UoL Library Blog

Develop, debate, innovate.

Archive for the ‘Meetings’ Category

USTLG November Meeting: Supporting Research

Posted by selinalock on 1 December, 2014

On the 26th November 2014 I attended and spoke at the University Science & Technology Librarians (USTLG) winter meeting on supporting research at Aston University. The last time I attended a USTLG meeting was in 2012 when I spoke about our re-structure into a Teaching and Learning team, a Research Support Team and a Special Collections/Digital Humanties team, and I was juts about to start my post as a Research Information Advisor.

This time I updated attendees on what had happened since the restructure and how the Research Services team had developed, and took #OAowl along for company:

#OAowl on the train to Birmingham

#OAowl on the train to Birmingham

The line-up for the day was:
Research Bites – researcher training programme
Georgina Hardy & Clare Langman
Aston University

  • Subject librarians with research support as part of their remit.
  • Research Bites – every lunchtime in July/August, 15-30mins sessions.
  • Record audio & slides to make available.
  • Used EventBrite for bookings & to keep stats on attendance.
  • Advertsie via lots of methods e.g. new bulletin, direct emails, flyers/posters to Depts, posters in library, in email sigs.
  • LibGuides to gather recordings.
  • Options to stay after talk to try  things out hands-on (in the lovely library training room where we had the meeting!)

Raising Your Research Profile – training programme
Linda Norbury & Judith Hegenbarth
University of Birmingham

  • Research support group to oversee research training within the library, run by subject librarians/group.
  • Tried out research support (ideas sessions) on Publication strategies, Open Access, Bibliometrics & Social Media on subject librarians first – helps upskill library staff.
  • Good feedback and led to other sessions/contacts, but need to review and expand in future.
  • Raising your research profile webpages.

Developing a blended learning approach to literature searching support for PhD students
Jenny Coombs & Liz Martin
De Montfort University

  • Compulsory lit searching module for PhD students as part of the Graduate School training programme.
  • Moved to an online approach – students can choose online module + face-to-face sessions or online only (depending on if they can visit campus)
  • Involves all subject librarians in the feedback part of the module – where students fill in a lit searching form to show what they have understood of the module.

Consultancy, bitesize and training – how Northumbria supports researchers
Suzie Kitchin
Northumbria University

  • Provide free advice and help with literature searching for all researchers, but also provide a charged literature searching service for funded projects that wish the library to undertake the literature search for them – charged at research librarian pay rate per hour.
  • research development week – feedback that it’s a good brand that is seen as targeted directly at researchers.
  • Use an online tutorial that is a pre-requisite to face-to-face teaching to ensure everyone is on the same level.
  • Skillsplus – online learning repository – includes all researcher materials – all online tutorials/learning objects are bitesized.

Supporting researchers – then and now
Selina Lock
University of Leicester

JISC Open Access Pathfinder project
Linda Kerr
Heriot-Watt University

  • Research Support Librarian – remit to run repositories and support open access publishing.
  • Offers advice, co-ordination, writes policies, support to staff in schools.
  • OA fund devolved to schools who deal with APCs.

 

Applying systematic review methodology from Health to other Science disciplines
Beth Hall
University of  Bangor

  • Supports systematic reviews in medicine/health care but found a growing demand for using thouse methods in other subjects such as ecology and software engineering.
  • Bangor Evidence Synthesis Hub (BESH) – Application of review methods and processes to different and interdependent contexts such as health, social care, environment, conservation.
  • Issues with applying methods to other areas – no one database to model search on (e.g. Medline in medicine), search functionality lacking in databases, no subject terms, no register of systematic reviews in non-medical areas.
  • Centre for evidence Based Conservation

 

You can access copies of the presentations on the USTLG website.

Tweets from the day: USTLG November 14 Storify (header seems to feature #OAowl)

Advertisements

Posted in Meetings, Open Access, Research Support, Service Delivery, Subject Support, Training, Wider profession | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

EMALINK Research Data Management Meeting

Posted by selinalock on 27 March, 2013

Several of us attended the EMALINK meeting on Research Data Management (RDM) at the University of Northampton on the 13th March, 2013. Here’s some of the main points I picked up on:

RDM at the University of Northampton (Miggie Pickton)

  • In 2010 little was known about the RDM needs of researchers so undertook a project using the ‘Data Asset Framework Methodology‘ (DAF) from the Digital Curation Centre (DCC).
  • Interview with research leaders, online survey of researchers and follow-up interviews to look at types of data, storage and access needs and funder requirements.
  • Found some good practice and some uncertainty about RDM.
  • A research data policy was drafted and approved, but not mandated.
  • Behaviour changes takes time and advocacy.
  • Research Councils started to bring out policy frameworks for RDM – led to research data roadmap.
  • Reflections: DAF allowed meaningful dialogue with researchers, raised awareness of RDM good practice, embed RDM training for new research students, up-skilling of library/support staff to support researchers.
  • More training, advocacy and awareness of RDM needed.

RDM at the University of Nottingham (Laurian Williamson)

  • Much bigger and more research intensive university than Northampton.
  • JISC funded project: A Data Management Infrastructure for Research (ADMIRe)
  • Looking at infrastructure, tools and policies.
  • Surveyed 366 researchers: survey and analysis available.
  • Wide types and locations for data.
  • Remember: Not just digital data!!
  • Need technical infrastructure but also human infrastructure: skills, workshops, materials & training needs.
  • Pre-requsite for any RDM service: approved policy, technical infrastructure, up-skilling of support staff, advocacy, tailored training, buy-in.

Common Themes among all the Universities attending:

  • Early stages of institutional RDM efforts.
  • Cross team skills needed (library, research support office, IT services etc) – no funding for RDM posts.
  • Staff need up-skilling before real advocacy and training can start.
  • Need to understand needs of researchers, institution and funders.
  • Can draw on expertise of DCC.

