How open access policies affect access to grey literature in university digital repositories: A case study of iSchools
This is a modal window.
Das Video konnte nicht geladen werden, da entweder ein Server- oder Netzwerkfehler auftrat oder das Format nicht unterstützt wird.
Formale Metadaten
| Titel |
| |
| Serientitel | ||
| Anzahl der Teile | 14 | |
| Autor | ||
| Lizenz | CC-Namensnennung - keine kommerzielle Nutzung 3.0 Deutschland: Sie dürfen das Werk bzw. den Inhalt zu jedem legalen und nicht-kommerziellen Zweck nutzen, verändern und in unveränderter oder veränderter Form vervielfältigen, verbreiten und öffentlich zugänglich machen, sofern Sie den Namen des Autors/Rechteinhabers in der von ihm festgelegten Weise nennen. | |
| Identifikatoren | 10.5446/37258 (DOI) | |
| Herausgeber | ||
| Erscheinungsjahr | ||
| Sprache |
Inhaltliche Metadaten
| Fachgebiet | ||
| Genre | ||
| Abstract |
| |
| Schlagwörter |
4
00:00
Vorlesung/Konferenz
00:59
Vorlesung/Konferenz
02:03
Vorlesung/Konferenz
02:54
Vorlesung/Konferenz
03:30
Vorlesung/Konferenz
04:44
Vorlesung/Konferenz
09:47
Vorlesung/Konferenz
14:49
Vorlesung/Konferenz
15:46
Vorlesung/Konferenz
19:09
Vorlesung/Konferenz
Transkript: Englisch(automatisch erzeugt)
00:00
and two of his commitments. Over to you, Thomas. Thank you, Margaret. You should have a handout, two-sided, that has two of the more significant tables from our study that I'll mention. And just to give you a little context,
00:20
Katie and I have been doing a series of projects in the area of open access. And cited in the paper is an earlier study where we looked at open access author agreements. And this study is looking at open access policies.
00:40
And then the third part of the study, which we haven't completed yet, is to take at if there are any extent open access, either Creative Commons licensing or some other type of terms of service or end user license agreement. So this is a study looking at policies.
01:03
And we wanted to take a look in some of our own domains, being an high school and being a North American library school. And so there's a literature review about open access, which I'm sure all of you are familiar with. And so the idea is that it eliminates barriers,
01:24
though there's still a struggle, period. And we found that to be the case in a number of instances. And open access can apply, obviously, to traditional literatures. But it can also apply to gray literature,
01:43
though you'll find what we found very interesting sort of dichotomies between the different types of institutional policies. Some include in their open access policy even proceedings. UT Austin and Rutgers did that.
02:03
And you'll see Indiana University, by default in its open access policy that I'll describe in a little more detail, wants everything in the world that they can find to put in that repository. But what we found is that when we started looking for specifically open access
02:23
policies, we found other policies that were just as important, such as a copyright policy that tried to figure out or sort out or at least state some ownership issues. There was often a general institutional repository policy.
02:47
And I'll say a little bit more about that in a detail. And then also there were not necessarily a policy, but there were often at the institutions we looked at, sort of help pages or more or less guidelines
03:04
instructing authors to make sure that when they go through the publication process that they retain the rights sufficient to allow the inclusion of the document or the work in the institutional repository. And I think Daniel is going to talk a little bit more
03:22
about Spark and some of the different types of addendums and agreements that are out there as well. So what we wanted to do is to take a look and see whether there were any best practices that emerged in open access policies. And since we were in high school,
03:41
we wanted to take a look at high schools. We did some cross-referencing between ranked schools, the schools ranking in the US News and World Reports. Those rankings of library information science schools came out this past spring.
04:02
So it's a new ranking across high schools. And then we looked at institutions that actually had open access policies and that were so labeled as open access policies. And that gave us a sample of about five. And you'll see on the next slide. And we felt confident at least during this initial study
04:23
that that was sufficient. I had done a study of iCloud terms of service with a small sample size like that as well. And it was enough to give you variation, but still enough that you could draw some conclusions. So we used five again.
04:40
And you basically have this table, which is table one on the full paper, and it shows you the five schools that we looked at, the institutions we looked at their specific policies. Far, far over the last column to your right is the institutional repository moniker.
05:04
So what we saw happening, and we didn't really expect this, but we went in really without any preconceived notions, but that the institutions we looked at often had an open access policy, which is very narrowly defined to peer-reviewed literature.
