic process required reflection and time that we didn’t always have to invest. Technically, conceptualizing and creating the report was time-intensive. We were fortunate to have a member of our staff with a design background to layout this report in Adobe InDesign. However, this posed another difficulty in that all editing fell to this one staff member. We plan to explore design tools that are more familiar to more staff.

Conclusion

We are pleased with the improvements of the report’s content and visual presentation. Going forward, we would like to incorporate impact narratives that can further integrate library data with institutional data and analysis of student learning and success. We would also like to use this report as a template for other levels of reporting, vertically and horizontally across the library organization, so that we are all intentionally and consistently incorporating ACRL’s recommendations for communicating library value into our reporting practices. A link to our full annual report can be found here: https://library.stonybrook.edu/ wp-content/uploads/2019/06/RUEAnnualReportFinalSinglePages.pdf.

92 Against the Grain / November 2019

Figure 4. Example of emphasizing important information with font, colors, and placement on page.

References

Association of College & Research Libraries. (2017). Academic Library Impact: Improving Practice and Essential Areas to Research. Prepared by Lynn Silipigni Connaway, William Harvey, Vanessa Kitzie, and Stephanie Mikitish of OCLC Research. Chicago: Association of College & Research Libraries. Association of College and Research Libraries. (2010). The Value of Academic Libraries: A Comprehensive Research Review and Report. Researched by Megan Oakleaf. Chicago: Associate of College and Research Libraries. Hall, K., and Clarke, J.H. (Forthcoming). Communicating Library Impact through the Assessment Website in the 2018 Library Assessment Conference Proceedings. Institute of Museum and Library Services. (2018). Library Integration in Institutional Learning Analytics. Prepared by Megan Oakleaf. Accessed November, 2018.

Lewin, H.S., and Passonneau, S.M. (2012). An Analysis of Academic Research Libraries Assessment Data: A Look at Profesional Models and Benchmarking Data. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38 (2), 85-93. Mayer, Richard. (2009). Multimedia learning, (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Miller, George A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychology Review, 63 (2), 81-97. Paivio, A. (2006). Mind and Its Evolution. New York: Psychology Press. Stony Brook University Libraries. (2018). Research & User Engagement 2017-2018 Annual Report. Retrieved from https://library.stonybrook.edu/wp-content/ uploads/2019/06/RUEAnnualReportFinalSinglePages.pdf. Sweller, John. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12 (2), 257-285.

Endnotes 1. Hall and Clarke, “Communicating Library Impact through the Assessment Website” in the 2018 Library Assessment Conference Proceedings (forthcoming). 2. For a more in-depth review of dual coding theory, see Mind and Its Evolution: A Dual Coding Theoretical Approach by Allan Paivio.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Epistemology — The Tests of Time Column Editor: T. Scott Plutchak (Librarian, Epistemologist, Birmingham, Alabama) <splutchak@gmail.com> http://tscott.typepad.com

was so sure she’d been there having dinner with me. I remembered so clearly how she looked, what she’d ordered. But she was equally adamant she’d never been to that restaurant, certainly not with me, not that evening years back. “I can prove it!” I’ve kept a daily log for over thirty years. There’d be evidence. But I was wrong. I’d been there alone. I’d written her a letter, described what she would have eaten if she’d been with me, imagined what she would’ve been wearing. Then I created a memory that was better than real. I guess love can do that to you. Our memories are notoriously flawed, a fact that has fascinated me ever since I first came across the work of Elizabeth Loftus when I was a teenager. Oh, wait. Her first books didn’t come out until I was in my early twenties. I just checked. So I’ve learned not to trust my memories. I started keeping a journal around age fourteen (I think — that first notebook’s in a box in the attic, so I can’t easily dig it out to see the date). I keep five year diaries and the daily logs. Multiple ways to cross check what I remember happening against what I can document. Our cultural memory is grievously flawed as well. This morning there’s news of a candidate for U.S. Senator from Alabama ranting against the “homosexual activities” and “wife swap shows” on television destroying our country’s moral core. He says we need shows that promote “the biblical principles on which our nation was founded.”1 Yesterday over lunch I read Jill Lepore emphatically pointing out in her book These Truths that the country “was not founded as a Christian nation.” As she points out, “[t]he United States was founded during the most secular era in American history … It is no accident that the Constitution does not mention God.”2 The candidate has cultural memory. Lepore has documentation. Lots of it. Which is stronger? The documentation is unreliable. My diaries and logs are far from complete. How does any diarist know which of a given day’s events will be the ones that matter the most when it comes to understanding a life in full? So it is with the stuff of history. “Most of what once existed is gone. Flesh decays, wood rots, walls fall, books burn. Nature takes one toll, malice another. History is the study of what remains,… [M] ost of what historians study survives because it was purposely kept — placed in a box and carried up to the attic,

Against the Grain / November 2019

shelved in a library, stored in a museum, photographed or recorded, downloaded to a server — carefully preserved and even catalogued. All of it, together, the accidental and the intentional, … is called the historical record, and it is maddeningly uneven, asymmetrical, and unfair.”3 Umberto Eco and Jean-Claude Carrière make similar points in their charming dialogue This Is Not The End of The Book. Eco emphasizes, “…we are not even-handed with the cultural objects that we choose to preserve. For example, if you want to buy an original of one of the great comic strips it is horribly expensive, because they are so rare…. But why are they so rare? Simply because the newspapers that used to publish them threw the plates in the bin the moment the strip had been printed.”4 The successful printers of the incunabula age made their money from indulgences, playing cards, and pornography, almost none of which survives. Gutenberg’s glorious bibles, which we’ve carefully preserved, bankrupted him. Carrière adds, “… if you look carefully, a horrific proportion of our libraries is made up of books written by the utterly talentless, or by halfwits and crazy people. The great majority of the 300,000 scrolls kept in the Library of Alexandria are bound to have been complete rubbish.”5 We romanticize what’s been lost. We fetishize the documentation of the past. As written records have shifted to digital formats over the past three decades, there’s been an endless drumbeat of dire warnings over what’s being lost. The kinds of records — letters, for instance — that have been the basis of so many fine literary biographies simply aren’t being written anymore. When I took up the position of Director of the Lister Hill Library in 1995, and wanted to trace the arc of certain key decisions made by my predecessors, there were binders of chronologically arranged memos for me to refer to. Within a year or two I abandoned the practice of writing and printing official memos. My communications became more informal, decisions traced and documented in emails. What memos there were existed only in digital form. I worried that my successors wouldn’t be able to trace my decision making in the same way. True enough — not in the same way. But my digital files still exist. And not just the official end products. Much more of the context has been saved than would’ve been the case with paper. Despite the use of the delete key, most of us do a poor job of organizing and prun-

