Springer Symposium on Scholarly Communications


Published on

Keynote presentation at UNT, Fort Worth TX.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The Claremont Colleges are a set of 8 independent institutions that are contiguously located in the small town of Claremont California. The 7 colleges and universities, in the order of founding, include Pomona College, Claremont Graduate University, Scripps College, Claremont McKenna College, Harvey Mudd College, Pitzer College, and Keck Graduate Institute. The Consortium makes up the 8th member of the group.
  • The founder of the Colleges, James Blaisdell, then President of Pomona College, had a vision to build a set of institutions that would retain their own uniqueness and then benefit from a set of shared services that would be used in common. Blaisdell thereby created not only an alliance that is now widely recognized as one of the nation’s greatest centers of liberal arts education, but also a central coordinating agency for the consortium - an organization known today as the Claremont University Consortium.
  • Give the agenda for the talk
  • Good afternoon, and thanks for having me today. The topic of Transforming the Library has been a popular one in our profession for quite a long time. And even though transformation can imply a blossoming into something beautiful like this epiphyllum, for us in libraries, we sometimes get the feeling that our faculty view it more like Jeff Goldblum’s metamorphosis into The Fly.
  • So, what does a library do now? How do we distinguish ourselves? Since, by and large, the majority of our academic libraries are no longer able to engage in a collections – based economy any longer?
  • If it’s not ‘stuff’ any longer for us, then it must be about people. We really need to focus our resources on our librarians and staff and put them in a position to provide an extensive array of services that will prove our value as information specialists and experts.And although this concept is not new, it’s important to understand a shift in focus away from a majority of staff who are devoted to acquiring and organizing information to a staff that is largely focused outward from the library to the faculty and students that we serve, providing outreach, instruction, and be proactive in connecting users to collections that are now much broader and distributed than ever before.What does this look like in practice?
  • Grant current state     - 3/4 done with planning grant ; infrastructure assessment and needs and capacity assessment and the curation assessment to do soon.     - digital learning tool around the Edward S Curtis of Native American Indians images. portfolio images of indians with some interesting provenance     - how is this different than just digitizing these images?  resource will be proof of concept of CCDH collaboration of the USC/Scalar group (& book)
  •  - CCDH as seed money/center to start a project and build capacity amongst faculty or students     - collaborative resourche for two faculty to come together and tap into a resource that has capacity with tools.
  • I just want to give you an example from our own recent experience. A group of our instruction librarians have developed a unique program over the past year and redefines their connection to faculty and students and provides a great example of how we can leverage our librarians to make those connections, and make them lasting and permanent.Char Booth, NatalieTagge, and Sean Stone have developed a three part program to develop a new support structure for information instruction. Briefly, this includes Curriculum Mapping, Portfolio Development, and Rubrics.
  • This program starts with curriculum mapping, and they’ve leveraged a software package called Mindomo to do this. Every inistitution likes to think they are unique, but in many ways, at Claremont, we are unique or at least we present unique symptoms that make a diagnosis and treatment more challenging. Take, for instance the Environmental Analysis program. This is an intercollegiate effort with faculty and classes being taught at all 5 undergraduate colleges and it is rather loosely organized. Our staff went through the information we had and outlined the degree requirements, the courses, the field study, and study abroad options.
  • This allowed them to build a rubric for research literacy that included:ScopeEvaluationAnalysisInterpretationAnd Ethics
  • Once they had that rubric, they were able to design a set of courses that addressed components of that rubric in a systematic way, either in course-based instruction or individual research consultations with individual or groups of students.What impressed me the most with this program development was the logical way they could complete the cycle for us in the Administration with an assessment component that could be used by librarians as instructors, or faculty as evaluators of student or librarian performance.
  • The end result, for the student, was that they ended up with a great experience using the library and developing skills and techniques in a more customized and logical fashion. This positive user experience means that we have successfully moved past the rote, one shot instruction session where a librarian opens up a firehose and sprays all the students at the beginning of a course with everything that they ever might need or be interested in using in the future. Rather, this program builds a relationship between librarian-student-faculty that can grow and develop over time. And for the faculty member, they’ve seen such improved results in the research ability of their students over a few semesters, that the program administrator told us that grades are going down. That’s right, since they are expecting so much better performance knowing that the program is robust and providing students with a arsenal of techniques to leverage information, faculty have raised their expectations and demanding more of the students.
  • Find better example of this.
  • *In all subsequent slides user books from user selected collections are in blue, and those from preselected collections are in green*Overall Average number of uses per year in general quite high ≈ 6 per year *Average number of post-purchase uses per year is significantly greater for user-selected ebooks (2x as high) *Even though the total number of books (n) in the user selected set is greater, this has no effect on the result—these are PER BOOK averages, so each book in the user selected collection is used an average of 8.6x per year, andeach book the preselected collection is used an average of 4.3x per year*This result rejects the hypothesis rejects the hypothesis that users will select ebooks will be used less than pre-selected ebooks
  • *This figure shows for the number of unique users per ebook per year for the overall user selected and preselected collections*The average user-selected ebook was used by a significantly greater number of different users per year (about 2x as many)*These data allow us to result rejects the hypothesis that users select books that are only of interest to themselves
  • So this example is just one of many where we hope to develop “Cylinders of Excellence”, which is my more palatable name for a ‘Silo’.
  • Springer Symposium on Scholarly Communications

