This introduction explains the Institute on Scholarly Communication Opportunity Assessment Instrument.
All participants accepted for the institute’s three-day program development event are encouraged to work with a selected department to complete an opportunity assessment prior to attending the institute.
 isc-workshop-apr2013-assessment-intro.pdf
Second worksheet used in the ARL/ACRL Institute on Scholarly Communications workshop, Increasing the Effectiveness of Your Scholarly Communications Program, held in Indianapolis, IN, on April 9-10, 2013.
isc-workshop-apr2013-handout2.pdf
Worksheet used in the ARL/ACRL Institute on Scholarly Communications workshop, Increasing the Effectiveness of Your Scholarly Communications Program, held in Indianapolis, IN, on April 9-10, 2013.
isc-workshop-apr2013-handout1.pdf
ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2010–2011 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 63 medical libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.
This publication is available for purchase in both online and print versions. Download the arl-statistics-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2010–2011 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2010–2011 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 74 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.
This publication is available for purchase in both online and print versions. Download the arl-statistics-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2010–2011 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
On April 17, 2013, the Association of American Universities (AAU), Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU), and Association of Research Libraries (ARL) released this two-page statement by David E. Shulenburger calling on the research university community to provide input to the US Government for increasing access to the results of federally funded research.
expanded-public-access-a-new-era-with-new-challenges-15apr13.pdf
In this issue, Alexandra Rivera, Jade Alburo, Makiba Foster, Lisa Chow, and Latanya Jenkins reflect on their experiences at the 2012 Joint Conference of Librarians of Color in Kansas City, Missouri.
synergy-issue-10.pdf
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) commend Edwin Mellen Press’s decision to discontinue its lawsuit against McMaster University and academic librarian Dale Askey. Nevertheless, both associations urge Mr. Richardson, founder and editor of Edwin Mellen Press, to discontinue as well his personal lawsuit against Mr. Askey...
arl-carl-urge-dropping-of-remaining-lawsuit-against-askey.pdf
While many research libraries have begun to digitize their collections and share best practices around the steps required to create digital content, much less is known about what happens post-launch. Building on previous research by Ithaka S+R that defined key aspects of sustainable digital content, Appraising our Digital Investment: Sustainability of Digitized Special Collections in ARL Libraries offers a first look at the practices, attitudes, costs, and revenues associated with caring for digitized special collections. The report shares results from a survey conducted on the sustainability of digitized special collections at ARL member institutions.
digitizing-special-collections-report-21feb13.pdf
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) share a commitment to freedom of opinion and expression of ideas and are strongly opposed to any effort to intimidate individuals in order to suppress information or censor ideas. We further share the belief that a librarian must be able to offer his or her assessment of a publisher’s products or practices free from such intimidation...
arl-carl-statement-supporting-askey-mcmaster-feb2013-final.pdf
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) decided not to participate in the appeal of the case Cambridge University Press v. Mark Becker as amicus curiae. The case concerns the use at Georgia State University (GSU) of electronic course reserves (e-reserves) and electronic course sites to make excerpts from academic books available online to students enrolled in particular courses. It was widely reported that the US Copyright Office requested that the DOJ file an amicus brief either on the side of the publishers or as a neutral party. On February 22, 2013, the DOJ sent this letter to the court stating that the US Attorney General had decided not to file an amicus brief in the case.
ltr-doj-re-gsu-ereserves-22feb13.pdf
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is evaluating whether to participate in the appeal of the case Cambridge University Press v. Mark Becker as amicus curiae. The case concerns the use at Georgia State University (GSU) of electronic course reserves (e-reserves) and electronic course sites to make excerpts from academic books available online to students enrolled in particular courses. It was widely reported that the US Copyright Office requested that the DOJ file an amicus brief either on the side of the publishers or as a neutral party. On January 25, 2013, the DOJ requested an extension of the time they have to file an amicus brief.
gsu-extension-motion-usgov-jan2013.pdf
Does the approach of creating a code of best practices, anchored in professional practice, actually work to expand the utility of fair use? What has happened to others who used codes of best practices to gain access to their rights?
This topic is discussed at length in Aufderheide and Jaszi, Reclaiming Fair Use (University of Chicago Press, 2011), but some specific examples include:
Does your university offer intellectual property education to incoming students, or have an academic integrity policy that addresses copyright issues? These are important areas where librarians can be of service in offering balanced information about copyright and fair use.
The Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries suggests at various points that librarians consider the use of appropriate “technical protection measures” when making digitized materials available on-line, as a way of bolstering their fair use claims. Many libraries already employ such measures as a risk-management strategy.
