[A snowstorm that morning affected the start time of the meeting and some arrival times].
Mullen announced that this meeting takes the place of the regularly scheduled November, December, and January meetings which were to coincide with the weeks of Thanksgiving, Winter Break, and the American Libraries' Association's midwinter meeting.
The minutes for the October meeting, recorded and submitted by Janice Pilch, have been approved (and CSC has had a good run with minutes this year).
The SCOAP3 (Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Partnership in Particle Physics) initiative goes live January 1, meaning that some high-energy physics journals will all switch to open access. The model redirects funds from subscriptions to open access (see http://scoap3.org/ for more information). Rutgers University Libraries was not a participant because pledge money was to come in advance and the timing coincided with our joining the Committee of Institutional Cooperation (CIC).
Future agenda items are open access policy implementation-establishment of an open access fund, memberships, harvesting, other repositories, NIH compliance and dovetailing with Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences. Open access implementation discussions will be taking place tomorrow (Dec. 11) at Cyber Infrastructure Steering Committee meeting and the Rutgers University Libraries Advisory Committee meeting. The final report on open access implementation is due in December 2014.
Rutgers University Libraries is joining CrossRef to put DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) in existing eJournals. Mullen attended the CrossRef annual meeting, which was also attended by lots of publishers. 85% of CrossRef members are from smaller publishing organizations, many nonprofit. CrossRef want to encourage smaller publishers to be in a DOI environment and will help by offering reasonably priced memberships. Izbicki is funding the membership and the initial DOIs. Upgrading existing e-journals is a top priority.
In terms of working collaboratively, the question arose as to whether we can build a shared open access environment with the other CIC schools.
We should also have a discussion about various aspects of Creative Commons licensing. This topic will be scheduled for the March or April CSC meeting.
Some CSC members attended the Electronic Theses and Dissertations program at which Marker and Kevin Mulcahy presented. Mullen attended another publishing workshop for authors at RUPress.
Cabinet has been through two rounds of discussion of digital priorities. The overall priorities are related to infrastructure over individual projects. The fact that priorities will now be revisited every 6 months is a good thing. Mullen then went through the list with CSC and asked the members to bring up any questions they might have.
There needs to be larger discussions about ETDs involving grad students. Students have asked how to be protected against reviewers or editors stealing their work and are fearful of sharing with anyone. Pilch added that the entire process of adding an ETD to RUcore needs to be understood.
The discussion focused on whether Citation Management Tools and Support should be added to the Research Services Website. CSC determined that it should be and an icon should be added to represent it on the Research Services Page (http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/services_researchers) so that it's consistent with the other services on the site.
A Rutgers Open Access Journals page had previously been considered for the research services page. CSC will continue working on this page and Ron Jantz will be listed as the first contact (there will also be a group email). Some questions about language and target audience also need to be considered.
Adding the Citation Management Tools and Rutgers Open Access Journals will bring the "boxes" on the webpage to eight.
This was moved to after item 5 and subsequently tabled. This topic is still being discussed in Planning and Coordinating, and some of its members will look at scholarly communication setups at other peer/aspirant universities. This discussion will return to CSC at a later date.
Pilch is getting a grip on campuswide issues requiring copyright education. It is very much needed as she sees the same questions come up in different places. Pilch reported on a talk she gave at an Academic Leadership program, seeing the same issues arise-people need basics of copyright and contracts. She gets a lot of questions on research and scholarly publishing, and finds that people are surprised to learn about options and that there is a gap between what they know and need to know.
Pilch is working on copyright framework for hybrid/online learning, especially with Pearson, and faculty need to be informed or determinations need to be made on who will make decisions.
RUL is increasingly involved in campuswide initiatives, such as establishing video deposit forms. For digitization projects, they are trying to separate proposals for digitization of analog material from those working with born-digital. For digital projects, the forms don't differentiate between digitization of analog materials and born-digital resources. The technical issues and process workflow are similar for each, but rights issues can vary.
Pilch is also working on a pilot project for digital deeds of gift and procedures related to the 250th anniversary (branded literature and Creative Commons license).
Practical advice regarding copyright is necessary. Pilch plans to have a friendly web page covering the basics up by end of January.
Otto demonstrated how to determine an article's views and downloads in RUcore, both from an article's landing page and from within the deposit form pages. Each location has its own unique displays and methods of counting, which may be a concern. In either case, when a search engine bypasses an article's landing page and goes straight to the pdf, no 'view' is counted. Also, we started counting views some time after we started counting downloads. For this reason, the statistics are out of sync, and generally there are more downloads than views. Users have found this confusing. For this reason, and since an article's impact is better reflected in downloads than in views, CSC proposes that RUcore no longer count or offer counts of views.
There was also discussion of the validity of statistics, and the necessity of knowing that all downloads are legitimate, and not generated (i.e. inflated) by automated means. The possibility of robots/scrapers' downloading activity affecting web stats was mentioned.
Next meeting: February 24, 2014.
Meeting adjourned 12:05.