ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 242 / C&RL News ■ A p r il 2003 SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION The bewildering new world of scholarly communication Helping faculty understand the issues by How ard M. Dess and M young C. W ilson I n A pril 2002, ACRL a n n o u n c e d th a t its scholarly com m unication initiative w ould b e o n e o f its highest strategic priorities during the next three years.' Among other issues, this initiative em p h a siz e d the n e e d for close co l­ laborative partnerships betw een librarians and o th er faculty to im prove the current system of scholarly communication. This report is offered as o n e such exam ple o f a productive alliance betw een librarians and faculty mem bers to ini­ tiate an informational program at Rutgers Uni­ versity about scholarly com m unication issues. T he traditional print-based w orld of schol­ arly co m m u n icatio n is cau g h t u p in a w h irl­ w in d o f ch a n g e an d u n certain ty as th e e lec­ tronic p u b lish in g rev o lu tio n raises a h o st o f q uestions a b o u t tim e-h o n o red practices an d pro ced u res governing th e dissem ination an d archiving o f n e w inform ation. A cadem ic li­ braries are at the center of the storm, buffeted from all directions by the often conflicting d e ­ m ands o f different constituencies. Librarians are also keenly aw are o f the frustrations aris­ ing from attem p ts to satisfy o ften in co m p at­ ible pressures from: • Library users, especially in th e sciences, w h o increasingly prefer the convenience an d po w er o f electronic access over print, b ut also expect such access to be unlim ited in scope. • Publishers w h o impose access restrictions and pricing structures that in them selves often com prise a form o f restraint. • University adm inistrations that m ust ex­ ercise budgetary discipline and hold spending d o w n to acceptable limits. It is iro n ic to n o te th a t facu lty m em b ers have generally b een w ell insulated from these problem s largely th ro u g h the efforts o f th e li­ braries. As a result, the faculty have been unfa­ miliar w ith or largely indifferent to the broader issues o f scholarly com m unication until such tim e as th eir favorite jo u rn al is c a n celled o r electronic access lost b e cau se o f b u d g e t cu t­ backs, an d th en th e library becom es a conve­ nien t focal p o in t for grievances ab o u t loss o f service. More recently, however, th e realization has b een grow ing that the faculty needs to be b et­ ter inform ed about the changes that are occur­ ring in th e area of scholarly com m unication. T his w o u ld se rv e as a n im p o rta n t first step tow ard building support in the academ ic com­ m unity fo r ad o p tin g n e w a p p ro a c h e s to the p u b licatio n a n d dissem ination o f its creative output. At Rutgers, th e u niversity a d m in istratio n h as exp ressed its determ ination to encourage this educational process an d enlisted th e sup­ About the authors Howard M. Dess is physical sciences resource librarian in the Library o f Science and Medicine, e-mail: dess@rci.rutgers.edu, and Myoung C. Wilson issocial sciences librarian in the Alexander Library at Rutgers University, e-mail: mywilson@rci.rutgers.edu mailto:dess@rci.rutgers.edu mailto:mywilson@rci.rutgers.edu C&RL News m A p ril 2003 / 243 p o rt o f th e library to p ro v id e lead ersh ip in developing and implementing programs that would help raise the level of awareness among faculty about scholarly communication issues and prom ote a greater willingness to explore new avenues o f publication. O r g a n iz in g f o r a ctio n The Scholarly Communication Steering Com­ mittee (SCSC) at Rutgers was created by Uni­ versity Librarian Marianne G aunt in D ecem ­ ber 2000 to address the previously described issues. The committee was charged with lead­ ing a university-w ide discussion ab o u t the changes occurring in the realm of scholarly com­ munication and the impact of these changes on the academic community. The immediate goal was to prom ote a better understanding of the evolving scholarly communication milieu. In the longer term, the committee w as charged with exploring possibilities for more positive action, such as encouraging Rutgers journal edi­ tors to move from boards of high-priced com­ mercial publications to lower-priced journals that are supported by professional societies. To achieve th ese ends, SCSC initiated a three-pronged action program. First, the com­ mittee decided to launch a fact-finding cam­ paign organized around a series of faculty lun­ cheon discussions to explore in greater depth faculty attitudes and the extent of their knowl­ edge about scholarly communication issues. Sec­ ond, the decision was reached to create an in­ formational brochure and a Web site outlining the current troubled state o f scholarly com ­ munication and possible remedies. Third, a sym­ posium was planned around the theme of