05:21
And then there was an institutional repository policy that was much, much broader. So I'm going to talk specifically about the open access policies, and then we'll talk about some broader issues, because it's the great literature that really is in these broader institutional repositories. And it may just be using the wrong term,
05:42
or it may be that the universities were looking at open access in a very narrow sense. I think most of us, so far at this conference, have been using it in a very broad sense. So all of these institutions had some type of a broad repository policy,
06:01
and a system and a mechanism set up. Not all of them had an actual open access policy. And so they seemed to have self-selected and distinguished themselves. And obviously, if you look at open access literature, there's lots of terms, green, gold, bronze, black.
06:20
Green being sort of the standard where the article is published, but then it is also a repository. The gold standard sometimes is referred to where the journal itself is open access. And sometimes you can get into all sorts of issues of predatory journals and things of that sort. And then there's bronze.
06:41
That was another term that came up a bit, which is a type of open access where it's published by a traditional publisher, but yet it's made available on that publisher's website. And then they use the term black to talk about pirate sites like SciHub. So we looked at the variables from the Harvard Open Access Project's good practices.
07:01
And there were about 15 variables there that we operationalized. And then we went to different clusters, as you see here. So there were administrative variables about the goal and who has responsibility for monitoring the open access repository. Then there are a cluster of variables regarding rights, often transferring them, keeping them assignable,
07:24
assignability, sometimes a little, once in a while mention of creating comments or some other sort of access tool. And then they talked about the works, the version of the works, what's included, what's excluded. And we actually added two variables, which we found consistent through the policies
07:42
or at least a mention of them. And one was whether students are addressed, whether the work of students are addressed. And the second was, which we saw in three or four of the examples, an exclusion for an incompatible conflicting license agreement or other lawful reason to exclude the license.
08:03
And that was not mentioned in the Harvard as well. So then if you look at the specific variables, so Harvard guidelines say, yes, you should have a goal or a mission statement. Oddly, there are very few of these policies, one that maybe actually said,
08:21
here's our goals, here's the purpose. Usually it was buried in somewhere, a series of whereas clauses, or just somewhere towards the end or in the middle. It wasn't very clearly identified, but you could look in each of these five policies and see that there was a general theme of dissemination,
08:40
making it permanent, making it widely accessible as possible. Responsibility was split in the policies either between the provost's office or in the library itself, typically either the librarian or the office of scholarly communication. Except for Indiana, all were mandatory opt-in,
09:02
there's no opt-out, but you could get away in circumstances where perhaps there was a license agreement to the extent that you signed away some rights and now you couldn't put it in the institutional repository. Only one, and that was Indiana, that really referenced specifically
09:22
Creative Commons and other types of schemes like that. Rutgers had an additional condition that the content could not be sold for profit and UT Austin had a clause that could be used only for non-commercial educational research
09:41
or personal purposes once the work was put into the repository. Some of the other variables were, again, and this was the most significant one, which we didn't really expect, but that was the open access policies other than Indiana, all defined specifically as peer-reviewed,
10:01
post-reviewed, as-published version or as-published final version. So the open access policies were targeting specifically publications and journals and, in two cases, at least conference proceedings as well. Indiana follows a different model where, for example,
10:22
if it's a paper, they don't mind, they're not commanding it, but they're saying have every version of the paper in there that you want, the first draft, the final draft, the second draft, whereas the other four institutions, University of Illinois, NC Chapel Hill,
10:40
UT Austin and Rutgers, wanted the final peer-reviewed article. And so that's where we kind of saw an odd sort of discrepancy in sort of two parallel tracks, not to say that those institutions didn't collect other types of great literature, but they didn't classify it as an open access.
11:02
They put it rather in their institutional repository. And then the timing of deposit is no later than the actual publication, so it was interesting. Two of the institutions did focus a little bit on students. Rutgers had grad and post-grad students as long as you were employed or enrolled,
11:23
and Indiana University writers and any other student work, undergraduate or graduate, if it was sponsored by a department or a particular faculty member. Many of the apologies excluded work.
11:40
Sometimes they did that by definition of what they wanted to include. The first bullet point is that added variable we had about incompatible license agreements, but UNC and Rutgers specifically did not want classroom pedagogical materials. Now in their institutional policy, they do include that, but they don't want it in their open access, so they're trying to keep that a very clean set
12:02
of documents that really mirror actually published and peer-reviewed items. Books and book chapters, anything else that generated royalties, that was not supposed to be in there, conference posters, dynamic resources, websites, video, audio.