At Leicester:

RDM Website and cross-service working party.

Library Research Services Team: Think about how to offer RDM training – possibly use MANTRA for PhD students.

Posted in Meetings, Research Support | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

eMRSG Meeting

Posted by selinalock on 17 September, 2012

 

I had lunch with Katie Fraser overlooking the lake at the University of Nottingham.

On Tuesday 11th September Helen Steele & I visited the University of Nottingham for the East Midlands Research Support Group meeting.

The first half of the meeting was about the creation of online learning resources for researchers (presented by Wendy Stanton & Helen Young), which you can find out more about on the eMRSG website. Some of the interesting points the group found when creating the online resources and talking to researchers were:

  • Researchers prefer online tutorials to be 10-30mins and include visuals, links, quizzes and screencasts.
  • They also prefer peer support, which was not an option for the current online tutorial project.
  • Skills they rated highly and think researchers should develop = literature search planning, assessing quality information and in-depth knowledge of published literature.
  • Tutorial creators thought they would need to present a balanced view – researchers wanted to know how to advance their career in three amazing leaps.
  • Tutorial creators thought they should include high level content such as ‘how to start a journal’ but many researchers were bemused as to why anyone would want to do that!
  • Calling the tutorial ‘Promotion of Research’ was perceived as too aggressive so changed to ‘Dissemination of Research’
  • Content more important than aesthetics – both were important.
  • The ‘Dissemination of your Research’ tutorials are now available under a creative commons license.

The second half of the meeting was a discussion of what the various libraries represented were doing to support research and the future of the group.

Keighton Auditorium, University of Nottingham

Main themes of research support were:

  • Work closely with Graduate School, Research Office, Staff Development/Learning Development.
  • Blogs, websites or Blackboard sites to bring scattered resources together as a one stop shop for research support within institutions.
  • Research Data Management – big theme for the future, how to support, where funds are coming from, working closely with IT Services etc.
  • Looking at different ways of engaging researchers – training sessions, Elevenses, attending appropriate committees, blogs, social media.
  • Mapping training and support on to the Researcher Development Framework.
  • Library support costed into research bids e.g. systematic reviews
  • Institutional repository data and REF.
  • OA publishing – how Finch Report will affect things – how/where OA funds placed and managed – what about institutions not receiving extra funds from Government?
  • Modules or moderated courses on information literacy and research skills for PGRs.
  • How to measure impact of training provided.
  • Contacting new staff/researchers on arrival (if possible).
  • Reference Management training and support.
  • Some libraries (like our new team at Leicester) have staff specifically responsible for research support, others it is part of the remit for all subject librarians.
  • Catalogue of Research Equipment (across the M5 group, as announced today here at Leicester) – could the equipment catalogue be linked to research data and research publications? (Loughborough investigating this).
  • Research Support Space within the library.
  • Challenges = time, resource, funding, do we know what researchers really want/need?

It was a really useful afternoon and everyone in attendance agreed that it would be useful to have a few meetings every year and keep in touch regarding developments to research support within the East Midlands. The next meeting will be hosted here at the University of Leicester in March, provisionally on Open Access Publishing Funds and the affects of the Finch Report.

Posted in Meetings, Research Support | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

USTLG Spring 2012 Meeting – Being a Science/Engineering Librarian

Posted by selinalock on 4 September, 2012

A very, very late report on the Spring meeting that I attended and spoke at, which was held at the University of Newcastle.

Although the main theme of the event was sharing experiences of being a science and engineering librarian, some other loose themes emerged becoming embedded vs becoming generic, and the way the profession has/is changing.

Being a subject librarian – Changes to the Profession

So, what does it mean to be a subject librarian? Jenny Campbell, Newcastle University

– Recognise how our jobs are changing – teaching, marketing, web guru
– Allowed to develop more things on OA & Endnote.
– Different ways of teaching, larger groups, lectures with drop-ins
– Research support growing – workshops at Faculty level (50-60hrs to PhD students) + need to do more
– Using social media & have some engagement
– Student surveys for refurbishment of library = more study space, quiet areas, more books, power supply at every desk, more IT…

The Environment and Technology librarian: a new professional’s perspective, making the role your own, Emma Illingworth, University of Brighton

– Know my students, researchers, school staff, academics, subjects
– Social networking on the student/staff community networking site
– Twitter for the subjects – but are the students on there? Professionals are on there but students prefer FB. Are there better ways of engaging?
– Little funky business cards to give to staff & students
– Mainly a L&T role & has become embedded in some modules
– Info skills in each year – need a clear path through the modules
– Tried various ways of delivering teaching – for some groups need to change activities to keep attention
– Email before session to online noticeboard to ask what they want out of session – works well for some groups & not others
– Working collaboratively with academics & sharing successes
– Helped with open day & it was pointed out as a unique selling point to students = their own librarian
– Future – wants to be an embedded librarian

From Soviet Studies to Science and Engineering, Jenny Brine, Lancaster University

– 40 years of librarianship, but only science for a few years
– 1st degree in Russian & first post was running library for Russian & East European Studies = Essential to have language skills, hard to find reliable information, embedded/worked closely with research staff, encouraged to do a PhD, specialised, treated as member of research team and found researchers didn’t want to share data until after they were published,
– Moved to Aberdeen & started teaching IL skills (just didn’t realise that they were called IL, but had been compiling bibliographies for years so had the skills required) to a wide range of subjects, encouraged to do a teaching qualification, had to supervise students doing searches in many subjects – learned about how to find out about research/suject vocabularly,
– Lancaster Uni Library – started in ILL which gives you a good picture of research within the Uni plus contact with staff and students, could notice trends and suggest books for purchase.

– Learning about new subjects – informal (family), formal – colleagues, reading, web resources etc
– Read new scientist
– Support from sci & tech lib colleagues e.g. lis-medical, USTLG, courses & conferences
– Read the study skills/research skills books for subjects
– Talk to academics – get invites to meetings or to look around the Depts.

