- Email: [email protected]
International Open Access Week at Small to Medium U.S. Academic Libraries: The First Five Years
The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES
International Open Access Week at Small to Medium U.S. Academic Libraries: The First Five Years Paula C. Johnson ⁎ New Mexico State University Library, MSC 3475, PO Box 30006, Las Cruces, NM 88003-8006, USA
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 24 June 2014 Accepted 28 July 2014 Available online 6 October 2014 Keywords: International Open Access Week Open access Scholarly communication Library programming Library outreach
a b s t r a c t This research seeks to expand the body of knowledge surrounding International Open Access Week (OA Week) practices among small to medium-sized U.S. institutions, examining the rationales guiding these, and creating a baseline activity inventory which may be elaborated upon as open access continues to evolve and as OA Week matures beyond its fifth (2013) anniversary. An electronic survey with closed- and open-ended questions was used to collect data, which were analyzed for recurring themes. Of respondents whose campuses did observe OA Week, the most reported reason for doing so was related to supporting the library's educational outreach program; fewer respondents cited the library's philosophical commitment to open access. Lack of time was the most frequently given reason for OA Week non-participation, however around one quarter of non-participating respondents reported that they were unaware of OA Week, and another quarter reported that it did not figure in their strategic plan. The conditions that were found to best support celebrating OA Week included a grasp of the principles guiding OA on the part of at least one librarian, reinforced by: the educational mission of the library; adequate personnel; and sufficient time for planning. This exploratory study yields points for library- and self-assessment. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION The global push for “free and unrestricted online availability” of scholarly research outputs first coalesced during the Open Society Conference at Budapest in December 2001. There, attendees from various disciplines developed the Budapest Open Access Initiative, which continues to garner signatures. In the words of the initiative, “we invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish” (Chan et al., 2002). Six years later (Oct. 14, 2008), the movement had gained such impetus that the first international Open Access Day was commemorated, sponsored by SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition), the Public Library of Science (PLoS), and Students for Free Culture. At that time, Heather Joseph (Executive Director of SPARC) said, “The momentum behind Open Access to research has been accelerating … Open Access Day will provide a perfect way for folks to come together, consider, and celebrate the ramifications of the global shift we're experiencing” (McLennan, 2008). Librarians and student groups were urged to host
⁎ Tel.: +1 5756364008. E-mail address: [email protected].
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.07.011 0099-1333/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
meetings around a live broadcast, that year featuring a Nobel Prize winner and the Founding Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computational Biology. The following year (2009), Open Access Day became Open Access Week, and ever since has been held during the last full week of October. 2009 also saw the launch of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Scholarly Communication Road Show, an annual initiative that sends expert trainers to five selected host college and university libraries to provide librarians with an overview of the scholarly communication system. This program is designed to motivate and facilitate individual librarians and their libraries toward developing strategic and action plans for transforming the landscape of this system. The call for action on the part of college and university libraries to provide leadership on their campuses concerning scholarly communication/open access issues has only amplified with time. Open access is now embraced by groups such as EDUCAUSE, the American Library Association, and the Association of Research Libraries. The establishment of an Open Access Week placed this cause on the calendar alongside such celebrations as National Library Week (April) and Banned Books Week (September) — events now often incorporated into library programming. Using an email survey of academic librarians, this research explores the extent to which librarians at small to medium U.S. colleges and universities (enrollments from 2000 to 17,000) have actively engaged in organized and sanctioned activities to mark International Open Access Week during the first five years of its existence.
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
627
LITERATURE REVIEW
ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS' INVOLVEMENT WITH OPEN ACCESS
CELEBRATIONS OF OPEN ACCESS WEEK
While surveys have been conducted to assess librarians' attitudes and roles vis à vis open access, the closest inventory of the type undertaken here was a Fall 2012 study conducted by the Association of Southeastern Research Libraries (ASERL). The ASERL surveyed 37 member libraries to learn the type and degree of their engagement with open access activities generally, including Open Access Week (Fruin, 2013). Most of the ASERL libraries (26) were involved with a broad range of OA advocacy activities (e.g., putting OA titles in the OPAC and providing direct support to the Directory of Open Access Journals). Twenty-three member libraries had celebrated Open Access Week, and four were developing plans to do so. Additionally, half of these libraries incorporated scholarly communications or open access advocacy into their liaison/reference librarian work responsibilities. Since the beginning of the drive toward greater open access of scholarly products, there has been a connection between OA advocacy and academic librarians. OA exists as a movement and as a practical means for sharing scholarship: it encompasses both the political/philosophical issue of unfettered access to scholarly research, and also the pragmatic issue of affordability. In an interview with Richard Poynder, Peter Suber, sometimes called the father of the OA movement, called librarians “some of OA's best friends” (Poynder, 2011). Suber credits librarians with greatly contributing to the advancement of OA, and notes that their support derives from both the accessibility and affordability perspectives. Poynder himself said, “On average, [librarians] understand [OA] issues better than any other stakeholder group, including researchers, administrators, publishers, funders, and policymakers” (Poynder, 2011). As mentioned previously, ACRL began offering intensive training in scholarly communication topics to selected academic librarians and libraries on an annual basis during International Open Access Week's inaugural year: these train-the-trainer workshops include a module on OA. The Scholarly Communication Road Show is intended to empower participants to serve as a catalyst for change in the areas of scholarly communication and OA within their home institutions. While data are not available, anecdotal evidence suggests that the Road Show has led directly to some of its participants to initiate outreach educational programming on OA – e.g., Open Access Week celebrations – at their institutions (Vandegrift & Colvin, 2012). During the Road Show workshop, participating librarians establish their personal and professional ethics concerning OA issues. Possessing a comfortable comprehension and thoughtful, informed opinions regarding OA enables librarians to fulfill the educator and advocate roles they may be called upon to perform on their campuses. Without a framework like the Road Show, librarians may struggle to develop knowledge and perspective on OA issues. One recent lecture concerning OA was entitled “Is a Rational Discussion of Open Access Possible?” (Anderson, 2014), and this gives an indication of the polarization and diversity of opinions that can be found on this topic within the academic press, and on scholarly communication blogs and listservs. Potvin (2013) observed that OA work can be “mission- or values-driven” (p. 69). She goes on to say “A notable impediment to … determining and developing competencies for future roles related to OA is academic libraries' collective uncertainty around what libraries' roles are – or will be – in shaping [scholarly communication] generally and responding to OA in particular” (p. 70). Some years prior to this assessment, Palmer, Dill, and Christie (2009) conducted a national survey of academic librarians on their opinions of open access. They discovered that a majority of those surveyed were supportive of OA's basic principles and believed that these were related to their work as librarians. The traditional librarian activities of user education (but around OA) and helping users locate items (in this instance, OA materials) were the OA activities garnering the highest levels of support. A key finding of the Palmer et al. study, however, was that there was “discrepancy between stated support of library involvement in open access initiatives and significantly lacking
In 2010, in an introduction to two articles written by participants in the first (2009) Open Access Week celebrations, Jennifer McLennan, then Director of Programs and Operations at SPARC said: “…Open Access Week has evolved into a truly global phenomenon thanks to the ongoing leadership of the library community. Not simply an awareness-raising exercise, librarians have made Open Access Week a platform for advancing policy changes on research sharing and dissemination, including institution-wide commitments to open access” (Jones, Waller, & McLennan, 2010, p. 21). It has been noted that hosting open access (OA) events highlights the significance of the issue on campus and is an important part of keeping academic libraries relevant (Jennings, 2013). Limited literature exists that discusses the development and/or hosting of Open Access Week celebrations held at U.S. colleges and universities. 2009 Open Access Week activities at the University of Northern Colorado included a library display, handouts, a LibGuide, and a cross-campus faculty panel discussion on open access (Rathe, Chaudhuri, & Highby, 2010). Ohio State University's 2009 OA Week program also featured a faculty panel discussion, bringing together those who edit or publish in open access journals with representatives from commercial and society journal publishers (Gilliland, 2010). Duke University's 2010 OA Week included a faculty panel very much like the one at OSU (Cryer & Collins, 2011), while their 2009 Open Access Week program targeted graduate students via a mandatory Responsible Research Conduct course. This course included an overview by the Library's scholarly communications officer of the pros and cons of publishing in open access venues. Within the context of discussing Florida State University's scholarly communication program, Vandegrift and Colvin (2012) mention FSU's 2010 and 2011 Open Access Week events, noting that “specific outreach programs like Open Access Week provide another opportunity to share information about scholarly communication topics and about the university's initiatives” (p. 388). Florida State University's 2013 OA Week programming was redesigned based on feedback from previous years: moving away from panel discussions, FSU elected instead to create events targeting specific user groups (Vandegrift, Bolick, & Rose, 2013). A faculty-focused event was a digital repository article upload-a-thon, and the student event involved asking students to endorse the Right to Research Coalition's “The Student Statement on the Right to Research” (Right to Research Coalition, 2010). FSU took particular aim at undergraduate students, a group they believed has been overlooked in OA programming. The challenge associated with initiating a limited-time event such as Open Access Week in order to discuss the manifold issues embedded in open access and the scholarly communications system has also been documented in the scholarly literature. Wright (2013) discussed the yearlong program offered at Furman University Libraries that covered evolving scholarly communication models and practices, geared toward both librarian professional development and outreach to the greater campus community. She identified the value of a lengthier OA discussion: “by holding the events throughout the year, we would capitalize on both the start of the academic year and Open Access Week while extending the conversations above and beyond those few days” (p. 3). In an ACRL conference poster titled, “If You Build It, Will They Come? Hard-won Lessons from 3 Years of Open Access Week Events,” Fernandez and Radom (2013) discussed 2010–2012 OA events held at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. They included their focus, audience, and promotion methods, as well as specific challenges and successes. Among their future plans: “We will advocate for OA Week events that are part of larger year-long strategy.”
