Sunday, January 4, 2015

The Evolving Scholarly Record, an OCLC Research Report

A recent OCLC Research report, The Evolving Scholarly Record, attempts to frame both the content of the scholarly record as well as its stakeholders. Authored by Brian Lavoie, Eric Childress, Ricky Erway, Ixchel Faniel, Constance Malpas, Jennifer Schaffner, and Titia van de Werf, this report is a thoughtful exploration of what the scholarly record is, and how libraries can approach its curation.

The report begins by stating that the scholarly record is "the curated account of past scholarly endeavor" (p. 6), but then goes on to explain the difficulty in pinning the definition down. One of the problems is in setting boundaries about what is meant by "record." Does this mean only published materials, or does it include data sets, models, blog postings, and more? Another difficulty comes when we try to define "scholarly." To address some of these challenges, the authors developed a model that describes what constitutes the scholarly record (p. 10). At the center are the outcomes of research: publications such as books or journal articles. Contributing to the process of research are methods, evidence collected, and discussion prior to publication. Post-publication there is reuse, revision, and further discussion. They go on to provide examples of each of these elements of the scholarly record (p. 14). For example, a blog that is established at the same time as a monograph is published, which is intended to provide a forum for discussion of the book, could rightly be considered part of the scholarly record.

The authors go on to describe the "Stakeholder Ecosystem" (p. 16). They include roles that create scholarly output (researchers), "fix" it (publishers), collect it (libraries), and use it (other researchers). Traditional print scholarship goes through a cycle of create, fix, collect, and use (p. 18). E-resources may go through a cycle of create, fix, and use, bypassing the collection role (p. 19). Social media and storage may go through an even simpler process of create and use, bypassing the publisher and library role (p. 20).

The report concludes with some issues that merit further consideration. They include acknowledging a distinction between the scholarly and cultural record; understanding the dynamics of the scholarly record; supporting discovery, access, and use; selection of the permanent scholarly record; and stewardship models going forward.

While I don't think the models of the scholarly record presented in this report adds much to what is commonly understood about it, the issues presented in the conclusion include some important points. Of them, the most important are issues related to discovery, access, and use; selection; and stewardship. Libraries and other organizations need to develop a systematic way to collect and provide access to these resources for future researchers.

Saturday, January 3, 2015

NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Library Edition

The New Media Consortium (NMC) has collaborated with other organizations to create an annual review of trends in higher education, academic and research libraries, and other sectors. The reports are created by consulting a panel of experts using the Delphi Method. Its 2014 Library Edition covers trends, challenges, and important directions in technology. Each of these three sections includes six topics.

The trends include research data management; mobile delivery of content; evolution of the scholarly record; accessibility of research content; progress in technology, standards, and infrastructure; and the rise of new forms of multidisciplinary research.

The challenges listed are embedding libraries in the curriculum; rethinking roles and skills of librarians; capturing digital content as research material; competition from alternate discovery methods; embracing the need for radical change; and maintaining ongoing projects.

Important developments in technology include electronic publishing, mobile apps, bibliometrics, open content, the Internet of Things, and the semantic web and linked data.

None of these trends, challenges, or developments should be a surprise to anyone who is following developments in academic and research libraries. I did find it gratifying to see linked data (and a mention of BIBFRAME) in the list of important developments. As we follow BIBFRAME and the multitude of programs presented at ALA conferences on linked data, the question on my mind has been how long it will take for us to get there. The timeline suggested in this report for widespread adoption of linked data was four to five years.

Each trend, challenge, and development was presented in a two-page format: an introduction; overview; implications for policy, leadership, or practice; and a further reading section. This report and series would be very useful to anyone interested in where academic and research libraries are going.

Friday, January 2, 2015

The Academic Library Landscape: Two Reports

Two recent reports provide some insight into the academic library landscape:

In October 2014 the Taylor & Francis Group published a white paper on the Use of Social Media by the Library: Current Practices and Future Opportunities. Their research consisted of several approaches, including focus groups in the UK, US, and India; ten telephone interviews with library thought-leaders; a "Twitter party;" an online survey; and desk research. Unsurprisingly, they found that more than 70 percent of libraries use social media tools, with facebook and twitter being the most popular. Their use was primarily for purposes of promotion: marketing library events, collections, and services, although there was also some use for collection management, outreach, teaching, and learning. A large majority (88 percent) believed that social media would become more important in the future, although it is difficult to demonstrate the effectiveness of libraries' efforts in this realm. These are just a few of their findings; the whole report is well worth reading for more insights.

In The Changing Landscape of Library and Information Services: What Presidents, Provosts, and Finance Officers Need to Know, authors Richard Holmgren and Gene Spencer describe how college and university IT environments are changing and how library and information technology services can evolve to address future challenges. This report was sponsored by the Council on Library and Information Resources Chief Information Officers (CIOs) group, and based on a workshop that took place in December 2013. This group includes the CIOs of small, private, residential colleges" (p. 1) in which the IT and Library functions have been consolidated under one CIO. The report discusses the major changes of the past 10 years, challenges within higher education, the concept of library and information technology services as a utility, the opportunity to leverage investments, the library as place, and new roles for information services organizations. In their discussion of LITS as a utility, they define utility as "any unit within a college that delivers infrastructure required to support the core mission of fostering student learning" (p. 4). Overall, an interesting read, especially in light of the 2014 Survey of Chief Information Officers that I reviewed on December 31, 2014.