1. SPARC and the Library Publishing Coalition Scholarly Communications Lunch and Learn Talk #10 Thursday, April 17, 2014 Office of Scholarly Communication & Publishing University Library System University of Pittsburgh CC BY 3.0

2. What is SPARC? Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition http://www.sparc.arl.orghttp://www.sparc.arl.org  A branch of ARL since 1997  An international alliance of 800+ academic and research libraries –SPARC North America (~200; includes most ARLs) –SPARC Europe –SPARC Japan

3. SPARC mission  advance open scholarly communication –Open Access to research –Open data –Open educational resources  works with stakeholders to: –expand research dissemination –reduce financial pressures on libraries

4. “ SPARC believes that faster, broader, and more open sharing of the outputs of the scholarly research process increases the impact of research, fuels the advancement of knowledge, and increases the return on research investments.”

5. SPARC’s Focus  Educating stakeholders about the scholarly communication system  Advocating policy changes that highlight the use of technology to advance schol comm & research dissemination  Incubating new business and publishing models that encourage openness for the benefit of scholarship and academe

6. SPARC Advocacy Information and positions on current legislation and policies at national, state, and campus levels http://www.sparc.arl.org/advocacy Also: –Alliance for Taxpayer Access  Patient groups, physicians, researchers, educational institutions, publishers, health promotion organizations –The Right to Research Coalition  Student organizations

7. SPARC Resources  Guidance on issues and best practices: –OA Data Resource for Research Funders –SPARC Author Addendum –OA publishing funds –Open education speaker list –Primer on article-level metrics –Strategies for Sustaining Open Access  Webcasts on hot topics in scholarly communication  Educational materials: –How Open Is It –What’s New in Open Access  News on OA & scholarly communication activities (not just SPARC)

8. Library Publishing Coalition (LPC)  Community of academic and research library members in the US and Canada involved in publishing  The LPC is new: formed in 2012  Pitt is in small core of founding members  60 members today  Includes university presses but only those with administrative connection to library

9. LPC Mission and Vision  promote development of innovative, sustainable publishing services in research libraries to support scholars  advocate for library publishing services  articulate the value of library publishing services for faculty, students, and other stakeholders  share information among members  address training and education needs

10. LPC activities in planning  Annual Library Publishing Forum ✔  Directory of Library Publishing Services ✔  Conducting new research  Developing advocacy and awareness materials and programs to articulate the value of library publishing.  Providing training and learning opportunities  Data collection to track trends, needs, and developments  Explore collective purchasing arrangements  Develop collective marketing strategies that build exposure for library publishers.

11. Library Journal Publishing - benchmarking faculty driven journals student journals journals for external publishing partnersTOTAL Cornell316973 California Digital Library2831059 Columbia14151948 Toronto2515040 Pitt 1 10 1434 Alberta246030 Western U10 222 Va Tec91616 Indiana U142016 Kansas151016 Brigham Young93315 U British Columbia78015 Purdue113014 Arizona53513 U Mass, Amherst71513 1. Does not include the (49) titles on ULS-hosted Scholarly Exchange service, since the ULS is not the publisher of record for these titles. Source: Library Publishing Directory, 2013 http://www.librarypublishing.org/resources/directory-library-publishing-services

12. SPARC Open Access Meeting Kansas City, MO March 3-4, 2014 Library Publishing Forum Kansas City, MO March 5-6, 2014

13. Tim’s presentation Open Access publishing at Pitt: alignment with local and global OA policies http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20684/  Overview of our publishing program  Importance of advocacy through national and international groups  How DOAJ and membership in OASPA helped shift our policies toward more open access

14. Lauren’s activities Presented on the Plum Analytics altmetrics widget at the SPARC Innovation Session. http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20656/ http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20656/ Presented a poster on the ULS’s e-journal publishing activities at the LPF http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20638/ http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20638/

15. (a few of) Lauren’s Highlights  Erin McKiernan’s “Being Open as an Early Career Researcher” http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.954994 http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.954994

16. Slide “What can I do?” by Erin McKiernan is licensed under CC-BY 3.0.

17. (a few of) Lauren’s Highlights  Erin McKiernan’s “Being Open as an Early Career Researcher” http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.954994 http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.954994  Impromptu discussion on creating an “Open Access Pledge” site for ECRs.  The start of PKP’s online Library Publishing course  Enjoying the art at the Nelson-Atkins Museum, just down the road from the hotel:

18. (a few of) Lauren’s Highlights: see the rest on Storify https://storify.com/parnopaeus/highlight-from- lpforum https://storify.com/parnopaeus/sparc2014-twitter- highlights

19. John’s activity  Presented on Pennsylvania Libraries: Research & Practice http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20662/  Discussed editorial quality for OA journals  Discussed PlumX and altmetrics activities

20. John’s highlights - OER  Open educational resources and open textbooks –Hot topic! –Seems like a natural fit –Faculty create these items already –Directly addresses student costs in higher education –Shouldn’t interfere with tenure, publication prestige

21. John’s highlights - DORA  San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment  Initiated by American Society for Cell Biology, editors, publishers (December 2012)  “Improving the ways in which the outputs of scientific research are evaluated”  http://am.ascb.org/dora/ http://am.ascb.org/dora/

22. 1 general recommendation  “Do not use journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as surrogate measures of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist’s contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions”

23. 17 specific recommendations  Organizations supplying metrics –Provide access to data  Publishers –Don’t promote journals by Impact Factor  Research institutions –Scientific content of a paper, not the JIF, is what matters  Researchers –Change the culture!  Funding agencies –Consider value from all outputs and outcomes generated by research

24. John’s highlights - Meeting others  Kimberly Chapman, Repository Services Manager at University of Arizona  Adrian Ho, Director of Digital Scholarship, University of Kentucky, and author of this articlethis article  Gail McMillan, Director of Digital Research & Scholarship Services, Virginia Tech  Karen Meijer-Kline, Public Knowledge Project

25. Oh, and this...  Fiorella’s Jack Stack Barbecue, Kansas City, MO  http://www.jackstackcatering.com/images/full/1a.jpg http://www.jackstackcatering.com/images/full/1a.jpg

26. Faculty to Liaison Librarian: “Have you heard about some bill on public access to science and technology research? I think it was introduced by Mike Doyle, our U.S. Representative. Should we really be spending more money on this? I mean, most researchers in our field already have access to research papers, right?”

30. Questions, comments...