schol­ arly com m unication, to be p resen ted by n a­ tionally prom inent experts on this topic. F a c t-fin d in g in v e s t ig a t io n T hro u g h o u t th e spring an d fall sem ester of 2001, the com mittee hosted seven luncheon discussion sessions with selected research and teaching faculty. The selection of faculty at­ tendees initially focused on journal editors, who were thought to be in a position to influence journal publication and pricing policies, and also included som e o f the m ost highly p u b ­ lished researchers, w ho may certainly be con­ sidered m ajor stake holders in any system of scholarly communication The sessions varied in the representation of academic disciplines. Some comprised faculty from a single discipline while others contained a mix (e.g., science plus arts and humanities). In some sessions only senior faculty attended w hile in others m ore junior ranks w ere also present. Each discussion was initiated with in­ troductory remarks from the host SCSC mem­ b er that addressed scholarly communication issues and the immediate objectives of SCSC. Existing brochures on scholarly com munica­ tion issues w ere also distributed to the partici­ pants. T hese discussions w ere n o t rigidly scripted and w ere intended to serve more as information gathering sessions that were judi­ ciously guided into relevant channels by the host librarians. Not surprisingly, these luncheon sessions re­ vealed large cultural differences betw een the faculties in the natural sciences and those in the humanities and social sciences. Natural sci­ ence faculty w ere generally far m ore know l­ edgeable about digital publishing than their colleagues in the humanities and social sciences. A lthough researchers in the hum anities and social sciences reported that they relied less on journal literature (with the possible exception of those in economics), they nevertheless were distressed about the negative impact exerted by high-priced science journals on their mono­ graph budgets. Worse yet, if cu rren t trends in scholarly communication continue, arts and humanities faculty are very aware of the diminished o p ­ portunities that their graduate students will have to publish their own work. Faculty jour­ nal editors and those o n editorial boards in­ formed us that they are largely responsible for the co n ten t o f the journal an d are excluded from the decision-making process concerning journal pricing and other business-related mat­ ters. However, some gratifying exceptions were also noted: several Rutgers faculty members have played leading roles in establishing new low -priced (or free) online journals that are explicitly intended to com pete against much higher priced commercial titles. What also emerged from these sessions was the strong faculty concern with the quality of scholarship in their respective disciplines. It became abundantly clear that any future schol­ arly communication system must continue to m aintain the highest quality o f scholarship, firmly grounded in and reinforced by a suitable system o f refereeing. Moreover, it w as also stressed that any new system must be compat­ 244 / C&RL News ■ April 2003 ible w ith th e faculty te n u re an d p ro m otion process. D e v e lo p in g an in fo rm a tio n a l b ro ch u re an d W eb site Early on, th e university librarian m et w ith SCSC and updated its members on the Schol­ arly P ublishing an d Academic Resources (SPARC) efforts with regard to scholarly com­ munication and h er ow n role as chair of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Schol­ arly Communication Committee. The commit­ tee w as inform ed that an inform ational bro-. chure entitled “Create Change,”2 developed by SPARC, ARL an d ACRL, w as available that could be tailored to m eet individual institu­ tional needs. The com m ittee agreed to ad o p t this bro­ chure as a m odel and to m odify it to fit the Rutgers context. The brochure was given the deliberately provocative title “Stop Reacting: Take A ction” an d d istrib u ted to th e entire Rutgers faculty in April 2002. SPARC w as prom inently m entioned in the brochure and SPARC’s “D eclaring In d ep e n d en ce” booklet was also noted. Creation of the Web site was the brainchild of one committee member, James P. Niessen, World History librarian, w ho d ev elo p ed the content with input from members o f the com­ m ittee.3 While the brochure was p lan n ed to reach all faculty at the same time, the Web site was intended to be an ongoing effort provid­ ing a venue for faculty to participate in future dialogue about the shape of the evolving schol­ arly communication system. O r g a n iz in g a sy m p o s iu m on s c h o la rly c o m m u n ic a tio n The initial reaction of faculty lunch attendees to the notion of a conference on scholarly com­ munication issues was decidedly negative. Li­ brarians w ere rem inded o f the dispersed na­ ture of the Rutgers campuses and how difficult it is to attend the many w orthwhile meetings and