Friday, 31 July 2015

IATUL Conference 2015 - Day 2

Day 2:

Keynote 3:

Wilma van Wezenbeek : “Open? Make it easy and fair!”

Ms. Van Wezenbeek focused on the how and why of open access publishing, making the argument that everyone should have easy access to research, as science grows when you spread and use results. This also prevents the unnecessary repeating of research. The assertion was made that science is for all, and that taxpayers should have access to the research that they pay for. The point was made that open access ties to open science, open education and open ICT, which requires responsible data management along the way.
The 3TU federation in the Netherlands have been leaders in the field of data repositories, being founder of the Datacite service in the 3TU Datacentrum. [See]. Policy in the Netherlands is to work towards 100% open access publishing by 2020. To this end there have been negotiations, including the Chairs of the Dutch Universities, with Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Sage, Oxford University Press, the American Chemical Society, Taylor and Francis, and Kluwer.
The argument was made that substantial open access output is needed to flip the publishing model in its favour. A call for a FAIR system was made.
Fair System


Keynote 4:

Wolf-Tilo Balke: “University libraries – between service providers and research institutions”

Mr. Balke argued that the idea of the library is an old one, and now libraries have a big data problem, and need to care more about the semantics in the metadata that they index, as the aim is to provide access to knowledge. The analogy was used that trying to get information from the web was like trying to get a drink from a fire hydrant. Consequently semantic indexing of heterogonous formats is need, such as that used by Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic Search. Major challenges facing indexing at the moment include automatic indexing and searching across paths. The culture of search in the chemistry discipline was used as an example, where researcher search for the chemical structure, but by 2009 the CAS index (for which a license costs +$30,000), had +50 million substances. The proposal was made that index retrieval interfaces are needed for every discipline, type of use and type of person… which differentiate at the level of detail provided in the result. For example: the results to match the question ‘What is the Higgs Boson particle?’ need to be different for users at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels of education.
Many automated data mining approaches now exist, and libraries as information institutions need to be connected to capture the semantics of these, as a large corpus of information sources is now held external to the library itself. In addition libraries should be aware of the increasing levels of publication withdrawals as issues with quality, data massaging, and honest mistakes in research are increasingly identified.

Mr. Balke questioned how reliable Science 2.0 is, and whether it represents collective intelligence or the dictatorship of the few. Hence his call for more collaborative research, and assertion that to extract the full potential of a corpus for researchers is important so that they can truly stand on the shoulders of giants. He stated that collaborative researchers looking to achieve the full potential for their corpus need to remember that what is good for one discipline is not necessarily so for another, as personalized knowledge spaces are still a distant hope at this point in time.

Posters on Stage:

10 posters were presented to the conference, all of which could have provided enough content for an individual parallel session.
Topics covered included:

  • ·        The united activities of 26 Latvian libraries.
  • ·        An analysis of the social networks of chemistry academics, identifying invisible colleges, who collaborates, and where collaboration is generated by this activity.
  • ·        The TIB AV portal, where descriptive metadata is automatically generated leveraging linked open data.
  • ·        Partnership approaches to strategic planning, illustrating 6 phases, 10 steps and 6 key questions.
  • ·        An approach to the digital long term preservation of human data.
  • ·        The use of social media in Academic Libraries
  • ·        New approaches to Reference Services – bridging the digital divide
  • ·        Open Science – Open Access along the research cycle, and data management tools
  • ·        Publishing in an Open Access Repository and the data management infrastructure required to support this.
  • ·        Providing free access to professional organization members to key peer reviewed resources, and the associated advice services.

Changing Environments for Librarians Session

Sagren Moodley: “repurposing library space: How the teaching and development grant and strategic partnerships made this a reality”

This speaker detailed the challenges faced by this relatively new TU (merged in 2003), with 26,000 students of whom 97% are undergraduates. Included in these challenges was the need to change the library ‘as place’, especially as we enter into a period where the size of the physical collection is no longer relevant, as is evidenced by the increase in e-book usage and corresponding fall in circulation. The changes which were undertaken were a strategic response to the introduction in 2010 of a student centred philosophy, aiming to create an environment conducive to learning. Specific issues were to be addressed by the project, including space for the physical collection and reducing noise levels. However, the expected funding did not materialize leading to the necessity of examining other streams of possible funding.
The library applied for funding from the teaching and development grant as the changes would support its role in supporting learning, e-learning, retention to graduate level [graduate hub], differing learning styles, and enhance information literacy provision.
2 pilot projects were undertaken and some interesting observations emerged as a result of these, for example students found the traditional issue desk, the first thing that greeted them when they came in the door, a threat. Sustainability was built into the design, with green technologies applied where practicable.

