Posted on

Roadmap to Library Publishing

First, I’ve determined that there is no one “roadmap” that will lead my library into digital publishing. So, instead of creating a map, I’m going to do the best I can to sketch out the terrain ahead and think about questions that can guide our path.

Broader Context

This section tries to address two main questions: What is happening in the world of scholarly publishing that is relevant to North Park? What is happening within the North Park setting that is relevant to a library published endeavor? Quick thoughts:

  • Continued movement toward Open Access. There is still work to be done in our local context but that is the clear movement. The Covenant Quarterly and Journal of Hip Hop Studies indicate this trend is taking root on campus.
  • Institutional branding. There is a renewed focus in institutional branding and online presence. There could be powerful connections to make here.
  • Publishing and the North Park mission. My sense is that North Park values diverse contributions to the academic community more than creating a specialized repository
  • Chicago. There might be some opportunities to promote North Park within the regional context through research and student projects.

Scope

We need to define the scope of this project. There are many different efforts that fall under the broad category of “digital publishing”, including:

  • Institutional Repositories
  • Digital Humanities
  • Data Repository
  • Open Educational Resources
  • Campus multimedia (lectures, performances, etc.)

Of these options, I think the most appropriate level and scope would be an institutional repository that contains simple/static documents such as PDFs. A next step would be to curate multimedia from across campus.

Even within this scope, the library will need to make editorial and collection development decisions to make sure that (1) we have a critical mass of content and (2) that there is some editorial scope. I think we should prioritize the following content areas and focus on building relationships with relevant parties.

Student Research

  • Honor’s Projects and Papers
  • Student Research
  • Master’s Thesis
  • NPPress Student Research
  • Covenant History Papers
  • Partnerships with different courses/programs.

Faculty/Staff Scholarship

  • Journal Articles
  • Faculty/Staff Presentations and other “gray” literature
  • Papers from campus symposiums
  • Offer hosting/support for existing campus projects

Political Realities/Soft Skills

We would need some strong support from across campus to take on this project and lead the campus here. Given the proposed scope of this project, here are the people I think it would be important to connect with:

  • The President
  • Provost
  • Campus Deans
  • The University Marketing and Communication Office
  • Honors Program
  • Seminary Faculty
  • Faculty/Tenure Committee
  • NPPRESS Leadership
  • Student Research Committee

Some of these needed connections blend into the next set of questions that seeks to define the scope of this project and effort. I think if we have 5 strong allies (willing to contribute the content they are responsible for) that would make a strong starting point.

Management

Do we have the technical and social workflows to produce, distribute and preserve this content? There are many overlapping questions here, but here is an attempt to list the important ones:

  • Do we have the rights/permissions to publish these materials? Who will work with each group to determine these permissions and who will maintain the paperwork?
  • Do we have the staff expertise, staff time, and faculty/staff connections to successfully manage this projects?
  • What is the ongoing cost of this project in terms of hosting costs, incentives and open access fees, etc.?
  • Where does this rank compared to other library/institutional priorities?
  • What are peer institutions doing? What can we learn from them?
Posted on

Copyright and Faculty Guidance

My library just fielded a question from the Nursing department who, after reading this article from the Chronicle of Higher Education, wanted to know our policy for posting articles and chapters into our Learning Management System (LMS).

While I was drafting a response in private, I thought it would be good to summarize that article and then post my response here for future updating and public re-use.

Summary

The article is commentary on the Georgia State University lawsuit where three publishers – Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage Publications – challenged the Georgia State University’s policy that allowed faculty members to upload excerpts from books into their LMS. Thankfully, the court has decided that the vast majority (70/75) of these uses were “Fair Use” and therefore legal under the law.

But, as the article points out, the issue at stake is not just the Georgia State University uses but to clarify (perhaps define?) the legal limits of copyright and fair use as it related to academic libraries. So the case is not limited to those three published and that one university, the results are much more far-reaching.

The publishers’ request for a very broad injunction is not really a surprise. The plaintiffs always intended for the GSU case to establish a precedent that publishers could use to persuade colleges to pay for digital licenses from a company they work with, the Copyright Clearance Center.

