“In July, Macmillan announced that come November, the company will only allow libraries to purchase a single copy of its new titles for the first eight weeks of their release—and that’s one copy whether it’s the New York Public Library or a small-town operation that’s barely moved on from its card catalog. This has sparked an appropriately quiet revolt. Librarians and their allies quickly denounced the decision when it came down, and now the American Library Association is escalating the protest by enlisting the public to stand with libraries by signing an online petition with a populist call against such restrictive practices. (The association announced the petition Wednesday at Digital Book World, an industry conference in Nashville, Tennessee.) What’s unclear is whether the association can get the public to understand a byzantine-seeming dispute over electronic files and the right to download them….”
“As we move toward a more openly accessible research environment, progress is often framed in terms of increasing access to original studies and associated data published in peer reviewed scholarly journals indexed in databases like Web of Science and Scopus. However, there is a growing awareness that a large body of high quality research from the Global South (aka developing countries in Latin America, Africa, & much of Asia) is not part of that scholarly communications environment. Much of this research is already open access, but because major western databases don’t index most of those journals, it does not register in terms of traditional bibliometrics that use citation counts to measure the impact of authors, their articles and the journals they publish in. For example, just 4% of Latin American peer reviewed journals are included in Web of Science. What can libraries do to help increase the visibility and impact of this large and growing body of research from the Global South? This panel gathers researchers, librarians and policy experts to explore new and innovative ways to change the ways we both access and assess research outputs, and why that is important….”
“The ACRL Research and Scholarly Environment Committee (ReSEC) is seeking community input on proposed revisions to the ACRL Policy Statement on Open Access to Scholarship by Academic Librarians, approved by the ACRL Board of Directors during the 2016 ALA Annual Conference….
Please review the draft revision (PDF) on the ACRL website and send your feedback by July 1, 2018 to Steven Harris (email@example.com)….”
The Reference and User Services Association (RUSA) announces that its Reference and User Services Quarterly (RUSQ) journal will move to open access beginning with the fall 2017 issue.
RUSQ disseminates information of interest to reference librarians, information specialists and other professionals involved in user-oriented library services. The decision to move RUSQ from subscription based to open access was based on many factors, most notably the open access movement strongly supported by librarians. Other factors include ensuring a continued pool of strong authors and articles, ease of access for readers as well as broader worldwide access as the cost for professional journal subscriptions is extremely prohibitive.
“The American Library Association (ALA), the oldest, largest and most influential library association in the world is seeking an Associate Executive Director (AED) Publishing, to head our Publishing Department….
ALA is looking for a leader who will take part in if not lead discussions that are going to be complex, but necessary, given the changing publishing market, the rise of library publishing in the academic sphere, and the librarian-led movement toward the use of open educational resources, including open textbooks, in the LIS pre-service and continuing professional education markets….”
“After a month of intense conversations and negotiations, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) will bring the ‘Fair Access to Science and Technology Research (FASTR) Act’ up for mark-up on Wednesday, July 29th. The language that will be considered is an amended version of FASTR, officially known as the ‘Johnson-Carper Substitute Amendment,’ which was officially filed by the HSGAC leadership late on Friday afternoon, per committee rules. There are two major changes from the original bill language to be particularly aware of. Specifically, the amendment Replaces the six month embargo period with ‘no later than 12 months, but preferably sooner’ as anticipated; and Provides a mechanism for stakeholders to petition federal agencies to ‘adjust’ the embargo period if the12 months does not serve ‘the public, industries, and the scientific community.’ We understand that these modifications were made in order accomplish a number of things: Satisfy the requirement of a number of Members of HSGAC that the language more closely track that of the OSTP Directive; Meet the preference of the major U.S. higher education associations for a maximum 12 month embargo; Ensure that, for the first time, a number of scientific societies will drop their opposition for the bill; and Ensure that any petition process an agency may enable is focused on serving the interests of the public and the scientific community …”
“Impact is multi-dimensional, the routes by which impact occur are different across disciplines and sectors, and impact changes over time. Jane Tinkler argues that if institutions like HEFCE specify a narrow set of impact metrics, more harm than good would come to universities forced to limit their understanding of how research is making a difference. But qualitative and quantitative indicators continue to be an incredible source of learning for how impact works in each of our disciplines, locations or sectors.”