Martin Eve is in a good position to spread the word about how open access publishing can benefit the humanities. He is a lecturer on 20th- and 21st-century American fiction at the University of Lincoln in the UK, with an impressive list of journal articles, book chapters, conference papers, and professional affiliations. His most recent book, Open Access and the Humanities: Contexts, Controversies and the Future, will be published by Cambridge University Press this November. At the moment, however, he is on research leave in order to concentrate on developing his new venture, the Open Library of the Humanities.
Most academic librarians are familiar with the ‘big deal’ bundles offered by large academic publishers, which grant access to a large number of journals from a particular publisher at a discounted rate. And many will also be familiar with the opacity surrounding those deals, which are often negotiated on a school-by-school basis with confidentiality clauses in place. A new study of the economics of these bundle deals suggests that variations in how these bundles are priced for different institutions mean that they are a better deal for some schools than others.
The business of university press monograph publishing has always been madness, and changing conditions have made it even less sensible than it was. Yet any suggestion that there should be fewer university presses or that they should refocus their missions is greeted with shouts of dismay that are usually reserved for heretics and anarchists. Maybe we should remember that oft-quoted definition of madness—doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.
One of the biggest names in scholarly publishing announced it was entering the open access ecosystem on February 14, as the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) announced that it would launch Science Advances, an online only, open access journal covering the same broad range of research topics addressed by the AAAS flagship journal, Science.
Vendor relations are a mixed bag. They can range from mutual respect and support to contempt and contentiousness. Academic librarians need to exchange experiences and information, but it will really help if someone is listening.
This year, several announcements and blog posts combined to focus my attention on a slightly different question. What problems can open access solve? The answer seems obvious; open access will solve the problem of highly restricted and limited access to scholarship. A somewhat different problem that OA can help solve is the problem of scholarship locked up in the hands of badly run businesses that have come to believe that their inefficient and ineffective ways of doing business must be preserved at all costs.
Here we go again? Earlier this week we posted a roundup of coverage about lawsuits re: Dale Askey and McMaster University. Today, Inside Higher Ed. is reporting about the Canadian Centre for Science and Education sending a letter to Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and scholarly initiatives librarian at the University of Colorado Denver saying they have [...]
The following article (pre-publication version) is scheduled to appear in the Spring 2013 issue of Research Library Issues published by ARL, CNI, and SPARC. Title The State of Large-Publisher Bundles in 2012 (Prepub Version) Authors Karla L. Strieb Associate Director for Collections, Technical Services and Scholarly Communications, Ohio State University Libraries Julia C. Blixrud Assistant [...]
The 36th PROSE Awards honored 50 works at the annual Professional and Scholarly (PSP) Conference in Washington, DC.
Just a few months after the merger of the Project MUSE Editions project and the University Press ebook Consortium (UPCC) to form the University Press Content Consortium (see “Two University Press Ebook Initiatives Merge”), UPCC has announced a total of 51 partners on board.