So, like the author of this commentary from the Chronicle of Higher Education and likely most academic librarians, I am rooting for GSU in this case and hope that it established precedent that ensures a broad definition of fair use and does not impose time consuming record keeping to track the fair use of copyrighted material.

So, given my thoughts, how should I respond to the faculty inquiry about our policy regarding fair use. I think it’s an opportunity to both establish the broad playing field, underscore the ramifications of this decision, and invite further conversation.

Response to Faculty Inquiry

Thanks for reaching out with a question about copyright and fair use as it relates to articles and book chapters in an academic setting. This is clearly an important and heavily contested issue – one that really precludes a simple policy or rule – so I’m happy to provide some background and some safe best practices and then invite further conversation.

Best Practices for Licensed Content

In general, if you are using electronic resources licensed by the Brandel Library, we encourage you to provide permalinks to the library’s subscription into Moodle. Two main reasons for this policy:

  1. This is almost always a permitted use within our license agreements. Some database license agreements allow articles to be uploaded directly into a LMS but other licenses expressly forbid this. This prevents this level of confusion and creates a better experience for students and faculty.
  2. Linking back to the publisher provides the library with vital statistics. Linking this way ensures that we can make collection development decisions that reflect accurate usage – posting a PDF in Moodle prevents the library from tracking usage and impairs our ability to use data to make collection development decisions.

Fair Uses for Non-Licensed Content

This gets slightly more thorny with non-licensed content such as print book chapters, articles from print journals, or articles not available through the library’s online resources. Assuming that such materials are under copyright – which is a safe assumption unless it was published before 1923 or published with a Creative Commons license of some kind – the only legal option to consider is Fair Use.

The US legal code (Section 107 of the Copyright Act) defines four factors to consider with fair use:

  1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
  3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
  4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Given that we are a university, the purpose and character of the use is educational and therefore the first factor will almost always support fair use. However, all educational uses are not permitted – copying an entire book and distributing it to a class would not be a fair use – and therefore all four factors should be considered.

The Georgia State University ruling seems to indicate that the courts view that using a single chapter from a book as fair use but that multiple chapters from a single book is problematic. However, posting a PDF of a scholarly article in Moodle would be problematic and would likely not quality as a fair use of that material. We are working on building up our electronic reserve capabilities here in the library and should be able to provide more robust services in this area soon.

The Future

I will conclude by underscoring a few things:

One issue at stake in the GSU case is how extensive our institutional record keeping needs to be in this area. The publishers want to require extensive recording keeping that GSU (and most schools) would view as very burdensome and a hindrance to fair use.

The proposed injunction would also require university personnel to confirm that every excerpt uploaded to course websites met the fair-use criteria and to keep track of information about the book, which parts were used, the number of total pages, the sources that were consulted to determine whether digital permissions were available, the date of the investigation, the number of students enrolled in the course, and the name of the professor. The university would have to maintain those records for three years.

North Park does not currently require any record keeping and entrusts faculty members to make informed decisions about fair use. The library will continue to follow this case and inform the campus if our record keeping policies need to change.

Second, one reason that fair use is so fuzzy and unclear is that there have not been many cases that have tested the limits of fair use as it related to academic institutions. As an academic library, we want to rigorous defend the rights of authors and content creators by respecting fair use and honoring our licensing agreements with the publishers we work with. On the other hand, we also want to claim the full expression of fair use afforded to us in the law.

Posted on

Social Media Policy for the Brandel Library

I’ve been thinking a bit about developing a plan and policy for the Brandel Library’s social media accounts. In the past, I’ve viewed this as an “important but not urgent” issue and I largely feel the same way now. However, I think that both for planning sake and direction I should invest some time and thought in researching other library’s policies and best practices to guide the Brandel Library’s social media in 2014.

Developing a Policy – Why?

By “policy” I mean a set of expectations that set the boundaries for acceptable conduct as well as some lofty goals for social media in the context of an academic library. I’ve started collecting some relevant policies and articles in this Zotero library and hope to keep updated that frequently.

