Presentation on theme: "Open Access: How are Academic Librarians in Nigerian Private Universities Reacting? by Omolara Bolarinwa 1, Samuel C. Avemaria Utulu 2 and Toun Sote 2."— Presentation transcript:
Open Access: How are Academic Librarians in Nigerian Private Universities Reacting? by Omolara Bolarinwa 1, Samuel C. Avemaria Utulu 2 and Toun Sote 2 1 Medical Library, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Nigeria. 2 RUN Library, Redeemer's University (RUN),
Abstract Two primary functions of scholarly publishing to scholarship are to ensure the dissemination of quality scientific knowledge and to assess the performances and contributions of scholars and researchers to the development of knowledge. The objective of this paper was to evaluate the reactions of librarians to the development of the open access publishing model as a medium of disseminating quality scientific knowledge and assessing the performances and contributions of scholars and researchers to knowledge development globally. Six of the fourteen private universities in Southwestern Nigeria were randomly selected to take part in the study. Thirty academic librarians from the six private universities were surveyed using a questionnaire adapted from Palmer, et al. (2009) which however, was slightly reviewed to meet the needs of this particular study. The result showed that academic librarians in Nigerian private universities are reacting positively to open access scholarly publishing trends. The paper concludes that with this kind of reaction that the full adoption of open access in Nigerian private universities may not be as challenging as one may have imagined.
Introduction Scholarly publishing has created a lot of challenges to stakeholders since its evolution in the mid 17th Century. This is the reason why stakeholders have continuously developed scholarly publishing models meant to ensure that scholarly publishing maintains its quality as source of global knowledge and a medium to assess the performances and contributions of scholars and researchers to the development of global knowledge. In the same vein, trends in the evolution of open access publishing model have been reported to have diverse effects on stakeholders.
Introduction cont. Over the years research on open access has been channeled towards understanding how various stakeholders react to its evolution. A considerable research effort has been geared toward academic institutions, publishers and scholars. However, Palmers et al. (2009) remains a significant effort geared towards understanding how librarians are reacting to the evolution of open access publishing.
Introduction cont. This survey was therefore carried out to study how academic librarians in private university in Southwestern Nigeria are reacting to the open access initiative. This study did not attempt to present a Nigerian experience, but a fraction of the many experiences that may be predominant in Southwestern Nigeria It was hoped that based on the number of private universities in Southwestern Nigeria, the study could provide a platform to assess the responses of academic librarians in private universities in Nigeria.
Previous Research on Open Access What is Open Access? Definitions Budapest, Bethesda and Berlin offer background for the definition of open access based on online availability, free access and no copyright restriction According to Palmer et al. (2009) open access is scholarship that is available online free of charge (p. 316).
Previous Research on Open Access cont. Primary efforts made by scholars regarding open access publishing models were research carried out to justify its economics, impact and quality as means of disseminating scientific knowledge and assessing scholars and researchers contributions to the growth and development of global knowledge. The following areas have been well covered in the literature on open access initiatives –economics, –impact –quality –authors services –Awareness and use E.g. Bjork and Oornas (2009); Liu (2003); Fytte and Schlenburger (2002); Suber (2004) and Kawooya (2008); Regazzi (2004); Fitzpatrick (2001); Utulu and Bolarinwa (2009) and Christian (2008); Nwagwu (2005)
Methodology Questionnaire was the main instrument used for data collection for the study. A questionnaire previously used by Palmer et al. (2009) with slight modifications was used to survey 30 academic librarians in six (6) randomly selected private universities in Southwestern Nigeria. The six universities amount to 42.9 % of the total number of private universities in Southwestern Nigeria and 17.7 % of the total number of private universities in Nigeria. The questionnaire copies were however, distributed by hand to the academic librarians in their institutions and by postal service in September 2009
Findings and Discussions S/NUniversitiesNo. of Academic Librarians % 1Redeemer's University930.0 2Lead City University723.3 3Babcock University723.3 4Joseph Ayoola Babalola University 310.0 5Caleb University26.7 6Crescent University26.7 7Total30100.0 Table 1: Distribution of Respondents According to their Universities
