 |
Scholarly Communication in the Twenty-first Century:
A Changing Landscape
Spring 2009
Introduction
In the world of scholarly
communication, new legislation and
successful legal actions in the private
sector are now confronting
problems of ownership and access
to information resulting from the
rapid rise in prices of e-journal and
e-book subscriptions and the
restrictions imposed by their
accompanying licensing practices.
There remains, however, a lot of
uncertainty and confusion about
intellectual property, copyright, and
fair use issues. There are also
deepening concerns and frustrations
about the amount of time it takes
for research results to reach the
public; about ever-changing
technology issues with which most
consumers are unfamiliar; and about
restrictions on what can be
published and how that content can
be disseminated. Creative uses of
digital technologies for distribution
and access to scholarly materials
(both print and digital) such as
journals and books, discussion and
working papers, and other formats
of scholarship are emerging in
response to these restrictive and
ever-fluctuating conditions. Jewish
studies scholars, as contributors and
consumers of intellectual works,
need to be aware of these trends
and need to be engaged in the
design, implementation, and use of
new venues for scholarly output.
Some of the most significant
developments include:
- On May 11, 2005, the Cornell
University Faculty Senate
endorsed a resolution
concerning scholarly publishing.
This resolution was a direct
challenge and response to the
rising costs of many traditional
scholarly publication venues,
and advocated for open access
publication of academic and
scholarly output and research.
In essence this resolution
encourages tenured faculty to
stop working with journals and
their publishers who engage in
out-of-sight pricing models and
also to resign from editorial
boards if changes to pricing
structures are not made.
- In January 2008, the academic
world witnessed the passing of
the National Institute of
Health (NIH) public access law, which stipulates
that all NIH funded research
articles must be deposited in
PubMed Central (PMC) upon
publication.
- In February 2008, Harvard
University’s Faculty of Arts and
Sciences (FAS)
required Harvard
researchers to deposit
their scholarly articles
in an open access
(OA) repository to
be managed within
the library and to be
made freely available
to anyone via the Internet. The mandate
further stipulates that faculty
can only submit their articles
to journals that allow articles
to be posted online
immediately after they are
accepted for publication. This
move has many implications,
not the least of which is its
impact on the authorpublisher
relationship, forcing
authors to negotiate with their
publishers on a case-by-base
basis.
- In April 2008, one thousand
professors from more than
three hundred colleges and
universities released a
statement affirming their
preference for high-quality,
affordable textbooks,
including open access
textbooks, over expensive
commercial textbooks.
- In autumn 2008 the
Association of Research
Libraries (ARL), in association
with Ithaka Strategic Services,
released a report "Current
Models of Digital Scholarly
Communication" designed to "look
squarely at new forms of
scholarship and scholarly works
and consider them in their own
lights." This report described
an array of innovative digital
scholarly resources that are in
use today. Among these are
e-only journals; reviews,
preprints, and working papers;
encyclopedias; dictionaries and
annotated content; blogs and
discussion forums; and
professional and scholarly hubs.
- In the e-book world we
recently witnessed the
settlement agreement between
Google, the Authors Guild,
and the Association of
American Publishers
concerning Google's scanning
of copyrighted works.
- On January 19, 2009, the
International Coalition of
Library Consortia (ICOLC),
an informal group of almost
150 library consortia from
around the world issued a
statement on the current
worldwide economic crisis. The group called for
publishers and vendors of
electronic content to work
together and look at some
creative strategies to cope with
the present situation.
Open Access and Institutional Repositories
Slowly and steadily humanities and
social science scholars are showing
support for open access publishing.
Scholars individually can make their
work freely available via their own
individual websites, or in
institutional and discipline-based
repositories. Another option is to
publish in journals freely available to
all on the Web. Some journal
publishers are experimenting with
this model by giving authors the
option of paying for open access to
their articles. Other journal
publishers provide an option
whereby articles become freely
available after a certain period of
time.
There are several open access, peer-reviewed,
and currently active
journals that are of interest to
Jewish studies scholars. These
include, among others, Azure: Ideas
for the Jewish Nation; Eras; Jewish
Studies, an Internet Journal; Min-Ad:
Israel Studies in Musicology Online;
Studia Judaica; Studies in
Christian-Jewish Relations; Journal
of Hebrew Scriptures; Women in
Judaism; and Quntres. These last
two journals are published using
Open Journal Systems from the
Public Knowledge Project, open
source journal publishing and
management software.
Nonmandated institutional and
discipline-based repositories have
been around for some time. In
addition to making scholarly output
previously published in traditional
venues accessible, these repositories
can bring visibility to materials that
historically have been hard to access
since they have not been published
or indexed, such as preprints,
conference and working papers,
student scholarship, and scholarship
in non-text formats. The University
of California and the California Digital Library's eScholarship
Repository and University of
Pennsylvania's
ScholarlyCommons@Penn offer
similar paradigms of open access
publishing of research carried out
within these institutions for many
types of scholarly content, including
preprints, postprints, peer-reviewed
articles, datasets, edited volumes,
and peer-reviewed journals.
