How does a differentiation between faculty on separate tracks for research or educational roles will drive change in the reward system? How might it impact scholarly publishing?
Applicants for a recent conference scholarship wrote essays that tended strongly to depict the traditional collection as dead and collaboration between librarians and publishers as essential to the library’s future. Do they herald a generational shift in mindset among librarians?
In Part Two, Richard Fisher looks at the past, the present and the future of monograph publishing in the humanities and social sciences.
Alison Mudditt asks a group of experts: what are the unique contributions that university presses make to scholarship and scholarly communication?
The recent editorial board defection from an Elsevier journal brings up issues raised in Todd Carpenter’s 2013 post on editorial boycotts and declarations of independence. They generate a lot of heat, but what do the data say about the actual success of the new journals compared to the journals that were overthrown.
Editors are quick to assume that reviewer fatigue is slowing them down; but one journal found that excessive invitations to review was not cited as a major reason why reviewers declined invitations.
A range of open access (OA) monograph experiments and studies are upon us, or are about to be, and it’s worth taking a look at what we know now and what we can expect to know in the next year […]
A key element of open access is the notion that circulating information is de facto a positive good. Audiences benefit from access, and scholars benefit from exposure. But for the latter, at least, there is a case to be made for a […]
Google wins in court (again) as the Second Circuit of Appeals rules that its mass book digitization program qualifies as fair use. But Google is a commercial entity! And their files might get hacked! And their library partners are even more susceptible to copyright pirates than Google is! Yes, said the court, but. . .
Alison Muddit interviews Goeffrey Crossick about his report on the future of open access monographs.
We spend much time these days wondering when the academic journal as we know it will cease to exist. Robert Harington discusses the role of the journal in light of a fascinating new venture in the field of mathematics – the overlay journal Discrete Analysis.
Charlie Rapple reports on “Think. Check. Submit.”, a campaign to help researchers learn who they can trust when they are seeking to publish their work.
Revisiting Kent Anderson’s 2014 post on the importance of editors–how much of what we see as a failure of “peer review” is really a failure of editorial oversight?
A collaborative venture between Oxford University Press and the University of Utah’s J. Willard Marriott Library exemplifies a new approach to library publishing, one that could be replicated elsewhere with relative ease and that offers potentially huge benefits to scholarship.
Libraries increasingly provide a wide range of publishing activities, but are there some areas where libraries are not active? It appears that libraries are unlikely to play a large role in publishing that is based on end-user demand.