1. NDLTD Prior Publications Working Group Gail McMillan, Marisa Ramirez, Joan Dalton, Ann Hanlon, Chelsea Kern, Heather Smith CNI Fall Membership Meeting Dec. 12, 2012

2.  Publishers previously surveyed 2000/2002.previously surveyed  Questions continue to arise.  ETD-L  Chronicle of Higher Education  Perceptions, not data, are usually reported.  LSU ETD by Ursula GoldsmithETD  VT ETD author surveysauthor surveys  VT Authors are restricting access to the ETDs.  Faculty are advising students to restrict access.

4.  VT graduate student alumni survey (2000)  Ohio U ETD by Angla McCutcheon (2010)  NDLTD Board’s support  ProQuest  NDLTD SoSci/Hum survey 2011

5.  Thompson Reuter’s Journal Performance Indicators (JPI), 2005-2009  16,455 journals in 171 subject categories  Relative Impact Factor (RPI): top 5  723 science journals--sampling  290 journal editors surveyed (40%)  Cal Poly Human Subjects Committee approved (IRB—Institutional Review Board)

6.  Which of the following statements best reflects the editorial policy or practice governing your enterprise? Manuscripts that are revisions derived from openly accessible electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs) are…  Always welcome for submission.  Considered on a case-by-case basis.  Considered ONLY IF the contents and conclusions in the manuscript are substantially different from the ETD.  Considered ONLY IF the ETD has access limited to the campus or institution where it was completed.  Not considered under any circumstances.  Other (please elaborate)

7.  Pretested w/8 editors  SurveyMonkey  Free Web survey tool  Emailed 290 journal editors  Aug. 9-27, 2012: online survey period  Aug. 14 and 21: 2 reminder emails  Sept. 7-14: Follow-up phone calls by LIS students to non-respondents

8.  27.9% responded to the Science survey  53 original SurveyMonkey respondents  28 follow-up phone interviews  17.0% responded to the 2011 Hum/SoSci survey  1 follow-up email

9.  60% Commercial publishing company  25% Academic society  10% University press  4%Other

10.  69% Editors-in-chief  16%Managing Editors  7%Members of Editorial Boards  3%Assistant Editors  6%Others

14.  33%OA is OK  21%No issue/no policy  12%Case by case  9%Wouldn't consider  6%If different  6%Out of scope  12%General comments

15.  “A peer-reviewed publication that comes out of a dissertation or thesis should not only be encouraged but is crucially important for the scholar's development and advancement of scientific knowledge.”  “It is our job to archive and publish the best research. Thus we are quite happy to publish material which otherwise would sit languishing on an online archive.”

16.  “Our journal has essentially ignored any potential conflict arising from publication of ETDs, because the situation is really not different from the days of hard copy thesis holdings by University libraries. They … are simply more easily available now… thesis without peer review in an open access format will never be considered “double publishing.””

17.  “While we recognise theses as legitimate and citeable publications, they are considered gray literature because they do not go through blind external peer review and are not published in a recognized peer reviewed outlet. They are not considered prepublication...”  “Work which has not been published in archival peer reviewed journals is considered appropriate for submission, even if it is accessible elsewhere.”

18. Gail McMillan gailmac@vt.edugailmac@vt.edu Marisa L. Ramirez mramir14@calpoly.edumramir14@calpoly.edu Joan Dalton jdalton@uwindsor.cajdalton@uwindsor.ca Ann Hanlon hanlon@uwm.eduhanlon@uwm.edu Chelsea Kern crkern@calpoly.educrkern@calpoly.edu Heather Smith hsmith@calpoly.eduhsmith@calpoly.edu