Widening Participation: building on the role of a science librarian, Tony Wilson, University of York

– Helps with Developing Independent Learning Day for schools & colleges network – aimed at 6th formers
– Library challenges = researching & evaluating info (other session on day about academic writing, campus tour & student ambassadors help with day)
– Quzzies about how library works
– Wanted to work closely with other Uni services to make the events more joined up – collaborated more & became the actual widening participation co-ordinator for Uni
– Extended projects may start to be taken into consideration for Uni admissions
– Develpoing a realising opp website at York – freely available resources
– Also work with local primary school projects – they liked the tour of the library! Done some sessions with school librarians and 10yr olds about evaluating websites
– Challenges – Doing on top of normal liaison post, need to be an all rounder, lack of clear leanining objectives from schools, maintaining discipline within classes
– Top tips – use student ambassadors, ensure clear understanding/agreement over what is being covered, keep session interactive, keep groups small
– Now have a relationship management team with WP as an area they deal with, share the workload – in future all liaison librarians will play a role.

All Change! Restructuring Academic Liaison, Selina Lock, University of Leicester

– I talked about our restructure from a team of subject librarians to a team of T&L Librarians (each with a subject remit for UG & PGT students) and a Research Support Team (each with a much wider subject remit for PGR and Researchers).

– I move into my new position supporting STEM researchers in a couple of weeks and I already know I need to learn more about/provide more support on our research archive, OA publishing, REF preparation, copyright, research data management… on top of the experience I already have in teaching literature searching and bibliographic software.

Becoming Embedded (in various ways…)

Embedding information literacy teaching within Engineering, Liz Martin, De Montfort University

– Moved from one induction slot in 2005 to sessions in induction, 1st yr, final yr UG, PG students
– Web-based Induction before students arrive & available all during their first year plus face to face induction within course induction

– 1st yr session = 2hr within design project module (e.g. design a remote controlled gutter cleaner), within report have to show evidence of research & IEEE referencing.

– Final yr UG as part as project briefings, big lecture to everyone as a refresher with the option to sign up for tutorials for more help.
– PG (MSc) – 2hr session
– How from one induction to embedding? Lots of chance opportunities, put together a Bb module for another subject & then showed it to other academics, Technology module leaders liked it, other links were forged through management boards (external examiner feedback), once referencing session in place led to other academics being interested & 1st yr engineering project session came through that, also worked with study support to introduce sessions on report formatting & do team teaching on some sessions.
– Future – a lot of teaching still ad-hoc/short notice, would prefer to be timetabled, see students every year of course, keep plugging for other subjects.

Making yourself indispensible – Science Community Librarianship, Steve Lee, University of Glamorgan

– Science, sport, chiropractice – too many subject to be traditionally embedded!
– Must be valued by our users – how?
– Make our users lives easier – if they value us they will fight to keep us
– Get out of the library – go to where users are
– Visit academic staff in their offices (on their turf) – what are their problems & work out action plan to resolve problems
– What are their problems? = time management, getting research time, dealing with students, accessing journals, searching easier on google, marking, admin takes time, keeping up to date etc
– Library matters not a priority, help solve their problems and their priorities – what makes their life easier?
– Visit your researchers & find out their interests – keep notes
– Plan individual strategies to meet needs – become valued member of support team
– Upskill users – you don’t loose value as they will come back when they need updating
– Takes time to set up e.g. new book lists & Journal ToC, but once up & running they can become automated
– Can then focus on individual problems- take ownership of problems & see it through to resolution instead of passing on to someone else
– Staff & students want fast resolutions to problems – want help now.
– E.g. staff member wanted to be able to borrow moe than 15 books – is it a resonable request? What do other institutions do? Present evidence to colleagues to increase loan limit & take it to senior management – agreed to put it up to 22 for a year – tiny amount took it up but had a few very happy academics.
– Periodically revisit staff to re-evaluate & find out about new needs.
– If you can’t solve the problems then at least they know you tried.
– In response to student need – sits in chiropractic dept at set times to help, as they are in a building away from both libraries – sit in student computer room so became another channel for helping students solve other problems too. Other people wanted same service & now done in other Depts.
– These surgeries allow you to get to know students, staff & researchers, can do work even if people don’t come, on average answer a couple of indepth queries each time, gather evidence for resources needed, only do in term time (exam times usually very quiet).

– Have to be pro-active so users cannot afford to loose you…

Hiding library training in other classes, Kirsty Thomson, Heriot-Watt University

– Students not keen on library training – think they already know it – even if they turn up they are not there in spirit.
– What do students care about? Getting their degree.
– Intro to Essay writing – biology students in wk 2+3, jointly teaching with effective learning tutor – saw in groups of 60-70 & got them to do group work looking at extracts of texts (e.g. journal, textbook, fiction, newspaper)
– Think about the style of writing, could they use it for essay, where/what did it come from, followed by group discussion on what is/isn’t appropriate for essay writing
– Fake essay extract with no references, talk about importance of referencing & got them to look at the essay to see whether they picked up where it should be referenced
– Class discussion on plagiarism – ‘is this plagiarised or not?’ slides
– 75% of class said info about referencing was useful & relevant
– Liked group work, working with examples
– Followed up by essay feedback class – essays submitted via TurnItIn – which librarian could see & based follow up on the kind of mistakes they’d made e.g. structuring, problems with referecing, using illustrations
– Made you realise what students don’t know! e.g. don’t realise a 70% mark =  a brilliant essay
– Go to meetings, volunteer for anything that is IL related, work with other services e.g. effective learning
– Needs to be relevant to student interest & worries
– Be convinced your teaching is interesting – if you’re not interested then they won’t be!
– Be careful what you call your sessions e.g. Avoiding Plagarism became ‘Copy & Paste: Just Say No!’ (only works if you remember Grange Hill!) – finally became ‘Using evidence in your essays’
– Don’t give up on an idea too quickly, but be ready to change classes if not working.
– Link to an assignment if possible
– Future: put shorter IL content into other lectures – build links to course content.

