Rick Anderson is Associate Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication in the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah. He has worked previously as a bibliographer for YBP, Inc., as Head Acquisitions Librarian for the University of North Carolina, Greensboro and as Director of Resource Acquisition at the University of Nevada, Reno. He serves on numerous editorial and advisory boards and is a regular contributor to the Scholarly Kitchen. He has served as president of the North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG), and is a recipient of the HARRASSOWITZ Leadership in Library Acquisitions Award. In 2015 he was elected President of the Society for Scholarly Publishing. He serves as an unpaid advisor on the library boards of numerous publishers and organizations including biorXiv, Elsevier, JSTOR, and Oxford University Press.
One way or another, the #scholcomm community is going to choose either a diversity of publishing models or a monoculture, because it can’t have both. How will this choice be made, and by whom?
A conversation with Scott Delman of ACM about the publisher’s recently-announced deal with four major US research universities.
Here are some takeaways from last week’s Academic Publishing in Europe meeting, from Chefs who were there (either physically or virtually).
A recent opinion paper by Richard Poynder @rickypo offers analysis and prognostication with regard to the current state and future prospects of #openaccess and the open access movement.
How many articles from predatory journals are being cited in the legitimate (especially medical) literature? Some disturbing findings.
Karin Wulf and Rick Anderson discuss some implications of a recent research report on the future of the scholarly monograph.
An interview with Springer Nature’s Dagmar Laging about the emerging transformative open access agreement with Germany’s Projekt DEAL.
An interview with Jason Lorgan, executive director of campus stores at @UCDavis, about the university’s innovative new textbook-affordability program.
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
So does Sci-Hub lead libraries to cancel journals, or doesn’t it? Maybe the answer isn’t a simple yes or no.