628
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
action toward this end” (p. 315). In regards to Open Access Week, the present study looks at whether a gap exists between what librarians/libraries think they should be doing and what they actually are doing. METHODS A sample of small- and medium-sized U.S. colleges and universities was invited to participate in the OA Week survey. A list of U.S. colleges and universities with 2012 total enrollments between 2000 and 17,000 was generated using the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System's data set (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). The resulting list consisted of 646 institutions; of these a random sample (162 institutions) was identified using Excel. These institutions were invited to participate in the online survey (Table 1) via email invitations. In an effort to target individuals at each institution who would be involved with OA Week efforts, relevant email addresses were extracted from university library websites (e.g., gathered from LibGuides or other research guides covering OA or scholarly communication content; library newsletters and announcements documenting OA Week; and staff email directories, searching for Scholarly Communication Officer or similarly titled librarians). For most institutions, two invitations were sent: one to the individual discovered via the process just described, and one to the Library director, with the request that the survey invitation be forwarded to the appropriate individual (see Appendix A). The survey was open for a period of 19 days. The survey was constructed using the web-based survey hosting site SurveyMonkey® and had either fourteen or five questions (see Appendix B). All survey takers were asked to provide: 1) consent to taking the survey; 2) their institution's Carnegie Classification and total enrollment; and 3) a reply to whether their library had celebrated Open Access Week. Further questions depended on whether number 3 preceding was answered in the affirmative or negative. If one's college or university had never celebrated OA Week, 1–3 were followed by two open-ended prompts: “Why has your library chosen not to celebrate Open Access Week?” and “Do you have anything else you'd like to say concerning the history of Open Access Week at your library?” For those whose institutions which had celebrated Open Access Week at least once between 2009 and 2014, there were an additional eleven questions. Survey takers were asked which years they had celebrated OA Week, and open-ended queries concerning: • Whether there was an individual/committee/other entity charged with promoting open access on their campus • Who was responsible for producing the events making up the OA Week celebration(s) • The types of activities that were included in the OA Week celebration(s) • When planning for OA Week typically began • Where OA Week events were held • Why the institution chose to celebrate OA Week • Who attended the OA Week events • How OA Week programming was funded and the way that funding was allocated. The affirmative group also received a final question that solicited any further remarks about the history of Open Access Week at their library.
RESULTS SURVEY RESPONSES — OPEN ACCESS WEEK PARTICIPATION RATE Eighty-nine responses to the survey invitation were received, with a total of fifty-four usable surveys returned (thirty were removed because of being incomplete and five since they were from non-U.S. institutions). Respondents provided the Carnegie classification inconsistently, precluding its use in analysis. Slightly more than forty percent of responding libraries (42.6%) had celebrated Open Access Week within the past five years. Survey results suggest that participation in Open Access Week has increased over time. During the first two years of this event (2009 and 2010) just three of the twenty-three libraries celebrated OA Week; by 2013, almost three-quarters of positive respondents had participated in OA Week (Fig. 1). This increasing level of participation may indicate that open access has gained traction in academic libraries over time, supporting predictions found in Laakso and Björk (2012) and Lewis (2012) about the “inevitability” of open access. OPEN ACCESS WEEK PARTICIPATING LIBRARIES — FACTORS AND QUALITIES Two libraries celebrated OA Week annually since its inception (hereafter referred to as “committed libraries”), and both libraries were at institutions with enrollment over 10,000. This suggests higher research activity and therefore possibly broader engagement with the scholarly communications system, of which OA is a part. Another possibility is that higher staffing levels at larger institutions may lead to personnel available to tackle library programming. Planning for Open Access Week at committed libraries commenced five to six months in advance of OA Week, which is held the last full week of October. This was the longest lead time of those mentioned by participating libraries, which most often reported initiating OA Week planning one to three months prior to the event. Committed libraries tasked committees (either library-based or cross-campus) with programming responsibilities. Programming included public screening of webinars, classes and workshops, LibGuides and posters. Interestingly, the committed libraries did not have a budget for OA Week, and did not report strong attendance at OA Week events. A librarian at one committed library commented that attendance was “very low — mostly library staff. Even in 2011 when we went all out for events — we probably had total 20 people (non-library).” While these two libraries could be considered OA Week veterans, three libraries celebrated OA week for the first time in 2013. Two of
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30%
Table 1 Total number of institutions meeting enrollment criteria; number of institutions invited Enrollment
Total U.S. institutions (n)
Invited institutions (n)
2000–4999 5000–7999 8000–10,999 11,000–13,999 14,000–16,999 (Total)
279 124 106 80 57 646
70 31 27 20 14 162
20% 10% 0% 2009
2010
2011
2012
Fig. 1. Participation in Open Access Week by year.