ing our digital files. So I’ve got twenty years of my time at Lister Hill on a flash drive, ready to be mined. But what do I do with it? When UAB’s archivist, Tim Pennycuff, was assiduously trying to wrest the boxes of personal papers from the office of one of the previous university presidents, Dr. McCallum kept putting him off, saying that first he needed to do some weeding. “No, no!” we’d cry. “Let Tim do the sorting. He’s the professional.” We knew what McCallum wanted to expurgate. His was an era of deals and favors and bargains behind closed doors, scores kept and vendettas waged. What he’d eventually allow into the archives would be the “clean” record. The official account. Far from the whole truth. That kind of cleansing is much more difficult now. (Using “deep fakes” to rewrite the historical record is an entirely different matter). There is a far more detailed record of the minutiae of the life of a typical Facebook user than could ever have been gathered for even a fairly prominent person of a hundred years ago. But who is charged with keeping it? It’s not that we lack the stuff; we lack the tools and systems and workflows to make sense of it all. Here’s Nicholas Carr: “When we complain about information overload, what we’re usually complaining about is ambient overload. This is an altogether different beast. Ambient overload doesn’t involve needles in haystacks. It involves haystack-sized piles of needles. We experience ambient overload when we’re surrounded by so much information that is of immediate interest to us that we feel overwhelmed by the neverending pressure of trying to keep up with it all.”6 That digital stack of needles upends Lepore’s comment about the historical record being mostly things “purposely kept.” The archivist sorts and sifts a messy carton of a hodge-podge of corporate records, selects what they believe to be the most telling and relevant ones and catalogs and preserves them. Archival best practices were developed in the world of print because it wasn’t practical, in any sense, to keep everything. But with a mass of digital records perhaps it isn’t practical, in any sense, to do anything other than keep everything. Take this flash drive containing twenty years of my decision making. Sure, there’s a lot of junk in there. But what would be the point of having a trained archivist sort through it, deleting everything that they decided isn’t an essential part of the historical record? The sensible thing is to use the kinds of refreshing techniques that digital preservationists now have in hand to keep the whole corpus together and mine it for whatever insights and stories can be revealed. I used to tell skeptical administrators that the archivist’s superpower wasn’t knowing what to keep, it was knowing what to continued on page 95

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Let’s Get Technical — Holistic Collection Assessment by Meghan Burke (Metadata/Electronic Resources Librarian, Marymount University) <mburke@marymount.edu> and Gwen Vredevoogd (Collection Development Librarian, Marymount University) <gvredevo@marymount.edu> Column Editors: Stacey Marien (Acquisitions Librarian, American University Library) <smarien@american.edu> and Alayne Mundt (Resource Description Librarian, American University Library) <mundt@american.edu> Column Editor’s Note: In this issue’s column, we profile how one library decided to pilot a collection evaluation project. Meghan Burke, Metadata/Electronic Resources Librarian and Gwen Vredevoogd, Collection Development Librarian, at Marymount University describe a holistic approach to assess their collections based on program reviews. — SM & AM

Introduction

While we constantly are performing basic collection maintenance, the librarians at Marymount University realized it had been well over a decade since the library collection had been assessed for content. Program collection profiles were woefully out-of-date, and the collection needed a more intensive evaluation.

Problem

Assessing library collections in a meaningful way at a small liberal arts university can be challenging. At Marymount University, our small size and curriculum-driven collection means we need more granular information to truly analyze our collection. Luckily, there is no shortage of studies on assessing library collections, and a review of the literature led us to Madeline Kelly’s method of holistically assessing library collections program-by-program1, which seemed to provide what we wanted, so in the spring 2019 we began to plan how to pilot this over the next academic year. In the spring and early summer, we identified the programs to be assessed, the cycle, and the data to be gathered. Our fiscal year ends in the summer, so this was when we gathered the information the liaison librarians would need and developed a template to guide what they should be assessing and to capture observations and decisions made during the process.

Process

By conducting collection assessment at the programmatic level, we hope to determine strengths and weaknesses in the relevant content areas and formats in order to establish any changes needed in our support of the degree program. Specifically, does the program review indicate new content areas or shifts in focus that we need to consider? And what types of resources are most useful to the program? (For example, some disciplines may prefer electronic over print, or vice versa). We decided to select several programs that had conducted program reviews in 2018-2019, gathering various data that would inform how best to support that program moving forward, determining if areas supporting the program needed to be weeded or updated, and revising

94 Against the Grain / November 2019

program profiles that detail how the library’s collection supports the program. We wanted a mix of graduate and undergraduate programs of different sizes. When several programs that had undergone review fell to the same librarian, we asked them to select just one program to assess. The program reviews conducted by departments gave us an idea of how the faculty plan to meet its goals over the next five years, so ideally, we would assess each program every five years. Once we determined how we wanted to evaluate the collection and which programs to include we needed to determine the data points to use to assess the collection. For our pilot year, we chose a mix of qualitative and quantitative data. Liaison librarians will be provided with the program review itself, along with the most current data available on the use and perception of the library’s print and electronic collections in the relevant subject areas. On the quantitative side, data includes: • Electronic resource usage statistics for the 2018 annual year for databases, e-journals, eBooks, and streaming media, in COUNTER format, when available • Total cost and calculated cost-peruse of each electronic resource • A report of physical item circulation by Library of Congress classification • Interlibrary loan statistics for both print and electronic resources, and data on the books requested through our consortium-loan service to determine gaps in the collection • Database overlap analysis, upon request On the qualitative side, in addition to the program review, we will evaluate: • Sample syllabi and course assignments from the chosen programs • Collections-related data from the library’s bi-annual faculty satisfaction survey, where faculty members self-identify by department We would like additional direct measures for student use of the collection. Possibilities to gather this information include evaluation of a selection of the bibliographies of student work (available through our Office of Planning and Institutional Effectiveness), an informal student survey about the collection, perhaps conducted at the circulation desk, or librarian-gathered data about which resources are

taught and most frequently used during library instruction sessions.

Outcomes and Anticipated Challenges When we identify changes that need to be made to support the programs assessed, the final steps will be to weed the collection and update it with new, more relevant content, cancelling or reallocating funds to more useful electronic materials, and if necessary, adjusting our budget allocations for print and e-resources to best reflect the needs and use of the collection by the programs. We have some reservations about the sustainability of assessing the collection this way. While assessing the collection program-by-program is much more thorough and breaks down the process so we are not trying to assess the entire collection in one year, it is a process that will need to be repeated each year as programs complete their reviews. Assessing the collection by program also places the responsibility for assessment on the liaison librarian, who will then consult with Collections to make decisions about the collection. While liaisons are responsible for collecting and weeding their content areas, this assessment is more prescribed and in-depth than undertaking a summer weeding project, or regular selection of materials. Despite these concerns, we are excited to see the results of this year’s pilot and hope it will allow us to curate a collection that will serve our students and faculty the best we can.

Assessing the Pilot After the initial pilot is complete, we should have the information to produce updated program profiles and the ability to easily identify areas to weed, update, and new resources or tools needed to purchase/subscribe. The three librarians participating in the pilot will also be providing feedback about the process itself and the usefulness of the data points we provided. Once we have completed the first round, we will make necessary improvements to the process and determine if this is the best method for collection assessment.

Tips (so far) for Starting your Own Holistic Collection Assessment • Use the program review as a jumping-off point to make the assessment more meaningful and timelier by tying it to a preexisting cycle. continued on page 95

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

Let’s Get Technical from page 94 • Identify the data points you already collect and select those that would be the most useful. • Explore ways to add useful data points you do not already collect, if possible. • Start small and see if this will work locally to work out any issues before it becomes programmatic. • Make sure you have support from library faculty and staff moving forward both to gather data and help with the assessment pieces. Larger institutions may need a dedicated position to provide support. • If you use Alma, become familiar with generating reports in Analytics or make friends with the person in your library who does this.

Endnote 1. Kelly, M. M. (2014). “Applying the Tiers of Assessment: A Holistic and Systematic Approach to Assessing Library Collections.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(6), 585-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. acalib.2014.10.002.

Epistemology from page 93 throw away. But the 21st century archivist needs to be a data and text miner rather than a careful selector. When designing a data collection tool, one tries to imagine all of the questions one might want to ask of the data. You want to avoid the situation of coming up with a great question and realizing you can’t address it because you didn’t gather the right data in the right format at the start. Librarians and archivists and curators have made educated guesses over the centuries about what to preserve and what to discard. Those decisions, even more than the accidents of war and fire, have constrained the stories that historians can tell us about how we came to be. In the last decades of the 20th century there was a great deal of justified anxiety over the preservation of digital formats. We’ve learned a lot since then. We understand redundancy and error-checking and transporting from older formats to new. The challenges aren’t technological as much as they are social and organizational. Process. The failure of the Library of Congress’s project to establish an archive of all of Twitter is a cautionary tale of opportunity lost.7 Although it was launched with great fanfare, LOC was never able to muster the resources that would’ve been required for it to live up to the hype. I’m sympathetic to the budgetary and technical challenges that the project presented, but saddened nonetheless at the decision to revert to print-world principles of selection. Now only those tweets “with historical significance” will make it to the archive. How can we know? We can’t tell if something will endure through time if we don’t keep it in the first place. It’s been the responsibility of the “memory institutions” — libraries, archives, museums — to maintain the historical record over centuries. That’s shifting. Scholarly journal publishers are sharing responsibility for developing preservation programs and protocols that are beyond

Against the Grain / November 2019

Visit us at table #113 Play our trivia game and you could go home with a Srub Daddy!

the capabilities of most libraries. Think Portico. LOCKSS. But these touch only a tiny fragment of what constitutes “the culture.” The corporate behemoths that own the servers on which our digital culture resides haven’t made long-term preservation a priority. Twitter and LOC took a stab at it. But it’s going to take more robust partnerships, led by the experts in the memory institutions and funded by the corporations building the global infrastructure, to figure out who is going to be responsible for what and how it is all going to be paid for. I hope they hurry. I need to know where to send that flash drive.

Endnotes 1. Koplowitz, Howard. “John Merrill: ‘Homosexual activities, wife swap shows’ ruined TV.” Al.com. July 15, 2019. https://www.al.com/ news/2019/07/john-merrill-homosexual-activities-wife-swap-shows-ruined-tv.html 2. Lepore, Jill. These Truths: A History of the United States. W.W. Norton & Co., 2018. pp. 199-200. 3. Lepore, Jill. These Truths. A History of the United States. W.W. Norton & Co., 2018. p. 4. 4. Eco, Umberto and Jean-Claude Carrière, with Jean-Phillippe de Tonnac. This Is Not the End of the Book. Northwestern University Press, 2012. p. 17. 5. Eco, Umberto and Jean-Claude Carrière, with Jean-Phillippe de Tonnac. This Is Not the End of the Book. Northwestern University Press, 2012. p. 200. 6. Carr, Nicholas. “Situational overload and ambient overload.” Rough Type: Nicholas Carr’s Blog. March 7, 2011. http://www.roughtype. com/?p=1464. 7. Daley, Jason. “The Library of Congress Will Stop Archiving Twitter.” Smithsonian.com. December 27, 2017. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/library-congress-will-stop-archiving-twitter-180967651/.

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG PROFILES ENCOURAGED

Anton Angelo Research Data Coordinator University of Canterbury Private Bag 4800 Christchurch, New Zealand Phoner: 027 509 7905 <Anton.angelo@canterbury.ac.nz>

Born and Lived: Gore, NZ. Lived in Dunedin, London, Amsterdam and Christchurch. Professional Career and Activities: Digital Librarian. Have been an IT Trainer/Support, Web developer, Business Development Consultant, Project Manager, Bookseller, Santa Claus. Favorite Books: Cryptonomicon, LOTR, The Thirteen Clocks.

Pet Peeves: Leggings aren’t trousers. Philosophy: Anarcho-syndicalist.

Most memorable career achievement: Helping Douglas Adams get his email in 1994. How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: Libraries will be guardians and promoters of local unique data, available to the world.

Dr Anke Beck CEO IntechOpen The Shard, 32 London Bridge Street London SE1 9SG Phone: 0044 20 3457 0462 <anke@intechopen.com> www.intechopen.com

Born and lived: I was born near the German university town of Göttingen where Robert Bunsen was born, the Grimm brothers taught and Max Planck died. I left the area when I was 19 to work in Namibia, where I later taught. I started to study in Regensburg, then Mainz, and went with a scholarship to study at SOAS in London, had a little stop-over in Boulder, Colorado and through a collaboration with one of SOAS partner institutes I returned to Germany to do my PhD. With my previous publisher, who appointed me first as Vice President, and had branches in Boston, Beijing, Munich, Vienna, Basel, there was lots of moving around, but, much to my regret, I never had the chance to stay there for longer than a business trip. Now I’m in London again, hopefully permanently – inshallah – given Brexit. Asia is still on my list for the future. I am very curious to live there for longer. Professional career and activities: My first publishing experience was with Mouton. Given my academic background: the publisher of my dreams! Eventually, I oversaw the whole of the Humanities and STEM program of De Gruyter, Berlin, both HSS and STEM. In my years there I headed up the editorial side of the US office and we later expanded our publishing programmes into China. We grew through many mergers and acquisitions and by partnering with University Presses. When people began talking about open access I was immediately fascinated: this was what scholars always wanted: research at their fingertips, no boundaries, no limitations: free access to what is important to them. Endless access to content. I knew that the model risked cutting into traditional revenue streams but there was no other way. At De Gruyter, we bought Versita, a pure OA publishing house, grew the numbers of journals and expanded the model to OA books and programs. Open access makes so much sense in the academic world and it reflects what scholars want, though there are things I want to improve upon.