conferences already scheduled by various units o f the university. One more conference on a topic such as scholarly communication, it was averred, w ould not be expected to result in overwhelming attendance by busy faculty researchers. Luckily for the committee, in spring 2002 the university vice president for academic af­ fairs asked the New Brunswick Faculty Coun­ cil to address how the current scholarly com ­ munication system impacts access to scholar­ ship. The library committee cochairs then re­ quested that the university librarian call a joint m eeting o f the council officers to discuss an appropriate strategy for organizing a sympo­ sium. This group recommended that personal invitations extended by the vice president for academ ic affairs to a select group o f faculty members w ould ensure the highest response rate. And to achieve the broadest base of sup­ port throughout the university community, the symposium would be cosponsored by the Uni­ versity Libraries, the Office o f the Vice Presi­ d en t for Research, the New Brunswick Fac­ ulty Council, and the university’s Academic Leadership Forum. The final invitation list included deans and departm ent chairs, the director o f the univer­ sity press, all of the luncheon group discussion participants, Rutgers journal editors, and fac­ ulty authors who had been actively publishing in the past five years. Finally, the Chief Collec­ tion D evelopm ent Officers o f the New York m etropolitan research libraries w ere also in­ vited. Ultim ately, o u t o f n early 500 invita­ tions, over 130 p eo p le atten d e d the May 9, 2002, sym posium en titled “Scholarly Com­ m u n icatio n : N ew C hallenges, N ew D irec­ tio n s .” T he half-day sym posium w as structured around two panel discussions. The first three- m em ber panel focused on “The Digital Chal­ lenges: Dissemination and Control of Academic Creative Output.” The second panel, also with three participants, focused on the theme “New Directions: What More Can We Do?” and ad­ dressed the issues raised by the first panel. The speakers w ere nationally prom inent journal editors and scholars. The symposium aim ed to dispel the faculty’s p erception that scholarly communication is solely the “library’s p ro b lem ” and to inform them that scholarly communication is directly linked to the ques­ tion of access to their ow n scholarship, now and in the future. To underscore this point, a nonlibrary campus setting was deliberately cho­ sen as the site of the conference location, and the event was m oderated by a com puter sci­ ence faculty member. It is gratifying to report that the symposium was so well received that the Faculty Council passed a unanimous reso­ lution recognizing the library’s extraordinary contribution to the success of this joint endeavor. C&RL News ■ A pril 2003 / 245 Outcomes A key lesson learned from this year and a half of effort was the importance of building coali­ tions throughout the university to accomplish goals that could never have been achieved by the library on its own. The realm of scholarly communica­ tion is too complex and too extensive for any one library or indeed any single institution to change on its own. In keeping with this understanding, SCSC in its final report recommended the estab­ lishment of a new university office, tentatively titled the Digital Publications Office, under the aegis of the vice president for academic affairs and closely linked to the University libraries, the Com­ puting Center, and the University Press. The pri­ mary mission of this new office would be to facili­ tate faculty exploration of how the new electronic media can be utilized for the purpose of dissemi­ nation of scholarship not only within their own disciplines but also across allied disciplines. A con­ tinuing role for the library was also considered vital as the ideal locus for monitoring, facilitating, and coordinating access to new forms of scholarly communication. A successor committee to SCSC was proposed as the most effective way to carry on with this w o rk .1 Notes 1. See th e ACRL Web sitè at h tt p :/ / w w w .ala.org/acrl (go to Issues an d A dvo­ cacy / Scholarly C om m unication). 2. The Create Change Web site is at http:// w w w .createch an g e.o rg /h o m e.h tm l. 3. The Rutgers Web site on scholarly com­ m u n ic a tio n is at h tt p : / / w w w .lib r a r ie s . rutgers.edu/rul/about/rusci/rusci.shtm l. 4. T he authors served as cochairs o f the Scholarly Communication Steering Committee and gratefully acknowledge the contributions made by the other members of the committee: Veronica Calderhead, Helen Hoffman, James P. Niessen, Wen Hua Ren, and Julie Still. ■ Correction In the February 2003 issue, the author o f “E ntering acad em ic lib ra ria n sh ip ,” Brent Singleton, w as incorrectly nam ed; h e is referen ce librarian at California State U niverstity-San B ernardino. The editors regret the error. http://www.ala.org/acrl http://www.createchange.org/home.html http://www.libraries