2013
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
these libraries were prompted to celebrate OA Week as a result of pivotal events at their institutions: one library had just inaugurated an institutional repository on campus and thus found it apropos to celebrate OA Week, while the other had just hired an Instruction and Scholarly Communication Librarian who took on solo responsibility for organizing OA Week events. In fact, at ten of the libraries participating in this study, the party named as responsible for Open Access Week programming was either the Scholarly Communication Librarian (also called Scholarly Communications Coordinator/Scholarly Communications Liaison) or the Scholarly Communication Team (also called Scholarly Communication Working Group). At other participating libraries, diverse individuals were responsible for OA Week programming: the Director of Library (collaborating with IT and the Center for Teaching and Learning); the Dean of Libraries and the Science, Government Information & Data Services Librarian; the Institutional Repository Librarian; the Digital Repository Librarian; the Associate Dean with various librarians; the Collection Management Librarian; the Science Librarian and Copyright Librarian; and Research and Instruction Librarians. While responsible parties varied among libraries, the Open Access Week events were consistently held in the Library, with just one mention of an event being held in a new building on campus and three mentions of setting up informational tables at other locations on campus during specific Open Access Weeks. No relationship appeared between location of events and attendance. Attendance was generally considered to be modest, or “typical for library events,” but there was a concern voiced numerous times that there were not enough non-librarian and student attendees. One librarian said their Open Access Week programming was “mainly preaching to the choir – mostly librarians attended – not enough faculty and students attended.” At the one library that reported a favorable student turnout, attendance earned students extra credit. One librarian's remarks summed up what several others expressed: “with all the activities on campus and faculty's constricted time, it takes quite a bit of promotion to draw [many people to an event].” Nevertheless, this library was successful in attracting “~50 people, a mix of faculty, library staff, and a few students” to its Open Access Week programming — a sizable group relative to other reports. It was notable that no respondents mentioned spending money on any promotional activities per se. Eighteen of the twenty-three respondents from libraries participating in OA Week events specifically stated that there was no budget allocated for Open Access Week. If funds were supplied, the event budget provided only small amounts of money to cover printing costs and refreshments. This money was reported being requested on an as-needed basis from library Deans/Directors. Two librarians reported receiving one-time grant funding of $5000.00 to support Open Access Week Activities in 2012, and one respondent simply reported that grant money for a larger speaker series had covered the expenses for the speaker at their 2012 Open Access Week. None of the grant awardees elaborated on whether they had applied for such funding in 2013, if it had been possible to do so. Given that there appears a general lack of funding for Open Access Week, those who celebrate it have been markedly resourceful. Open Access Week activities offered by the participating libraries are enumerated in Table 2. As can be seen passive (or non-interactive) activities were various and popular among libraries participating in OA Week programming. Respondents from all libraries mentioned having a display, posters, or signs that called attention to Open Access Week: one library hung extra-large banners on the outside of the library building. All libraries used a variety of mediums to furnish information about what open access is, placing content on: Library websites; flyers; research guides/LibGuides; or video loops shown in library lobbies. More rarely, OA information was conveyed through blog posts and tweets. A variety of materials were given away, including buttons, cookies, “swag,” and postcards — but bookmarks were the most frequently reported giveaway. Multiple libraries engaged in interactive
629
Table 2 Open Access Week activities Type
Sample activitiesa
Passive: public display Passive: educational content delivery Passive: handout materials Active: students targeted
Banners; bulletin boards; displays; posters; signage Blogposts; content on Library website; flyers; research guides; tweets; video loops in library lobby Bookmarks; buttons; cookies at service desks; OA “swag” provided by vendors; postcards Graduate student workshop on OA and ETDs; student essay writing contest; student panel; student poster contest Panel discussions on digital repositories, author rights, etc.; seminar on OA publishing venues; statewide conference Copyright workshops; invited speakers; OA panel discussions; OA seminars; webcast screenings
Active: faculty targeted
Active: all-campus targeted a
Bold indicates multiple mentions.
Open Access Week events such as panel discussions, invited speakers, seminars, and webcast screenings followed by question and answer sessions. WHY LIBRARIES CHOSE TO CELEBRATE OPEN ACCESS WEEK Respondents' comments concerning their library's rationale behind celebrating Open Access Week fell into four general categories (Table 3). Some libraries reported more than one reason (n N 23). The most frequently mentioned purpose behind celebrating OA Week was to educate faculty and students (and in two instances non-campus community members were mentioned) about OA. Providing information/increasing awareness and engagement with OA issues was emphasized in these cases. A distinction was drawn between libraries that mentioned “increasing knowledge,” “sharing info,” and “informing people about” open access (building knowledge category) during OA Week, and those libraries that referred to their educational purposes with phrases such as “we have a responsibility to teach the importance of open access.” Libraries in the latter group were included among those whose reason for celebrating OA Week was based on a philosophical stance in favor of open access. Instances here include: “the Librarian's commitment to open access” and “we believe in the open access movement.” Strategic motivations were involved for seven of the participating libraries. Three respondents said they used the occasion of Open Access Week to promote their institutional repository (IR). Another librarian described open access as fitting in well with their institution's mission of social justice, and was heartened that they “finally have an IR to physically support the concept of OA.” Two libraries mentioned celebrating OA Week due to the parent institution's support for increasing access to faculty work — so potentially these were referencing either an existing IR or the immanent establishment of one. One response was simply that celebrating Open Access Week was a task required of the Scholarly Communications Librarian, presumably then part of the scholarly communications strategic plan at that library. The final reason given for celebrating Open Access Week was that it was incorporated into a specific form of library educational outreach. One of these was a seminar that engaged campus researchers in learning their rights as authors, and the other involved assisting researchers in evaluating publishing venues.
Table 3 Reasons for celebrating Open Access Week Theme
Number
Build community's knowledge of OA issues Part of library's or institution's mission Philosophical commitment to OA Form of specific educational library outreach
13 7 6 2
630
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
OPEN ACCESS WEEK NON-PARTICIPATING LIBRARIES: FACTORS AND QUALITIES A simple text analysis was done on the short responses supplied by the thirty-one librarians whose institutions had never celebrated Open Access Week, and eight themes emerged (Table 4). Some librarians gave more than one reason for non-participation (n N 31). Time and lack of personnel were sometimes intertwined, and in several instances the lack of time was linked to when Open Access Week is celebrated — the end of October is often a hectic period during the academic year. Inadequate staffing was often referenced as a challenge related to OA Week celebrations within small to medium college or university libraries: one-quarter of the librarians who answered that their library had never celebrated Open Access Week identified it as a concern. Somewhat surprisingly, eight librarians had never heard of Open Access Week. Librarians who feel they have too much to do already may not extend themselves to take on additional responsibilities, which could be what underlay the “not on our radar,” “never heard of it,” and “we're not aware of it” responses. There were also eight librarians who said the reason for not celebrating Open Access Week was that there were other initiatives of greater importance to their libraries. Statements such as “other priorities,” “not a priority,” “have to choose our activities carefully,” and “isn't something we wish to spend time on,” are representative of this response type. Another reason listed for not celebrating OA Week was that no one at the library had enough expertise in open access to head up the effort, e.g., “no one librarian with sufficient confidence in the area of open access to take the lead.” This response type is insufficient to determine whether the library would have celebrated Open Access Week if there were personnel with OA expertise on staff, since buy-in could be the ultimate determinant. Two librarians said their library Deans did not support public activities, which meant they could not celebrate OA Week. Lack of other types of buy-in – from the college/university faculty and from the student body – was also cited by some libraries as the reason they had not undertaken OA Week celebrations.