Posted in Meetings, Research Support, Subject Support, Training, Wider profession | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

EMLIP Meeting – 9 August 2012

Posted by JackieHanes on 10 August, 2012

I attended an EMLIP meeting hosted by Nottingham Trent University.  We were a select group this time – due to some members acquiring last minute Olympics tickets!  The meeting was held in the Newton Building – a showpiece conference centre – with excellent lecture theatres and meeting rooms – and delicious biscuits to accompany the coffee.

We discussed the presentations given by Thomson Reuters at our previous meeting; and there was considerable interest in Solcara as a federated search engine.  Westlaw have gone quiet on a release date for their new interface – none of the group had heard from their reps, and were concerned as they prepared for new students and trainees. 

We discussed summer projects, and conversation also turned to Talis Aspire and Patron Driven Acquisition.  The Universities at Nottingham Trent and Derby have both implemented these initiatives, and had some words of advice and caution.  Talis Aspire: Nottingham Trent have experienced difficulty adding digitised materials to their reading lists.  They also feel Talis have prioritise development of ‘social media’ functionality over fixing known software bugs.  PDA: both librarians had been dissatisfied with the range of legal titles included in the collections – they had encountered both old editions and foreign jurisdictions – are were concerned that students might select inappropriate materials.

The group exchanged experiences of the BIALL Conference held in Belfast in June.  Generally experiences were positive, with some stand out speakers on financial law, US law and tender processes.  Some sessions were described as ‘very interesting but not practical’ – such as the ‘importance of case law’ session.  Finally, there was a general feeling that many sessions were ‘focus groups’, with the speakers gaining more than the delegates. 

Finally the group discussed the emergence of Isential Solutions, a new ‘library outsourcing’ company established by former managers at Integreon.  Isential have been targeting managing partners at law firms in the Midlands offering ‘library health checks’ and promisng to save ££££s on their library spend.  Naturally, law firm librarians are worried.

There was no official speaker at this meeting – so we had to buy our own lunch …!  We had very nice pizza at an Italian restaurant around the corner from City campus, made all the nicer for the glorious sun shining down on us.

Posted in Law, Meetings | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

UKSG Introduction to Open Access Day

Posted by selinalock on 25 July, 2012

UKSG OA DAY
Another belated event report as I attended this in May. Recent events, such as the UK Government taking on most of the Finch Report recommendations (e.g. to make publically funded research results open access by 2014) have taken over the Open Access (OA) discussion. However, I think many of the points made below are still relevant:

Review of the traditional commercial pricing models for accessing electronic content  
James Pawley, Regional Sales Manager, SAGE Publications

-James started with a historical reminder of why people publish in the first place – the same reasons as the first journal ‘Philosophical Transactions’ was published by the Royal Society.

– To share knowledge while providing evidence for, and getting credit for your discoveries. – in the past this might get you patronage, now it might get you finding…

– The publishing ecosytem has developed since the introduction of ejournals in the 1990s and now the main competitors for publishers are Amazon & Google as these raise user expectations.

– Business costs – editorial board (to ensure scope, quality, prestige), platforms & discoverability tools – electronic publishing is not cheaper than publishing in print due to the metadata, user platform, citation tools, stats provision etc.

– Publishers need to be at cutting edge to keep submissions and quality high.

– E is also not cheaper than print due to VAT regs, complicated subscriptions models and being governed by different contract law to print.

What is Open Access and how does it differ?  
Charlie Rapple, Associate Director, TBI Communications

– Religion, politics & money – affects OA & for some OA is a religion!

– OA is young in publishing terms so not enough data yet to assess how viable a business model & data available is biased.

– Have to make your own mind up & keep an open mind…

– Green & Gold levels – green = self-archiving/OA repositories, gold = publisher version is OA or hybrid solutions

– OA is not… non-profit, the death of peer review (though may undertake it in a different way), not embraced by majority of academics at this point (it is not a priority for them – they want speedy publication, high impact etc), a panacea that will create savings everywhere (costs just move to a different place), not the only answer to the problems of scholarly publishing

– Benefits of OA – human genome project (funding this & making it OA had an enormous economic & research impact), some evidence for higher citations (but would that be true if everything OA?), might save money (but might just move costs elsewhere)

– Viable funding model? Author funding – shifts costs but costs still there, Membership funding – OA membership fees will be an easy target for cost cutting.

– Politicians getting involved – politicised: makes is harder to discuss in a sensible manner but has got OA on the agenda

– I want to break free! Current promotion system for academics is driven by publishing in high impact journals – if this doesn’t change then academic publishing won’t change.

– Don’t want to lose the skills, knowledge and value that publishers add – throwing the baby out with the bath water?

– Library skills may need to change in an OA world? Become repository managers instead of content purchasers?

OAPEN-UK  
Exploring open access scholarly monographs in the humanities and social sciences
Caren Milloy, Head of Projects, JISC Collections

– Arts & Hums project looking at scholarly monographs

– Needs to be talked about as it often ignored in favour of STEM journal OA

– Been a decrease in print monograph sales to libraries – so less published – concern for AHSS researchers in terms of getting their research disseminated

– Pilot – 5 publishers, submitted matched pairs of monograph titles, steering group chose titles to include, one of the pair in control group & one in experimental group, 58 titles. Control group made available as standard by publisher & experimental group made available OA under CC license (PDF version for free) through OapenUK library – can be put into institutional repositories etc as well & in Google books

– Key areas identified across focus groups:

– Metadata (needed for discoverability, auditing, who creates it? who maintains it? what is needed for OA? is it put into the supply chain, and whose version? most find things by searching so metadata vital)

– Versioning, preservation & archiving (CC commons license means people can re-use, mash-up – researchers felt threatened by this option & wanted preservation of their original version. who preserves & archives? )

– Methods of delivery (where should it be available? central platform, or anywhere? format & functionality?)