Starting with the question of “Why?” leads me to connect our social media policy to the library’s general mission statement. Our current mission statement (as of 2012) is:

The Brandel Library supports the educational mission of the university by offering resources, services, and an environment to stimulate academic inquiry and intellectual, cultural and social exchange, while reflecting the Christian, urban, and multicultural vision of the university. This is accomplished through the acquisition, organization, and preservation of both physical and digital materials, and by facilitating their use (access) in a complex information environment through course and individual instruction. Creating awareness of and providing access to these collections are essential to our mission.

I’ve taken the liberty of highlighting certain phrases that I find particularly relevant to the library’s social media policy. Having not planned this – I’m actually relatively happy with how well library mission statement mapped to social policy. At the same time, I also see that our mission statement seems focused on our collections (and facilitating their use) and not on our our users (and meeting their needs). Something to consider long term, I guess.

A Simply Policy

Editorial confession – this draft has been pending for months. In that time, I went to the #ILEADUSA meeting and heard an inspiring talk from Beck Tench. The simplicity of her institutions social media policy has inspired me so much that I’m going to steal it directly and offer it as a first draft. Her policy is simply this:

  1. Use common sense.
  2. If it gives you pause, pause.
  3. We’ve got your back on this.

If I recall correctly, this policy was given in a section of her talk focused on trusting people completely. I’m going to move forward with that confidence and revisit this when the need arrives.

Posted on

“This is how I study”

Just wanted to jot down an idea and try to fill out in a semi-public space.

I’ve been thinking a bit about library instruction, social media, and creating a learning culture at North Park. One idea – based deeply on lifehacker posts “How I work” – is for North Park to try and create a “This is how I study” video series. I think it would be awesome for the following reasons:

  • Would allow and encourage peer to peer instruction.
  • Would create content for our social media campaigns.
  • Would allow librarians to do instruction on a personal basis as well as on make that content available to a wider audience.
  • It would be interesting! Do students listen to music? Work in the library or their apartment?
  • I would imagine these stories (videos? webpages?) could be linked from social media as well as embeded in libguides.
  • I wonder if it could fit in existing structures (like the writing center, tutoring program, or capstone classes) or whether it would be separate.

That’s my emerging idea. Will run it by some people here at North Park to see what people think.

Edit: This idea is also very similar to the ACRL’s recurring post “Memeber of the Week”

Posted on

Review – “What is a Data-Driven Academic Library”

Last week, I watched the webinar entitled “What is a data-driven academic library?” hosted by Library Journal and really, really enjoyed it. Like, best webinar ever.

I was too engrossed in the content (and busy tweeting the event) to take comprehensive notes. But here are some of my notes from the webinar as well as later reflections.

To be data driven means to use data to drive change.

I feel like this is the core of the presentation. To be data driven means to use the data libraries and library systems collect to drive decision making. She proposed a five part method to accomplish this goal.

1. Create Questions

All questions are good – but bigger questions might need to be broken down into smaller chucks. Good questions are ones that are answerable based on data. To me, that meant questions like “are the nursing databases meeting current needs” must be translated into questions about usage and coverage – and that we should be honest and clear about that work. She also advised to not be overly reductive and to pay attention to other factors. Lastly, she advised people to let these questions guide your research – don’t get lost in the data!

2. Create a Plan

Along with crafting questions, Tudesco suggesting creating a plan. Essentially, what data will answer your question and how will you get that data? Refine your questions and create a plan or timetable for this project.

3. Collect and Manage Data

Honestly, I feel like I usually begin my data-driven projects at this step – and my projects almost always suffer because of this! My workflow usually begins with “What can I do with this data?” rather than the more important “How can this data help me make a decision?”. Allowing the question and project drive the data needs – and not the other way around – is a very valuable lesson I will take from this webinar.

She was also clear that sometimes the data you want/need doesn’t exist and that perhaps you need to create a tool to gather that data. Whether than means a survey or structured observations will be guided by the question

4. Analyze the Data

Again, this methodology focused on using the data to make a decision. This data analysis will bring together a lot of information – perhaps from different sources and with different nuances – and this will require interpretation and analysis to make sense of this. More on this later.

5. Make a Decision

This is where all that data matters! It’s very basic but it’s worth repeating – Data Driven libraries use data to drive decisions.