96 Against the Grain / November 2019

Besides my day joy, I serve on the advisory board of the Rat für Informationsstruktur (RfII. German Council for Information structure) It is part of the German Ministry of Education and Research. We focus on the topic of Research Data – Sustainability – Internationality, in the area of digital data. http://www.stm-publishing.com/anke-beck-appointed-to-german-council-for-information-infrastructure/. I also serve on the board of one university and one Centre for Advanced Studies. It is important for my work to keep one foot in academia, to monitor changes but also the needs of today’s academic system. Family: One of each: one daughter and one husband

In my spare time: …I like to see or listen to things which challenge what I saw or listened to before, be it the recent exhibit in the Tate Modern by Olafur Eliasson or music by John Adams “Harmonielehre.” Favorite books: Both the academic writings of Siri Hustvedt, and also her literature books. Pet peeves: People who say one thing but mean the other... Philosophy: “Life is short – have dessert first.”

Most memorable career achievement: The opening of the Beijing office for my previous employer. This was quite a challenge. There were absolutely no resources to make it happen but an intern, the Chinese bureaucratic apparatus rejected the application again and again and again – and we had no idea why. At some point, I found out: it was because, as press, we belonged to the category “tendency operations.” Encouraged by Eleanor Roosevelt´s motto “do one thing every day that scares you,” I took a desperate step, invited myself to the Chinese Embassy in Berlin, invited the (then) Cultural Attachée and invited him to see our “harmless 260 years-old publisher.” He and a whole delegation came to see us. And then like a miracle, papers finally got through and we could employ our first member of staff. I hope that I can do something similar for IntechOpen in the near future. Goal I hope to achieve five years from now: There are lots of things happening in open access but the key goals I have are to be a more active part of the transformation to a world of knowledge without boundaries, to include more geographical areas and institutions and give them visibility on the academic landscape without compromising on quality. AI offers so much potential that I can only imagine how that can support our systems and digital workflows. I am excited by the future and want to make sure we are agile enough to embrace new technologies quickly to support academia.

Dr. Robin Burgess Senior Research Data Librarian The University of New South Wales UNSW Library (level 5) Sydney NSW 2052 Australia Phone: 0293858161 <r.burgess@unsw.edu.au>

Born and Lived: Born in the UK moved to Australia (Sydney) 4 years ago. Professional Career and Activities: I have a First Class Honours degree in Environmental Biology and a PhD in Biosciences where I specialised in the management of research data both quantitative and qualitative to devise a mixed method approach to be able to analyse data and develop decision support systems. I undertook Postdoc research incontinued on page 97

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Profiles Encouraged from page 96 vestigating mapping performance culture in the city of Nottingham during the 1860s, developing an online mapping tool, database and website. I worked as a Research Information Manager at The Glasgow School of Art for 6 years. This is where my love and real interest in Non-Traditional research came about and how to manage non-traditional data and outputs. I designed and developed the repository for the school which was a very successful achievement. I then moved to Sydney and took up the post of Repository and Digitisation Manager at The University of Sydney. In this role I was responsible for the running of the repository and digitisation services and looking for new opportunities. I played an important role in the procurement of a new repository platform for the University. I then moved to UNSW and became their Senior Research Data Librarian. In this role I manage the publication of data sets to Research Data Australia and our data management platform for the development of research data management plans. From my career background and current state, it is clear I have a real interest in data and how it is managed, handled, presented and used. I’m currently interested in the application of FAIR and embedding this into the data management work I’m doing. Favorite Books: I love the author Kurt Vonnegut, his books Sirens of Titan and Breakfast of Champions are excellent. I’ve recently started reading and enjoying Jo Nesbo’s books, especially The Thirst and The Bat. And i’ve just finished reading Muriel’s Wedding and Picnic at Hanging Rock, two classic Australian books! Pet Peeves: Hmm... When my cat wakes me up at 2am, purring in my face! Philosophy: “Your song you sing it into me, my hope you breathe in me” (Neilson Hubbard taken from the album ‘Sing into me’ and song of the same name) Most memorable career achievement: Becoming a Dr (getting my PhD) and having the opportunity to move across the world to Australia to continue doing a job I really enjoy, working with data and understanding its management. And I probably should mention something a little different, I have written tunes on the guitar about data management which I have performed at conferences in the UK and internationally, these were well received and something a little different! How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: I think BOOKS will have a revival!! At the moment libraries are moving away from books and going digital for everything. I think books will have a comeback, like with the music industry and the return of vinyl. It will be seen as “cool” again to read and use physical books.

Eleni Castro OpenBU and ETD Program Librarian Boston University Libraries 771 Commonwealth Avenue Boston, MA 02215 <elenic@bu.edu>

Born and Lived: Born in Montreal, Canada. Lived in Montreal, San Diego, and Boston. Professional Career and Activities: Worked on digital initiatives and libraries for over a decade. My work has included advocating for open and equal access of scholarly works, and curation of open research data as well as providing guidance on digitization, curation, preservation, and discovery of digital collections. Majored in History and received an MA in Library and Information Studies from McGill University.

Chris Erdmann Library Carpentry Community & Development Director California Digital Library 302 Millsford Hill Pl Cary, NC 27518 Phone: (617) 817-2826 <Christopher.Erdmann@ucop.edu>

Professional Career and Activities: Christopher Erdmann is an author, developer, and experimenter in the areas of digital libraries, social networking, library UX, interactive technologies, bibliometrics, and data services in libraries. He is currently the Library Carpentry Community and Development Director at The Carpentries and the California Digital Library. Chris will be working with the Library Carpentry community and The Carpentries to start mapping out the infrastructure for growing the community, formalizing lesson development processes, expanding its pool of instructors, and inspiring more instructor trainers to meet the demand for Library Carpentry workshops around the globe and thus reach new regions and communities. He has previously worked for organizations such as North Carolina State University, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, European Southern Observatory, Supreme Court of the US, United Nations, University of Washington, Smithsonian, and CNET. Chris holds an MLIS from the University of Washington iSchool and a BA from the University of California, Davis.