– Usage (collection of data & standards for that data – vital for assessing value & impact & for researchers to know)

– Quality & prestige (perceptions of brand, reputation, quality & maintaining excellence. High concern about the quality of monographs being lowered)

– What do authors want? (Researchers say they want prestige, while publishers thought authors wanted financial reward)

– Copyright

– International issues (territories & markets)

– Changing roles (what stays, what goes – authors value the marketing from publishers. Authors do not want to do own marketing)

– Impact on processes (policies, mandates & behaviour)

– Ways of Making OA profitable, Risk, Funding

– oapen-uk.jiscebooks.org

Repositories Support Project  
The work of the RSP in supporting repository development in the UK
Jackie Wickham, Open Access Adviser , University of Nottingham

– Supports public access to public funded data – serves UK Higher Education

– OA repository benefits for institutions – showcase for research output, marketing mechanism, REF/research management, complying with funding mandates, management & preservation of assets, encourages collaboration.

– Benefits for academics – in principle academics support OA, but not in practice due to pressure for high impact publishing, faster dissemination, wider readership, increased citations.

– Benefits if they do deposit in repositories = compliance with funding mandate, secure storage environment, personalise services (stats on downloads, personal profiles/bibliographies as webpages etc)

– Study by Swan, A suggested OA citation advantage (but people disagree with the rigour of these studies!)

– Creative arts research – repositories for arts material can help with visibility & preservation

– RSP based at Notts Uni – offers advice, visits to institutions to support installations, advocacy, evaluations, telephone & email service, advocacy materials & briefing papers on website, buddy scheme, events programme, webinars, embedding repositories project to look at how this can be done (see website), skills training,.

BioMed Central (+ SpringerOpen)  
Bev Acreman, Commercial Director, BioMed Central

– OA Journals = Journal publishing just a different business model.

– Business model – article processing charge APC (also membership, digital sales, events etc)

– BMC offers several package options = prepaid funds, supporter fund (discount on APC), shared support split between author/institution.

– Hindawi = flat rate fee based on size of institution

– PloS = flat rate fee based on size of institution

– Subjects BMC support the authors are used to paying page rates & often built into research bids

– New journal – peerJ are offering a $99 life membership compared to the $1-3k APC of other OA publishers.

– SCONUL survey 2011 – 13% institutions manage OA payments centrally

– 2014 REF – 20% weighting to societal & economic research impact – easier to show if OA as research open to re-use & sharing

– Why funders support OA? Public access to funded research, wide dissemination, APCs are expected as part of research process, some have a charitable remit e.g. Wellcome Trust

– APCs waive fees to low-income countries but all authors can apply for a waiver e.g. lone researcher outside institution

– Growth in fee waived APCs e.g. Pakistand, Eygpt researchers

– Costs – pay academic editors, societies, writing workshops in China (China now has mandate for researchers to publish in western journals) & developing world, customer service, targeted digital marketing, sales team, editorial office & office systems, IT development

– Common misconceptions:

– Will publish anything = No, need to ensure quality & credibility & keep impact high

– All OA equal = no, there are certain companies who sign up to code of conduct, be wary of those that haven’t.

Nature Publishing Group  
David Hoole, Director of IP Policy and Licensing, Nature Publishing Group

– OA at Nature – focusing on it for business development but not something that’s easy to transition to.

– Recognise there is a shift in the balance of rights back towards authors – no longer ask for copyright, just exclusive publication rights.

– 2009/10 started turning most academic journals hybrid & more fully OA journals = sister journals to existing journals.

– Nature Communications born/launched in 2010 as hybrid – Nature branding with OA policy

– 2011 Scientific Reports – seen as competitor to PLoS one

– High rejection rate so looking at what can be done for good research that’s not appropriate for their top journals & efficient use of editorial teams.

– Nature & Nature Research journals are not OA due to the amount of money that is spent on editorial duties rejecting manuscripts (90% rejection rate) – if introduced APC rates would be phenomenal.

– APC for Nature Communications ~£3k – still a 60-70% rejection rate.

– Large amount of editorial input in Nature titles e.g. redrawing of diagrams & restructuring of articles which adds huge amount of value.

– Their OA journals are small & targeted – they are launching new OA journals instead of subscription titles.

– Scientific Reports – all areas of natural sciences, peer-reviewed, 100% OA, rapid dissemination (less editorial input/added value), external editorial board (no other Nature journals have this), online only.

– Should sub prices lower to reflect the amount of OA? APCs don’t generally make up for the loss of revenue if subscription prices are lowered.

– Top tier, high impact journals – high editorial cost as every submission read, high circulation – cannot transition to APC model – APC would be £20-30k per article!

– Nature is 143 years old & does its job well, especially in communicating with the media & dissemination.

– Genome articles in Nature titles are OA because of human genome project being OA & authors insisting on it & have CC licenses for those articles.

– Encourages green self-archiving – can opt-in on many titles for submission to PubMed Central – self-archive after 6 months post publication.

Managing Open Access in the library  
Wendy White, Head of Scholarly Communication, University of Southampton

– At Southampton OA repository is designated a core system – good for institutional support but tends to put academics off.

– Not just about the library – also need IT, legal, research services, faculty admins etc

– Requirements & Encouragements (carrot & stick) – requirements to deposit where permitted by publisher, emphasis on author involvement over compliance, University mandates will not win people over, funder mandates then funders need to work with repository staff and academics, focus on author benefits.

– Cost & sustainability needs to be considered in future

– Repositories good at making available grey lit e.g. reports, conference papers, theses, art items

– Downloads & uploads – people want to know how often their work downloaded, need stats, RSS & twitter alerts – marketing & discoverability, Google analytics. Even amount of uploads – don’t want big deadlines & backlogs.

