Minutes of January 31, 2013 Meeting

Laura Mullen (co-chair), Jane Otto (digital library issues, Senator), Janice Pilch (copyright), Caryn Raddick (SC & UA) , Jeffrey Triggs (SCC, recorder), Joseph Deodato (digital library issues) , Minglu Wang (data), Yingting Zhang (UMDNJ), Donna Schulman (social sciences, minutes)
Tom Izbicki (co-chair)


  1. Introductions and welcome to Yingting Zhang, UMDNJ liaison to CSC; brief update on scholarly communication issues of interest to UMDNJ constituencies (All)
    1. Targum articles and communication (added at last minute)
  2. The research services aggregated website; final decision making and moving forward (Wang and Mullen)
  3. Brief update from Senate RGPEC in terms of OA Policy, other initiatives (Otto)
  4. RU/RUL Copyright Update (Pilch)
  5. Announcements and Miscellaneous/updates from sessions at ALA Seattle (all)

1) We welcomed Yingting Zhang, UMDNJ liaison to CSC. Yingting has been at UMDNJ since 1993, and she updated us about UMDNJ activities involving open access. Yingting herself has been the NIH public access person for UMDNJ and is the Endnote contact person for the UMDNJ New Brunswick campus. Some other items:

1a) Targum articles and communication

There is concern about two articles published recently by the Targum, the student newspaper:

  1. Libraries increase book digitization, Jan. 25 2013
  2. New RUcore policy opens online repository (editorial), Jan. 29 2013

The articles are disseminating incorrect and misleading information. For example, the 1/29 editorial states that under the Open Access policy "faculty and scholars will be required to share all their work in the University libraries' online repository called RUCore" and describes RUCore as "a 24-hour private reading room" that students can use instead of reading books in the library. It also gives the impression that President Barchi has already signed off on the Senate OA resolution.

We are concerned because the articles are available on the Internet, both on the Targum web site and elsewhere, and might be the source of continuous errors about Rutgers' OA and other library policies. There are questions about who to refer student reporters to, when they ask Harry or other library personnel for information, and also a question about how to respond. It is a tricky problem, since we don't want to impinge on students' rights to a free press.

Laura will talk to Harry, to explore options, whether we should send a letter with corrections to the editorial or reach out to the Targum in another way.

2. Research Services web site.

Vision for an Aggregated Webpage (under current RUL website framework)
RUresearch Data Services (outline for landing page)

The website is meant to be an aggregated presence that will provide access to all RUL research services. We have presented the mockups to the Web Board and the RUresearch team and received positive feedback. Wording has become an issue, and has been discussed in other RUL meetings (Planning and Coordinating Committee, November). Data Management Services is now Research Data Management. There is a question about how to linguistically present Research Services to the non-library university community, which has its own ideas about what research services means. Research Support Services is one suggestion, but we don't think that communicates what we do.

Minglu presented the outline for the Research Data Management webpage/landing page. This is our first demo page, and was very useful in helping us explore what each landing page should look like and the information that should be presented.

Responding to questions about the platform for the web site, Joseph told us that we will be migrating to Drupal this spring. RUCore will also have a new version and appearance soon. We hope that our content preparation can be timely integrated into the new library website release. Joseph said there will be multiple linkages of our website, for example, "faculty services" and "for research".

We briefly discussed branding and visual identification systems. The University has rules on how different departments can use Rutgers symbols and name.

We discussed the details of structure and look of the website homepage and landing page for each service:

Discussion about the major sections on the website's homepage:

We have seven major sections, with room for an eighth. Several suggestions were made, including compliance, ETD's, and citation management systems. It was decided that Citation Management Tools would be added and the other topics would be treated within larger sections.

Major sections and assignments:

  1. Open Access - Laura and Jane
  2. Copyright - Janice
  3. eJournals - Laura and Jeffery
  4. Data Management - Minglu
  5. RUCore - Jane
  6. Digitization Projects - Caryn and Janice
    (describe as consultative service, FAQ)
  7. DCRC - Jane (in consultation with Isaiah)
    (technical preservation, give specs, answer common questions)
  8. Citation Management Tools - Yingting

3. Open Access Update, Jane

The Senate OA resolution is still awaiting Barchi's signature; it is one of many outstanding resolutions and business items on his desk. Jane is actively pursuing closure on this, requesting status updates from the Executive Committee every time it meets, and seeking suggestions from RGPEC. We need to emphasize that by adopting this measure we are joining an elite group of universities engaged with Open Access.

Research support Infrastructure charge to RGPEC: The Senate Committee has several subcommittees working on this because the charge is so broad. Jane is on the Data and Information Sharing Subcommittee. Speakers to the committee so far have included Grace Agnew, Tibor Purger and Rhonda Marker from RUL, as well as Silvia Muller and Peter Mattaliano from DoCS, Tom Richardson from the Office of Research Alliances, and Don Smith and Charles Hedrick form OIT. Ryan may speak at the March meeting. Reports are due in April, but that may change. (handout, Research Support Infrastructure Charge, S-1108)

4. Copyright Update, Janice

The U.S. Copyright Office is soliciting comments on amending Section 108 of the copyright law and on orphan works. Both issues have significant implications for libraries and archives.

In the library, the digitization framework is being discussed as a way to create a workflow for digital projects. Insofar as the new framework involves copyright decisions, this is not about creating stricter copyright requirements, but merely to make the process better known and to help get projects moving more quickly. The Jazz Oral History project in Newark is one of the first big projects we are pursuing under this type of framework. In general we are looking at any legal restrictions associated with project materials, and operating within accepted national practices for digitization. Other major efforts include new copyright policies and forms for IJS and SC/UA. This year Janice hopes to review the system for RUcore rights statements to make sure they are clear and that standard statements are being used. Also RUL will begin to discuss the archiving of "born digital works" in the university. There is the continuing task of addressing copyright law and practices with faculty and students, involving workshops and individual queries. The new copyright website will clarify copyright issues involving research, scholarship, and teaching. There is a great demand for service in this area.

5. Updates and Announcements

With the meeting running over and no pressing announcements on hand, there is nothing to report for this agenda item.

Next meeting: Feb. 25th.

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/com_of_schol-comm/minutes/schol-comm_13_01_31.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries