Minutes of November 24, 2014 Meeting

Jane Otto, Laura Bowering Mullen, Yingting Zhang, Minglu Wang, Aletia Morgan, Rhonda Marker, Ron Jantz (invited), Tom Izbicki, Caryn Radick (recorder) Krista White (teleconferencing from Newark)
Jill Nathanson, Janice Pilch

Chair's Report (Mullen)

Mullen reminded the committee that there is no meeting in December. The next meeting is scheduled for January 26, 2015. In the meantime, all other business should be conducted via e-mail.

Symplectic Elements is coming for a demo December 11, 2014. Symplectic Elements is being used by the University of California's open access implementation (as well as by others). Mullen invited them so Rutgers could learn about what Symplectic Elements could do for RU's open access implementation. Symplectic Elements crawls the web and looks for institutionally- authored papers and notifies authors, giving them additional details about the OA Policy as well as how to deposit their discovered papers. The open access implementation report is due to University in December, so we want to see Symplectic Elements to see if it should be added to recommendations. Symplectic Elements is part of Digital Science, which also includes FigShare and Altmetric. We will want to recommend whatever products could help us facilitate policy implementation.

Mullen also talked to Elsevier about coming for a more advanced Mendeley (reference manager and scholarly network) training. It would be good for librarians to start thinking about how Mendeley could work for grad students, who are part of the Rutgers open access policy. It is useful to think of open access policy as the central hub and start working other programs (such as Mendeley and ORCID) around it.

The Charleston Conference also put together open access people and people representing journals that cause some additional work and issues for open access policies. For instance, Nature, AAAS and PNAS require authors to get waivers from the OA policy. Laura is composing an e-mail to Congressman Rush Holt who is taking over as CEO of the AAAS family of journals Holt has demonstrated that he's pro-library. It is unclear what his level of support is for open access.

In spring CSC will continue discuss scholarly communication organization and the makeup of the committee. Planning and Coordinating Committee wants to discuss it again in the spring, particularly how to evolve the committee so that it's more inclusive, especially in light of open access implementation.

Discussion of issues with AUL (Izbicki)

Libraries Resources Council (LRC) will be looking at Academic Analytics as far as what it can tell us about directions for future collections and better budgets. It can get down to the level of productivity of individual members, which can be problematic regarding privacy issues and individuals taking on other responsibilities, but worth looking at holistically for departmental reporting.

Mullen, Jantz, and Izbicki have been discussing open access journal issues. Izbicki asked what else he should be looking at now that he's able to spend time on issues other than the budget. Mullen thinks publishing, journals, and textbooks should be a continuing focus. Jantz is working with Grace Agnew and Michael Lesk to design a library school publishing course. An independent study student is doing survey of what library schools offer publishing courses. If it pans out, they would launch a course in Spring 2016. The focus will be on research libraries and new roles for librarians.

Mullen and Otto attended Kevin Smith's (Duke 's Director of Copyright and Scholarly Communication) presentation to graduate students at Princeton, who said libraries must be producing information/be working on production, not just purchasing/licensing scholarly content.

Mullen would like input on all citation analysis tools issues: there may need to be a panel about both traditional and alternative metrics to our CSC webpage. What metrics are needed all around? Should we add a panel to our webpage? Also, we need to be adding open access materials to collections. Izbicki said there is a form on the collection development page for adding free materials to the catalog and it might be good to have meeting focused on the collection development side of open access. Open access collection development will help liaisons. There are also questions regarding HathiTrust and how we can contribute, but they not responded to questions on some issues. Marker said we also need to identify who deals with HathiTrust issues. Mullen stated that Melissa Just has a task force for this, and HathiTrust can be put on CSC agenda soon for an update.

Other questions include how Responsibility Centered Management will be managed and how we will establish a "base." There can be tensions involving the library "dunning" departments and conversely the libraries may be on the defensive when asked why it doesn't have what academic units need. Izbicki stated that the university may ask the Libraries to model further cuts.

"Round Robin" updates: Data Task Force (Morgan), Tweeting SOAR (Zhang), Open Access Fellows pilot (Mullen), SOAR status update (Otto)

Morgan: Data Task Force. The task force is moving forward. Right now, it's trying to get to the point of funneling things to a final product report by the end of the year. It is working on final recommendations and workflows for phase one implementation. This includes issues such as: 1. if someone comes to us with data, what is the level of handholding needed automated process? 2. Staffing-in general, data work could start today (if approval was given) based on demand. Jantz stated that they could start working on such projects under embargo until ownership of data issues is resolved. It may be six months before there's a clear policy, so perhaps the best tactic is to move ahead with ingesting and embargo. Morgan said that word is getting out about data management and we need to get a message out rather than give a vague/noncommittal response. Mullen pointed out that the SOAR deposit process will also be an issue as people may want to link their supplemental data (being published) to the article.