    1. 1. Scholarly Communications on Campus John McDonald Associate Vice President & Chief Information Officer Claremont University Consortium Springer SymposiumFacilitating Scholarly Communication on April 24, 2013 Campus
    2. 2. Blaisdell’s Vision• “My own very deep hope is that instead of one great, undifferentiated university, we might have a group of institutions divided into small colleges—somewhat on the Oxford type—around a library and otherutilities which they would use in common. In this way Ishould hope to preserve the inestimable personal values ofthe small college while securing the facilities of a greatuniversity.” —James A. Blaisdell, 1923
    3. 3. Where arewe now?
    4. 4. Transforming the Library March 11, 2012
    5. 5. What does a library do then? March 11, 2012
    6. 6. Future of Scholarly Communication Librarians supporting… 1. Faculty & student publishing 2. New types of scholarship 3. New modes of collaboration 4. New collections strategies 5. Assessment efforts
    7. 7. Publishing Support
    8. 8. Faculty-specific archives
    9. 9. Institution specific publications
    10. 10. Text-basedtraditionalpublishing Faculty or students ordisciplines
    11. 11. Academic research journals
    12. 12. Studentpublications
    13. 13. Promoting the LOCAL at theNATIONAL level
    14. 14. New forms ofscholarship
    15. 15. Potential Projects• Integrated approaches to research and teaching• Transdisciplinary approach to digital humanities• Creative computing: generating artistic works using algorithms and computer models• Virtual recreations of historical sites• Integration of Spatial analysis & GIS in historical research
    16. 16. Challenges• Inter-institutional collaboration• Developing sustainable models for post-grant funding• Incubator for regional projects involving faculty across institutions• Addressing multi-institutional models• Determining where Libraries and IT come together and where they can work with faculty.
    17. 17. New modes of faculty- librariancollaboration
    18. 18. March 11, 2012
    19. 19. March 11, 2012
    20. 20. March 11, 2012
    21. 21. March 11, 2012
    22. 22. New collections strategies
    23. 23. Resource Sharing: CAMINO Collections CUC LMU Oxy Pep UOP CSTWstmtCalArts CBU Dom WJUWUHS AJU HNU 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 Books held only by library Books held by BOTH library and the rest of Camino Books held only by the rest of Camino
    24. 24. Resource Sharing: CAMINO Collections Santa Clara 119012 394706 USF 115071 377476 Fuller 149023 270988 Caltech 96352 226332 Biola 68159 182984 La Sierra 49731 150355 Azusa Pacific 47403 148658 Loma Linda 73435 136616 St. Marys 32632 129135 La Verne 33712116530 Pacific Union 35796 101624Point Loma Nazarene 30527 100582 Cal Lutheran 2350694953 0 100000 200000 300000 400000
    25. 25. Shared Print: Find Overlap Holdings toMaximize DeselectionBooks also held by Claremont
    26. 26. Shared Print: Find Overlap as a % of thecollection
    27. 27. New Access & Selection Models
    28. 28. New Access & Selection Models
    29. 29. Librarianssupportingassessment efforts
    30. 30. Better technology
    31. 31. Click through to article and user level detail!!!
    32. 32. ROI at the Campus level:Google Scholar Institutional profiles
    33. 33. Additional ROI Efforts
    34. 34. It’s about people…
    35. 35. Continuing to makeCylinders ofExcellence March 11, 2012