Findings and Discussions cont. S/NOfficial AssignmentsNumberPercentage 1Acquisition and Collection Manager1963.3 2Administration1860.3 3Archives/Government Documents/ Special Collection1136.6 4Audiovisual/Media Services930.0 5Cataloguing/Metadata1550.0 6Circulation/Access /Public /Reference Services2376.7 7Development/Fundraising310.0 8Digital Library/System Network/Web Development1653.3 9Instructional Services723.3 10Interlibrary Loan620.0 11Subject Specialist413.3 Table 1: Distribution of Respondents According to their Universities
Findings and Discussions cont. Perception Factors SDDNSASANR Note: AL= Academic Libraries; OA= Open Access No.% % % % % % AL should take actions to shape the future of scholarly publishing 310.0----620.01860.0310.0 OA will fail without the active involvement of academic librarians 26.72 516.71033.31136.7-- The Principles of OA relate to the purpose of AL 13.31 413.31136.7826.7516.6 Involvement in OA is one way for AL to stay relevant in the changing information landscape 310.0--13.31653.31033.3-- AL should help develop impact measurement tools for OA journals 13.326.7620.01136.7930.013.3 Providing financial resources to support OA should be a priority of AL --26.7413.31550.0826.713.3 AL should reallocate existing resources --26.7723.31446.7723.3-- Table 3: Distribution of Respondents Self Assessment of their Perception of the Role Academic Libraries Could Play in shaping the Future of Scholarly Publishing
Findings and Discussions cont. Table 4: Distribution of Respondents Self Assessment of Academic Librarians Perception of their Roles in Introducing Open Access to University Communities Perception FactorsSDDNSASANR Note: AL= Academic Libraries; OA= Open AccessNo.%No.No. % % % % % AL Should educate faculty about OA26.7----1550.01240.613.3 AL should educate campus administration about OA26.7--13.31446.71136.726.7 AL should educate faculty about copyright issues related to their publications13.3--1 1756.71136.7-- AL should encourage faculty to submit pre-published versions of their research to OA journals 13.326.76.7 26.71653.3826.713.3 AL should encourage faculty to publish their research in OA peer-reviewed journals--13.33.3 26.72170.0620.0-- AL should encourage faculty to deposit scholarly work that they do not intend to publish into OA repositories 26.7--826.71756.7310.0-- AL should encourage campus administration to adopt tenure and promotion policies that support the growth of OA 13.313.33.3 723.31240.0930.0--
Findings and Discussions cont. Table 5: Distribution of Respondents Self Assessment of Academic Librarians Perception of their Roles in Creating Access to Open Access Resources Perception Factors SDDNSASANR Note: AL= Academic Libraries; OA= Open Access No.% % % % % % AL should include bibliographic records for OA journals in their catalogues 13.3--26.71653.31033.313.3 AL websites should include links to OA journals 13.3----1653.31343.3-- AL should create professional positions whose main duties concern OA 26.7--516.71343.3930.013.3
Findings and Discussions cont. Table 6: Distribution of Respondents Self Assessment of Academic Librarians Perception of their Roles in Supporting and Promoting Policies Meant to Regulate Open Access Perception FactorsSDDNSASANR Note: AL= Academic Libraries; OA= Open AccessNo.% % % % % % AL are the best suited to manage campuses OA repositories13.3--1 1343.31550.0-- AL should replace exorbitantly priced journals with comparable OA journals when available --310.0413.31343.3930.013.3 AL should give subscription preference to journal publishers who allow authors to retain copyright 1.3.3413.3310.01136.71136.7--
Findings and Discussions cont. Table 7: Distribution of Respondents Self Assessment of the Frequency in which they Engage in Educating Members of the University Communities about Open Access Perception FactorsNeverOccasionallyAlwaysN R Note: OA= Open AccessNo.% % % % On average I read literature that discusses OA13.31963.31033.3-- On average I discuss OA with librarians at the campuses outside my own723.31963.3413.3-- On average I discuss OA with librarians at my campus620.01240.01240.0-- On average I discuss OA with non-librarians at my campus826.7930.01240.01.3.3 On average I discuss OA with non-librarians at campuses outside my own930.01756.7413.3-- On average I discuss OA administration at my library516.71446.71136.7-- On average I discuss OA with non library administrators at my campus1136.71343.3516.713.3
Conclusion This paper concluded that academic librarians in Nigerian private universities were very much aware of the importance of open access to the development of scholarship, especially with regards to the influence of the serials crises on access to scholarly publications. They also showed positive reaction to the support by promoting and educating stakeholders on how to use open access opportunities and on the development of policies that will help promote the initiative. With these kinds of reactions, it therefore shows that the adoption of open access by Nigerian private universities would be faster than one might have imagined.