6 research outputs found
Exploring faculty perspectives on open access at a medium-sized, American doctoral university
Faculty hold widely varying perspectives on the benefits and challenges afforded by open access (OA) publishing. In the United States, conversations on OA models and strategy have been dominated by scholars affiliated with Carnegie R1 institutions. This article reports findings from interviews conducted with faculty at a Carnegie R2 institution, highlighting disciplinary and individual perspectives on the high costs and rich rewards afforded by OA. The results reiterate the persistence of a high degree of skepticism regarding the quality of peer review and business models associated with OA publishing. By exploring scholars’ perceptions of and experiences with OA publishing and their comfort using or sharing unpublished, publicly available content, the authors highlight the degree to which OA approaches must remain flexible, iterative and multifaceted – no single solution can begin to accommodate the rich and varying needs of individual stakeholders
Champagne Wishes and a Domestic Beer Budget: Assessing and Supporting Serials Access at a Carnegie R2
As library budgets are cut or remain flat, librarians asked to do more with less are considering diverse data to investigate how best to invest limited funds. The data available to librarians are extensive but they may also be contradictory. In this presentation, we contextualize findings from interviews conducted with Illinois State University faculty with institutional and collections data. Using the words of faculty members across disciplines, we highlight some of the tensions around discovery and access to scholarly literature, perceptions of urgency, and engagement with open access. The interview results--triangulated with institutional usage and cost data—suggest a variety of ways by which to support serials access and align our practices with the strategic plan of our University and Library
“Academic Publishing is a Business Interest”: Reconciling Faculty Serials Needs and Economic Realities at a Carnegie R2 University
Introduction: This article explores faculty conceptions of academic publishers, their willingness to circumvent paywalls and share content, and their understanding of who holds the responsibility to pay for this body of scholarly work to which they all contribute.
Methods: The authors conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 faculty at their Carnegie R2 university to explore scholars’ perspectives with respect to the costs of serials and the responsibilities of the University and library in support of scholarly publishing.
Results: Participants reported a broad spectrum of perspectives with respect to circumventing publisher paywalls and offered nuanced practices for interacting with paywalled content. They explained which library services work well and offered suggestions on how best to support faculty needs for serial literature. Although most participants agree that the University has the responsibility of making academic literature available to the community, they differ in their conceptions of academic publishers as good-faith partners in the knowledge enterprise.
Discussion: The results suggest a great deal of ambiguity and diversity of beliefs among faculty: some would support boycotting all commercial publishers; some understand academic publishers to be integral to the dissemination of their work, not to mention tenure and promotion processes; and many acknowledge a variety of tensions in what feels to them an exploitative and fraught relationship. These findings have implications for library services in acquisitions, collection management, scholarly communication, discovery, and access.
Conclusion: The data provide insight into the nuanced perceptions that faculty members at a Carnegie R2 hold concerning the costs of scholarly publishing and the role of academic publishers within scholarly communication
Disciplinary Differences and Scholarly Literature: Discovery, Browsing, and Formats
This study reports faculty experiences regarding the discovery of scholarly content, highlighting similarities and differences across a range of academic disciplines. The authors interviewed twenty-five faculty members at a public, high-research university in the Midwest to explore the intersections of discovery, browsing, and format from diverse disciplinary perspectives. Although most participants rely on similar discovery tools such as library catalogs and databases and Google Scholar, their discovery techniques varied according to the discipline and type of research being done. Browsing is not a standard method for discovery, but it is still done selectively and strategically by some scholars. Journal articles are the most important format across disciplines, but books, chapters, and conference proceedings are core for some scholars and should be considered when facilitating discovery. The findings detail several ways in which disciplinary and personal experiences shape scholars’ practices. The authors discuss the perceived disconnect between browsability, discovery, and access of scholarly literature and explore solutions that make the library central to discovery and browsing
I’ll Wait Zero Seconds : Faculty Perspectives on Serials Access, Sharing, and Immediacy
This study explores how faculty across disciplines access and share scholarly serial content and what expectations they have for immediacy. The authors conducted twenty-five in-depth, semi-structured interviews with faculty of various ranks representing all Illinois State University (ISU) colleges. The findings, presented in the words of participants and triangulated with data from local sources, suggest that faculty use a variety of context-specific mechanisms to access and share serial literature. Participants discuss how they use library services such as databases, subscriptions, interlibrary loan, and document delivery, coupled with academic social networks, disciplinary repositories, author websites, and other publicly available sources to obtain the full text of articles along with their manifold considerations for sharing and requesting content. The urgency with which faculty need to gain access to scholarly literature is dependent on intersecting elements of discipline, current projects, how the resource will be used, the perceived competitiveness of the field, career stage, and personal practices. The findings reiterate that scholarly literature remains integral to the research and teaching of faculty even as needs and practices for accessing and sharing it grow more individualized and distributed
Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2023
Report of Milner Library\u27s activities and initiatives related to Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access in Fiscal Year 2023.https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/mlp/1035/thumbnail.jp