ENGAGING FACULTY AROUND NEW MODELS Sarah Shreeves & Joy Kirchner ACRL Workshop: Scholarly Communication 101

Why engage with faculty?  Because they are the producers and the consumers of the products of scholarly communication  Because they edit journals, sit on editorial boards, provide peer review, and are officers of scholarly societies  Because they are the movers behind many new models of scholarship (often because of their own frustrations with the traditional model)  Because they can make change in ways that libraries struggle to do on their own

Why Do Faculty and Researchers Publish? To make an impact – we want our research to make a difference. To build a reputation. To engage with other scholars. To secure grant funding To fulfill institutional and organizational expectations. Professional advancement. To make money. Others?

Why do faculty develop new models of scholarship?  A reaction to the restricted flow of information  Open science, blogs, open access  Access to CURRENT research  Note: not all new models are open!  A reaction to traditional models of control  Technology enables them to do things they couldn’t before  Collaboration  Free flow of information  Supports distributed scholarship  Research doesn’t fit into traditional models

Highlights from the ARL / Ithaka Report  While some disciplines seem to lend themselves to certain formats of digital resource more than others, examples of innovative resources can be found across the humanities, social sciences, and scientific/technical/medical subject areas.  Most original scholarly work operates under some form of peer review or editorial oversight.  Some of the resources with greatest impact are those that have been around a long while.  Some resources serve very large audiences, some are small & tailored to niche groups.  Innovations relating to multimedia content and Web 2.0 functionality appear in some.  Projects of all sizes--especially open-access sites and publications--employ a range of support strategies in the search for financial sustainability.

What’s the faculty point of view?  What are the practices in a particular discipline?  How does the scholarly society(s) approach scholarly publishing and communication?  What’s the culture in the department and college?  What are promotion and tenure requirements?

Drivers for change? Drivers for status quo?

Tool: Environmental Scan Purpose: Understand the scholarly communication environments for particular disciplines and help to identify advocates and allies within the faculty. Collect Information Like: - Who on the faculty are editors? - What are the major scholarly societies? What are their policies on author rights? Open access? - Have any of the major journals published papers about scholarly communication in the field? - Is there a disciplinary repository? Is it well used? - Do the common funders have open access mandates? - What are the tenure and promotion codes in the department?

{Slide for presenter(s) to talk about own experience engaging with faculty}

Other Strategies Give faculty examples of changes and new models from other similar disciplines Discuss scholarly communication issues (esp. author rights) with graduate students and work with your Graduate College. Engage with the research offices on campus about funder open access policies. Share knowledge of copyright, legislative issues, and other current events that may have direct impact. Bring faculty advocates from other campuses to speak.

What else can we do?  Include scholarly communication in subject librarians jobs & service models  Negotiate for Green OA with publishers  Consider supporting OA author fees  Education around copyright and author rights  Have an institutional repository? Get more people involved – catalogers, subject librarians, etc.  Provide technical and organizational infrastructure for publishing journals and other content

“My goal is now to have a conversation not a convert.”

Conversational openers activity Be curious!

Resources ARL Environmental Scan Outline and Tools  Univ. of Minnesota Environmental Scan Example  ne ne  ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit  Create Change – ARL, SPARC, and ACRL 

Attribution  Slide 3: BookCase  Slide 8: Faculty Member -  Slide 12: Researchers  Slide 14: Slow -  Slide 16: Curiosity All photos used under a Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license This work was originally created by Sarah L. Shreeves and Joy Kirchner and was last updated on April 16, It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.