Sarah Shreeves University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Penn State Faculty Forensic - April 29, 2011 CONVERSATIONS BEFORE CONVERTS: ENGAGING RESEARCHERS IN OPEN ACCESS ISSUES

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

“Scientific publishers should be terrified that some of the world’s best scientists, people at or near their research peak, …are spending hundreds of hours each year creating original research content for their blogs, content that in many cases would be difficult or impossible to publish in a conventional journal. By comparison, journals are standing still.” Michael Nielsen, “Is scientific publishing about to be disrupted?”, blog post on The future of science, June 29, 2009

WHAT ABOUT LIBRARIES?

OUTLINE  Background  Openness  How to engage researchers in OA issues  Questions and comments

BACKGROUND

disruption: economic model proved unsustainable

Steelmakers Auto manufacturersConsumers Steel$$ Cars$$ Typical economy

Library Gift economy P&T Grants Reputation Prestige Author Journal Article + IP Publisher $ $ $ $

© wholesale transfer of rights creates scarcity/monopoly drives prices up (inelastic market)

Source: Reed Elsevier: The Inevitable Crunch Point - Downgrading to Underperform Because of Growing Concerns on Elsevier BernsteinResearch March 10, UNSUSTAINABLE FOR PUBLISHERS TOO

disruption: Web

Formulation Registration Certification Dissemination Preservation Reformulation ITERATIONS IN THE SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATIONS LIFE CYCLE

Academic Library Publisher Editor Peer Reviewers Formula -tion Manuscript & IP Dissemination and Preservation Registration and Certification Reformulation

Formulation Registration Dissemination Reformulation Publishers editor Peer-reviewers Libraries Disaggregation of traditional system is in process…

FunctionOldNew FormulationAlone or in laboratory with graduate students and colleagues  and… With colleagues all over the web RegistrationJournal submission Book publication Conference presentation Working paper / Technical Report  and… Blogs Disciplinary repositories Open notebooks / open data CertificationPublishers through peer review Universities indirectly through promotion and tenure  and… Accuracy/good science review (PloS One) Open peer review Data requirements DisseminationLibraries Publishers – journals and monographs Scholarly societies thru publications & conferences Abstract and Indexing Services  and… Blogs Repositories Google Funding agency mandates PreservationLibraries  and Collaborations like Portico & Hathi Trust Disciplinary / institutional repositories Publishers

disruption: Open Movement

OPENNESS

Open to contributions and participation Open and free to access Open to use & reuse w/few or no restrictions Transparency Open to indexing and machine readable WHAT DO WE MEAN BY OPEN?

PARTICIPATE in BUILDING and CONTRIBUTE EXPERTISE

AS OPPOSED TO…

OPEN and FREE TO ACCESS

AS OPPOSED TO…

OPEN TO USE and REUSE WITH FEW or NO RESTRICTIONS

AS OPPOSED TO…

TRANSPARENCY

AS OPPOSED TO…

OPEN TO MACHINE READING, INDEXING, and PROCESSING

AS OPPOSED TO…

 Generally enabled by technology  Works both inside and outside of traditional models  Supported by a variety of business models COMMONALITIES

Open access literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. - Peter Suber OPEN ACCESS

GRATIS AND LIBRE  Gratis: You can read it for free. Anything else, you better ask permission.  Libre: With credit given, OK to text-mine, re- catalog, mirror for preservation, quote, remix, whatever.  Most OA is gratis. You get to “libre” via Creative Commons licensing, usually. Definitions from Dorothea Salo

‘TWO ROADS’ TO OPEN ACCESS Open Access Publishing (journals & books) ‘gold’ Archiving (self, institutional, disciplinary) ‘green’

 Publication that is free & open for anyone to access on internet  Journals or books!  6355 OA journals according to Directory of Open Access Journals (as of April 2011)  Journals across all disciplines  Share common features with toll access journals  Supported by variety of models  Institution / funder supported OR author-supported (2006 – 47% author supported)  Generally allow authors to retain copyright and/or license under creative commons OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING (‘GOLD’)

 Has taken time for impact factors and reputation to build  Business models still emerging  Author-pays model has better traction in the STM community ISSUES AND QUESTIONS

 Literature published through traditional channels that is made openly available through deposit in a repository or placing on web site  Institutional, departmental, or discipline based repository  Supported by wide range of business models  Range of publisher policies on deposit OPEN ACCESS VIA ARCHIVING/REPOSITORIES (‘GREEN’)