What Skills and Tools are Needed?

Tudesco mentioned three core skills library staff need to truly embrace the data movement and mentioned several tools under each area. This section also provided my favorite quote – one near and dear to my heart!

I’m trying to remember what she presented the best I can while also taking the liberty to add my own skills and tools to this list. This is a work in progress and will likely add more in the future.

Data Capture

  • Programming and database skills (SQL, etc.)
  • Circulation
  • Business domain knowledge
  • COUNTER reports and SUSHI protocols
  • Designing and implementing surveys

Data Analysis

Presentation

  • Visualization
  • Storytelling
  • Raw

Overall, this was a wonderful and timely webinar. I will do my best to take the lessons and tips to heart and structure all future data project in light of what this presentation taught me.

Here is the link to the webinar – I believe that if you register you will get archived access to webinar so you can watch it yourself!

Posted on

E-Resource Workflows in CORAL

A while back, I read the book “The Checklist Manifesto.” It was a very worthwhile read that was very relevant to libraries and librarians. That has been in the back of my mind as I craft workflows for our electronic resources. The books main premise, as summarized by Steven Levitt is simply this:

No matter how expert you may be, well-designed check lists can improve outcomes.

Two small details from that book have stuck with me.

First, useable workflows are short. Long checklists seem doomed to fail – it is better to break those up into smaller, more manageable lists. Many of the books examples are drawn from the airline and health care industries; it would be crazy to craft comprehensive workflows in those situations. So they have checklists for particular situations that, if need be, direct you to other checklists. I’ve adopted and adapted that idea here.

Second, checklists can either be READ-DO lists or DO-CONFIRM lists. READ-DO checklists are like recipes; you read something and then do something. DO-CONFIRM checklists reverse the order; do the things that need to be done and then confirm they are done. I think too many library checklists are READ-DO checklists when I believe that DO-CONFIRM lists are better suited to this part of library resources. Why? Because the diversity of library resources sometimes demand different things and because, often, the order of steps isn’t vitally important. I could be swayed on this – but right now I’ve been happy with my DO-CONFIRM checklist.

In CORAL, workflows are set for Acquisition Type, Format, and (optionally) Type. All of these fields can be defined in the admin setting of the resources tab. I’ve decided not to really discriminate based on resource type or resource format. So, essentially, we have four basic workflows for electronic resources. They are as follows:

Active Trial/Electronic/[Any]

This is the starting place for all new electronic resources and is the basic workflow when setting up a trial.

  1. Resource information is complete in CORAL.
  2. Organization information is complete in CORAL.
  3. Collection decision has been made.
  4. Appropriate Access Points have been determined and recorded.
  5. Pay invoice; gather license; change Acquisition Type in CORAL.

Paid/Electronic/[Any]

If after the trial period we decide to purchase  resource, I will change the acquisition type to “Paid” – this will trigger a number of different CORAL workflows based on the resource type. Here is the basic and general outline.

  1. Resource and Organization information is complete in CORAL.
  2. A copy of the invoice is saved in CORAL.
  3. A copy of the license is saved in CORAL and has been parsed for ILL rights.
  4. Appropriate access points have been created.
  5. Access has been checked from both on-campus and off-campus.
  6. SUSHI (or alternative statistic measuring tool) is in place.

Free/Electronic/[Any]

I’ve decided to add all of the free resources that North Park provides access to in CORAL for a number of reasons. First, I’d like CORAL to be a centralized and complete inventory of all our electronic resources. Second, if we are providing access we need to commit to supporting that access. Third, because so many valuable information resources are moving forward open access models.

  1. Title information is relatively complete in CORAL.
  2. Applicable access points (Catalog, Database pages, Libguides, SFX) have been created.
  3. Check access points.

Additionally, a few of these resources are actually cancelled print+online titles that guarentee perpetual access. Because the workflows are identical, I’d added these to this category with notes detailing the acquisition history. They are identifiable by having a resource type of “ejournal (single title)”. NOTE: If we start adding many open access titles to our list, I might have to specify what sort of “free” we are talking about; free because of a past subscription or free because it’s open access.