DISCUSSION This study explored data collected from an online survey of fifty-four academic librarians describing their library's efforts surrounding international Open Access Week since its inaugural year, 2009. The goal of this work was to develop an understanding of the particular contexts within which academic librarians/libraries operate that either lead toward or away from open access education efforts such as OA Week celebrations. The participation levels of libraries in this study appear to run the gamut: some were heavily involved with OA and in celebrating OA Week — while others were not at all involved with either. Several of the librarians where OA Week was not marked alluded to the circumstance described by Palmer et al. (2009), in which there is a gap between the library's OA views and the impetus to transform these ideals into action. Some survey respondents noted, “we'd like to be hosting events and hope to do so,”; “not much of a history [of Open Access at my library]…but I hope to change that,”; “we hope to expand Table 4 Reasons for not celebrating Open Access Week Theme
Number
Not enough time Lack of personnel; short-staffed Other library initiatives of greater importance Unaware of Open Access Week No buy-in from college/university faculty No personnel with adequate OA expertise Unsure of student interest Lack of support from library administration
10 8 8 8 4 4 3 2
our activities in the future” — responses indicating a gap between desires and actions. The results of this study suggest some implications for librarians contemplating celebrating OA week at their own institutions. It is selfevident that librarians work within contexts, and that their interest and knowledge levels concerning OA vary. What appears to set apart the responding libraries that celebrate Open Access Week – libraries involved at whatever level – is a philosophical commitment to OA on the part of the individual or committee organizing the celebration, reinforced by 1) a belief in the educational mission of the library; 2) adequate personnel; and 3) sufficient time, both for planning for the event and time within the sometimes crowded academic schedule. Lack of financial resources was not mentioned as an obstacle, nor did low attendance seem to affect participation in subsequent Open Access Weeks (although greater attendance is an oft stated goal, e.g., “we need to devise ways to get more of the relevant people attending”). Both of the libraries that celebrated Open Access Week since its beginning had committees/teams with a permanent head and a changing composition, but most of the other libraries that held OA Weeks had one individual who served as the guiding force. However, no matter how strongly a librarian or library may believe in open access, support for action is required in order to produce events such as Open Access Week celebrations. Based on survey responses, two recommendations for obtaining such support were suggested. The first is to make OA Week a yearlong activity — that is, develop an open access strategic plan that encompasses the whole year and simply incorporates International OA Week as one of the year's highlights. The second is to place more emphasis on reaching graduate and undergraduate students (separately from faculty), since this is the population that will either facilitate the transformation of scholarly communication to a more open model, or will be part of the population that insures the system changes only incrementally. CONCLUSION Open Access Week, as described on the International Open Access Week website, is “a global event … [an] opportunity for the academic and research community to continue to learn about the potential benefits of Open Access, to share what they've learned with colleagues, and to help inspire wider participation in helping to make Open Access a new norm in scholarship and research. … Get involved. Participating in Open Access Week can be as simple or involved as you like. It can also be a chance to let your imagination have full rein and come up with something more ambitious, wacky, fun” (Open Access Week Organization, 2014). While some of the librarians where Open Access Week has been celebrated spoke from an overtly OA advocacy position as encouraged by SPARC, a greater number spoke more neutrally about providing their users with awareness, information, and education concerning OA issues. From either perspective, it is hoped that the types of activities described in this study will inspire librarians to think more about how they initiate or organize International Open Access Week celebrations on their campuses. APPENDIX A SURVEY EMAIL INVITATION To: bemail addressN Subject: Open Access Week Five Years In: What has your Library been doing? Dear b nameN, You are invited to participate in a survey on how small to medium sized academic libraries have celebrated – or not – International Open Access Week on their campuses since it was initiated in 2009. Participation in this study is voluntary and should take approximately 15 min. To take the survey, please use the following link: https://www. surveymonkey.com/s/intlopenaccessweek.
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
There are no known risks with this survey. Results from this survey will be presented in a future publication, from which you may learn the ways that your peer libraries have been involved in celebrating Open Access week. The survey will remain open until March 15, 2014. Thank you in advance for your participation. If you have any questions, please contact me. APPENDIX B WEB-BASED SURVEY Open Access Week @ Your Library 1. I consent to taking this survey and further attest that I am at least 18 years of age. 2. Please state the Carnegie classification and the total enrollment of your institution. 3. Since it began in 2009, has your library ever celebrated Open Access week? [if no, skip to #14] 4. Please check the years in which your library has celebrated Open Access week. [2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013] 5. Currently, does your library have an individual/committee/other entity that is charged with promoting open access on your campus? If yes, please describe. 6. Who has been chiefly responsible for producing the event(s) that make up your Open Access Week celebration? Please include a title and indicate any collaboration that occurs with groups or individuals external to the library. If your library has celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with responsibility information. 7. What activities have you included in your Open Access Week celebration(s)? If you have celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with activity(ies). 8. When does your library typically begin planning its Open Access Week celebration? 9. Where have you held the events that make up your Open Access Week celebration? 10. Why has your library chosen to celebrate Open Access Week? 11. How has attendance to Open Access Week events been? If you have celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with overall attendance information. Lacking numbers, relative size of turnout is appreciated. If you know the population type, kindly include it, as well. (e.g., 2013 — approx. 80 people attended our 3 events, which was a strong turnout for the library. Majority were faculty members.) 12. Funding: Have you had a specified budget to produce programming for Open Access Week? If yes, please state the funding source and amount. If your library has celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with budget data. N/A if you haven't received funding. [If n/a, skip to #15] 13. Regarding the most recent time you received funding: please provide a general breakdown of where disbursed (e.g., 50% went to honorarium for outside speaker, 30% went toward publicity and 20% went for refreshments). [Skip to #15]
631
14. Why has your library chosen not to celebrate Open Access Week? 15. Do you have anything else you'd like to say concerning the history of Open Access Week at your library? REFERENCES Anderson, R. (2014, March 10). Is a rational discussion of open access possible? Smithsonian Libraries lecture (Retrieved from http://discussingoa.wordpress.com/). Chan, L., Cuplinskas, D., Eisen, M., Friend, F., Genova, Y., Guédon, J. -C., et al. (2002). Budapest open access initiative. Retrieved from. http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/ read Cryer, E., & Collins, M. (2011). Incorporating open access into libraries. Serials Review, 37(2), 103–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2011.10765359. Fernandez, P., & Radom, R. (2013, April). If you build it, will they come? Hard-won lessons from 3-years of open access week events. Poster presented at the biennial conference of the Association of College and Research Libraries., Indianapolis, IN (Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/peter_fernandez/13). Fruin, C. (2013, June). ASERL Open Access survey — Fall 2012 summary of results. Retrieved from. http://www.aserl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/OA_Survey_ Exec_Summary.pdf Gilliland, A. (2010). Evaluating Open Access Day 2009 at Ohio State University. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 5(4), 121 (Retrieved from http://ejournals. library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/8883/7527). Jennings, E. (2013). The relevance of academic libraries in the twenty-first century. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 20(1), 107–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10691316.2013.761037. Jones, J., Waller, A., & McLennan, J. (2010). Open access week: Library strategies for advancing change. Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, 270. (pp. 21–26), 21–26 (Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/rli/archive/ rli270.shtml). Laakso, M., & Björk, B. C. (2012). Anatomy of open access publishing: A study of longitudinal development and internal structure. BMC Medicine, 10(1), 124. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-10-124. Lewis, D. W. (2012). The inevitability of open access. College & Research Libraries, 73(5), 493–506 (Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/73/5/493.full.pdf+html). McLennan, J. (2008). Open access day registration closes Friday, call for shout-outs. Retrieved from. http://www.sparc.arl.org/news/open-access-day-registrationcloses-friday-call-shout-outs National Center for Education Statistics (2014). Integrated postsecondary education data system. Retrieved from. http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/ Open Access Week Organization (2014). About open access week. Retrieved from. http:// www.openaccessweek.org/page/about Palmer, K. L., Dill, E., & Christie, C. (2009). Where there's a will there's a way?: Survey of academic librarian attitudes about open access. College & Research Libraries, 70(4), 315–335 (Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/70/4/315.full.pdf+html?sid= c67a4b46-d3dd-4888-b49a-0d6658f17e02). Potvin, S. (2013). The principle and the pragmatist: On conflict and coalescence for librarian engagement with open access initiatives. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(1), 67–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.11.002. Poynder, R. (2011, July). Suber: Leader of a leaderless revolution. Information Today, 28(7) (Retrieved from http://www.infotoday.com/it/jul11/Suber-Leader-of-a-LeaderlessRevolution.shtml). Rathe, B., Chaudhuri, J., & Highby, W. (2010). Open access advocacy: Think globally, act locally. Collaborative Librarianship, 2(3), 162–168 (Retrieved from http:// collaborativelibrarianship.org/index.php/jocl/article/view/99/65). Right to Research Coalition (2010). The student statement on the right to research. Retrieved from. http://www.righttoresearch.org/about/statement/index.shtml Vandegrift, M., Bolick, J. A., & Rose, N. (2013). Open Access Week 2013 final report. Library faculty publications (Paper 9. Retrieved from http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/library_ faculty_publications/9/). Vandegrift, M., & Colvin, G. (2012). Relational communications: Developing key connections. College & Research Libraries News, 73(7), 386–389 (Retrieved from http://crln.acrl.org/content/73/7/386.full.pdf+html). Wright, A.M. (2013). Starting scholarly conversations: A scholarly communication outreach program. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 2(1). http://dx. doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1096.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES
International Open Access Week at Small to Medium U.S. Academic Libraries: The First Five Years Paula C. Johnson ⁎ New Mexico State University Library, MSC 3475, PO Box 30006, Las Cruces, NM 88003-8006, USA
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 24 June 2014 Accepted 28 July 2014 Available online 6 October 2014 Keywords: International Open Access Week Open access Scholarly communication Library programming Library outreach
a b s t r a c t This research seeks to expand the body of knowledge surrounding International Open Access Week (OA Week) practices among small to medium-sized U.S. institutions, examining the rationales guiding these, and creating a baseline activity inventory which may be elaborated upon as open access continues to evolve and as OA Week matures beyond its fifth (2013) anniversary. An electronic survey with closed- and open-ended questions was used to collect data, which were analyzed for recurring themes. Of respondents whose campuses did observe OA Week, the most reported reason for doing so was related to supporting the library's educational outreach program; fewer respondents cited the library's philosophical commitment to open access. Lack of time was the most frequently given reason for OA Week non-participation, however around one quarter of non-participating respondents reported that they were unaware of OA Week, and another quarter reported that it did not figure in their strategic plan. The conditions that were found to best support celebrating OA Week included a grasp of the principles guiding OA on the part of at least one librarian, reinforced by: the educational mission of the library; adequate personnel; and sufficient time for planning. This exploratory study yields points for library- and self-assessment. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION The global push for “free and unrestricted online availability” of scholarly research outputs first coalesced during the Open Society Conference at Budapest in December 2001. There, attendees from various disciplines developed the Budapest Open Access Initiative, which continues to garner signatures. In the words of the initiative, “we invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish” (Chan et al., 2002). Six years later (Oct. 14, 2008), the movement had gained such impetus that the first international Open Access Day was commemorated, sponsored by SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition), the Public Library of Science (PLoS), and Students for Free Culture. At that time, Heather Joseph (Executive Director of SPARC) said, “The momentum behind Open Access to research has been accelerating … Open Access Day will provide a perfect way for folks to come together, consider, and celebrate the ramifications of the global shift we're experiencing” (McLennan, 2008). Librarians and student groups were urged to host
⁎ Tel.: +1 5756364008. E-mail address: [email protected].