 Sustainability sometimes an issue  Participation of faculty (particularly for institutional)  Discipline based repositories often rooted in cultures used to sharing  Often include a range of material including student work, grey literature, theses and dissertations, etc.  For published literature, what can be deposited confusing (post print, pre print, published version?)  Copyright issues murky and (often) frustrating ISSUES AND QUESTIONS

HYBRID MODELS PublisherPriceNotes Elsevier Sponsored Article$3,000Some journals Oxford Open$3,000Some journals; lower price if author is from a developing country Springer Open Choice$3,000All journals Wiley OnlineOpen$3,000Some journals; fees vary American Chemical Society AuthorChoice $1,000 – 3,000Lowest price if institution subscribes & have personal membership Plant Physiology$1,500/ $500 / Free OA free for members of ASPB; Discount if non-member but institution subscribes

 Mixed business model – subscriptions and author pays on an article by article basis – uncomfortable for many  Relatively low adoption (generally around 1-2%)  What impact on subscription prices?  Many libraries with funds for faculty to publish in OA journals will not fund these articles ISSUES AND QUESTIONS

Public should have ready and easy access to taxpayer funded research Many legislative efforts in US to halt and expand this. PUBLIC ACCESS MANDATES

Harvard (Faculty of Arts and Sciences, College of Law) MIT Kansas Oberlin Duke And many others… INSTITUTIONAL OPEN ACCESS POLICIES

OPEN EDUCATION

OPEN BOOKS

OPEN PEER REVIEW

 Open access to data not just papers  The rate of discovery is accelerated by better access to data  Actionable data  Funder mandates around management and sharing of data (in some cases) OPEN DATA

OPEN SCIENCE

YET…

HOW TO ENGAGE FACULTY IN OA ISSUES

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

1. DO YOUR HOMEWORK  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?

EXAMPLE: HISTORY DEPT AT ILLINOIS

Cambridge University Press (46) Wiley Blackwell (42) Duke University Press (37) University of Chicago Press (37) Oxford University Press (30) Routledge (30) Johns Hopkins University Press (27) University of Illinois Press (24) Sage Publications (19) TOP PUBLISHERS FOR HISTORY

EXAMPLE: HISTORY DEPT AT ILLINOIS  Several editors of journals on faculty  No disciplinary repository / no history of ‘pre-prints’ per se but seminars where working papers shared seemed common  Suspicious of depositing anything but the authoritative version of article into repository  Decline of monographs/univ presses concern for many  Some concern that their research wasn’t exposed and some concern about control of their research  Some interested in digital humanities but wouldn’t try it until tenure was received

2. DON’T CRAFT A SINGLE MESSAGE

SPEAK TO THE DISCIPLINE Give faculty examples of changes and new models from other similar disciplines Talk about how changes in other disciplines will have impact on theirs. Bring faculty advocates (in same or similar disciplines) from other campuses to speak. Include scholarly communication in subject librarians positions & service models

Negotiate for OA of faculty work when negotiating license agreements Provide support for funders OA mandates Provide central funding for publishing in OA journals Support OA initiatives such as arXiv and SCOAP3 Provide publishing support 3. PROVIDE SYSTEM SUPPORT

4. AUTHOR RIGHTS ARE CRITICAL

A researcher may not care about OA but they might about control of their work You (may) lose your:  Right to make copies  Right to distribute copies  Right to make derivative works  Right to archive the published copy into a disciplinary or institutional repository “The Author(s) assigns to Publisher exclusive copyright and related rights in the Article, including the right to publish the Work in all forms and media including print and all other forms of electronic publication or any other types of publication including subsidiary rights in all languages.”

5. ENGAGE STUDENTS

Negotiate copyright / publication agreements Publish with Open Access Publishers Self-archive (in disciplinary or institutional repository) Lobby our associations and societies to consider OA and more liberal copyright policies Encourage our colleagues to do the same 6. EAT OUR OWN DOG FOOD

7. EDUCATE AND ADVOCATE BUT WATCH OUR LANGUAGE

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

Questions?Comments?

Title Slide: Slide 3 and 57: Slow - Slide 5: Hare Slide 5: Tortoise Slide 34: Arrows Slide 35: Public Slide 36: Widener Slide 44: Faculty Member Slide 48: Scientist Artist Writer Field work Slide 51: Contracts Slide 53: Dissertations andhttp:// Slide 55: Balancing Act Photo used under a Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license Pieces of this work were created by Lee Van Orsdel, Molly Kleinman, and Sarah Shreeves for the ACRL Scholarly Communications Roadshow 101 and were modified by Sarah Shreeves for this presentation. It was last updated April 28, It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. LEGAL STUFF