Hildegard Schaffler: “Value-based pricing, open access, enhanced rights – the impact of current trends on collaborative collection building for digital resources”

Ms. Schaffler outlined her experiences as Head of Serials for the Bavarian State Library, and trends observed in relation to subscriptions, renewals, licencing and pricing while in that role. In relation to digital resources she spoke of twenty year trends, which inform what is happening today,  the work of the ‘International Coalition of Library Consortia’, [] and how ‘Big Deals’ emerged in response to journals crises. Models of publishing and pricing were discussed. For example ‘Library Journal’s’ Annual survey of periodicals pricing[] , issues with double dipping by publishers, charging for access and charging to publish, issues with the price of Gold Standard Open Access Publishing, Mega journals which are essentially databases themselves, Hybrid models such as that used by Springer [where only selected articles are available via the open access model], PLOS publishing on the basis of scientific soundness rather than potential impact,  ACS’ pricing based on more non-traditional usage figures, being the introduction of a tiered pricing structure, and perhaps a next generation publishing model. Further discussion revolved around the 2012 Finch report in the UK where Gold Standard Open Access publishing was put forward as the way to go to Academics in the UK [  ], and the 2014 Report for JISC Collections on Total Cost of Ownership Project:  [  ] . It was put to the attendees that in relation to e-journals, the ‘big deal’ still dominates.
The ‘LIBER Response to STM Statement on Text and Data Mining’ was discussed in relation to copyright and licensing changes proposed at EU level, [ ], as well as Library Journals assertion that the financial tipping point for Open Access to become the dominant model still being a while away from fruition. Attendees were reminded that it is in our own interest to standardise pricing models, but be aware that usage statistics are ambivalent and value-based price analytics could be a more useful tool.
The Austrian model, which avoids double dipping, was put forward as an exemplar. The point was made that usage right should be considered in addition to access rights when negotiating licenses, with perpetual access viewed in some quarters as added value. Issues with enforcement arise, especially in relation to hosting of open access articles on local servers, and repositories, as text and data-mining rights may not automatically transfer to the local service.  The Green Standard was put forward as that most beneficial to libraries and their home institutions, but the point was made that transition to this may differ across disciplines, or take very different directions, due to the differing nature of the content and subject scope.
It was noted that there are hidden costs to moving to these ‘next generation’ models, as those who use a lot, may also produce a  lot, which in turn generates administration costs.

Sharon L. Bostick/Brian Irwin: “Changing spaces: Creating the next generation of work environments for library staff”