Sven Fund Managing Director Knowledge Unlatched Wartburgstrasse 25a 10825 Berlin Germany Phone: +491725114899 <sven@knowledgeunlatched.org> www.knowledgeunlatched.org

Born and lived: Born in the unpronounceable town of Georgsmarienhuette, lived in the countryside in Lotte, the university city of Muenster, in St. Louis, MO, for a year, in Basle, Switzerland for four years. Happy citizen of Berlin since 2008. Early life: I was raised in the countryside, which made me a tree person. I have very happy memories of growing up in a family that understood to give freedom and yet set ambitious goals, and I am trying to hand this on to my own children. Which makes me realize how difficult it can be at times to find the right balance. Professional career and activities: As a kid of the end of the Cold War, I studied Political Science and History – a great choice in the 1990s, since so much was going on! I started working in the wild days of the Internet, and some might even say in one of the (European) epicentres of developments at the time, in 2000. After seeing a lot of different portfolio companies from a corporate development perspective and in an operational role of the Bertelsmann Club, I left to become CEO of Birkhaeuser in the gorgeous city of Basle, Switzerland. I loved to work with a great team there, turning the business around. Subsequently, I held different roles within what is now SpringerNature and which Birkhaeuser was a part of. In 2008, I relocated to Berlin to become De Gruyter’s CEO. A completely different challenge in growing, digitizing and internationalizing a traditional publisher. After seven years and a very gratifying time there came the first dip in my career – I got laid off. Fortunately, that was early enough in my life and I got involved with Knowledge Unlatched soon thereafter. In 2016, the founder of KU, Frances Pinter, wanted to move on to other projects (and she has a lot of exciting projects!) and I bought Knowledge Unlatched from her. KU is what I always wanted to do, and I am working here with a very creative and dedicated team. Family: Patchwork family with two great teenagers continued on page 98

Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Profiles Encouraged from page 97

the Harvard University Archives in collection management, circulation, and preservation. He was recently President of the New England Archivists.

In my spare time: I enjoy spending time with family and friends. I also travel a lot.

How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: Far greater integration of and emphasis in open scholarship, infrastructure, and resources!

Favorite books: Changes almost every month – that’s the fate of working with librarians and publishers…

Pet peeves: Oh, don’t get me started. I dislike narrowmindedness and ideological prejudice – in business, for sure in politics, and in everyday life.

Collections Strategist for Institute Publications MIT Libraries 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139 <mssimon@mit.edu>

Philosophy: Not wise enough for a philosophy.

Most memorable career achievement: Only time will tell.

Goal I hope to achieve five years from now: I am here to help make Open Access work, beyond real hurdles and ideologies. How/where do I see the industry in five years: Academic publishing has changed a lot over the past 20 years – and I am convinced it will do so even more in the next two decades. In addition to thriving new market entrants, we will see a lot of publishers not being able to adapt. But I see a “golden age” for researchers, with much more understanding of and control over their research output. All in the ecosystem need to actively safeguard freedom of speech and integrity.

Erin Jerome Open Access & Institutional Repository Librarian University of Massachusetts Amherst/Du Bois Library Du Bois Library, Room 1967 54 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA 01003 Phone Number: (413) 545-2174 <ewjerome@library.umass.edu>

Born and Lived: Born in Red Bank, NJ. I grew up in NJ, went to college in CT, did the required post-college year in NYC, and moved to Boston for graduate school in 2005. I’ve lived in MA since then, first in the Boston area and now in central MA. Professional Career and Activities: I began working in libraries as a graduate student employee while pursuing my Ph.D. in Musicology. I had the opportunity to be a part of the launch of Brandeis University institutional repository and that was my “eureka” moment – when I knew what I actually wanted to do with my career. I finished my Ph.D. in 2011 and began working as a full-time library employee at Brandeis in Access Services. I eventually became the manager of Brandeis’ IR, but left in May 2016 to join the Scholarly Communication department at the University of Massachusetts Amherst as their IR manager. I still occasionally perform as a chamber musician (I’m a pianist) and am a pretty serious knitter and baker. Favorite Books: Annihilation (the Southern Reach Trilogy), Possession, The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Klay, The Bone Clocks. Most memorable career achievement: Getting the job offer for my current position!

Colin Lukens Repository Manager Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication Widener Library G-20, Harvard Yard Cambridge, MA 02138 <colin_lukens@harvard.edu>

Born and Lived: Born in Green Bay; Lived in Minneapolis, London, Boston. Professional Career and Activities: Prior to joining the Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication, he spent a decade at

98 Against the Grain / November 2019

Mikki Simon Macdonald

Professional Career and Activities: I have been with the MIT Libraries for 13 years, first as a collections and processing Archivist, then as the Metadata Archivist, and now as a Collections Strategist.

Amanda Makula Digital Initiatives Librarian Copley Library, University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 <amakula@sandiego.edu>

Born and Lived: I was born in Iowa City, Iowa, and graduated with my M.A. in Library and Information Science from the University of Iowa. The Midwest will always hold a special place in my heart, but my chosen home is San Diego, where I’ve lived for the past three years, and am in absolute love with the city! Professional Career and Activities: I served as Research & Instruction Librarian at Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois, for twelve years. When the college adopted an institutional repository in 2015, I found a new calling: advancing open access and innovations in scholarly communication. I began working at the University of San Diego in December 2016 as Digital Initiatives Librarian, where I manage and promote the IR, liaise to the Ethnic Studies department, and spearhead the “Digital Initiatives Symposium,” an annual two-day event drawing international leaders and practitioners in open access and the scholarly communication revolution. Favorite Books: Everything by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and Sherman Alexie; The Oxford Project by Peter Feldstein; Imagine Me Gone by Adam Hazlitt is haunting and exquisite. Truth and Beauty by Ann Patchett is riveting and disturbing and I find myself thinking about it years later. Most recently I read How to Be Alone by Lane Moore. I loved its darkness, humor, honesty, and relatability. Pet Peeves: When people say “liberry” instead of “library.” Shudder!

Philosophy: It changes frequently, but right now I’m digging the wisdom of Jagger and Richards: “You can’t always get what you want / But if you try sometimes, well, you might find / You get what you need.” Most memorable career achievement: At Augustana: Authoring the application that won our library the ACRL “Excellence in Academic Libraries Award.” At USD: Launching the “San Diego Lowrider Archival Project,” which showcases and preserves the history of lowriding in San Diego and the surrounding borderlands from the mid-twentieth century to the present day: https://digital.sandiego.edu/lowriders/. How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: In a fascinating presentation, “Radical Collaboration: Designing Libraries to Advance Open Scholarship” Greg Eow of MIT predicted a future in which scholarly communication issues are at the core of all library operations and values. Every aspect of library work – acquisitions and collections, instruction, service, etc. – will be tied in some way to advancing open continued on page 99

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Profiles Encouraged from page 98 and interactive knowledge. Job descriptions will change to reflect these new priorities, with Eow going so far as to say that all units may report to the Scholarly Communication department! I agree that the work of librarianship is changing dramatically; I expect it to look quite different in 5-10 years, with librarians being not so much in the library as all over campus, becoming more embedded at all stages of the knowledge production and dissemination processes.

Nigel Newton Founder and Chief Executive Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 50 Bedford Square London WC1B 3DP UK Phone: 020 7631 5600 <nigel.newton@bloomsbury.com> www.Bloomsbury.com

Born and lived: San Francisco, Cambridge, UK, and London.

Early life: Schoolboy in San Francisco serving Mass as an Altar Boy at the Convent of The Sacred Heart whilst Haight-Ashbury raged around me, missing entirely the Summer of Love. Had a draft card number. Just missed Vietnam too.