Historically there have been
variations between disciplines with
respect to the ways in which digital
scholarship has been shared and
disseminated. Scientists and social
scientists rely to a much larger
degree on professional and
disciplinary repositories such as the
Social Science Research Network and arXiv.org. Scholars in the
humanities have relied more on
listservs and discussion forums,
which for Jewish studies scholars
include the Jewish Studies Network (JSN), H-Judaic, H-Antisemitism,
H-Holocaust, Jewish Languages,
Mendele: Yiddish Literature and
Yiddish Language, and Sephardi
Mizrahi Studies Caucus Discussion
List. Participants, however, usually
use these vehicles of communication
for limited purposes: to post
research questions, announce recent
publications, issue calls for papers,
provide notification of conferences
and fellowship opportunities, and
post book reviews. They generally
do not include ongoing discussions
or conversations. To this end, new
forums of scholarly communication
are emerging, enabling faster
dissemination of ideas and more
community dialogue.
Blogs
Blogs offer an alternative to the
traditional approach of writing
articles that is offered by peerreviewed
journals, which can be
notoriously slow. In the
blogosphere, responses to new
scholarship can be posted in a
matter of minutes or hours by
readers of the blog who may
respond to a thought, idea,
question, or review, in order to
amplify or criticize it. In turn,
others may respond to those
postings, leading to ongoing
discourse that can move within and
across other blogs.
Several blogs have come on the
scene that offer a counterpoint to
traditional scholarly discourse
bringing together postings,
commentaries, reviews, and musings
related to new and old rabbinica,
bibliography, and historical oddities
from tenured faculty, junior
scholars, graduate students, and
others stationed outside the
academy who possess knowledge
and erudition in these areas.
Hagahot issued by Pinchas
Roth, who identifies himself as
Manuscriptboy; Michtavim,
written by Menachem Butler; and
Tradition Seforim, edited by
Menachem Butler and Dan
Rabinowtiz, are three blogs that
have established themselves as
important forces in Jewish studies,
providing an intersection of
academic Jewish studies, Orthodox
Judaism, and scholarly rabbinica and
bibliography.
Two disadvantages that blogging
suffers from in comparison to
traditional venues of scholarly
publications such as journals and
monographs, however, are
accessibility and permanence.
Traditional publications benefit
from the careful indexing systems
that have long been in place and the
preservation capabilities that
libraries have been able to develop
and maintain. Although it may be
easy to Google something and find
it in the blogosphere, a blog
discussion trail can be difficult to
navigate over a period of time
because it may have shut down,
links may be broken, or servers may
be closed. Just as the Internet is
emerging as a new publishing
medium, so too are new forums for
Web page preservation being
developed. For instance, the
Internet Archive's Wayback
Machine allows searchers to look
for Web pages that are no longer
online. A check on the home page
for Menachem Butler's first blog,
AJHistory, which has been
discontinued, finds archived pages
from January 1, 1995–July 13, 2006.
Open Access Textbooks
The soaring price of academic
textbooks is no secret. Open access
textbooks are complete, peerreviewed
textbooks written by
academics that can be used online
for free and printed for a small cost.
What sets them apart from
conventional textbooks is their open
license that allows readers flexibility
to use, customize, and print the
textbook. Open textbooks are
already used at some of the nation’s
most prestigious institutions
including Harvard, Caltech, and
Yale, and at some of the nation’s
largest institutions such as the
California community colleges,
Arizona State University system,
and Ohio State University.
Several open access textbook
initiatives are in place including
content from the Open University
of Israel, which in 2008 launched
the Pe’er project which makes freely
available to the public electronic
versions of dozens of academic
textbooks. The
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT) was the first to
start making course materials freely
available with its MIT
OpenCourseWare Program, but the Open
University’s project was the first to
place entire textbooks online.
E-Books
Almost everyone in the academic
world has heard about the settlement of the class action lawsuit that the
Authors Guild, the Association of
American Publishers, and individual
authors and publishers filed against
Google for its Book Search program,
which has been digitizing millions of
books from libraries. The Google
Book Settlement is complex and the
settlement must still be confirmed by
the court (the Association of American
Publishers has issued an FAQ that can
be found here).
Google has long made clear its
intention to digitize all of the books in
major U.S. libraries and has now
expanded its program to include some
of the major libraries in Europe,
Japan, and India. Up until now,
Google has not embarked on any
collaborative scanning venture of
Hebrew books with Israeli libraries,
but a nonprofit organization within
Israel has embarked on a project to
create a library of scanned books on
Israel and Jewish culture, most of
which are under copyright. The
Center for Educational Technology
(CET) has signed contracts with a
number of major Israeli nonfiction
book publishers to make their works
available online to the public. These are mostly
recent titles; the project offers a
number of features that make e-books
attractive such as navigation tools,
searching via one search engine,
morphological searching, and social
networking capabilities.
The recent statement from ICOLC reflects the financial impact that the ebook
market has had on universities
and institutions of higher education.
At present there are various pricing
options offered by publishers and
aggregators, who provide access to
large collections of titles from many
publishers via a single interface.
Universities and consortia can
negotiate rates for access to these
collections through individual
agreements made without public
disclosure. Libraries can acquire
e-books on a title-by-title basis. They
can also subscribe to or lease e-book
collections. The various models all
have advantages and disadvantages,
with pricing structures usually based
on the number of users in the
institution or the resources that are
acquired through restricted
simultaneous user licensing
agreements.
Conclusion
Jewish studies scholars and researchers
have the ability to meet the challenges
of the changing landscape of scholarly
communication. As more options and
opportunities become available they
need to think about how their
research and teaching will be affected.
They must look at their own roles as
creators, disseminators, and users of
intellectual content and engage with
their institutional administrators,
librarians and information
technologists, university presses, and
professional societies in developing
more awareness and innovation in new
paths of scholarly communication.
Heidi Lerner is the Hebraica/Judaica cataloguer at Stanford University Libraries. |
|