Browsing by Subject "scholarly communication"
Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Beyond Web-based Scholarly Works Repositories: The effect of institutional mandates on the faculty attitudes towards Institutional Repositories(2014-03-25) Tmava, Ahmet Meti; Alemneh, Daniel; University of North TexasIn the last decade there has been a push from academic institutions to encourage faculty to deposit their work in web-based scholarly work repositories, commonly known as institutional repositories (IR). IRs are responsible for collecting and preserving the intellectual works of faculty and students and making them widely available. In light of the ever-evolving landscape of higher education, IRs seek to move beyond the custodial role and actively contribute to the advancement of scholarly communication. Understanding and addressing the issues faced by IRs requires a multidimensional approach that involves all stakeholders including: individual scholars and researchers, academic institutions and librarians, scholarly and scientific society publishers, commercial publishers, and government institutions. However, most researcher (Kim, 2010) agree that the main players are faculty members that can make-or-break an IR. In spite of the fact that IRs are an innovation in scholarly communication they have been met with a resistance from faculty members. Academics have been slow to embrace the concept of IRs, according to recent studies by Primary Research Group (2014), only 5% of journal articles published by the faculty members of the organizations have been archived in the IR. While a range of factors seem to influence use of repositories by researchers there is still no agreement how to resolve the challenge of getting authors to deposit content. The most recent survey by Nicholas et al (2014) suggested that while the size and use of repositories has been relatively modest, almost half of all institutions either have, or are planning, a repository mandate requiring deposit. However, Crow (2002) warned that faculty submission will have to be voluntary or risk encountering resistance from faculty members who might otherwise prove supportive. The current situation of IRs is rather bleak and calls to question the effectiveness of the current ways of recruiting content, including institutional mandates. Nicholas et al argue that mandates vary based on the research community and/or institution. Their findings reveal that none of the participating institutions reported any attempt to force researchers to comply with the mandate and describe the current mandates as more educational rather than binding. The same study concludes that 22 percent of the researchers were directly influenced by mandate to deposit their work, and this varied based on the age. Thus, the hope remains that with the mandates in place the new generation of researchers will get used to the idea of depositing their work. This poster will revisit the content recruitment issues in general. Although there is an extensive body of relevant knowledge, discussions about IRs transformations, they are often based on opinion, and isolated experience of commentators, leaving out the main issue (i.e. institutional policies) and the main players (i.e. faculty). This paper will attempt to assess the effect of institutional mandates on the faculty attitudes towards IRs. We believe that analyzing and spotlighting the possible correlations between and among various factors are pertinent for understanding and shaping the ongoing transformation of IRs.Item An Evolving Model for Supporting Scholarly Communication at Texas A&M University(2010-05-17) Mercer, Holly; Texas A&M UniversityIn 2007, the Texas A&M University Libraries Bridge Group was charged to "support the developing infrastructure of the Texas A&M University’s and TDL’s Repositories." The group reported on its activities at the 2008 TCDL. The Texas A&M University Libraries continues to expand its support of scholarly communication activities with changes in services, strategies, and staffing. Using Texas A&M as an example, this poster will help attendees explore changing support models and resource needs for a growing scholarly communication program.Item How many graduate degrees does it take to figure out if it’s Open Access?(Texas Digital Library, 2023-05-18) Winkler, Heidi; Henry, Cynthia; Hight, AlexaDespite the Open Access (OA) movement’s progress over the past few decades, publishing costs, faculty understanding, and the nuances of Open Access can cause challenges. In this presentation, we will discuss some of the more persistent challenges of Open Access issues including: faculty understanding of OA, the publishing system related to tenure and the ever-increasing cost of gold OA, and the nuances of OA publishing such as gold vs. green, embargos, versions of the published document, etc. We welcome attendees to share their challenges as well!Item If You Build It, Will They/Should They Come? Implementing PlumX at Baylor University(2017-05-25) Peterson-Lugo, Billie; Baylor UniversityIn 2014, the Baylor University Libraries subscribed to PlumX, an altmetrics solution provided by Plum Analytics (then owned by EBSCO and now owned by Elsevier). This 24x7 presentation will provide an overview of how we implemented PlumX at Baylor, using data from Baylor's Institute for Research and Testing, Scopus, Academic Analytics, and ORCID for the initial population of PlumX; cleaned up data issues after the initial implementation; and identified specific faculty and departments to use for initial review and feedback. The presentation will end with a summary of the faculty feedback, identification of some issues to be addressed, and a description of the future direction of PlumX at Baylor.Item It Takes a Village to Grow ORCIDs on Campus: Establishing and Integrating Unique Scholar Identifiers at Texas A&M(2014-04-14) Clement, Gail; Ilik, Violeta; Hahn, Douglas; Cooper, Micah; Tucker, Sandra; Texas A&M UniversityThis panel presentation focuses on an innovative program at Texas A&M that is changing workflows and practices not only within the Libraries