This joint presentation by a Librarian and an Architect was interesting in that it illustrated two differing views of the same project. The librarian’s point of view was that the Architect comes to the project with a different eye. Ms. Bostick asserted that space impacts on behaviour, and that staff spaces were key to the strategic planning of the project. Currently libraries are going through a time of huge change, from storage and study to learning spaces, and becoming busier than ever as a result. This change means that Academic Libraries are now repositioned at the core of Academic Architecture. This has an impact on the special typographies applied to projects such as this, as one size no longer fits all, and spaces need to be designed to be flexible. Contemporary models of study require differing special layouts, as activities are no longer stratified; making the real issue the retro fit of one size fits all buildings to facilitate these blended activities.
Attendees were reminded that the library desk provides the visitors first impression, and asked to consider what it says about their institution. It was highlighted that to break down barriers between staff and patrons it is important not to squirrel staff away in attics, or diffuse them too far away from their collaborative teams. As libraries shift from transactions to consultations as the main business at hand, funding sources and existing building layouts can make it hard to be innovative with the use of space. It is essential therefore to look at the dynamics of the staff to be located within the space at hand. Uniform spaces / room can have multiple uses: offices, project space, group study etc. depending on need / demand. The University of Helsinki City Campus Library was examined in relation to its transition to the promotion of self-service activities with library staff moved to more consultative roles.
The project included the design of library specific furniture, including the library desk, which can be reconfigured easily. The Munday Library was discussed in relation to the desire to test out space usage and not commit to any one solution. Attendees were reminded to design based on library mission rather than staff personality, and that no one gets it right the first time.
Notable trends observed by the project team included the removal of issue desks, and their replacement with information desks, and in parallel the introduction of academic enrichment services into library spaces, in addition the introduction of consultation areas gives some flexibility. (Academic skills, CELT).
The Hunt Library [] was put forward as an example of a very experimental library space where some elements of the space are very successful, in non-traditional library ways.
The project being discussed was designed to created flexible library spaces in response to organisational structure changes and to support the tasks allocated to the library, tying the project into the strategic plan. Green approaches were integrated from the beginning. The common problem of a library having a huge desk with stacks behind it was identified as a key component to be addressed. Significant effort was put into designing a flexible library modular library desk, which in the long run ended up with just one module being utilized by staff to provide services. The rest was repurposed for student use. Spaces for collaboration were included in the project design, both for staff and students.
A key lesson learned was not to design the space around operational needs. In this project it led to:
·        The consolidation of some spaces to create space for new services
·        The relocation of key services to improve access [the special collections and archives being the illustrative example here]
·        Staff being moved out of priority spaces, including the library issue desk, which is now called the information desk
·        Noise management based on the physical hierarchy of the building; quieter spaces are located higher up
·        Spaces were provided for support partners where the user would need support, for example it support on the IT floor
Achieving this was only possible via organization wide support. The Centre for Learning and Technology became an Information Literacy program partner, the Student Representative Council purchased library use laptops, an iPad zone was introduced, and faculties gave support for new equipment and furniture. The key to receiving this support was the Library being seen as a partner in academic success not just a support.
The project was done within the teaching and learning framework. It is now at the stage were the spaces need to be evaluated, as there have been +600,000 more visits.
There was a discussion around the issue of the ‘copyright’ of the design residing with the Architect, and the challenge that provides, as there is often a clause disallowing change to the design once the building is complete.
Mr. Irwin asked librarians to protest the lack of availability of good study furniture, and mentioned a New Zealand source.

Hester Mountifield: “Impact2: Through power of collaboration. How we increased our impact by helping researchers to increase theirs”

Ms. Mountifield spoke of the learning team becoming part of the library team, and the introduction of a compulsory information literacy course for all students. The focus of the University of Auckland is to improve research quality, and to this end the library began exploring the concept and tools available around research impact. This lead to the idea of creating an evidence portfolio for each researcher, as there seems to never be enough information available about researchers, either to the public, or when applying for funding. This portfolio should also include a description of peer esteem. The library selected a publication management system provided by Symplectic [Elements] in the UK. [ ]. This research information management system has significant functionality. Parallel to this discussion the Institutional Repository was relocated to the library, as the staff had the metadata management and technical skills required for the service. There are 8 full time staff dedicated to publication management on campus. Library staff skills have been utilized to leverage the system so that uploaded portfolios add value to the project. Academic members of staff can manage their own profiles and upload to the repository from there for example they can choose ‘favourite’ publications, or have their last eight publications show in the university directory [i.e. their top output].  This system allows for lots of metrics, including altmetrics.
In tandem with the introduction of the publication management service, a flagship Biblioinformatics Services was introduced. Consultations with Academics and Researchers indicated that they want to be aware of all the metrics which apply to their publications. To this end the library uses the SciVal [] and Incites [] citation analytics tools / services. Reports can be generated for Departments / Disciplines, and can assist in raising the profile of some publications.  An ‘Uploadathon’ was held to encourage the addition of materials to the institutional repository, with the by-line of ‘increase your impact’.

The library is a sought after partner in these projects where funds from strategic development funds regarding open access publishing are made available for the delivery of services. However, it remains to be seen who / which department will pay for gold access publishing in journals by staff.  The library works with the Dean of Research on this. The Research / Publication management system was relatively cheap for what it delivers. ORCID will be launched at an institutional level in the near future. 

No comments: