PDF - CARL - ABRC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Document 1 The question was asked of what endorsement from CARL mean? In-principle endorsement doesn’t bind CARL to anything in particular. [CARL letter had about 8 or 9 caveats – e.g. the pricing shouldn’t go up; Canada can pull the plug if CARL deems it an unpalatable product.] Endorsement in principle another thing that helps the libraries keep a high profile in Open Access. A Motion for CARL support of SCOAP3 was raised. Passed. The Canadian contribution would be negotiated through CRKN. The letter from the BOARD did not commit individual institutions to anything as far as subscriptions go. The Committee members agreed that there needs to be a different kind of response – one of being supportive of an academic community’s efforts to achieve OA. Caveats were included in the original letter to CRKN; reiterating them in an endorsement in principle would water it down. 3. Discussion of the new CARL Committee structure, Many proposed activities in the revised CARL Strategic Plan fall under the OA theme. The Committee considered the following questions: What are the short, and mid-term goals of the Committee; can’t do everything. What are the highest priorities to put the Committee’s efforts to? The following points were raised: Transforming Scholarly communication; OA issues; Influence legislation; advocacy with the granting councils; maintain CARL momentum there; Open Access advocacy – e.g. there isn’t an equivalent of SPARC in Canada; need to keep up the pressure; need some champions; foster Tri-Council mandates; Institutional mandates have to be perceived as grass-roots Research Data management; Research teams – e.g. embedding the librarians Digitization – Canadiana.org; CARL support of; CARL started CIHM, and AlouetteCanada Multimedia/Digital Collections ; creating digital media from any media – e.g. old, new media, born-digital; not just retrospective, rather any media to build the digital collections of the future Embedding the library in the research enterprise, and the librarians’ specific roles to support researchers Preserving print / physical collections; CARL should identify the role in can play in that area – a leadership/coordinating role; there’s a lot going on regionally, so there is value in bringing some national perspective for this issue Less cumbersome orphan works regime for Public Policy Committee rather than SCOM Supporting Granting agencies; key drivers of OA-related change; that’s where a lot of ground will be won in support of OA; they need to sense that they have support from their communities Great opportunities to work with the University presses to explore library partnerships with, and new business/access models; narrow window of opportunity the libraries must quickly act on Votes and Institutional mandates; have to be a matter of behaviour among faculty, rather than just a matter of principle Institutional Repositories How many faculties/departments have OA mandates; suggest keeping track of in some form; regarding IRs, do we have the capacity to respond to enthusiastic, large-scale faculty uptake when that happens? The Data Management Sub-Committee will take up the matter of Data mgt, and SCOM will continue to rely on them for that 2
For the matter of print preservation, a sub-committee or working group can be formed to explore possibilities for CARL; a certain amount of resources would have to allocated to this; it stands apart from some of the other activities identified for SCOM – e.g. it doesn’t have the synergistic properties that OA, Data Mgt, IRs, Digitization, etc have. That said, not everything is going to be digital, and there are scholars who require materials in their original formats for their research. It was suggested that the Committee draw up a matrix or conceptual model organized by audiences the various issues address: Gov’t; Granting Councils; Research Community; University Presses; Regional Groups; Librarians Some of the discussion’s key points: OA activities remain a top priority Data Mgt Digital Collections Roles of librarians in the research enterprise; integration of library services in the research lifecycle Preserving physical collections Recommendation from the Committee: Physical preservation should be taken care of by a working group, Margaret Grove could Chair, Brent Roe can be on it too. Regarding University presses: Ingrid Parent (UBC) is interested in continuing the dialog Peter Ward started with the Nov 2008 library / university presses symposium. Another meeting has been planned with inclusion of the UBC Provost. There are smaller presses/entities in