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.07.011 0099-1333/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
meetings around a live broadcast, that year featuring a Nobel Prize winner and the Founding Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computational Biology. The following year (2009), Open Access Day became Open Access Week, and ever since has been held during the last full week of October. 2009 also saw the launch of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Scholarly Communication Road Show, an annual initiative that sends expert trainers to five selected host college and university libraries to provide librarians with an overview of the scholarly communication system. This program is designed to motivate and facilitate individual librarians and their libraries toward developing strategic and action plans for transforming the landscape of this system. The call for action on the part of college and university libraries to provide leadership on their campuses concerning scholarly communication/open access issues has only amplified with time. Open access is now embraced by groups such as EDUCAUSE, the American Library Association, and the Association of Research Libraries. The establishment of an Open Access Week placed this cause on the calendar alongside such celebrations as National Library Week (April) and Banned Books Week (September) — events now often incorporated into library programming. Using an email survey of academic librarians, this research explores the extent to which librarians at small to medium U.S. colleges and universities (enrollments from 2000 to 17,000) have actively engaged in organized and sanctioned activities to mark International Open Access Week during the first five years of its existence.
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
627
LITERATURE REVIEW
ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS' INVOLVEMENT WITH OPEN ACCESS
CELEBRATIONS OF OPEN ACCESS WEEK
While surveys have been conducted to assess librarians' attitudes and roles vis à vis open access, the closest inventory of the type undertaken here was a Fall 2012 study conducted by the Association of Southeastern Research Libraries (ASERL). The ASERL surveyed 37 member libraries to learn the type and degree of their engagement with open access activities generally, including Open Access Week (Fruin, 2013). Most of the ASERL libraries (26) were involved with a broad range of OA advocacy activities (e.g., putting OA titles in the OPAC and providing direct support to the Directory of Open Access Journals). Twenty-three member libraries had celebrated Open Access Week, and four were developing plans to do so. Additionally, half of these libraries incorporated scholarly communications or open access advocacy into their liaison/reference librarian work responsibilities. Since the beginning of the drive toward greater open access of scholarly products, there has been a connection between OA advocacy and academic librarians. OA exists as a movement and as a practical means for sharing scholarship: it encompasses both the political/philosophical issue of unfettered access to scholarly research, and also the pragmatic issue of affordability. In an interview with Richard Poynder, Peter Suber, sometimes called the father of the OA movement, called librarians “some of OA's best friends” (Poynder, 2011). Suber credits librarians with greatly contributing to the advancement of OA, and notes that their support derives from both the accessibility and affordability perspectives. Poynder himself said, “On average, [librarians] understand [OA] issues better than any other stakeholder group, including researchers, administrators, publishers, funders, and policymakers” (Poynder, 2011). As mentioned previously, ACRL began offering intensive training in scholarly communication topics to selected academic librarians and libraries on an annual basis during International Open Access Week's inaugural year: these train-the-trainer workshops include a module on OA. The Scholarly Communication Road Show is intended to empower participants to serve as a catalyst for change in the areas of scholarly communication and OA within their home institutions. While data are not available, anecdotal evidence suggests that the Road Show has led directly to some of its participants to initiate outreach educational programming on OA – e.g., Open Access Week celebrations – at their institutions (Vandegrift & Colvin, 2012). During the Road Show workshop, participating librarians establish their personal and professional ethics concerning OA issues. Possessing a comfortable comprehension and thoughtful, informed opinions regarding OA enables librarians to fulfill the educator and advocate roles they may be called upon to perform on their campuses. Without a framework like the Road Show, librarians may struggle to develop knowledge and perspective on OA issues. One recent lecture concerning OA was entitled “Is a Rational Discussion of Open Access Possible?” (Anderson, 2014), and this gives an indication of the polarization and diversity of opinions that can be found on this topic within the academic press, and on scholarly communication blogs and listservs. Potvin (2013) observed that OA work can be “mission- or values-driven” (p. 69). She goes on to say “A notable impediment to … determining and developing competencies for future roles related to OA is academic libraries' collective uncertainty around what libraries' roles are – or will be – in shaping [scholarly communication] generally and responding to OA in particular” (p. 70). Some years prior to this assessment, Palmer, Dill, and Christie (2009) conducted a national survey of academic librarians on their opinions of open access. They discovered that a majority of those surveyed were supportive of OA's basic principles and believed that these were related to their work as librarians. The traditional librarian activities of user education (but around OA) and helping users locate items (in this instance, OA materials) were the OA activities garnering the highest levels of support. A key finding of the Palmer et al. study, however, was that there was “discrepancy between stated support of library involvement in open access initiatives and significantly lacking
In 2010, in an introduction to two articles written by participants in the first (2009) Open Access Week celebrations, Jennifer McLennan, then Director of Programs and Operations at SPARC said: “…Open Access Week has evolved into a truly global phenomenon thanks to the ongoing leadership of the library community. Not simply an awareness-raising exercise, librarians have made Open Access Week a platform for advancing policy changes on research sharing and dissemination, including institution-wide commitments to open access” (Jones, Waller, & McLennan, 2010, p. 21). It has been noted that hosting open access (OA) events highlights the significance of the issue on campus and is an important part of keeping academic libraries relevant (Jennings, 2013). Limited literature exists that discusses the development and/or hosting of Open Access Week celebrations held at U.S. colleges and universities. 2009 Open Access Week activities at the University of Northern Colorado included a library display, handouts, a LibGuide, and a cross-campus faculty panel discussion on open access (Rathe, Chaudhuri, & Highby, 2010). Ohio State University's 2009 OA Week program also featured a faculty panel discussion, bringing together those who edit or publish in open access journals with representatives from commercial and society journal publishers (Gilliland, 2010). Duke University's 2010 OA Week included a faculty panel very much like the one at OSU (Cryer & Collins, 2011), while their 2009 Open Access Week program targeted graduate students via a mandatory Responsible Research Conduct course. This course included an overview by the Library's scholarly communications officer of the pros and cons of publishing in open access venues. Within the context of discussing Florida State University's scholarly communication program, Vandegrift and Colvin (2012) mention FSU's 2010 and 2011 Open Access Week events, noting that “specific outreach programs like Open Access Week provide another opportunity to share information about scholarly communication topics and about the university's initiatives” (p. 388). Florida State University's 2013 OA Week programming was redesigned based on feedback from previous years: moving away from panel discussions, FSU elected instead to create events targeting specific user groups (Vandegrift, Bolick, & Rose, 2013). A faculty-focused event was a digital repository article upload-a-thon, and the student event involved asking students to endorse the Right to Research Coalition's “The Student Statement on the Right to Research” (Right to Research Coalition, 2010). FSU took particular aim at undergraduate students, a group they believed has been overlooked in OA programming. The challenge associated with initiating a limited-time event such as Open Access Week in order to discuss the manifold issues embedded in open access and the scholarly communications system has also been documented in the scholarly literature. Wright (2013) discussed the yearlong program offered at Furman University Libraries that covered evolving scholarly communication models and practices, geared toward both librarian professional development and outreach to the greater campus community. She identified the value of a lengthier OA discussion: “by holding the events throughout the year, we would capitalize on both the start of the academic year and Open Access Week while extending the conversations above and beyond those few days” (p. 3). In an ACRL conference poster titled, “If You Build It, Will They Come? Hard-won Lessons from 3 Years of Open Access Week Events,” Fernandez and Radom (2013) discussed 2010–2012 OA events held at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. They included their focus, audience, and promotion methods, as well as specific challenges and successes. Among their future plans: “We will advocate for OA Week events that are part of larger year-long strategy.”