Institutional Repository Librarian University of Massachusetts Medical School Lamar Soutter Library 55 Lake Avenue North Worcester, MA 01655 Phone: (508) 856-4368 <lisa.palmer@umassmed.edu> Born and Lived: I grew up in Rhode Island and have lived in Massachusetts most of my adult life. Professional Career and Activities: I spent the earlier part of my career as a corporate librarian and cataloger for Digital Equipment Corporation, Compaq Computer Corporation, and Hewlett-Packard. I started my position at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in 2003 as a cataloger and have been the Institutional Repository Librarian since 2009. How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: The Open Access movement will continue to decrease the economic and legal barriers between scholarly research and those who want to learn from it and expand upon it. Open access papers and open data will become increasingly prevalent in the biomedical literature and in repositories. Library subscriptions to toll access journals will decrease and pay-per-view access to journal articles will increase.

In my spare time: Family, reading, walking, music, wine, working with the disabled, and working for Cuckmere Haven SOS. Favorite books: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang by Ian Fleming. The English Patient by Michael Ondaatje. The Anarchy by William Dalrymple (just published – read it – best book ever). Pet peeves: “Moving forward” “a sandwich lunch will be served.” Philosophy: Hope for the best.

Most memorable career achievement: Career – starting Bloomsbury. Family – seeing our daughter Alice aged 11 singing Joseph in Joseph and the Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat in the school play. Goal I hope to achieve five years from now: Keep on truckin’. Publish some books which shift world thinking on the big challenges: environmental, social, political, personal. Publish some books which entertain or amuse people. How/where do I see the industry in five years: Technology will continue to provide new ways for us to deliver and package content to users in ways that better support research and instruction – we’re already seeing this to a certain extent but I believe that this will rapidly accelerate in the coming years, especially given the explosion of interest in and use of streaming. There will also be greater numbers of open access books and the market infrastructure surrounding it will be more developed, standardised and sophisticated. The wider openness and discovery of research will in turn fuel a more networked and sharing ecology for information, with a greater sense of books being “without borders.”

Natasha Simons Associate Director Australian Research Data Commons AIBN Building 75 The University of Queensland St Lucia QLD 4070 Australia <natasha.simons@ardc.edu.au>

Professional career and activities: BA in English from Cambridge University. Macmillan Graduate Trainee scheme. Sidgwick & Jackson Publishers. Started Bloomsbury in 1986. Family: Married Joanna, then advertisement manager of The Bookseller trade magazine, in 1981, one month before Charles and Diana. Family of Joanna and our children Catherine, William, Alice and Digby the dog.

Lisa Palmer

Professional Career and Activities: Natasha Simons is Associate Director, Skilled Workforce, for the Australian Research Data Commons. With a background in libraries, IT and eResearch, Natasha has a history of developing policy, technical infrastructure (with a focus on persistent identifiers) and skills to support research. She works with a variety of people and groups to improve data management skills, platforms, policies and practices. Based at The University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, Natasha is co-chair of the Research Data Alliance Interest Group on Data Policy Standardisation and Implementation, Deputy Chair of the Australian ORCID Advisory Group and co-chair of the DataCite Community Engagement Steering Group.

Micah Vandegrift Open Knowledge Librarian North Carolina State University D. H Hill Library 2118 2 Broughton Dr., Campus Box 7111 Raleigh, NC 27695 Phone: (919) 515-2175 <mlvandeg@ncsu.edu>

Professional Career and Activities: Agitator and advocate for a more open scholarship and research ecosystem. Philosophy: Access for all

Most memorable career achievement: Fulbright-Schuman Research Fellowship, 2018-2019. How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: Librarianship will continue to contend with and evolve toward open knowledge as a core part of what we do. We will be the catalyst for equitable change in the higher education industry and broadly in society. continued on page 100

Against the Grain / November 2019

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Profiles Encouraged from page 99

Andrew Wesolek Director, DiSC: Digital Scholarship and Communications Vanderbilt University 2209 Garland Ave. Office #109 Nashville, TN 37212 <andrew.j.wesolek@vanderbilt.edu>

Favorite Books: Right now: The Age of Surveilance Capitalism (Zuboff) and Stoner (Williams). Pet Peeves: Cities constructed around cars as the primary mode of transportation. Most memorable career achievement: Publishing Making Institutional Repositories Work with Burton Callicott and Dave Scherer. How/where do you see the industry in 5 years: Increasingly open and as a result, increasingly focused on critical evaluation of information (in scholarship and media).

Professional Career and Activities: Scholarly Communication Librarian Utah State University (2011-2013) Head of Digital Scholarship, Clemson University (2013-2015) Director, DiSC, Vanderbilt University (2018-present).

COMPANY PROFILES ENCOURAGED Bloomsbury Publishing Plc London offce: Bloombury Publishing Plc. 50 Bedford Square London WC1B 3DP UK New York Office: Bloomsbury Publishing 1385 Broadway, 5th Floor New York, NY 10018 USA Phone: London Office: +44 (0)20 7631 5600 New York Office: +1 (212) 419 5300 Websites: https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/ https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/ Officers: Nigel Newton, Founder and Chief Execuitve.

Association memberships, etc.: Association of American Publishers, UK Publishers Association. Key products and services: Academic monographs, scholarly general interest titles, digital resources, textbooks, in addition to providing sales, marketing, and “white label” services for client publishers; quality consumer fiction and nonfiction. Core markets/clientele: Academic libraries, researchers, students, and consumers on the trade side. Number of employees: 700

Number of books published annually (print, electronic, open access, etc.): c. 1400

Total number of books on your backlist (print, electronic, etc.): 30,000+

History and brief description of your company/publishing program: Bloomsbury Publishing is a leading independent publishing house, established in 1986, with authors who have won the Nobel, Pulitzer and Booker Prizes, and is the originating publisher of Harry Potter. Bloomsbury Academic and Bloomsbury Digital Resources publish books and online products in the humanities, social sciences, law, and visual arts. Imprints include Methuen Drama, The Arden Shakespeare, T&T Clark, Fairchild Books and The British Film Institute. Bloomsbury’s adult trade division was shortlisted for Trade Publisher of the Year in the IPG Independent Publishing Awards (2018) and, alongside our special interest list, shortlisted for the British Book Awards’ Publisher of the Year, 2018. The division includes the imprints Bloomsbury Publishing, Bloomsbury Circus, Raven Books and Absolute Press. Bloomsbury publish in the UK

100 Against the Grain / November 2019

Khaled Hosseini, Margaret Atwood, Elizabeth Gilbert, William Dalrymple, Lisa Taddeo and Ann Patchett. Our Children’s Division was shortlisted for Children’s Publisher of the Year 2018 for both the Independent Publishing Group Award and the British Book Awards, our children’s consumer division includes the bestselling authors J.K. Rowling, Michael Rosen, Sarah J. Maas, Debi Gliori, Sarah Crossan, Lucy Worsley, Sibeal Pounder, Louis Sachar and Neil Gaiman. Is there anything else that you think would be of interest to our readers? Bloomsbury Digital Resources now offers nearly twenty online products covering a range of disciplines including visual art and architecture, fashion, drama, philosophy, education, history, religion, film studies, and more. IntechOpen Limited The Shard, 25th floor, 32 London Bridge Street London SE19SG UK Janeza Trdine 9 51000 Rijeka Croatia EU Phone: +44 (0) 20 3457 0462 https://www.intechopen.com/ Officers: Dr. Anke Beck, CEO; Dr. Sara Uhac, COO; and Dan Brooker, CFO. Association memberships, etc.: Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) International Association of STM Publishers Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) – https://publicationethics. org/become-member Creative Commons (CC) – https://network.creativecommons.org/signup/ International DOI Foundation (IDF) – https://www.doi.org/ Crossref – https://www.crossref.org/membership/ CLOCKSS – https://clockss.org/community/participating-publishers/ Research4Life COUNTER – https://www.projectcounter.org/become-a-member/ – https://www.projectcounter.org/members-section/?action=private ORCHID – https://orcid.org/about/membership continued on page 101

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

ATG Profiles Encouraged from page 100 Key products and services: Open Access Book Publishing

Core markets/clientele: The scientific community of editors, authors, readers from the Physical Sciences, Engineering and Technology, Life Sciences, Health Sciences and HSS areas. Number of employees: Not all of them are Full Time Equivalants — Croatia - 75; London - 10; Spain - 2; Berlin - 1. Number of books published annually (print, electronic, open access, etc.): 900-1,000

Total number of books on your backlist (print, electronic, etc.): 4,272 Open Access Books (based on data collected Aug20th 2019)

History and brief description of your company/publishing program: IntechOpen is the world’s leading publisher of Open Access books founded in the year 2004 by scientists to provide a collaborative environment for peer-reviewed content and book publishing of academic research for other scientists. IntechOpen is a scientific community comprising of 116,000 authors and academic editors and a publisher of more than 4,200 Open Access books. Is there anything else that you think would be of interest to our readers? The company was set up by scientists, who faced problems accessing research that was behind paywalls, hence the slogan we use: by scientists for scientists.

Back Talk from page 102 first night and day after the explosion — all of whom died shortly after the exposure. Twenty kilometers further north looms a half-completed cooling tower in the familiar shape. The reactor that blew was the fourth to go into operation on the site, with two more under construction and six more beyond that on the plans. Now the two unfinished reactors and their cooling tower sit rusting in the sunlight. By contrast, Reactor Four, the culprit, looks surprisingly normal. A giant half-cylinder containment structure has recently been built over the reactor and its original concrete containment. The nuclear material below these structures will take another 24,000 years to cool itself into innocuousness. Work continues around it to manage containment and further cleanup — those are the workers who spend about three months a year right there. Two miles further on is the ghost town of Pripyat. At its peak, 50,000 people lived there, people with good jobs, careers, and prospects. The growth of the reactor complex meant that promotion and good pay were all but guaranteed. The hulks of a hotel, another cultural center, and an amusement park with its iconic still-standing Ferris wheel are all to be seen. One building has a partly collapsing

Against the Grain / November 2019

Knowledge Unlatched GmbH Wartburgstrasse 25A 10825 Berlin Germany www.knowledgeunlatched.org Officers: Dr. Sven Fund (Managing Director), Catherine Anderson (Sales), Max Mosterd (Analytics & Operations), Philipp Hess (Publisher Relations). Association memberships, etc.: OASPA, ALPSP

Key products and services: KU Select, 15 partner Projects, KU Open Funding, KU Open Analytics.

Core markets/clientele: Academic libraries, researchers, academic publishers (STEM/HSS). Number of employees: 15

Number of books published annually (print, electronic, open access, etc.): We don’t publish books, instead we help our partners publish books Open Access, on average 1,000 titles per year. Number of journals published annually (print, electronic, open access, etc.): 19 journals have been made open access already, 14 more are in pledging for 2019. History and brief description of your company/publishing program: KU was founded in 2013 as a initative to create a link between libraries that want to support OA and publishers that want to transform their publishing programs into Open Access. Is there anything else that you think would be of interest to our readers? More information about KU’s core service for libraries, KU Select, is available at knowledgeunlatched.org/ku-select. More information about KU partner projects is available at knowledgeunlatched.org/ku-partners-quick-overview.

sign on the roof: “The atom should be for the workers, not for the soldiers.” It was hard not to be both sad and confused. All is so quiet, nature is so powerful (wildlife is returning to the area in abundance, secure from human predators), and everything looked so normal on a summer’s day — still, one couldn’t help but imagine the inferno and the tragedies of that time. And then it was on to Athens and IFLA-WLIC. Lessons learned? Our modern societies depend absolutely on the huge complexity of scientific learning that we capture in libraries; and at the same time depend on the currency of that information to deal with situations where human ambitions outrun current technology. Racing ahead to expand our knowledge is essential to avoiding disasters. But one is also forced to meditate on the long term. Chernobyl is a microcosmic example of what we can fear from other planetary disasters. It’s a reminder that the preservation of what humankind knows and the accessibility of the information that we preserve must not be taken for granted. As we go about our daily chores and deeds, we should remember that the seemingly less urgent tasks of preservation are not ones to be allowed to drift down our to-do lists. The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone will be a toxic waste dump for another 24,000 years — can we hope in libraries to be sources of enlightenment for an equally long period? When will there once again be a library in the Exclusion Zone of Chernobyl?

<http://www.against-the-grain.com> 101

Back Talk — When Spooky is Normal: Lessons Learned while Visiting Chernobyl Column Editor: Ann Okerson (Center for Research Libraries) <aokerson@gmail.com>

here are no libraries in the Exclusion Zone of Chernobyl. The 30-kilometer radius area to which access is allowed only with considerable precautions is cut off from all the realities of our profession still, nearly 35 years after the disaster. So what’s a librarian to learn from going there? We were on our way to the IFLA World Congress, meeting this year in Athens, Greece. IFLA, as I’ve written before on these pages, is a wonderful organization in many ways, best of all for bringing together serious professionals from — genuinely — all over the world (this year 140 countries). There are plenty of Euro-Americans in attendance, of course, but the halls are filled as well with colleagues (and by the time you’ve gone to a few of these conferences, friends) from Sub-Saharan Africa, the former Soviet Union, the Middle East, East and Southeast Asia, and all the lands beyond. The great benefit of attendance is the way it reminds one to think of our profession and its issues in a context beyond the great privileges we enjoy as rich Westerners. And, I like to use the IFLA trips to look even further than the rooms full of professional colleagues. How can I use this couple of weeks in the late summer to expand my field of vision further? Well, why not go to Chernobyl (Ukraine is three hours flying time from Greece)? Let me tell a little story. Chernobyl is the name of the town 20 kilometers south of the reactor complex near the Ukraine-Belarus border where extraordinarily bad Soviet management led to the worst nuclear disaster the planet has yet seen. The recent

