ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 526 / C8ıRL News ■ September 2003 S C H O L A R L Y CO M M U N ICA TIO N Principles and strategies for the reform of scholarly communication1 Issues related to the formal system of scholarly communication by the ACRL Scholarly Communication Committee S ch o la rly co m m u nicatio n d efined S cholarly com m u n ication is the system through which research and other scholarly writings are created, evaluated for quality, disseminated to the scholarl y community, and preserved for future use. The system includes both formal means of com­ munication, such as publication in peer-reviewed journals, and informal channels, such as electronic mailing lists. One of the fundamental characteristics of scholarly research is that it is created as a public good to facilitate inquiry and knowledge. A sub­ stantial portion of such research is publicly sup­ ported, either directly through federally funded re­ search projects or indirectly through state support of researchers at state higher-education institutions. In addition, the vast majority of scholars develop and disseminate their research with no expecta­ tion of direct financial reward. S ch o larly com m u nication in crisis The formal system of scholarly communication is showing numerous signs o f stress and crisis. Throughout the second half of the 20th century, commercial firms have assumed increasing con­ trol over the scholarly journals market, particularly in scientific, technical, and medical fields. The jour­ nal publishing industry has also become increas­ ingly consolidated and is now dominated by a small number of international conglomerates. Prices for scholarly journals have risen at rates well above general inflation in the economy and also above the rate of increase of library budgets. Libraries have coped with price increases through a variety of strategies, including subscription cuts and reductions in monographic purchases. In addition, escalating prices have occurred at the same time that the quantity of scholarly informa­ tion, including the number of scholarly journals, has increased substantially. The net effect of these changes has been a significant reduction in access to scholarship. The economic challenges facing scholarly monograph publishers, particularly university presses, are another aspect of the growing crisis, one that illustrates its systemic nature. Faced with declining library markets and other economic pres­ sures, university presses have substantially de­ creased the extent to which they produce special­ ized scholarly monographs. Such publications have been an important component of scholarly out­ put, particularly in humanistic disciplines. The recent transition to electronic publishing, though promising in many respects, presents nu­ merous new challenges and threats to access. As journals move from print to electronic form, the legal framework for their use changes from copy­ right law to contract law. The latter framework governs publisher licensing agreements, which of­ ten include undesirable limits on use, eliminating forms of access that would have been permitted in the print environment under principles of fair use. Individual libraries tend to have limited bar­ gaining power in negotiating publisher licensing agreements that provide desired levels of access for users as well as rights for such services as inter- library loan. Libraries also face loss of content in licensed aggregated journal databases when agree­ ments between publishers and aggregators change. The electronic environment also poses significatn C&RL News ■ Septem ber 2003 / 527 challenges for long-term preservation of, and access to, information. Since most libraries do not actually own and store the content of the journals they license in electronic form, new models for preservation must be developed. Changes in tech­ nology platforms pose other serious preservation challenges. Access to scholarship is further threatened by various issues at the national policy level. Powerful commercial interests have successfully supported — and are continuing to advocate— changes in copyright law that limit the public domain and sig­ nificantly reduce principles of fair use, particularly for information in digital form. Public policy es­ tablishes the legal environment in which publish­ ers and aggregators negotiate licenses with librar­ ies; it can seriously compromise the ability o f li­ braries and library consortia to negotiate licensing terms on an equal footing. National policy has also failed to address consolidation in the journal pub­ lishing industry and the price increases that result from publisher mergers. These issues and trends have reduced access to scholarship. While the severity of problems expe­ rienced has varied by both the type o f institution involved and its particular circumstances, these is­ sues touch all types of universities and colleges and their libraries. They will continue to adversely affect the system o f scholarly communication, unless they are successfully addressed by die higher education community. The A C R L S ch o la rly C o m m u n icatio n In itia tiv e The purpose of the ACRL Scholarly Communica­ tion Initiative is to work in partnership with other library and higher education organizations to en­ courage reform in the system o f scholarly com­ munication and to broaden the engagement of academic libraries in scholarly communication is­ sues. Goals o f the initiative are to create a system of scholarly communication that is more respon­ sive to the needs of the academy, reflecting the nature of scholarship and research as a public good. P rin cip le s su p p orted ACRL supports the following principles for reform in die system of scholarly communication: • the broadest possible access to published re­ search and other scholarly writings, • increased control by scholars and the acad­ emy over the system