– Adding value & support – need to be part of researcher workflow so provide tools to make things easy – lots of ways of importing & exporting between systems.

– Adding value by gaining expertise – guidance on copyright & versions, quality assurance for metadata, engaging with researchers about developments in OA etc, linking the repository to other relevant services & uses in the Uni & professional development for library staff so they can communicate with researchers.

– Individual & group support – training for PGRs and research community, embedded where possible, bespoke session for Depts, session for copyright for teaching materials & OA educational objects, one-to-one support, enquiry service, support for new staff – does require resources.

Managing Open Access fees  
Chris Middleton, Head of Academic Services, Information Services,
University of Nottingham 

– Centrally managed fund for OA fees – challenges & admin issues:

– Drivers for institutional funding is the benefits of OA & the funder mandates.

– Notts have policy for OA e.g. deposit and encouraging OA publishing – need to back up with appropriate funding.

– Research income can be channelled to OA fund – build into research grant application e.g. in the indirect costs in the funding bid (retrospective – institution has to pay and then claim back – quite a complicated and not transparent in funding guideline)

– Notts OA fund is managed by research office but advocated by library

– Nottingham – had fund since 2006, which includes advocating the use of Wellcome Trust money

– Embedded in Faculty Team librarians remit when talking to researchers

– Total number of requests over 5 years = 615. From 27 requests 2006-7 to 262 in 2010-11

– Total costs = £714,244

– Average cost per article = £1,216. Highest = £3,095 (Elsevier/Springer) & Lowest = ~£200

– Mainly medicine & life sciences

– Apart from BMC then only 9 publishers received 10 or more payments (70 publishers overall)

– Biggest challenge = future publishing = costs high

– Changes might come from Research Councils, REF, repositories, future publishing models?

– Challenges of advocacy = OA and high impact are mutually exclusive, lack of awareness of funding options, stigma associated with “vanity publishing” (paying to publish), OA seen as not as high quality

– Repository & central fund is managed within existing staff resource, which is a strain.

Panel Discussion

– Lots of interest in how to set-up a central fund, do you fund first author or any author, split between several institutions if multiple authors? What’s the best value OA model if subscribing as a membership – may depend on area of publication & rate of publication. How to make sure the right fund is used e.g. central fund or Wellcome fund. Nottingham fought hard to say central fund should be funded from research money as it’s a research related cost (not from library journals fund).

Posted in Meetings, Open Access, Research Support | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

EMALINK – Bibliometrics & Research Visibility

Posted by selinalock on 12 July, 2012

A rather belated report on this May Emalink event:

What are Bibliometrics and why should I care?  Ian Rowlands (University of Leicester)

  • Bibliometrics can be very sterile & specialist so they must be used in a context that makes sense.
  • Citation data – indicates relationships of influence, deference & usage – a bit like social media networks.
  • Bibliometrics have to help the institution or individual in the research process.
  • BUT bibliometrics just one small par of the puzzle and tools available.
  • How much information is there really out there about research inputs & outputs?
  • Data can be variable e.g. to pick up on Univerisity of Leicester citations then authors need to put University of Leicester in their address.
  • Currently it is difficult to deal with the variety of research outputs e.g. data, software, plays…
  • New tools emerging e.g. Readermeter from Mendely to see if your papers have been socially bookmarked.
  • IMPACT of research – very important for REF but citations do not always translate to real world impact – need to go beyond bibliometrics.
  • Some types of citations have greater ‘weight’ in terms of impact e.g. citation in a NICE guideline directly impacts how healthcare is provided.

Enhancing research visibility at Loughborough (Lizzie Gadd)

  • In 2011 Loughborough found it had slid down the THE World rankings and needed to improve their citations count.
  • The Plan to improve citations = library to run sessions on publishing & promoting research, VC commissioned Academic Champion for bibliometris, promote visibility of good research in high impact journals, recruit & retain good researchers, ciations taken into account when promoting, use ResearcherID and Google Scholar profiles to improve citations & impact & use research repository.
  • Training Implementation = publish or perish sessions for new academics, lunchtime bibliometrics seminars in Depts/Research groups, 1to1 appointments ion request and online tutorials on citation tools and impact tools.
  • Plus provide bibliometric data to support staff and promote bibliometrics training through staff conferences, webpages, blogs & newsletters.
  • The Vision for the future = joined-up thinking (work with research office, IT service etc), research visibility focus (databases of research kit, data and publications).
  • Already seeing improved citations.

Some good ideas that could be implemented elsewhere.

Research training will be high on our agenda once we get our Library Research Services team fully in place, headed up by our own bibliometrician Ian Rowlands. I’ll be moving over into that team later this year.

Posted in Meetings, Research Support, Service Delivery, Staff training | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

BLA Financial Databases Training Day – 14 May 2012

Posted by JackieHanes on 15 May, 2012

I attended the Business Librarians Association Financial Databases Training event at the University of Birmingham on 14 May 2012.   We received presentations about 7 financial databases – delivered by academic business librarians (not sales representatives!). 

Fame and Amadeus by Emma Craggs (University of Warwick)

Fame (UK and Irish) and Amadeus (European) are company financial information databases provided by Bureau van Dijk.  Both products (indeed all BvD products) run across the same platform and user interface.   The user interface appears to be very intuitative – especially to a non-business librarian.  The company reports were well laid out, and I liked the peer report option, whereby you can compare a company to it’s competitors, and the ability to create tailor-made reports.  With Fame, you can also download orginal documents as submitted to Companies House. 

PI Navigator by Anastasia Kelly (Sheffield Hallam University)

PI Navigator is an international company and markets financial information database provided by Perfect Information.  PI Navigator is used widely in law firms – providing company reports and mergers and acqusitions information.  The user interface involves building a search from options on the side-menu, with search criteria displayed at the foot of the screen.  It’s supposed to be easy and user-friendly; however I was not convinced by the demonstration.  One of the key features included the ability to download original company reports and documents.  The presenter had experienced problems setting up ezproxy access to the database; but praised PI Navigator technical support, and online training tutorials.

