STAFF RESOURCES

Minutes of March 23, 2015 Meeting

Present:
Tom Izbicki, Rhonda Marker, Aletia Morgan, Laura Mullen (chair), Jill Nathanson, Jane Otto, Janice Pilch (recorder), Krista White, Yingting Zhang
Excused:
Minglu Wang

1. AUL report (Izbicki)

2. Chair's report (L. Mullen)

3. Round Robin Updates

Copyright update (J. Pilch)

The HathiTrust Public Services Task Force adopted an action plan on March 18 for its second and final phase, consisting of five areas to be implemented by five working groups: Access Working Group that will address important issues of print disability access, Catalog and Discovery Working Group, Preservation Working Group that will address using preservation copies under the section 108(c) copyright exception, Report Working Group, and Training, Documentation, and Promotion Working Group.

The Research Data implementation is also entering a phase two, with the copyright review of the task force report. As was discussed in LRC on February 19, some of the information in the report will need revision to address legal aspects and the report will be tweaked with respect to the legal issues.

J. Pilch attended a national copyright meeting at the University of North Carolina last week and reported that Rutgers is well within the norm in terms of approaches to copyright and other legal issues- somewhere in the middle. But with respect to funding for copyright-related projects, including digitization and author fees, Rutgers lags significantly.

HathiTrust meeting with Jeremy York (R. Marker)

R. Marker reported on the meeting held with Jeremy York on February 24.

RUL will be able to offer full download of public domain works, including to onsite library users. Access will be by IP address with NetID proxy. Walk-ins may apply for access. Other groups will probably be excluded, such as alumni, retirees including emeritus faculty, doctoral students not registered for classes, and visiting scholars.

We will not be able to lend HT resources. We may put files on class reserves and make them available to all registered students for that class including out of state and out of country uses, with an appropriate login.

HT provides two options for users with print disabilities: PDF that incudes images and OCR text layer- RUL has to provide software for extracting the text and extract the text; and ePub version.

HT accepts "book or book-like materials." They will not accept material like letters as individual pieces of correspondence, but will accept compilations of letters that take the form of a book.

For preservation, if our item has a status of damaged, deteriorating/brittle, lost, stolen and it is in the HT database of out-of-print titles, HT will make it available to our users. HT has guidelines for checking if something is out of print. J. Pilch added that it is our responsibility to do the work to see if a work is out of print following the "In-Print Status Review" documentation, and HT aggregates files of these searches.

HT supports Zotero but not RefWorks.

Mendeley update (L. Mullen)

L. Mullen wants to explore using Mendeley as a scholarly collaborative space and what the library's role in this space will be. We get many questions about use of ResearchGate, Academia.edu, etc., especially since we have access now (to the basic version, not institutional edition). Mendeley has 700 users at Rutgers (those registering as RU affiliates. What will the library's role be?

Mendeley has a certification course of 15-20 hours if people are interested. Laura will send out an article by Richard Price on Academia.edu. CSC needs to decide what it will do in the area of collaborative scholarly networking tools.

A. Morgan wants to ensure that RUL maintains communication with the ORED and ORSP university offices to look for opportunities to coordinate our efforts with their research management systems.

Supplemental Data and SOAR (L. Mullen, J. Otto)

SOAR may be able to be innovative in handling published supplementary data. J. Otto and L. Mullen had been discussing this since 2011. The RUresearch group confirmed that that we can handle this for SOAR deposits.

"Academic Reference in the Trenches" program recap (Y. Zhang)

Yingting reported on the one-hour, 5-member panel on March 12 charged by VALE Reference Services Committee, chaired by Joseph Deodato and moderated by Kay Cassell.

4. SOAR deposit form revisions, updates and discussion (J. Otto)

The group went through 25-30 suggested revisions which have been proposed either by Otto and Mullen (dating to 2013, to streamline form and align it with the OA policy message) or by faculty members of the OA Policy Implementation Working Group, who made deposits via the OAF pilot. This has been backburnered at CSC, but is now timely, since J. Deodato's usability study yielded many comments which will generate changes to the form. It would be good for CSC comments to inform that discussion.

CSC comments included: Change "Assign permission" because it sounds like some other kind of permission; use 'proxy' or 'designee'; 'IP rights" should be "Choose license"; people don't know what "Article, Refereed" means, or that it's a synonym for peer reviewed; see if progress bar can be converted to tabs, for jumping around (so long as input data is not lost, of course); agree "Category" should be changed to "Type of Work"; get rid of "copyright holder" question (we have to investigate anyway, and author usually checks either the wrong thing or "I don't know"); the copyright holder question could be changed to "Have you transferred copyright to your publisher?" but not all deposits are published articles; order of summary and upload screens used to be reversed and it wasn't popular (on the other hand, if they were swapped, you could see your own file name in the summary, then 'Finish'); would be nice to be able to drag the file to upload it; the reference on the top bar to "Intellectual Property Rights" should be changed to "License".

There was a brief discussion of the balance we need to strike between educating users and simply expediting progress through the form. For some copyright information, perhaps hover text could be added. Additional comments will be taken by email. See handout on Proposed Revisions.

5. ORED Newsletter and archive update (Morgan)

The contribution on Scopus has been sent. We will send information on the 10th of every month, so we don't have to worry about the exact distribution date. What do we want to do with the items we write and publish? Do we want to archive? We have the pieces, and ORED's newsletter will not be archived forever.

Aletia talked to Sam about putting this information up on an RUL webpage. Another option is to keep it on our Sakai site. Can we add it as part of Drupal's 'News' feature, on the CSC panels page? This could include all scholarly communication news, such as announcements brought to CSC. We will need resources to maintain this. Aletia will make a proposal. Jane and Laura will put an ORCID piece in by April 10. See handout on Proposed Schedule for Short ORED Newsletter Topics.

6. New panels on CSC webpage (All)

The committee will continue discussing new ideas for the CSC webpage.

7. Open Access Week 2015 planning (All)

Yingting met with J. Cohn and K. O'Rourke. We could have a keynote in Newark, stay at the Hyatt and organize a talk at New Brunswick the next day. There might be two identical presentations on two different days. There was a question on whether it would be possible to videoconference instead, or record the presentation and play at a live panel the next day.

8. Announcements, Adjourn

There will be an ACRL roundtable on open access policymaking this week, led by L. Mullen and Anne Langley (Princeton) in Portland, OR.

The meeting was adjourned.



 
URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/com_of_schol-comm/minutes/schol-comm_15_03_23.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy

© Copyright 1997-2017, Rutgers University Libraries