Academic Health Sciences Reference Librarians' Involvement with the NIH Public Access Policy

Reference librarians are in a unique position to act as change agents by influencing library users' and researchers' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to open access. The purpose of this study was to explore academic health sciences reference librarians' knowledge of, attitudes, and behaviors in relation to the NIH Public Access Policy. Attitudes towards the Research Works Act (H.R. 3699) were also investigated. This bill, proposed in 2011, would prohibit federal open access mandates, thus eliminating the NIH Public Access Policy. The Internet survey yielded 66 responses. Academic health sciences reference librarians appeared to be generally knowledgeable and positive about the NIH Public Access Policy. New librarians were less knowledgeable than their more experienced colleagues and were less able to provide instruction and support. This finding suggests a need for better training of new librarians. Librarians were overwhelmingly opposed to the Research Works Act

Getting on Board with Open Access Publishing: A Role for Reference Librarians

Purpose: This poster examines the roles of reference librarians in the open access (OA) publishing movement and opportunities to participate in a more robust manner, as described in the literature. Methods: A literature review of reference librarians’ involvement in OA publishing, obstacles to their participation, authors’ views on open access, suggestions for future research, and evidence of the need for reference librarians to take more responsibility was performed

JLSC Board Editorial 2021

It hardly needs to be said that 2020 was a difficult year for the world. COVID-19 has infected over 120 million people and killed over 2 million as of March 2021 (Johns Hopkins). At the same time, police violence against people of color continues, even as communities engage in long-overdue reckoning initiatives. Across the globe, researchers, governments, and communities needed quick, open, up-to-date information on testing for, treating, and preventing COVID-19. Our increased dependence on technology during lockdowns provided some with safety and continuity, while others experienced the widening of the digital divide. There is no greater urgency than the work of identifying and addressing issues of inequality and lack of equity and inclusivity. Although the results remain to be seen, the field of scholarly communications experienced disruption in 2020. The editorials below discuss these recent changes and imagine what could come out of the pandemic. We hope that these reflections invite conversation and action

Liberation through Cooperation: How Library Publishing Can Save Scholarly Journals from Neoliberalism

This commentary examines political and economic aspects of open access (OA) and scholarly journal publishing. Through a discourse of critique, neoliberalism is analyzed as an ideology causing many problems in the scholarly journal publishing industry, including the serials crisis. Two major efforts in the open access movement that promote an increase in OA funded by article-processing charges (APC) —the Open Access 2020 (OA2020) and Pay It Forward (PIF) initiatives—are critiqued as neoliberal frameworks that would perpetuate existing systems of domination and exploitation. In a discourse of possibility, ways of building a post-neoliberal system of journal publishing using new tactics and strategies, merging theory and praxis, and grounding in solidarity and cooperation are presented. This includes organizing journal publishing democratically using cooperatives, which could decommodify knowledge and provide greater open access. The article concludes with a vision for a New Fair Deal, which would revolutionize the system of scholarly journal publishing by transitioning journals to library publishing cooperatives

JLSC Board Editorial 2019

Many of us were hired to work toward systems where knowledge is open, equitable, transparent, and diverse. At the same time, our hiring institutions can be ambivalent about change, and we ourselves sometimes fall short of the ideals we espouse. One antidote for burnout and disillusionment is to build a durable, continuing community that can survive and do good work despite setbacks and failures. As JLSC editors, the three of us—Anne, Jennifer, and Rebekah—plan to continue facilitating the conversations that make this community a sustainable reality. The editorials below all engage with the idea of community. We hope that their thoughts and critiques will encourage all of us to think about our own communities and work to improve them.status: Published onlin