but also across campus. Led by a cross-unit team from the University Libraries, the ORCID Integration initiative at Texas A&M University aims to incorporate globally unique scholar identifiers into the research information systems and workflows used within and beyond the university. At the heart of the program is the establishment of Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) identifiers for every graduate student, faculty member, and full time researcher on campus, and the integration of those identifiers in key campus systems: the Vireo system for electronic thesis and dissertation (ETD) submission and management; the OAK Trust digital repository for capturing and preserving campus research outputs; and the VIVO researcher profile system for establishing and representing the scholarly identity of each campus author. ORCID is a new global standard being used by publishers, societies, universities, and funding agencies to distinguish authors unambiguously and permanently, in order to accurately associate a given author with his or her research contributions. Thanks to advocacy and education efforts by the Libraries, Texas A&M University Administration has determined that ORCID identifiers are necessary as a business operation for distinguishing the research contributions of each campus author; managing and preserving the institution’s research outputs; and ensuring that works created at and by the institution are easily discoverable and accessible in the rapidly expanding online information environment of the World Wide Web. It has taken considerable input and efforts by library faculty and application developers, in consultation with university administration, the graduate studies office, and the campus IT department, to design, plan, and implement ORCID integration at the scale of a large research university. Information sharing policies have seen revision and expansion; existing applications have gained new features and functions; new applications have come online; marketing and outreach campaigns raise awareness of the benefits of establishing a unique scholar identity for campus stakeholders; and learning and user support programs are assisting users in claiming and seeding their ORCID profiles while also preserving preferences for privacy. This panel presentation includes representatives from each of the units contributing to the success of the ORCID Integration Project at Texas A&M. Panelists will provide demonstrations of applications devised during the project and samples of learning and assessment materials used. An open mike segment at the end of the panel presentation will enable attendees to ask questionsItem NIH Public Access Policy: What It Means for Authors and for Universities(2008-06-09) Furrh, Jamie L.; University of North TexasPart of the 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed includes a provision requiring the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to make its voluntary Public Access Policy mandatory. This is a landmark achievement, as it is the first Open Access initiative to be mandated by U.S. government. As with anything that is implemented for the first time, there are some questions and concerns regarding how this new law will work, and the pieces that need to be in place for it to be successful. This presentation will provide a description of what the current NIH Public Access Policy is(1); a brief history of the policy from 2004 to present day(2); discuss how the policy effects research authors and the institutions they work at; consider the six options on institutional compliance as presented by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, Science Commons, and Association of Research Libraries White Paper(3); examine actions taken by other Universities regarding Open Access; explain the work currently underway by the University of North Texas Health Science Center to ensure compliance; and discuss the future of scholarly communication(4) as it relates to the ultimate goal of UNTHSC regarding Open Access and compliance with NIH policy. References: (1) Public Access Homepage, http://publicaccess.nih.gov/, Accessed 4/7/2008. (2) English, Ray and Joseph, Heather. The NIH mandate: An open access landmark; 69; http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/erlnews/backissues2008/february08/nihupdate.cfm. Accessed 4/7/2008. (3) Carroll, M. W. Complying with the national institutes of health public access policy: Copyright considerations and options. SPARC, Science Commons, ARL; February 2008; Accessed 4/7/2008. (4) Hahn, K. L., Talk about talking about new models of scholarly communication. JEP, Winter, 2008; 11, pp. 1-14, http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3336451.0011.108.Item Session 2B | Campus Partnerships for Research Data(Texas Digital Library, 2021-05-25) Boehm, Reid; McEniry, Matthew; Morganti, Dianna; Trelogan, Jessica; Watts, JohnChat with fellow library professionals about the successes and lessons learned in developing cross-campus partnerships around Research Data. Whether you've succeeding in expanding services with your Office of Research or failed at pitching a partnership to your Grad College, we want to learn from each other. Share your stories and hear others' in this free-form birds of a feather discussion.Item Session 3K | Subject Librarians, Outreach, and Digital Publishing: My First eBook Project(Texas Digital Library, 2021-05-26) Barba, IanA subject librarian’s experience with a scholarly communication project. This presentation will try to present scholarly communication work as a natural outgrowth of the outreach and relationship building that subject librarians typically engage in. We used Pressbooks, and the resulting eBook was published jointly through TTU’s Institutional Repository and an Italian publisher (Ytali). The work received significant attention here and in the Italian art community, including a joint online presentation with artist Ezio Gribaudo, whose work was the subject of the eBook. Includes lessons learned and suggestions for librarians interested in pursuing scholarly communication projects.