Developing Effective Scholarly Communication Advocates: The Experiences of Three University Librarians in Developing Scholarly Communication Programs

  • Sara Fuchs – Digital Technologies Librarian, Georgia State University
  • Julie Speer – Head, Scholarly Comm. & Digital Services, Georgia Institute of Technology
  • Christine Fischer – Head of Acquisitions, UNC Greensboro
  • Stephen Dew – Collections & Scholarly Resources Coordinator, UNC Greensboro
[n.b., this entry is a mash-up of all presentations at this session.]

Library liaisons to academic departments need training on IR and scholarly communication issues in general.
  • Hold in-house training based on the ARL/ACRL institute.
  • Review publisher copyright agreements and discuss modifications.
  • Prepare a sample addendum to publisher copyright agreements.
  • Talking points: develop a short list of points to make with teaching faculty.
  • Hold a Take Control of Your Scholarship forum for teaching faculty. Include librarians, IT staff, university counsel, director of technology transfer, etc.
Library liaisons want and need documentation, policies, and outreach plans for scholarly communication and IR.

Expectations vs. Reality: faculty don’t want to self-submit to IR. Explore alternatives for IR submissions. With training, liaisons can actively recruit content for IR. Liaisons can upload objects to IR and mediate transactions for faculty authors.

What not to say to teaching faculty:
  • Institutional Repository
  • eprint
  • post print
  • serials crisis
  • library budget
  • mandate
  • rising journal costs
  • projections

What to say to teaching faculty:
  • your work will have more impact
  • more citations
  • your work will be more accessible
  • digital archive of your work
  • publicity for university
  • easier access for international colleagues
Why librarians can help with copyright, IR questions: we know which publishers support or allow open access. We can help faculty tailor copyright agreements for specific publishers.