Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

Journal Information
EISSN : 2162-3309
Current Publisher: Pacific University Library (10.7710)
Total articles ≅ 211
Current Coverage
Archived in

Latest articles in this journal

Tina M. Griffin
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2365

INTRODUCTION Data management education has been part of library service models for almost 2 decades. This paper describes a pilot graduate student education program whose framework shows interdependencies between data management practices, uses a flipped classroom model to allow maximum time for implementation, and whose primary activities are entirely student research based. lLITERATURE REVIEW Education in data management encompasses many different formats (in-person, online, synchronous, asynchronous). Within this instruction, Data Information Literacy competencies help define student-learning objectives for data management tasks. Currently data management education is a combination of theory and active learning, with students asking for more hands-on practice. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION This program is an 8-week, in-person, flipped classroom series that addresses all data life cycle stages and aligns with many Data Information Literacy competencies. It is entirely student research data focused in that activities require that they use their projects, with significant time allocated to implement these practices while in the classroom. NEXT STEPS With a 69% retention rate and student improvement in seven foundational data management concepts, this program is considered a success. Future work involves converting this program to a credit-bearing course.
JLSC Editors and Editorial Board
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2398

Robin Champieux, Camille Thomas, Ali Versluis
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2371

INTRODUCTION Like the scholarly communication system it aims to transform, open advocacy work is broad in scope and reflects many influences, practices, and players. Despite having a rewarding mission, scholarly communication librarians frequently juggle multiple roles, may experience isolation and career stagnation, and produce outputs that are not readily understood. METHODS These challenges inspired the creation of the Open Action Kit, a suite of tools to help practitioners plan, execute, and assess open advocacy weeks, particularly Open Access Week. This resource sought to make explicit parallels between the activities and scope of open advocacy work and leadership skills that could aid in career progression. RESULTS The project’s aims and structure matured to focus on a broader, critical appraisal of the nature of scholarly communication work. Its encouragement of dialogue between its members and audience more thoroughly recognized and addressed the tensions between open advocacy work and professional success. DISCUSSION Open advocates expressed many frustrations with their work: they often felt isolated or burnt out, hindered by structures or expectations from their organization. While relational work is fundamental to the cultural change inherent in scholarly communication work, the overly simplistic, quantitative measures typical of library assessment do not accurately capture its nuance or complexity. CONCLUSION Centering the relational components of open advocacy work is necessary for it to be successful, sustainable, and appropriately valued. While the Open Action Kit has not been updated since 2017, it serves as a useful model for translating and centering relational work through distributed leadership, advocacy, and skill development.
Megan Sapp Nelson, Abigail Goben
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2382

Research data services in academic libraries is often perceived as the purview of liaison librarians. A variety of models has emerged by which these services may be developed or implemented. These include hierarchical models and those based more on individual interest. Of critical importance with any model, however, is the identification of support and opportunities for engagement from library administration and management in order to grow and assess the implementation of research data services.
Angela Hackstadt
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2376

INTRODUCTION In 2012, the Association of Research Libraries reported that 95% of libraries identified their libraries as leaders of scholarly communication efforts on campus. While academic librarians have long been responsible for SC issues, institutions have explicitly tasked positions with these responsibilities increasingly over time. This qualitative analysis of position announcements focuses on the ways libraries expect these librarians to engage with SC issues and responsibilities, rather than describing the prevalence of SC-related functions. Specifically, this study asks the following questions: (1) How do administrators communicate leadership expectations of SC librarian roles through job advertisements? (2) In what ways could these leadership expectations be challenging or problematic for SC librarians in non-administrator positions? METHODS This study is a qualitative content analysis of scholarly communication librarian position announcements posted to ALA JobList between January 1, 2016, and July 31, 2019. The advertisements are predominantly from North American academic libraries. Qualitative content analysis is systematic but allows for flexibility of interpretation in describing themes and categories. The coding scheme developed over multiple readings of the data and the author identified categories through the process of subsumption. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Prevalent themes in position announcements include leadership, expertise, and development. Leadership responsibilities appear as management duties or, often in non-administrator positions, as an expectation to take initiative or be an exemplar. SC librarians are expected to be experts, often as the library’s campus liaison or as educators in a variety of SC issues. They may also be tasked with developing institutional repositories or SC programs, though it is not always clear in the advertisement what support is available. These themes are discussed in terms of the SC librarian as a boundary spanning role. Boundary spanners are positions within an organization that communicate with the outside environment. They may also serve as filters for information coming into the organization or facilitate communication between departments or units in an organization. CONCLUSION In SC librarian job advertisements, positional authority is often absent from positions that have a responsibility to lead or develop SC efforts, programs, or initiatives. Non-experts may bestow some level of authority to experts. However, leadership and development tasks may prove difficult for a SC librarian who lacks the ability to make decisions or organizational changes. Suggestions for institutions and potential further research are discussed. External Data or Supplements: Hackstadt, A. (2020). Data from: Leadership, Development, and Expertise: A Qualitative Content Analysis of Scholarly Communication Librarian Position Announcements., Harvard Dataverse.
David Gibbs
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2370