There was further discussion about what was needed to move forward with data management projects. This hinges on Cabinet approval and University General Counsel wants a policy for data management. As we are entering into an end of year schedule, there's some question about whether this will be discussed before the end of the year. Issues may need to be taken up with the Interim Vice President for Information Services and University Librarian (unappointed at this time). Data needs to be a major agenda item. White pointed out that we need to be transparent, and that embargo is a problem for faculty who want data accessible, not just "preserved."

Zhang: Tweeting SOAR. CSC is going to be tweeting. The Twitter Username is Rutgerssoar/ and the password was distributed. @Rutgerssoar looking for frequent Twitter users. Zhang can give an informal Twitter workshop to help us do better/more effective tweeting. CSC was interested in a workshop.

Mullen: Open Access Fellows Pilot. Harvard has an "Open Access Fellows" program where graduate and undergraduate students are trained to do brief visits with faculty about open access. It's a way of scaling up and getting younger people involved and engaged. Mullen and Otto are giving a report to the Libraries Advisory Committee that will eventually make its way up to Barchi about the open access policy implementation. A discussion followed about whether we should have an open access fellows program here. We want interested students who are trained and can show the capabilities of SOAR. There is a pilot going on now so can see if we want to recommend this. Melissa Just has lent an iPad for the project and Matt Gallagher from TAS is working with Mullen and Otto on a limited pilot this month. He will meet with two faculty members from our working group. He's sending e-mail, making appointment for 10-15 minutes and getting and giving info. This will allow Mullen and Otto to gauge whether to recommend the development of a similar program at Rutgers.

OpenCon conference just happened in Washington. This was the first open access conference for graduate students and early career researchers. This is becoming a big focus for OA. The conference was interested in Rutgers representation since we're the only institution with an open access policy for grad students.

Otto: SOAR. RUcore Release 7.5 will be the second major release for SOAR. Otto and Mullen are working on the implementation report about SOAR that is due to the administration on Dec. 31. Although SOAR is not "public" it is accessible at Everyone is reminded not to advertise this URL until after the holidays.

Open Access Journals Program status update (Jantz, guest)

Jantz mentioned that Cabinet was due to re-set the digital project priorities in December. "Under development" will be taken off the "For Researchers" web page for the Open Access Journals panel since the panel and page describe what we have -as opposed to what is being developed. Grace Agnew had said that we can't go forward with open access journals without having an archives program in place. There also needs to be a discussion about soliciting new journals. There are seven CIC university libraries publishing journals (some archive, some don't) including Michigan, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, and Nebraska. We are still working on a formal program and acknowledge that sustainability is an issue. The vision is that there would be a governing/advisory body consisting of University Librarian, Editor, Dean or Dept. Head of the associated area. The Libraries would have an "OA journals team." Such a program would move slowly, one or two journals a year. This is meant to be cost effective-the journal would be set up and then the editor would take control. Steps towards launching a journal would include a proposal form like the libraries' form for digitization. The issue of publishing and archiving had not been through Cabinet yet. There was also a discussion about how to define a "high impact" journal.

Archiving is about using Open Journal Systems (OJS)'s capability for exporting content and using the WMS for ingesting content. All content will be in RUcore and "dark." (i.e. not findable or viewable) This won't be ready until July and still needs to be reviewed and vetted through the usual processes.

Visibility/Discoverability of "Information for Researchers" CSC webpage

The Information for Researchers page should be made more visible as it is growing and needs to be discoverable. There was discussion about changing the "Information for Researchers" to "Scholarly Communication/Information for Researchers" (or flipping the two concepts). Without the connection to scholarly communication, it's harder to find. We will also send the following requests to Sam and Mary Ann: under the RUL main menu "Services", insert (under Research Assistance), an additional "Scholarly Communication" link to our main page of "Information for Researchers / Scholarly Communication"; take out the "(Under Development)" for "Rutgers Open Access Journals" from the main panel page and its landing page ."Panel and page contributors need to work with Wang to keep their pages current. Also, Otto and Mullen will do a SOAR panel.

Office of Research and Economic Development Newsletter: Schedule/assignment of contributions (Morgan)

Morgan is coordinating topics and schedules. There is a spreadsheet available for us to sign up for topics. We can start with January and think about how to make the information available (and archived) on the RUL site (this can be discussed as a future agenda item). For now, start getting content together. We have an opportunity to contribute content to each newsletter issue.

Strategic Plan follow up on action items (Mullen) (Tabled)

Announcements (All)

Zhang reported that on Dec. 4 there will be a citation management workshop covering Flow and Endnote. Symplectic demo is on the 11th.

Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy

© Copyright 1997-2017, Rutgers University Libraries