STAFF RESOURCES

Minutes of June 3, 2005 Meeting

Present:
Denda, Dess, Fishman, Gaunt, Hoffman, Niessen (recorder), Womack

1. New Brunswick Faculty Council in the coming year

Niessen's term has ended, Sara Harrington will take his place. Fishman will continue on the Council and as Library Committee chair and will ask NBFC chair Paul Leath to confirm Niessen's continued membership on the committee.

2. Followup on Library Resolutions from the April 15 Faculty Council

Resolution 1: Consultation with RUL on the strategic plan. Gaunt will ask Ron Becker to speak to the September NBFC about the strategic plan.

Resolutions 2-3: Consultation on digital projects. Rutgers supports RUL role in digital dissertations, but individual graduate programs will decide on their time frame. The FAS Graduate School took the initiative in asking RUL to take this on.

The NJDH is also coming into the repository. Earlier digital projects are being examined as to their ingestion into the repository. 2 to 3 e-journals have been adopted at this point (Journal of RUL is in transition). Fishman noted that it is desirable in terms of faculty perception that there be a formal, above-board process for the selection of e-journals to be mounted on the platform.

Resolutions 4-5: Updating the scholarly communication website. Advisory on responding to the NIH policy is important. Gaunt noted that the Office of Research & Sponsored Programs can tell who is getting NIH grants; Hoffman says there are other sources of information for this. She noted that the science faculty are very concerned about author's fees, hence she suggested this issue be discussed in the appropriate fora as part of an open access discussion. This would involve costing out the implications of such a policy, for instance if a university-wide subscription to BioMed Central with payment of authors' fees alleviated the need for authors to pay the fees. Niessen noted that for the sake of equity we might also investigate Rutgers support of subventions for book authors. The committee agreed that the Stanford scholarly communication page at http://library.stanford.edu/scholarly_com/ is an attractive model.

Project RoMEO http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ls/disresearch/romeo/ "(Rights MEtadata for Open archiving) is funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee [,,,] to investigate the rights issues surrounding the 'self-archiving' of research in the UK academic community under the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol for Metadata Harvesting." Gaunt recommends its use to satisfy resolution 4 on journal policies regarding archiving. She will investigate with WAC of a top- level link on the RUL web page for "Publishing Information for Faculty". Its main features would be

NBFC should encourage all departments to link to the page. General discussion ensued about the desirability of getting non-library faculty involved in library collection funding issues.

Resolution 6: Database and listserv of Rutgers editors. Fishman noted that the following faculty discussion venues exist on scholarly communication: the NBFC, its Library Committee, the RUL Advisory Committee, and the database/listserv of editors. The enhanced website should be linked to each of these so that they reinforce each other. It is suggested the improved website be brought online in advance of the activation of the listserv so that it will stimulate members' interest at the outset.

To create the database/listserv subscribers list, the existing spreadsheet must be pared down by eliminating all but a restricted set of editors: chief editors of scholarly peer review journals, and editors of scholarly monographic series. Including other categories, last of all mere board members, would be an option for creating a much less selective list. Then the resulting names should be sorted by department (the spreadsheet format will facilitate this, and liaisons can help). Finally, 1 on 1 email contacts by the liaisons will ascertain editor's current status, willingness to subscribe to listserv, and also answer a brief survey.

3. Future Faculty Symposium on Scholarly Communication

The symposium would be in Spring 2006. Since this would come shortly after the public launch of the repository, it would be timely to make issues of the repository a key theme. Topics covered might include how repositories function at other universities, their role at Rutgers, and next steps. Hoffman would like to see a term other than symposium that would convey the notion of a practical event involving a cost analysis of action plans and even the adoption of plans. The event might be called a working group, or an action plan, or something else. Author pays and open access issues should also be incorporated into the program.



 
URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/scholarly_communication/minutes/scholcom_05_06_03.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy

© Copyright 1997-2013, Rutgers University Libraries   (Further Copyright Information)