Cancelled/Electronic/[Any]

Right now, our “Historical” Acquisition type is for cancelled titles are trials that we decided not to purchase. In addition to changing the status as “archives” we have a one step workflow for these resources.

  1. All Access Points have been removed, disabled, or deleted.

Additionally, I note why the product was cancelled and/or why we opted not to purchase the product.

So that’s it. I have other workflows for the more detailed processes (adding a title to SFX, setting up SUSHI, etc.) but those exist best as separate workflows.

Posted on

An Archon (and data) manifesto

Last Saturday I was asked to give a short overview of Archon to the Preservation Committee of the Swedish American Historical Society. It was mostly a hands-on demonstration of how to use Archon and not a theoretical exercise about the transformative role of technology in archival metadata. However, the basic question I was trying to answer was “Why does this matter?” or perhaps “Why is this important?” and those seemed like questions worth answering in a compelling way.

Structured Data > Unstructured Data

By this I mean simply that data that is organized into formal structures (whether MARC, Dublin Core, EAD, whatever) has clear and distinct advantages over unorganized and unstructured data. This project began with loosely organized and structured data – paper based finding aids – but migrated that into the more formal structure of Archon. This had several advantages:

  • Ability to standardize language and make the data more uniform.
  • Ability to set clear metadata standards and systematically improve and add metadata.
  • Ability to migrate to new and differnt systems.

The main advantage of this structure vs. unstructured data is so important to me that it deserves it’s own heading

Linked Data > Unlinked Data

Structuring metadata in an online system allows for a paradigm-shifting revolution – that data can be linked to other pieces of data. I’ve been thinking about this for a while – and will likely continue to think about this – but this is the power of the paradigm shift. Data is linked to other data – thereby linking thoughts, ideas, people, etc. Linked data is fundamentally different than unlinked data.

Typing a subject heading onto a card catalog is fundamentally different than typing a subject heading into a linked database. The question when typing a card catalog seemed to be “what will describe this item to our users?” whereas the fundamental question when created linked data is “how can I link this item to similar items in ways that will be helpful and meaningful?” and that is a huge distinction in my mind. Thinks like controlled vocabularies, conforming to national standards, etc. all make infinitely more sense when linked data is viewed from this perspective.

More Access > Less Access

This perhaps seems obvious, but it’s worth mentioning. More access is better than less access. Connecting people to information resources is the most important work of the library and of archives and providing more access seems nearly undeniably better than providing less access.

I will almost certainly add to this later on (as my views on technology and metadata continue to evolve) but I wanted to take a moment to document this particular moment in time,  capture my current thoughts on the subject, and rely a bit of what I wanted to convey to the Preservation Committee of the Swedish American Historical Society.

 

 

 

Posted on

“Focus on People, Not Tools”

I just read this great article posted by Library Journal: here is a link to the article.

Here are two highlights and my reflections on them:

Focusing on the technologies rather than the outcomes changes the way we talk about these topics and the way we learn about them. When we aim for the outcomes, we’re more likely to think deeply about the problems we’re trying to solve and consider multiple strategies that speed us to our goals.

Let me be clear: I’m not downplaying the importance of technology in libraries or setting up a false dichotomy. As a profession, librarianship has developed many mechanisms to learn about technology and the web. This is important, and we need to keep learning about the broader world of resources that can help us efficiently deliver our services. But let’s shift our collective eye to learning about people first, so everything we know about technology can be put in service of supporting meaningful goals.

Yes! Too often I fall into the habit of thinking about technology as the end itself rather as a means to a greater end. I really shouldn’t care how many people like a particular post or follow us on twitter – I really should care about the online community that has gathered around the library and meeting their needs.

Our collective focus on technology also prevents technology from being as deeply integrated into our libraries as it should be. When we fetishize technology, we can only look at it shallowly. When we depend on emerging technology librarians to be the ambassadors for relevant technologies, we take the rest of the organization off the hook.

In fact, if we put the emphasis on people, library technology will become even more important. Currently, it is all too easy to implement tech solutions halfheartedly, check the box that the project is complete, and more or less be done with it.