628
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
action toward this end” (p. 315). In regards to Open Access Week, the present study looks at whether a gap exists between what librarians/libraries think they should be doing and what they actually are doing. METHODS A sample of small- and medium-sized U.S. colleges and universities was invited to participate in the OA Week survey. A list of U.S. colleges and universities with 2012 total enrollments between 2000 and 17,000 was generated using the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System's data set (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). The resulting list consisted of 646 institutions; of these a random sample (162 institutions) was identified using Excel. These institutions were invited to participate in the online survey (Table 1) via email invitations. In an effort to target individuals at each institution who would be involved with OA Week efforts, relevant email addresses were extracted from university library websites (e.g., gathered from LibGuides or other research guides covering OA or scholarly communication content; library newsletters and announcements documenting OA Week; and staff email directories, searching for Scholarly Communication Officer or similarly titled librarians). For most institutions, two invitations were sent: one to the individual discovered via the process just described, and one to the Library director, with the request that the survey invitation be forwarded to the appropriate individual (see Appendix A). The survey was open for a period of 19 days. The survey was constructed using the web-based survey hosting site SurveyMonkey® and had either fourteen or five questions (see Appendix B). All survey takers were asked to provide: 1) consent to taking the survey; 2) their institution's Carnegie Classification and total enrollment; and 3) a reply to whether their library had celebrated Open Access Week. Further questions depended on whether number 3 preceding was answered in the affirmative or negative. If one's college or university had never celebrated OA Week, 1–3 were followed by two open-ended prompts: “Why has your library chosen not to celebrate Open Access Week?” and “Do you have anything else you'd like to say concerning the history of Open Access Week at your library?” For those whose institutions which had celebrated Open Access Week at least once between 2009 and 2014, there were an additional eleven questions. Survey takers were asked which years they had celebrated OA Week, and open-ended queries concerning: • Whether there was an individual/committee/other entity charged with promoting open access on their campus • Who was responsible for producing the events making up the OA Week celebration(s) • The types of activities that were included in the OA Week celebration(s) • When planning for OA Week typically began • Where OA Week events were held • Why the institution chose to celebrate OA Week • Who attended the OA Week events • How OA Week programming was funded and the way that funding was allocated. The affirmative group also received a final question that solicited any further remarks about the history of Open Access Week at their library.
RESULTS SURVEY RESPONSES — OPEN ACCESS WEEK PARTICIPATION RATE Eighty-nine responses to the survey invitation were received, with a total of fifty-four usable surveys returned (thirty were removed because of being incomplete and five since they were from non-U.S. institutions). Respondents provided the Carnegie classification inconsistently, precluding its use in analysis. Slightly more than forty percent of responding libraries (42.6%) had celebrated Open Access Week within the past five years. Survey results suggest that participation in Open Access Week has increased over time. During the first two years of this event (2009 and 2010) just three of the twenty-three libraries celebrated OA Week; by 2013, almost three-quarters of positive respondents had participated in OA Week (Fig. 1). This increasing level of participation may indicate that open access has gained traction in academic libraries over time, supporting predictions found in Laakso and Björk (2012) and Lewis (2012) about the “inevitability” of open access. OPEN ACCESS WEEK PARTICIPATING LIBRARIES — FACTORS AND QUALITIES Two libraries celebrated OA Week annually since its inception (hereafter referred to as “committed libraries”), and both libraries were at institutions with enrollment over 10,000. This suggests higher research activity and therefore possibly broader engagement with the scholarly communications system, of which OA is a part. Another possibility is that higher staffing levels at larger institutions may lead to personnel available to tackle library programming. Planning for Open Access Week at committed libraries commenced five to six months in advance of OA Week, which is held the last full week of October. This was the longest lead time of those mentioned by participating libraries, which most often reported initiating OA Week planning one to three months prior to the event. Committed libraries tasked committees (either library-based or cross-campus) with programming responsibilities. Programming included public screening of webinars, classes and workshops, LibGuides and posters. Interestingly, the committed libraries did not have a budget for OA Week, and did not report strong attendance at OA Week events. A librarian at one committed library commented that attendance was “very low — mostly library staff. Even in 2011 when we went all out for events — we probably had total 20 people (non-library).” While these two libraries could be considered OA Week veterans, three libraries celebrated OA week for the first time in 2013. Two of
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30%
Table 1 Total number of institutions meeting enrollment criteria; number of institutions invited Enrollment
Total U.S. institutions (n)
Invited institutions (n)
2000–4999 5000–7999 8000–10,999 11,000–13,999 14,000–16,999 (Total)
279 124 106 80 57 646
70 31 27 20 14 162
20% 10% 0% 2009
2010
2011
2012
Fig. 1. Participation in Open Access Week by year.