When teachers bring Stacey, a librarian at a Midwestern private university, their course materials to upload on the university’s e-reserves system, she always checks to make sure that the course material has not been uploaded before—or at least, not in the last three years. If it’s fresh material, and it’s only a small fraction of the original work, she’s pretty sure that uploading it for the students to study could be considered a “fair use.” If it has been uploaded before, she tries to license the material, or have the professor find a substitute that the professor hasn’t used before. She knows that at some universities, e-reserves policies are more liberal, but her institution can’t afford a legal challenge, so she likes to err on the conservative side. After all, you can’t be too careful.
The Fifth Principle in the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries is entitled "Reproducing material for use by disabled students, faculty, staff, and other appropriate users." It describes in some detail the circumstances in which making and providing copies of collection materials in formats that are accessible to persons with disabilities constitutes fair use, as well as certain limitations to which that general principle is subject.
The report proposes that the growing number, and heterogeneity, of graduate students and programs presents opportunities for research libraries to provide segmented services targeted for students at different stages of their academic and demographic life-cycle.
Through their interviews, Covert-Vail and Collard found an enthusiasm for a broad range of new services, from advanced data manipulation and visualization to softer skills-based instruction in time management and writer’s block. They also report that new configurations of library space, housing aggregated services into research or scholarly commons, for example, can both create and leverage collaborations within the larger institution.
Finally, the authors present different strategies for staffing graduate student services, from dedicated positions and committees to more loosely structured teams comprising subject liaisons, technologists, data librarians, and others, who work together to deliver a suite of complex solutions to meet the needs of graduate students in research institutions.
nrnt-grad-roles-20dec12.pdf
SPEC Kit 333 explores the scale and scope of art and artifact materials held by ARL member libraries, which tools and techniques they currently use to manage these collections, including those used by library staff only and those used to make information about these collections available to the public, and if there is evidence of a convergence of library, archive, and museum practices in the management of these collections. It includes collection development policies, guidelines for arranging materials, and examples of how art and artifact collections are described.
This publication is available for purchase in both online and print versions. Download the spec-kit-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online SPEC Kit 333 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
Research libraries have a responsibility to make library collections and services universally accessible to their patrons. And as research libraries provide more content electronically to students, faculty members, researchers, and others, the role of libraries and other partners in their institutions and beyond is changing in the provision of information resources and services to patrons with disabilities.
print-disabilities-tfreport02nov12.pdf
SPEC Kit 332 explores how research institutions are currently organizing staff to support scholarly communication services, and whether their organizational structures have changed since 2007, when member libraries were surveyed about their scholarly communication education initiative. It covers who leads scholarly communication efforts inside and outside the library, the scholarly communication related services that are offered to researchers, and which staff support those services. It also looks at how the library measures the success of its scholarly communication services, including demonstrable outcomes of these services. It includes position descriptions for library leaders of scholarly communication efforts, charges for SC committees, organization charts, descriptions of SC services, assessment tools, open access policies, and SC resolutions.
This publication is available for purchase in both online and print versions. Download the spec-kit-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online SPEC Kit 332 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 125 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2010–2011.
This publication is available for purchase in both online and print versions. Download the arl-statistics-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online ARL Statistics 2010-2011 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
The advent of Massive Open Online Courses raises serious legal questions that in turn pose important and fundamental policy challenges for research libraries. As universities rush to find ways to add courses to emerging MOOC platforms, research libraries are being asked to take on new responsibilities (or new versions of old responsibilities) to support this new mode of teaching and learning. issuebrief-mooc-22oct12.pdf
Before the Court are two motions for judgment on the pleadings and three motions for summary judgment. hathitrust-decision10oct12.pdf
Proceedings of the 161st ARL Membership Meeting, October 2012. mm12fall-attendance.pdf
The case of Kirtsaeng v. Wiley & Sons, a case in which the key issue is the proper scope of the "first-sale doctrine" in copyright law. In this case, the first-sale doctrine is being challenged by a publisher who seeks to block re-sale in the US of the cheap editions of textbooks it authorized to be printed and sold abroad.
kirtsaeng-petitionerreplybrief.pdf
SPEC Kit 331 focuses on the professional, administrative, and management positions that report directly to the library director (or in some ARL member libraries the position that serves as the representative to the association), positions that have not been examined by a SPEC survey since 1984. It explores the responsibilities of these positions, and the skills, qualifications, and competencies necessary for these administrators to successfully lead a transforming 21st century research library. It looks at whether and how position requirements have changed in the past five years, whether the number of direct reports has changed, whether these administrators have assumed new areas of organizational responsibility, and how they acquire the new skills to fulfill those responsibilities. It includes documents that compare organization charts and position descriptions from 2007 and 2012.
This publication is available for purchase in both online and print versions. Download the spec-kit-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online SPEC Kit 331 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
|
|