Yes. I think this article is such a basic reminder that my excitement about libraries and technology is best understood in the broader context of meeting user needs. At least for me, there is a tensions between measuring quantifiable outputs (numbers of followers, number of circulations, etc.) and measuring qualitative outcomes (how patrons engage with the library online, how patrons use library resources, etc.) but that in the best possible world the assessment practices should be tied to both objective standards and to the broader goals.

Posted on

Managing multiple Zotero libraries

I love Zotero. I use it all the time and have been for just over 4 years now. I organize all of my research there and just love using it. I’ve become a bit of a Zotero evangelist too – also happy to tell others about the joys and wonders of Zotero!

In fact, I’m relying on Zotero to help me compile my research for my Master’s thesis project on the history and theology of Covenant Publications. “Covenant” refers to the Evangelical Covenant Church – my denominational home and the parent institution of North Park University and Seminary. However, for the sake of this project, I wanted to keep my personal Zotero library separate from the new library I was creating with Zotero. How do I manage multiple Zotero libraries?

Firefox Profiles

After a quick google search, I found this old thread on the Zotero forums. After that, it was smooth sailing and has allowed me to do things I didn’t even think to dream of! The official Firefox support page is (as always) very helpful and I won’t bother clarifying or adding to it. Here is the link!

Now, when I open Firefox, I just have to select what profile I want to work with. And it’s awesome. My library work profile is separate from my seminary research profile and my personal library is separate from my thesis related research.

Zotero Evangelism

[This has less to do with multiple accounts and more to do with my love of Zotero]

One think I’ve loved as I’ve poured lots and time and energy into my thesis is Zotero’s syncing ability and the fact that all my information is stored in the cloud. It has meant that I’m always working with the most current text – not having to deal with multiple drafts, etc. – and that my information is accessible from anywhere with an internet connection.

Posted on

iPad apps for Libraries and Library People

Lots and lots of websites lists the “Best Apps” for libraries and librarians. So, to that deluge, I thought I would add another. My library is getting five iPads to circulate to current students, faculty, and staff, and I’ve been asked to help come up with a list of apps to add to them. The focus is on free and library specific.

The last section – Personal – lists apps that I use on my personal iPad but would have limited application (no pun intended) on a iPad that is loaned for a few hours. The rest of the apps should be good on a shared iPad – though some will require personal accounts to fully use them

(I hope to update this page frequently so as to stay current!)

Productivity

  • Dropbox – I personally use Dropbox all the time and think it’s wonderful. I’ve never compared it to other cloud based storage systems because I’ve never had any problems.
  • Evernote – I truthfully don’t use Evernote as much as I would like to – and have never really understood why. I use the Apple “Notes” app and this interchangeably to store short, mostly unimportant text. Evernote seems like a racecar that I’m content to idle in the driveway. But it’s nice to have in the driveway.
  • Gmail – If you use gmail you should use this app.
  • Google – Not essential, but makes googling things easier. And I google things like it’s my job.
  • Wikipanion – Wikipediaing things is my part-time job.
  • Paper – This drawing app is great for sketching out ideas and brainstorming. Though the app is free, the new brushes and colors are very tempting.

News and Information

  • NPR – Still my go to source for news.
  • PBS – A close number two.
  • TED – A smarter, more interesting youtube.

Reading

  • Kindle – I know they don’t play nicely with libraries, but this is my preferred ebook reader.
  • Poetry – This is an amazing app that really is perfectly suited and formatted for a tablet. Very fun.
  • Stanza – I don’t use this app personally, but it was highly recommended.
  • Hathitrust – Not an app, just a link to their mobile website.
  • WorldCat – Not an app, just a link to their mobile website. Truthfully, the standard WorldCat site works perfectly well on an iPad.

Social Media

  • Twitter – The official twitter app is still my favorite app. Call me old fashion, I guess.
  • Facebook – It’s a juggernaut.
  • Pinterest – Very nice app that makes pinning even easier.
  • Pandora – I usually listen to my own music, but this seems like a good app to include on loanable iPads.
  • Instagram – The Brandel library is surprisingly very popular on instagram.
  • Youtube – Everything from technology tutorials to funny dog videos.

Website Shortcuts

Personal

  •  [Coming Soon!]