12:21
So when we came to this conclusion, we realized, well, gee, it doesn't have a lot of great literature, and this is by definition their own policy for published literature, so we kept looking, and so this can't be the case. There must be another vehicle, another place where great literature sits in these universities.
12:41
And we started, we did more investigation, we started to find out about these institutional repositories that solely seem to be quite separate from the open access policy. First question we had is, well, all these policies and the Harvard guidelines are talking about rights, rights transfers, rights retentions,
13:01
and so we wanted to ask the question, well, who holds the copyright? Is there some statement from these universities about copyright? And in fact, they do all have a copyright policy, some less clear than others, but seem to suggest that the faculty members possess the copyright. Now, without going into a lot of detail about U.S. copyright law, that's not necessarily the case
13:22
under the work made for hire doctrine. Now, there's some case law in certain parts of the country that suggests that faculty own all their traditional copyright, but the University of Illinois was the only one that specifically referenced that documentation and their copyright policy in their open access policy.
13:40
You had to go somewhere else on the website and figure out how the university was thinking about copyright in terms of faculty or student work product. So we came in terms of some conclusions and a few recommendations. So there's this odd bifurcation of the open access policies
14:02
and the institutional repositories. If you take a moment and look at the handout and look at what is table six, you will see the institutional repository breakdown of all the different types, or at least some types of great literature.
14:23
So while the open access policy strangely doesn't talk about electronic theses and dissertations, when you move to the general repository policy for the university, you clearly see that in all cases it's including, and in fact, Illinois even has graduate student research,
14:43
it doesn't necessarily have to be an actual formal thesis or dissertation. And then data sets, that we talked about data earlier this morning, primary evidence and other sorts of field notes and things of that sort are included specifically.
15:00
Only Indiana in its policy actually uses the word gray. But if you look at the description of all the other policies, they're talking about a lot of great literature, working papers, white papers, technical reports, other research, what we talked about this morning. And some are even including pedagogical materials,
15:22
classroom materials, not everybody, but UNC is doing that and one or two others. So we found though, that even though we had to dig a little for it, that these universities are responding to great literature
15:41
and having policies in that place, but what we were disheartened by and reflected in our recommendations, is that there really wasn't any cross-reference between these two types of policies. Illinois at least references copyright policy,
16:02
but we would recommend that if an institution is taking this sort of path and wants to have a specific open access policy for published literature that it has a mirror repository of, that it reference, not only its copyright policy, but it reference its institutional,
16:21
maybe a broader institutional repository that would include the gray literature and then three, that if they are concerned, which I think they should be, about faculty and students retaining copyright or at least enough copyright rights, if you will,
16:43
that it can, that content can and without restriction into their own repository, the institutional repository, that again, there'd be some reference made to those types of tools that are available, like the Spark addendum and there's a Big Ten addendum as well, and just other types of language like that.
17:03
And none of the universities, while they referenced that, they had a policy that, for example, commanded the faculty to use this particular phrase or this vehicle or to ensure that that happens. So that would be our main recommendation. Some other minor ones would be, there's no reason that we could think of
17:22
to exclude student work, about certain levels of student work or theses of dissertation, but if you're really trying to build a great repository of the institutional knowledge base of that community, there's no reason why other types of student research couldn't be included. And in fact, there's a movement at least
17:42
across the US universities to have engaged research even at the undergraduate level. And so there's an emphasis on more and more students, not necessarily at the theses of dissertation stage to include, to generate research and to have that research be then included.
18:01
And we found too some inconsistencies about inclusion of proceedings, even in the open access policy. I mean, if it's peer reviewed and it's journaled, it ought to be in there. And you might wanna consider even making the scholarly repository policy mandatory
18:20
for certain literatures so that the content is put in there but the rights are retained as well. And then again, as the discipline or the field applies to even consider gold open access. I know in my own field of copyright law and librarianship, there's a new journal. I think it's just in its first volume.
18:41
It's a journal of copyright education and librarianship, and it is an open access journal on a large. There's no predatory nature about it whatsoever. It's an open access journal. So it has a one year embargo period, but other than that, it allows the authors to use that work after it's been published
19:00
as long as the original citation to JCE. So that's something else to consider as well. So with that, I'll stop. I think I'm about right on time. So if you have any questions, I'm happy to entertain them. And thank you for your attention.