Bloomberg and WRDS by Carolyn Smith (Cass Business School)

Bloomberg is a leading international financial markets information database.  It is used widely in banking and trading – less so in education (prohibitive cost).  I was impressed by the look and feel of the Bloomberg terminal – a double black screen, a colour coded keyboard and dos-style command language.  Indeed, the Bloomberg training suite is one of Cass Business School’s best marketing tools.  Bloomberg provides more than stocks and shares information – there is business news and company / director profiles.  I particularly liked POSH – eBay for the super-wealthy!  Bloomberg is not a user-friendly database, but it comes with a vast range of tutorials and a 24 hour support line.

WRDS (Wharton Research Data Services) is a business, finance and economics database for researchers provided by the Wharton Business School.  WRDS is only the user-interface, you need to purchase data sets at additional cost.  The presenter talked only briefly about the service: their only support is to administer user accounts and guide researchers to WRDS help services. 

Datastream and Thomson One Banker by Steven Bull (University of Birmingham)

Datastream and Thomson One Banker (product replaced by T1.Com) are financial information databases provided by Thomson Reuters.  The presentation was beset by technical problems connecting to data terminals – not helping to convince me that Datastream is entirely user-friendly.  Datastream provides international public company, financial markets and macroeconomic data.  The presenter, and many of the delegates, preferred to use Datastream via the Excel Add-in, rather than the Datastream client.  I was pleased to recognise some of the research techniques demostrated by our own Andrew Dunn at internal UoL Datastream training earlier this month.  Thomson One Banker ( T1.Com) is an UK and international comapny financial information database.  It is unique because it harmonises data across regions, and enables direct comparisom. 

Thomson Reuters were praised for their customer support, including support guides, online training videos available via Thomson Reuters Knowledge Network, and telephone/email help services.  Delegates had mixed experiences with getting Thomson Reuters trainers onto Campus to deliver training direct to students.  There was success in London (Cass) and Birmingham, but not further North. 

Vendor backed training and certification schemes were a recurring theme during the day.  Databases (financial and legal) are increasingly provide online training tutorials, and associated tests, leading to a certificate of competency.  The certification schemes are popular with students as they add to employability. 

The University of Birmingham proved to be excellent hosts: the training was held in a state-of-the-art group study room in the iconic Muirhead Tower (if you like the Rotunda!).  Our welcome packs included a University of Birmingham Library Services branded note-paper, pen, pencil, ruler and drinks coaster.  Coffee and pastries were served upon arrival; with a nice sandwich spread for lunch, and chocolate brownies for dessert.  We also received a tour of the library during the lunch break – which is reassuringly full-to-the-rafters in this pre-exam period.

Posted in Meetings | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

EMLIP Meeting & Westlaw Update – 9 May 2012

Posted by JackieHanes on 10 May, 2012

I attended my first EMLIP (East Midlands Legal Information Professionals) meeting held at Freeth Cartwright in Nottingham.  The meeting attracted an unusually high turnout (including 4 academic law librarians) – perhaps drawn by the promise of lunch courtesy of Thomson Reuters?

The main event was a presentation from Santiago Alonso (Westlaw UK Product Manager) on the new Westlaw platform scheduled for release in Q2 (July) 2012.  Westlaw considers their main competitor to be Google – not LexisLibrary et al.  New features in Westlaw UK include:- word wheels (predictive typing) indexing case citations, case names, legislation titles, and the Sweet & Maxwell legal subject taxonomy; improved relevance ranking of results (currently displayed chronologically); ability to filter results by subject, date and content type; and unlimited number of results (currently limited to 4000). 

Westlaw UK are also introducing new products including:- an online legal encyclopaedia led by Daniel Greenberg (editor of Stroud’s judicial dictionary), of articles providing a statement of the law on a subject in England, Scotland and Wales; a release of 50 more Sweet & Maxwell e-book titles (pay per title – additional cost on subscription); and status checking software to review legal citations in word documents.  Westlaw UK are also looking at mobile optimisation, and are planning APIs that could be used in mobile technology or embedded into websites.  The (as yet unnamed) legal encyclopaedia is a particularly welcome addition to the product range.  Westlaw asked for name suggestions – with the most apt being Halsbury’s Laws of England!

Westlaw International (currently well-hidden in Westlaw UK) is likely to move to a new platform in the near future, but will remain part of the Westlaw Academic subscription.

Also presenting was Mosharaf Hossain (Knowledge Management Consultant) who demonstrated the Solcara Legal Search federated search engine.  Solcara is aimed at the legal practice market, and searches across all major legal subscription databases, external legal websites, intranets and document management systems.  A federated search enables the user to search multiple datasets from a single search.  Results are organised by dataset, and you can link directly to the primary resources.  You can also create collections of resources and share them within your organisation.  While second federated search engine is probably not a path we would follow at UoL, it is interesting to hear that Westlaw / Lexis et al can be interogated by a federate search engine – which makes me wonder why Summon and Primo are unable to interogate legal databases …?

Thomson Reuters (Westlaw & Solcara parent company) then left the EMLIP – retiring to the Rutland Square Hotel to arrange lunch.  EMLIP continued their meeting, welcoming new members including me, Caroline Ball (University of Derby), and Paul Keegan (Fraser Brown).  Members exchanged views of Lexis PSL as an alternative to PLC; and discussed policy and opinion on sharing personal information (e.g. photo and social media) on company intranets and websites.  I was particularly pleased to make contact with law librarians at DeMontford, Derby and Nottingham Trent Universities.