HBO series tells the story powerfully: a stress test on a new reactor went badly, steam built up and blew the lid off the reactor, and the consequent exposure to oxygen ignited an explosion and fire that scattered incredibly toxic debris to the atmosphere, where winds from south and east carried the debris to western Europe and (especially) north into neighboring Belarus. Over 100 villages (or hamlets) had to be abandoned completely and the “company town” of Pripyat, a couple of miles from the reactor, was evacuated and now left to deteriorate slowly. It will be some 24 millennia before humans can permanently live and thrive again in this area. Since 2010, one can visit the sites. I hasten to say that it’s perfectly safe to do so — in the sense that the continuing levels of radiation are now low enough that the exposure one receives from going there for a day tour is trivial. All who enter carry radiation detectors and dosimeters as a precaution, and those are examined when one leaves the area. Upon departure, we learned that the radiation picked up that day was about a quarter of what one would get from spending two days in Denver, Colorado. (Higher altitude brings one closer to the largest nuclear reaction in the solar system — the sun

ADVERTISERS’ INDEX

39 Accessible Archives 2 ACS Publications 52 Adam Matthew Digital 53 Adam Matthew Digital 17 American College of Physicians 29 American Psychiatric Association 59 ASME 5 ATG 69 Berghahn Books 13 Bloomsbury Digital Resources 49 Bloomsbury Digital Resources 55 Brepols Publishing 81 The Charleston Advisor

10 The Charleston Report 47 CHOICE 85 CLOCKSS Archive 15 Cold Spring Harbor Lab Press 21 ECS | IOP Publishing 67 Emery-Pratt 3 GOBI Library Solutions 19 Harrassowitz 27 The IET 103 IGI Global 73 Infobase 43 INFORMS 31 Innovative Interfaces Inc.

77 International Monetary Fund 25 ISSN International 95 Marcive, Inc. 104 Midwest Library Service 35 The MIT Press 23 Modern Language Association 7 The Optical Society 9 Project MUSE 71 Rittenhouse Book Distributors 11 The Royal Society Publishing 89 University of California Press 65 University of Chicago Press 61 Wolters Kluwer

For Advertising Information Contact: Toni Nix, Ads Manager, <justwrite@lowcountry.com>, Phone: 843-835-8604, Fax: 843-835-5892.

102 Against the Grain / November 2019

— which is why one also gets radiation from airplane flights.) That’s not to say the Chernobyl area is 100% safe in every way. Workers who continue to spend their days very close to the reactor (gathering data, working on core-cooling, doing routine maintenance as well) are carefully monitored and usually manage about three months in a calendar year working before being pulled away for having reached the normal limit of one year’s safe exposure — it’s vastly better than the situation in the days and months after the explosion and safe enough for tourism. About 6,000 service providers live in Chernobyl village, providing basic services like food and medical care — 3,000 stay for 15 days, return home to Kyiv, as the next 3,000 return for their next 15-day shift. And so on. Our tour guide and driver is a dentist in Chernobyl. Having gone to dental school on a government scholarship, he was obligated to work for three years as assigned by the State, but he liked Chernobyl so much (peaceful, quiet, lots of verdant growth) that he’s stayed for 7.5 years so far. What does one see? The drive is about 2.5 hours from Kyiv — where my only relatives live — on increasingly bumpy roads. (The drive, especially with poor suspension, may be more dangerous than the lingering radiation!) At a checkpoint at the 30-kilometer mark, visitors and workers register their ID or passport details, tourists collect radiation devices, and we drive on. The first stop is the site of one of the abandoned villages, where a “cultural center” built in 1959 is being swallowed up in forest the way temples around Siem Reap (Cambodia) yield to the jungle. Then in a few kilometers comes the town of Chernobyl itself. The town was spared the worst of the disaster and is now the headquarters and residence for the people who work on site, such as our tour guide dentist. He too stopped to get his personal radiation-recording device, part of the usual routine for all workers. Chernobyl itself looks like a western military base: boring, cheap architecture, spread out, Soviet bureaucracy style. The one striking stop was at a newly refurbished Orthodox church (in Ukraine as in Russia, there is money for churches these days) with a memorial to the dead of the disaster. The number of official victims is tiny — mainly the firemen who were stationed a few hundred yards from the reactor and who scrambled to put out the fire on the continued on page 101

<http://www.against-the-grain.com>

IGIGlobal

Publisher of Peer-Reviewed, Timely, and Innovative Academic Research Since 1988

www.igi-global.com

InfoSci-Books ®

A Database of 5,300+ Reference Books Containing Over 100,000+ Chapters Focusing on Emerging Research Annual Subscription Price (2000-2020) Offered As Low As: US$ 9,450*

One-Time Perpetual Purchase for Current Copyright Year (2020) Offered As Low As: US$ 20,500

*See Site for Details and Receive an additional 5% Discount When you Sign up for IGI Global’s Free Library Account www.igi-global.com/library-account-program

Spanning 350+ topics in 11 core subject areas including business, computer science, education, social sciences, science and engineering, and more, IGI Global’s InfoSci-Books database is an ideal resource for research and academic-focused institutions.

Provide an Additional Source

Key Features:

of Open Access Funding For Your Institution Through Your

• No Set-up or Maintenance Fees • Guarantee of no More Than a 5% Price Increase • COUNTER 5 Compliant Reports • Downloadable MARC Records • Archival Access Preservation Through CLOCKSS and LOCKSS • Persistent URLs at any Time • Unlimited Simultaneous Users • No Embargo of Content (Research is Available Months in Advance of the Print Release) • No DRM • And More.

InfoSci-Books Investment For any library that invests in IGI Global’s InfoSci-Books database, IGI Global will match the library’s investment with a fund of equal value to go toward subsidizing the OA article processing charges (APCs) for their students, faculty, and staff at that institution when their work is submitted and accepted under OA into an IGI Global journal.* *The fund will be offered on an annual basis and expire at the end of the subscription period. The fund would renew as the subscription is renewed for each year thereafter. The open access fees will be waived after the student, faculty, or staff’s paper has been vetted/accepted into an IGI Global journal as requested by the author(s) of the paper. Libraries in developing countries will have the match on their investment doubled.

To Learn More About IGI Global’s InfoSci-Books Database, Visit:

www.igi-global.com/e-resources/infosci-databases/infosci-books/ www.igi-global.com

facebook.com/igiglobal

twitter.com/igiglobal

Against the Grain v31 #5 November 2019

Articles inside

Communicating Library Impact through Annual Reports

Profiles Encouraged People and Company Profiles

Hey Vendors, Do You Really Understand Your Marketplace?

Food Websites

Management

Sarah Howard

Writing in Mathematics

Nigel Newton

Dr. Anke Beck

Dr. Sven Fund