New Study on Scholarly Communication

This new study on scholarly communication is quite interesting. It’s worth a read if your library is involved in supporting innovation in the scholarly communication process. I was intrigued at their conclusions that innovation receptivity was higher in older faculty and arts faculty. There is limited but significant use of alternative forms of scholarship, with 21% of faculty having published in open-access journals, and 14% having posted peer-reviewed articles in institutional repositories or disciplinary repositories. 82% admitted to being fairly unaware of OA I think if we’re hoping to see progress on critical issues like open access and copyright, it’s worth reviewing these results and giving them a ponder.
Faculty Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Scholarly Communication:
Survey Findings from the University of California
Prepared by The University of California Office of Scholarly Communication and the California Digital Library eScholarship Program in association with Greenhouse Associates1
August 2007
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
“The University of California’s Office of Scholarly Communication (OSC) promotes and
encourages Universitywide planning and action to develop scholarly communication systems
that 1) meet the needs of the University’s researchers, teachers, and students; 2) are
economically sustainable; and, 3) leverage Internet technologies to support innovation in all
forms of scholarship.
Results of the survey reveals a profile of UC’s community of scholars where:
“• Faculty are strongly interested in issues related to scholarly communication.
• Faculty generally conform to conventional behavior in scholarly publication, albeit with significant beachheads on several fronts.
• Faculty attitudes are changing on a number of fronts, with a few signs of imminent change in behaviors.
• The current tenure and promotion system impedes changes in faculty behavior.
• On important issues in scholarly communication, faculty attitudes vary inconsistently by rank, except in general depth of knowledge and on issues related to tenure and promotion.
• Faculty tend to see scholarly communication problems as affecting others, but not themselves.
• The disconnect between attitude and behavior is acute with regard to copyright.
• University policies mandating change are likely to stir intense debate.
• Scholars are aware of alternative forms of dissemination but are concerned about preserving their current publishing outlet.
• Scholars are concerned that changes might undermine the quality of scholarship.
• Outreach on scholarly communication issues and services has not yet reached the majority of faculty.
• The Arts and Humanities disciplines may be the most fertile disciplines for university sponsored initiatives in scholarly communication.
• Senior faculty may be the most fertile targets for innovation in scholarly communication.
The OSC is sharing these results openly and widely, as a contribution to campus and
University-wide strategic planning, and in the hope that they will inform the scholarly
communication program planning of non-UC stakeholders. Within UC, the results are being
made available to various segments and stakeholders in order to assist ongoing efforts to:
• Contribute to strategic planning and implementation of a range of publishing services made available to faculty, departments, and research centers;
• Redirect and fine-tune outreach and education activities that deepen scholars’ understanding and inform their actions with regards to disseminating and using research results;
• Inform the University’s contributions and responses to policy proposals and other environmental developments;
• Organize and prioritize faculty attention through ad hoc as well as formal governance venues.”
It is a rich report at 126 pages with interesting data on whether faculty think citation analysis or download numbers are indicators of quality or value. Only 75% thought that rising journal costs werer a burden on their insititutions. It’s also nice to see some data on their real attitudes toward publishing and tenure versus institutional policy.
Interesting anyway, and among all faculty respondents, 72% agreed that minor or substantial
changes need to be made so there’s room for conversation here between libraries and faculty.
Stephen