Guest Post – Library Publishers Convene in Vancouver to Discuss Open Platforms and Open Educational Resources – The Scholarly Kitchen

From May 8 to 10th of this year, about two hundred librarians, publishers, and all flavors in between gathered at Simon Fraser University (SFU) in Vancouver for the 6th annual Library Publishing Coalition Forum. The Pre-Conference on Wednesday, May 8th, focused on Open Educational Resources, had about 90 attendees. The open theme carried over into the main event with presentations on open publishing platforms of many kinds.

Increased interest in open platforms and open tools has grown after continuing industry consolidation of hosting and authoring tools — namely, Wiley’s acquisition of the Atypon platform and the latter’s subsequent purchase of the Authoria and Manuscript tools, along with Elsevier’s shift in emphasis on the researcher workflow with acquisitions of the Mendeley Scholarly Collaboration Network, Aries’ Editorial Manager, and the institutional repository provider, Bepress. Many posts here in the Scholarly Kitchen have focused on this trend and highlighted concern of vendor lock-in, as well as smaller publisher concerns of being “locked out.” 

With so many open platforms in the mix today, one focal point of the meeting was SFU’s own John Maxwell, who presented preliminary findings from an environmental scan of open source publishing conducted by MIT Press and funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. (Full disclosure: I currently work for the MIT Knowledge Futures Group, but I had agreed to present at this meeting while still employed by the open annotation tool creator Hypothesis.)

With a full report scheduled for later this summer, Maxwell detailed the scope and process of the scan, which hopes to create a catalog of approximately 50 open source projects itemized with their main approaches, key partners, codebases, and more….”

Humanities Scholars and Library-Based Digital Publishing: New Forms of Publication, New Audiences, New Publishing Roles | Journal of Scholarly Publishing

Abstract:  The rise of library-based digital scholarly publishing creates new opportunities to meet scholars’ evolving publishing needs. This article presents findings from a national survey of humanities scholars on their attitudes toward digital publishing, the diversification of scholarly products, changing perceptions of authorship, and the desire to reach new audiences. Based on survey findings, the authors offer recommendations for how library publishers can make unique contributions to the scholarly publishing ecosystem and support the advancement of digital scholarship in the humanities by accommodating and sustaining more diverse products of digital scholarship, supporting new modes of authorship, and helping scholars reach broader audiences through interdisciplinary and open access publishing.

Developing a Business Plan for a Library Publishing Program

Abstract:  Over the last twenty years, library publishing has emerged in higher education as a new class of publisher. Conceived as a response to commercial publishing practices that have strained library budgets and prevented scholars from openly licensing and sharing their works, library publishing is both a local service program and a broader movement to disrupt the current scholarly publishing arena. It is growing both in numbers of publishers and numbers of works produced. The commercial publishing framework which determines the viability of monetizing a product is not necessarily applicable for library publishers who exist as a common good to address the needs of their academic communities. Like any business venture, however, library publishers must develop a clear service model and business plan in order to create shared expectations for funding streams, quality markers, as well as technical and staff capacity. As the field is maturing from experimental projects to full programs, library publishers are formalizing their offerings and limitations. The anatomy of a library publishing business plan is presented and includes the principles of the program, scope of services, and staffing requirements. Other aspects include production policies, financial structures, and measures of success.

Making the Move to Open Journal Systems 3: Recommendations for a (mostly) painless upgrade

Abstract:  From June 2017 to August 2018, Scholars Portal, a consortial service of the Ontario Council of University Libraries, upgraded 10 different multi-journal instances of the Open Journal Systems (OJS) 3 software, building expertise on the upgrade process along the way. The final and the largest instance to be upgraded was the University of Toronto Libraries, which hosts over 50 journals. In this article, we will discuss the upgrade planning and process, problems encountered along the way, and some best practices in supporting journal teams through the upgrade on a multi-journal instance. We will also include checklists and technical troubleshooting tips to help institutions make their upgrade as smooth and worry-free as possible. Finally, we will go over post-upgrade support strategies and next steps in making the most out of your transition to OJS 3. This article will primarily be useful for institutions hosting instances of OJS 2, but those that have already upgraded, or are considering hosting the software, may find the outlined approach to support and testing helpful.

UVA Library, UVA Press Partner to Make Original Scholarship Freely Available | UVA Today

“Students and parents often and understandably object to the high cost of textbooks, and colleges and universities also incur high costs to make academic research in scholarly journals available to students and faculty alike.

It’s a problem that affects everyone – students, researchers and scholars, the colleges and universities where they work, and the public who often have no easy access to the latest studies. A new partnership at the University of Virginia aims to solve these problems and to make new knowledge more readily available – and free.

Called “Aperio,” the new digital publishing partnership between the University Library and University of Virginia Press employs the latest technology to produce what’s called “open access” to research, scholarship and other educational materials – eventually including textbooks. (“Aperio” is a Latin word meaning “to uncover, to open, to make public.”) …”

Building Capacity for Academy-Owned Publishing through the Library Publishing Coalition

Abstract:  Library publishing is both a growing area of interest in academic libraries and an increasingly visible subfield of scholarly publishing. This article introduces the field of library publishing—and the opportunities and values that make it unique—from the perspective of the Library Publishing Coalition (LPC). The LPC is an independent, community-led membership association of academic and research libraries and library consortia engaged in scholarly publishing, and it is the only professional association dedicated to this emerging area of librarianship. In its first five years, LPC has produced a robust set of resources to support library publishers, including the annual Library Publishing Forum, the annual Library Publishing Directory, and a variety of freely available professional development resources. It has also built a strong community of members and an extended network of affiliates. This paper presents and contextualizes these accomplishments and shares new developments and future directions for the Library Publishing Coalition.

The Academic Library in the Face of Cooperative and Commercial Paths to Open Access

Abstract:  This paper sets out the place of the academic library within the digital-era developments of open access to research and scholarship. It analyzes how this development, now that open access is becoming a scholarly norm and common goal for scholarly publishing, is taking two forms, both of which are about making the move, if not a flip, from the subscription model for the circulation of journals to that of open access. The paper sets out the terms and instances of the two paths to open access. The one is a commercialization of open access publishing dominated by the large corporate academic publishers that are pursuing open access on their own terms through the article processing charge (APC) and in relation to the acquisition and development of scholarly communication infrastructure. The other, older tradition, if still on a smaller scale, is one of cooperation and collaboration, growing out of the commons that the library has always represented, involving libraries, journals, and archives, as well as open source tool and platform development. There is some crossover between the two paths, between library consortia and corporate publishers, and this paper encourages librarians to consider how they might take advantage of the market for publishing services that the two paths are creating amid the move to universal open access as a scholarly norm.

Five Reasons Why Publishing Science for Profit Will Endure

[Access may require registration.]

Big Deals Are Actually a Good Deal….

Prestige Matters….

Boycotts Are Largely Symbolic….

Preprint Archiving Is Not Universal….

Publishing Quality Science Is Difficult and Expensive….