2013
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
these libraries were prompted to celebrate OA Week as a result of pivotal events at their institutions: one library had just inaugurated an institutional repository on campus and thus found it apropos to celebrate OA Week, while the other had just hired an Instruction and Scholarly Communication Librarian who took on solo responsibility for organizing OA Week events. In fact, at ten of the libraries participating in this study, the party named as responsible for Open Access Week programming was either the Scholarly Communication Librarian (also called Scholarly Communications Coordinator/Scholarly Communications Liaison) or the Scholarly Communication Team (also called Scholarly Communication Working Group). At other participating libraries, diverse individuals were responsible for OA Week programming: the Director of Library (collaborating with IT and the Center for Teaching and Learning); the Dean of Libraries and the Science, Government Information & Data Services Librarian; the Institutional Repository Librarian; the Digital Repository Librarian; the Associate Dean with various librarians; the Collection Management Librarian; the Science Librarian and Copyright Librarian; and Research and Instruction Librarians. While responsible parties varied among libraries, the Open Access Week events were consistently held in the Library, with just one mention of an event being held in a new building on campus and three mentions of setting up informational tables at other locations on campus during specific Open Access Weeks. No relationship appeared between location of events and attendance. Attendance was generally considered to be modest, or “typical for library events,” but there was a concern voiced numerous times that there were not enough non-librarian and student attendees. One librarian said their Open Access Week programming was “mainly preaching to the choir – mostly librarians attended – not enough faculty and students attended.” At the one library that reported a favorable student turnout, attendance earned students extra credit. One librarian's remarks summed up what several others expressed: “with all the activities on campus and faculty's constricted time, it takes quite a bit of promotion to draw [many people to an event].” Nevertheless, this library was successful in attracting “~50 people, a mix of faculty, library staff, and a few students” to its Open Access Week programming — a sizable group relative to other reports. It was notable that no respondents mentioned spending money on any promotional activities per se. Eighteen of the twenty-three respondents from libraries participating in OA Week events specifically stated that there was no budget allocated for Open Access Week. If funds were supplied, the event budget provided only small amounts of money to cover printing costs and refreshments. This money was reported being requested on an as-needed basis from library Deans/Directors. Two librarians reported receiving one-time grant funding of $5000.00 to support Open Access Week Activities in 2012, and one respondent simply reported that grant money for a larger speaker series had covered the expenses for the speaker at their 2012 Open Access Week. None of the grant awardees elaborated on whether they had applied for such funding in 2013, if it had been possible to do so. Given that there appears a general lack of funding for Open Access Week, those who celebrate it have been markedly resourceful. Open Access Week activities offered by the participating libraries are enumerated in Table 2. As can be seen passive (or non-interactive) activities were various and popular among libraries participating in OA Week programming. Respondents from all libraries mentioned having a display, posters, or signs that called attention to Open Access Week: one library hung extra-large banners on the outside of the library building. All libraries used a variety of mediums to furnish information about what open access is, placing content on: Library websites; flyers; research guides/LibGuides; or video loops shown in library lobbies. More rarely, OA information was conveyed through blog posts and tweets. A variety of materials were given away, including buttons, cookies, “swag,” and postcards — but bookmarks were the most frequently reported giveaway. Multiple libraries engaged in interactive
629
Table 2 Open Access Week activities Type
Sample activitiesa
Passive: public display Passive: educational content delivery Passive: handout materials Active: students targeted
Banners; bulletin boards; displays; posters; signage Blogposts; content on Library website; flyers; research guides; tweets; video loops in library lobby Bookmarks; buttons; cookies at service desks; OA “swag” provided by vendors; postcards Graduate student workshop on OA and ETDs; student essay writing contest; student panel; student poster contest Panel discussions on digital repositories, author rights, etc.; seminar on OA publishing venues; statewide conference Copyright workshops; invited speakers; OA panel discussions; OA seminars; webcast screenings
Active: faculty targeted
Active: all-campus targeted a
Bold indicates multiple mentions.
Open Access Week events such as panel discussions, invited speakers, seminars, and webcast screenings followed by question and answer sessions. WHY LIBRARIES CHOSE TO CELEBRATE OPEN ACCESS WEEK Respondents' comments concerning their library's rationale behind celebrating Open Access Week fell into four general categories (Table 3). Some libraries reported more than one reason (n N 23). The most frequently mentioned purpose behind celebrating OA Week was to educate faculty and students (and in two instances non-campus community members were mentioned) about OA. Providing information/increasing awareness and engagement with OA issues was emphasized in these cases. A distinction was drawn between libraries that mentioned “increasing knowledge,” “sharing info,” and “informing people about” open access (building knowledge category) during OA Week, and those libraries that referred to their educational purposes with phrases such as “we have a responsibility to teach the importance of open access.” Libraries in the latter group were included among those whose reason for celebrating OA Week was based on a philosophical stance in favor of open access. Instances here include: “the Librarian's commitment to open access” and “we believe in the open access movement.” Strategic motivations were involved for seven of the participating libraries. Three respondents said they used the occasion of Open Access Week to promote their institutional repository (IR). Another librarian described open access as fitting in well with their institution's mission of social justice, and was heartened that they “finally have an IR to physically support the concept of OA.” Two libraries mentioned celebrating OA Week due to the parent institution's support for increasing access to faculty work — so potentially these were referencing either an existing IR or the immanent establishment of one. One response was simply that celebrating Open Access Week was a task required of the Scholarly Communications Librarian, presumably then part of the scholarly communications strategic plan at that library. The final reason given for celebrating Open Access Week was that it was incorporated into a specific form of library educational outreach. One of these was a seminar that engaged campus researchers in learning their rights as authors, and the other involved assisting researchers in evaluating publishing venues.
Table 3 Reasons for celebrating Open Access Week Theme
Number
Build community's knowledge of OA issues Part of library's or institution's mission Philosophical commitment to OA Form of specific educational library outreach
13 7 6 2
630
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
OPEN ACCESS WEEK NON-PARTICIPATING LIBRARIES: FACTORS AND QUALITIES A simple text analysis was done on the short responses supplied by the thirty-one librarians whose institutions had never celebrated Open Access Week, and eight themes emerged (Table 4). Some librarians gave more than one reason for non-participation (n N 31). Time and lack of personnel were sometimes intertwined, and in several instances the lack of time was linked to when Open Access Week is celebrated — the end of October is often a hectic period during the academic year. Inadequate staffing was often referenced as a challenge related to OA Week celebrations within small to medium college or university libraries: one-quarter of the librarians who answered that their library had never celebrated Open Access Week identified it as a concern. Somewhat surprisingly, eight librarians had never heard of Open Access Week. Librarians who feel they have too much to do already may not extend themselves to take on additional responsibilities, which could be what underlay the “not on our radar,” “never heard of it,” and “we're not aware of it” responses. There were also eight librarians who said the reason for not celebrating Open Access Week was that there were other initiatives of greater importance to their libraries. Statements such as “other priorities,” “not a priority,” “have to choose our activities carefully,” and “isn't something we wish to spend time on,” are representative of this response type. Another reason listed for not celebrating OA Week was that no one at the library had enough expertise in open access to head up the effort, e.g., “no one librarian with sufficient confidence in the area of open access to take the lead.” This response type is insufficient to determine whether the library would have celebrated Open Access Week if there were personnel with OA expertise on staff, since buy-in could be the ultimate determinant. Two librarians said their library Deans did not support public activities, which meant they could not celebrate OA Week. Lack of other types of buy-in – from the college/university faculty and from the student body – was also cited by some libraries as the reason they had not undertaken OA Week celebrations.
DISCUSSION This study explored data collected from an online survey of fifty-four academic librarians describing their library's efforts surrounding international Open Access Week since its inaugural year, 2009. The goal of this work was to develop an understanding of the particular contexts within which academic librarians/libraries operate that either lead toward or away from open access education efforts such as OA Week celebrations. The participation levels of libraries in this study appear to run the gamut: some were heavily involved with OA and in celebrating OA Week — while others were not at all involved with either. Several of the librarians where OA Week was not marked alluded to the circumstance described by Palmer et al. (2009), in which there is a gap between the library's OA views and the impetus to transform these ideals into action. Some survey respondents noted, “we'd like to be hosting events and hope to do so,”; “not much of a history [of Open Access at my library]…but I hope to change that,”; “we hope to expand Table 4 Reasons for not celebrating Open Access Week Theme
Number
Not enough time Lack of personnel; short-staffed Other library initiatives of greater importance Unaware of Open Access Week No buy-in from college/university faculty No personnel with adequate OA expertise Unsure of student interest Lack of support from library administration
10 8 8 8 4 4 3 2
our activities in the future” — responses indicating a gap between desires and actions. The results of this study suggest some implications for librarians contemplating celebrating OA week at their own institutions. It is selfevident that librarians work within contexts, and that their interest and knowledge levels concerning OA vary. What appears to set apart the responding libraries that celebrate Open Access Week – libraries involved at whatever level – is a philosophical commitment to OA on the part of the individual or committee organizing the celebration, reinforced by 1) a belief in the educational mission of the library; 2) adequate personnel; and 3) sufficient time, both for planning for the event and time within the sometimes crowded academic schedule. Lack of financial resources was not mentioned as an obstacle, nor did low attendance seem to affect participation in subsequent Open Access Weeks (although greater attendance is an oft stated goal, e.g., “we need to devise ways to get more of the relevant people attending”). Both of the libraries that celebrated Open Access Week since its beginning had committees/teams with a permanent head and a changing composition, but most of the other libraries that held OA Weeks had one individual who served as the guiding force. However, no matter how strongly a librarian or library may believe in open access, support for action is required in order to produce events such as Open Access Week celebrations. Based on survey responses, two recommendations for obtaining such support were suggested. The first is to make OA Week a yearlong activity — that is, develop an open access strategic plan that encompasses the whole year and simply incorporates International OA Week as one of the year's highlights. The second is to place more emphasis on reaching graduate and undergraduate students (separately from faculty), since this is the population that will either facilitate the transformation of scholarly communication to a more open model, or will be part of the population that insures the system changes only incrementally. CONCLUSION Open Access Week, as described on the International Open Access Week website, is “a global event … [an] opportunity for the academic and research community to continue to learn about the potential benefits of Open Access, to share what they've learned with colleagues, and to help inspire wider participation in helping to make Open Access a new norm in scholarship and research. … Get involved. Participating in Open Access Week can be as simple or involved as you like. It can also be a chance to let your imagination have full rein and come up with something more ambitious, wacky, fun” (Open Access Week Organization, 2014). While some of the librarians where Open Access Week has been celebrated spoke from an overtly OA advocacy position as encouraged by SPARC, a greater number spoke more neutrally about providing their users with awareness, information, and education concerning OA issues. From either perspective, it is hoped that the types of activities described in this study will inspire librarians to think more about how they initiate or organize International Open Access Week celebrations on their campuses. APPENDIX A SURVEY EMAIL INVITATION To: bemail addressN Subject: Open Access Week Five Years In: What has your Library been doing? Dear b nameN, You are invited to participate in a survey on how small to medium sized academic libraries have celebrated – or not – International Open Access Week on their campuses since it was initiated in 2009. Participation in this study is voluntary and should take approximately 15 min. To take the survey, please use the following link: https://www. surveymonkey.com/s/intlopenaccessweek.
P.C. Johnson / The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (2014) 626–631
There are no known risks with this survey. Results from this survey will be presented in a future publication, from which you may learn the ways that your peer libraries have been involved in celebrating Open Access week. The survey will remain open until March 15, 2014. Thank you in advance for your participation. If you have any questions, please contact me. APPENDIX B WEB-BASED SURVEY Open Access Week @ Your Library 1. I consent to taking this survey and further attest that I am at least 18 years of age. 2. Please state the Carnegie classification and the total enrollment of your institution. 3. Since it began in 2009, has your library ever celebrated Open Access week? [if no, skip to #14] 4. Please check the years in which your library has celebrated Open Access week. [2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013] 5. Currently, does your library have an individual/committee/other entity that is charged with promoting open access on your campus? If yes, please describe. 6. Who has been chiefly responsible for producing the event(s) that make up your Open Access Week celebration? Please include a title and indicate any collaboration that occurs with groups or individuals external to the library. If your library has celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with responsibility information. 7. What activities have you included in your Open Access Week celebration(s)? If you have celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with activity(ies). 8. When does your library typically begin planning its Open Access Week celebration? 9. Where have you held the events that make up your Open Access Week celebration? 10. Why has your library chosen to celebrate Open Access Week? 11. How has attendance to Open Access Week events been? If you have celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with overall attendance information. Lacking numbers, relative size of turnout is appreciated. If you know the population type, kindly include it, as well. (e.g., 2013 — approx. 80 people attended our 3 events, which was a strong turnout for the library. Majority were faculty members.) 12. Funding: Have you had a specified budget to produce programming for Open Access Week? If yes, please state the funding source and amount. If your library has celebrated OA week multiple times, please list year with budget data. N/A if you haven't received funding. [If n/a, skip to #15] 13. Regarding the most recent time you received funding: please provide a general breakdown of where disbursed (e.g., 50% went to honorarium for outside speaker, 30% went toward publicity and 20% went for refreshments). [Skip to #15]
631
14. Why has your library chosen not to celebrate Open Access Week? 15. Do you have anything else you'd like to say concerning the history of Open Access Week at your library? REFERENCES Anderson, R. (2014, March 10). Is a rational discussion of open access possible? Smithsonian Libraries lecture (Retrieved from http://discussingoa.wordpress.com/). Chan, L., Cuplinskas, D., Eisen, M., Friend, F., Genova, Y., Guédon, J. -C., et al. (2002). Budapest open access initiative. Retrieved from. http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/ read Cryer, E., & Collins, M. (2011). Incorporating open access into libraries. Serials Review, 37(2), 103–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2011.10765359. Fernandez, P., & Radom, R. (2013, April). If you build it, will they come? Hard-won lessons from 3-years of open access week events. Poster presented at the biennial conference of the Association of College and Research Libraries., Indianapolis, IN (Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/peter_fernandez/13). Fruin, C. (2013, June). ASERL Open Access survey — Fall 2012 summary of results. Retrieved from. http://www.aserl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/OA_Survey_ Exec_Summary.pdf Gilliland, A. (2010). Evaluating Open Access Day 2009 at Ohio State University. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 5(4), 121 (Retrieved from http://ejournals. library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/8883/7527). Jennings, E. (2013). The relevance of academic libraries in the twenty-first century. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 20(1), 107–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10691316.2013.761037. Jones, J., Waller, A., & McLennan, J. (2010). Open access week: Library strategies for advancing change. Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, 270. (pp. 21–26), 21–26 (Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/rli/archive/ rli270.shtml). Laakso, M., & Björk, B. C. (2012). Anatomy of open access publishing: A study of longitudinal development and internal structure. BMC Medicine, 10(1), 124. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-10-124. Lewis, D. W. (2012). The inevitability of open access. College & Research Libraries, 73(5), 493–506 (Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/73/5/493.full.pdf+html). McLennan, J. (2008). Open access day registration closes Friday, call for shout-outs. Retrieved from. http://www.sparc.arl.org/news/open-access-day-registrationcloses-friday-call-shout-outs National Center for Education Statistics (2014). Integrated postsecondary education data system. Retrieved from. http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/ Open Access Week Organization (2014). About open access week. Retrieved from. http:// www.openaccessweek.org/page/about Palmer, K. L., Dill, E., & Christie, C. (2009). Where there's a will there's a way?: Survey of academic librarian attitudes about open access. College & Research Libraries, 70(4), 315–335 (Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/70/4/315.full.pdf+html?sid= c67a4b46-d3dd-4888-b49a-0d6658f17e02). Potvin, S. (2013). The principle and the pragmatist: On conflict and coalescence for librarian engagement with open access initiatives. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(1), 67–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.11.002. Poynder, R. (2011, July). Suber: Leader of a leaderless revolution. Information Today, 28(7) (Retrieved from http://www.infotoday.com/it/jul11/Suber-Leader-of-a-LeaderlessRevolution.shtml). Rathe, B., Chaudhuri, J., & Highby, W. (2010). Open access advocacy: Think globally, act locally. Collaborative Librarianship, 2(3), 162–168 (Retrieved from http:// collaborativelibrarianship.org/index.php/jocl/article/view/99/65). Right to Research Coalition (2010). The student statement on the right to research. Retrieved from. http://www.righttoresearch.org/about/statement/index.shtml Vandegrift, M., Bolick, J. A., & Rose, N. (2013). Open Access Week 2013 final report. Library faculty publications (Paper 9. Retrieved from http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/library_ faculty_publications/9/). Vandegrift, M., & Colvin, G. (2012). Relational communications: Developing key connections. College & Research Libraries News, 73(7), 386–389 (Retrieved from http://crln.acrl.org/content/73/7/386.full.pdf+html). Wright, A.M. (2013). Starting scholarly conversations: A scholarly communication outreach program. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 2(1). http://dx. doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1096.