of scholarly publishing, • fail- and reasonable prices for scholarly infor­ mation, • competitive markets for scholarly infor­ mation, • a diversified publishing industry, • open access to scholarship, • innovations in publishing that reduce distri­ bution costs, speed delivery, and extend access to scholarly research, • quality assurance in publishing th rough peer review, • fair use of copyrighted information for edu­ cational and research purposes, • extension of public domain information, • preservation o f scholarly information for long-term future use, and • the right to privacy in the use of scholarly information. S tra te g ie s su p p o rte d ACRL supports the following strategies for reform in the system of scholarly communication: • the development of competitive journals, in­ cluding the creation of low-cost and open-access journals that provide direct alternatives to high priced commercial tides; • increased control by editorial boards over the business practices of their journals, which may in­ clude negotiating reductions in subscription prices, converting to open access business models, or moving journals to nonprofit publishers, such as university presses, in instances where continued commercial publication does not serve the needs o f their scholarly communities; • challenges to journal publisher mergers to pre­ vent increased industry consolidation, especially among publishers of journals in scientific, techni­ cal and medical fields, where mergers have resulted in documented opportunistic price increases; • the development of peer-reviewed open ac­ cess journals, which follow business models that obviate the need for subscriptions or other eco­ nomic restrictions on access; • federal and private funding of authors’ fees for publishing in open access journals, incorpo­ rated as an integral part of the process dirough which research is funded; • federal legislation that will require that feder­ ally funded research published in subscription- based journals be made openly accessible within a specific period of time (e.g., six months) after pub­ lication; • the development o f institutional reposito­ ries (defined as open access sites that capture the (c o n tin u e d o n p a g e 5 4 7 ) C&RL News ■ September 2003 / 547 • are the responsibility o f all members of the institution, not simply the librarians. Category 10: A ssessm ent/evaluation Assessment/evaluation of information literacy includes program performance and student out­ comes and: for program evaluation: • establishes the process of ongoing plan­ ning/improvement of the program; • measures directly progress toward meet­ ing the goals and objectives of the program; • integrates with course and curriculum assess­ ment, as well as institutional evaluations and re­ gional/professional accreditation initiatives; and • assumes multiple methods and purposes for assessment/evaluation ( “Principles…” continuedf r o m p a g e 5 2 7 )’ research output of a given institution) that are created either by single institutions or by groups of institutions working under a cooperative framework; • the development of disciplinary repositories (open access sites that archive research in a disci­ pline according to principles of open access); • self-archiving by scholars of their research and writings in open access repositories; • publishing and copyright agreements that al­ low authors to retain the right to self-archive their peer-reviewed publications in open access reposi­ tories; • maintenance of interoperability standards that facilitate efficient access to content in open repositories; • the development of new models and prac­ tices that will preserve scholarly information in electronic fonn for future use; • implementation of public policies that en­ sure fair use of scholarly infonnation in electronic form; • implementation of public policies that pro­ tect the rights and capacities of libraries to pro­ vide acceptable terms of user access and reach reasonable economic terms in licensing electronic information; • licensing agreements by library consortia and other groups of libraries that maximize their col­ lective buying and negotiating power; • use of innovative and cost-effective elec­ tronic information technologies in publishing, including — formative and summative: — short term and longitudinal; for student outcomes: • acknowledges differences in learning and teaching styles by using a variety o f appropri­ ate outcome measures, such as portfolio as­ sessment, oral defense, quizzes, essays, direct observation, anecdotal, peer and self review, and experience; • focuses on student performance, knowledge acquisition, and attitude appraisal; • assesses both process and product; • includes student-, peer-, and self-evaluation; for all: • includes periodic review of assessment/evalu­ ation methods. ■ publication of journals in electronic form and the creation of scholarly electronic commu­ nities that serve the needs o f scholars in a disci­ pline in flexible ways; • campus advocacy by librarians, faculty, and administrators to create greater awareness of the need for change in the system of scholarly com­ munication; and • vigorous national advocacy, in cooperation with other groups, in support of the public policy principles enumerated in this document. Note 1. This document, which was developed by the ACRL Scholarly Communications Commit­ tee, is intended to be a foundation statement that provides overall guidance for the ACRL Scholarly Communications Initiative. It was approved by the ACRL Board of Directors on June 24, 2003, at the ALA Annual Conference in Toronto. ■ C o r r e c tio n In the July 2003 issue of C&RL News, an incor­ rect e-mail address was given for Clara Fowler, co-author of “Instructional leadership: New responsibilities for a new reality.” The conect address is: Clara.Fowler@mail.uh.edu. The edi­ tors regret the error. mailto:Clara.Fowler@mail.uh.edu