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Kathy Christie Anders, Emilie Algenio
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2359

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Christie Hurrell, Kathryn Ruddock, Paul Pival
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2325

The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Anne Hays
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2341

INTRODUCTION Zine scholarship is a relatively new academic field that has emerged since the late 1990’s. Now that two decades have passed since the publication of Stephen Duncombe’s seminal text, Notes From Underground, it is possible to take a landscape view of how and why zine scholars have studied zines in peer-reviewed journal publications. Knowing how scholars have studied zines can teach us about how zines and zine culture have contributed to academic knowledge. We can also learn which subjects are understudied as zine scholars continue to investigate these curious ephemeral print objects. METHODS This study uses citation analysis to uncover how scholars have explored zines and zine culture as objects worthy of academic inquiry between the dates of 1990 and 2018. The purpose of this study is to examine whether (and how) zines have held influence as objects worthy of study over time, to determine which disciplines tend to treat zines as a valuable academic pursuit, and to reveal what subtopics those scholars tend to focus on. RESULTS & DISCUSSION This study analyzes 163 peer-reviewed articles published between 1990 and 2018, and finds that a) scholarly interest in zines has increased steadily and by 1,700% over 28 years; b) that scholars in the fields of Library Science, Education, Feminist Studies, and Media Studies are most likely to study zines; and c) that zine scholars pursue a wide and varied range of subtopics most prominently concentrated in “riot grrrl” studies, “collection development,” “music criticism,” and a suite of articles about aspects of art. More nuanced analysis based on discipline and subtopic are discussed in the findings. CONCLUSION This study makes clear that zines are influential and worthy objects of study, not just as a form of print media, but as educational and pedagogical tools in the classroom, as evidence of activism, political movements, third-wave feminism, cultural critiques, cultural movements, and much more. Future scholars may use this study to build upon more established topics as well as those that are understudied.
Victoria Pilato, Clara Y. Tran
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, Volume 8; doi:10.7710/2162-3309.2349

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to gain an understanding of Stony Brook University (SBU) author perspectives on article processing charges (APCs). Publishing an article without restrictions, also known as open access publishing, can be a costly endeavor. Many publishers charge APCs ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars to publish an article without access restrictions. Authors who cannot obtain funding from grant agencies or their institution must pay APCs on their own. Do APCs fundamentally impact how authors choose their preferred publication venues? METHODS A cross-sectional survey was designed to learn SBU author perspectives on, and concerns about, APCs. RESULTS Responses mainly came from the sciences. Many SBU authors preferred to publish in a prestigious journal or journal of their choice rather than in an open access journal. Most authors published their articles in open access journals even if they were required to pay APCs. Many authors found that it was difficult finding funding for APCs and some expressed their concerns about the double charging practice. DISCUSSION SBU authors might believe that publishing in established and prestigious journals could secure their career’s advancement. Authors who chose to pay open access journals with APCs might be following publishing criteria. Libraries can encourage authors to negotiate with publishers to obtain a discount or waiver of APCs, when possible. Institutions should negotiate shifting journal subscription costs toward hybrid open access publishing. CONCLUSION Data will be used to inform how the SBU Libraries can help authors locate funding opportunities for APCs.
Back to Top Top