Notes from Discussion Groups: Objective 8. Respond to the crisis in scholarly communication by clarifying alternatives for publishing outlets for faculty and others at the university.
Group #2885
Facilitator: Zsuzsa Koltay
Note-taker: Marijo Wilson
LMT: Tom Hickerson, Ross Atkinson
Attending: Teresa Ehling, Rich Entlich, David Fielding, Anna Korhonen, Terry Kristensen, Greg Lawrence, Leah Solla
The Objective
- KEY CONCLUSION: “A multi-level shared vision [of alternative publishing system] within the library, the university, and the academy” does not exist.
Objective #8 should be reworked with emphasis on formulating this multi-level shared vision (would also support Objective #7. Operate an electronic publishing program … )
- Need to identify the nature of the crisis
- The “crisis” is 20+ years in the making
- Problem is international in scope, not just US-centric
- Flow of scholarly information increasingly restricted and costly
- Science/engineering publishing is actually thriving; humanities is suffering
- Need to inform key stakeholders on current trends in the flow of scholarly information
- Lay foundation for increased use of alternative publishing against eventual failure of the current system
- Acknowledge that faculty have different set of concerns in utilizing alternative publishing outlets (visibility and prestige, tenure and career advancement); communicate clearly the impact on them of the use of alternative outlets
- Acknowledge generation gap – older faculty established on journal editorial boards; younger faculty have different focus, needs
- Define the Library’s role now in scholarly communication process and where it needs to go
- Library administration must take the lead in pushing for a mandate for change to alternative publishing
Implementation
- Identify stakeholders (faculty and departments, etc.)
- Alert to current publishing system deficiencies
- Query them for their perspective on communication flow in their fields; identify needed changes
- Acknowledge the role of the US government, private industry, public corporations
- Educate library staff on the issue; staff needs to buy into the justification of the library promoting alternative publishing outlets.
- Actively maintain a website on alternative publishing issues, what Cornell is doing, new developments, etc.
- Integrate aspects of the promotion of publishing outlets in job descriptions, evaluations
- Focus efforts locally on encouraging humanities faculty to adopt self-publishing
Potential partners
- Other academic libraries
- ARL
- SPARC
- Professional and learned societies
- Cornell University Press and other University Presses; university press system needs to be strengthened; partnership with libraries
- US government -- a major player in funding as well as producing
- Cornell needs to assume a leadership role in defining this “multi-level shared vision”
Measures of Success
- Educational: An informed faculty and educated staff
- Practical: Practices established to facilitate alternative publishing