Canadian universities that have similar issues aligned with monographs, and there are links to Synergies. CARL should explore the relationship between libraries and the University presses. [The last Ithaka report had some interesting ideas: http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/current-models-report.pdf ] Action item: Research report on what the various university presses are doing, and collaborative opportunities. Looking at the Ithaka report, what’s going on in Canada that parallels it. Ryam Crow’s SPARC report useful in that regard as well. Action item: Proposals for an OA Advocacy Strategy with the Funding Councils and Government – e.g. Industry Canada. Go to funding agencies, and Industry Canada, and contact politicians. Engaging the Ministries is a way in as well. Support for OA in the Natural Sciences lags behind the Health Sciences, but there are advocates in the former community. Researchers in the field are making the case for the value of broad accessibility for research; a way of improving recognition internationally for Canadian research. The other side is the political; if the public paid for it, it should get access to it. It’s about publicly funded research dissemination. The taxpayers own this research in a fashion. Digitization / Canadiana.org Document 1 Action item : Research report: Where is Canada with respects to what was proposed in CDIS – What is the state of national digitization activities in Canada? Review the CDIS. 3
Page 1 and 2: Meeting oof the CARL Scholarly S Co
Page 3: Meeting of the CARL Committee on Sc
Page 7 and 8: as the first step in developing a s
Page 9 and 10: Minutes of the CARL Scholarly Commu
Page 11 and 12: DART Europe (ETDs partnership betwe
Page 13 and 14: Document 3 strategic interest in op
Page 15 and 16: Document 3 memberships have one vot
Page 17 and 18: (ICM) Document 3 Partners Ligue des
Page 19 and 20: and increased content achieved thro
Page 21 and 22: Document 6 Outline - Synergies Busi
Page 23 and 24: Outline - Synergies Business and Su
Page 33 and 34: Special Collections in ARL Librarie
Page 35 and 36: Contents Special Collections in ARL
Page 37 and 38: Preface Special Collections in ARL
Page 39: ARL Working Group on Special Collec
Page 47: Recommendations: Special Collection
Page 54 and 55:
Special Collections in ARL Librarie
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61:
Page 65 and 66:
Appendices Recommendations I. Colle
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
identify and acquire culturally sig
Page 71 and 72:
Collaborative Print Repositories: A
Page 73 and 74:
willingness to consider the goals o
Page 75 and 76:
OCUL digital collection development
Page 77 and 78:
might happen. There are still many
Page 79 and 80:
Document 10 2010 Open Access Engage
Page 81 and 82:
CARL Brief for Open Access Engageme
Page 83 and 84:
scholarship through hybrid scholarl
Page 85 and 86:
and a vital service, and (3) publis
Page 87 and 88:
importance of experimenting with mo
Page 89 and 90:
At its January 2010 meeting, the Si
Page 91 and 92:
Recommendation: The Canadian Associ
Page 93 and 94:
Meetings (resulting from letters) M
Page 95 and 96:
In attendance: SCHOLARLY JOURNALS S
Page 97 and 98:
context of world trends towards ope
Page 99 and 100:
2010 Congress in Montreal CARL Spon
Page 101 and 102:
and determine whether it could be t
Page 103 and 104:
Total 2010 budget of Scholarly Comm
Page 105 and 106:
December 2009 Questionnaire RE: Int
Page 107 and 108:
Concordia Librarians staffed welcom
Page 109 and 110:
generally better Tuesday to Thursda
Page 111 and 112:
UWO Western Libraries at The Univer
Page 113 and 114:
A Review of Emerging Models in Cana
Page 115 and 116:
Toronto, and University of Calgary.
Page 117 and 118:
Case Studies The remainder of this
Page 119 and 120:
The journals single revenue source
Page 121 and 122:
want to be “Main Sponsors”. •
Page 123 and 124:
improving access to research result
Page 125 and 126:
• Provide the server space to hos
Page 127 and 128:
processing with respect to both eBo
Page 129 and 130:
criticized for failing to exploit t
Page 131 and 132:
Funding for the Press comes from bl
Page 133 and 134:
experience dealing with the epub/xm
Page 135 and 136:
Working with Kirtas Technologies, t
Page 137 and 138:
collection. Contributors are encour
Page 139 and 140:
The content is updated daily. Once
Page 141 and 142:
References Antonius, Daniel and Ada
Page 143 and 144:
Appendix 1: More examples of journa
Page 145 and 146:
services are available to the McMas
Page 147:
University of Western Ontario Libra
show all

PDF - CARL - ABRC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?