Lunch was a splendid hot-fork buffet with a choice of fish-pie, chicken curry and vegetable pasta; plus couscous salad, potato salad and bread rolls (carb overload?); and followed by a ‘mystery fruit brule tart’ and fruit salad.  I avoided the wine – it being rather warm in the conservatory, and me being quite thirsty (never a good mix)!  Thomson Reuters gave us a lovely goodie bag of pens, usb stick, post-it notes, stress ball, drinks bottle and chocolates.  My daughter was particularly taken with the ball, bottle and chocolates …

Posted in Meetings, Subject Support | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

ALLICE Meeting & PLC Update – 16 April 2012

Posted by JackieHanes on 17 April, 2012

I attended ALLICE’s (Association of Law Librarians in Central England) quarterly meeting held at Wragge & Co in Birmingham.

Chris Jeffries and James Chuck from PLC (Practical Law for Companies) legal database were invited to update the group on developments to their product and service.  The University of Leicester does not have a subscription to PLC, although it is widely used in corporate and commercial law firms: providing practice notes, forms, precedents, and links to case law, legislation and legal commentary. 

Ask PLC  is an archive of frequently asked questions and answers related to PLC database content.  Ask PLC can be searched or browsed by practice area (subject), and provides alternative access to key resources.

PLC Briefing are current awareness briefings written by PLC for use by law firm providing business development services to their clients.

PLC What’s Market provides a summary and comparison of selected public company deals, mergers and acqusitions, and market news. 

PLC recently redesigned their user-interface: the default Search option is now a cross-database search.  However, the changes were made piecemeal, and without user consulation, and have proven to be very unpopular.  (PLC users are used to accessing information by practice area).  PLC acknowledge mistakes were made with user consultation and testing, and are now seeking partners to work with them into the future.

PLC now links to full-text legislation on Legislation.Gov.UK and Westlaw UK legal databases.  I discovered that PLC were one of the partner organisations working with the National Archives to maintain the Legislation.Gov.UK a free public legislation database.  PLC (along with other partner organisations) fund paralegals to update legislation in target practice areas.  Legislation.Gov.UK has long been criticised for slow updating of amended legislation; however PLC informed us that they are now on track to have fully up-to-date Acts by November 2012 (SIs to follow at a later date).

On a lighter note, Wragge’s in-house catering team were exceptional – with a delicious buffet including olive and tomato bread sandwiches, home-made quiche, chicken and salmon bites, and blueberry eton mess for dessert.

Also, ALLICE have a ‘speed-networking ‘ evening in the week commencing 9 July 2012 – should you want to socialise with an *insert appropriate collective noun* of brummie law librarians.

Posted in Meetings, Wider profession | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

EMALINK Supporting Researchers Event

Posted by selinalock on 13 July, 2011

Several of us attended this event on the 13th April 2011. Sorry for the rather delayed write-up!

The bulk of the session revolved around the idea of the “information arc” that a researcher would work through, going from a consumer to a producer (see embedded slideshow). We all thought about what researchers might want at different points in their research and how we can fulfil those needs.

Literature Search

  • Defining research topic, Concept mapping, Search Strategies
  • Types of information required & how to access them
  • Time management
  • Reading strategies, decoding academic language
  • Alert services – as literature search evolves, is refined and is reviewed  later in research

Information Management

  • Reference management strategies & software, bookmarking tools
  • RSS tools
  • Note taking
  • How to structure writing  a literature search, thesis, journal article
  • Critical Analysis

Writing

  • Academic writing style
  • Proof reading & grammar skills
  • Summarising, paraphrasing, citing

Publication Strategies

  • Types of publication
  • Copyright issues
  • Writing for a specific audience
  • Quality measure – impact factors/bibliometrics – what might be required for REF
  • Benefits of collaboration
  • Publication fees – OA ‘vs’ traditional publishing
  • Publication trends
  • Responding to feedback and/or Handling rejection
  • Tips for becoming highly cited & reviewed
  • Corrections and retractions

Publicising Work/Publications

  • Open Access (Institutional Repository)
  • Online research profiles (and being professional online)
  • Social Networks and blogs
  • Google Juice

Most of the institutions represented at the event felt that they offered training or services that could help with all these areas but:

  • Not clear who offers what – Library, Student Development/Support/Study Skills, Staff Development, Research Support Team.
  • No clear advertising/promotion or route through the training available from different places.

Other points that arose from discussion were:

  • Researchers often need/want one to one support as have specific needs.
  • Useful to talk to staff before they go on sabbaticals to see if they need any research support.
  • Good to get research supervisors on-side and clued-up on training on offer.
  • How can we get involved in the research process and be there at the right time to offer support?
  • Important to share expertise between staff.
  • Look at collaborative project e.g. EMRSG who are creating online tutorials for supporting researchers.
  • Online tutorials – there for staff that cannot access face to face services, access at the time right for them.
  • Need to market libraries better and ensure buying the right resources for researchers.

We are lucky at Leicester to have a couple of specialist posts to support researchers and work alongside Information Librarians:

Posted in Meetings, Research Support | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Evidence-Based Library and Information Practice

Posted by katiefraser on 13 July, 2011

Earlier this month I attended the 6th annual Evidence-Based Library and Information Practice (EBLIP) Conference. In return for my kindly sponsored place, the Library and Information Science Research Coalition asked me to blog a day of the conference. I won’t repeat the same material here: my post covers day one, and my fellow sponsored attendees covered a pre-conference workshop, day two and day three.

Overall, it was a great conference, and a really useful opportunity for me to consider how to use evidence in my own work. The main messages I took away were:

  1. think small and manageable when gathering evidence in your own everyday work
  2. nothing is too small to share, there’s an appropriate place to publish any study
  3. library and information practice isn’t the same as medicine (where EBLIP emerged), librarians need to think about the kind of evidence which is appropriate to use in our own work.

Next up? Thinking about how to gather evidence for the new (and repeat!) sessions I’m running this coming academic year.

Posted in Meetings, Projects, Service Delivery | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »